IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8577-d861905.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rural Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes, and Environmentally Responsible Behaviors towards Garbage Exchange Supermarkets: An Example from Huangshan City in China

Author

Listed:
  • Song Lu

    (College of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200233, China)

  • Zehui Zhou

    (College of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200233, China)

  • Yingfan Lu

    (College of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200233, China)

Abstract

Rural residents not only produce rural garbage and participate in its disposal, but are also beneficiaries of a beautiful rural environment. The garbage exchange supermarket (where garbage is exchanged for goods) is a garbage disposal method that is employed in some villages in China. It is of great significance for the improvement of rural living environment and rural residents’ awareness of environmental protection. Thus, it is necessary to explore rural residents’ perceptions and behavior regarding garbage exchange supermarkets. Based on planned behavior theory and social exchange theory, this paper develops a model of rural residents’ perceptions, attitudes, and environmentally responsible behaviors regarding garbage exchange supermarkets. Then, using Huangshan City, China, as a case study, three villages, located in the upper, middle, and lower reaches of the Xin’an River were selected. Using a stratified sampling method, 324 questionnaires were obtained from residents. The developed model was verified by the method of structural equation modeling. Findings are as follows: (1) On the whole, residents have a strong and positive perception of the benefits of garbage exchange supermarkets, with an emphasis on its environmental advantages. (2) Regarding the cost dimension in perception, the focus is spent queuing for exchange on the time and sorting garbage at home. In general, residents are still willing to spend this time going to the supermarket to exchange. (3) Environmentally responsible behavior is divided into two dimensions: compliance and promotion-type environmentally responsible behavior—the former is more apparent among rural residents. (4) Residents’ perceptions of benefits positively affect their attitudes and satisfaction towards garbage exchange supermarkets. Cost perception has no significant effect on residents’ attitudes but has a negative correlation with satisfaction, satisfaction and attitude have positive correlations with environmentally responsible behavior, and satisfaction also positively affects residents’ attitudes.

Suggested Citation

  • Song Lu & Zehui Zhou & Yingfan Lu, 2022. "Rural Residents’ Perceptions, Attitudes, and Environmentally Responsible Behaviors towards Garbage Exchange Supermarkets: An Example from Huangshan City in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8577-:d:861905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8577/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8577/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Sirivongs, Khamfeua & Tsuchiya, Toshiyuki, 2012. "Relationship between local residents' perceptions, attitudes and participation towards national protected areas: A case study of Phou Khao Khouay National Protected Area, central Lao PDR," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 92-100.
    3. Jenkins, Robin R. & Martinez, Salvador A. & Palmer, Karen & Podolsky, Michael J., 2003. "The determinants of household recycling: a material-specific analysis of recycling program features and unit pricing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 294-318, March.
    4. Yixuan Wang & Xingle Long & Liang Li & Qinglin Wang & Xiping Ding & Sijia Cai, 2021. "Extending theory of planned behavior in household waste sorting in China: the moderating effect of knowledge, personal involvement, and moral responsibility," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7230-7250, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nketiah, Emmanuel & Song, Huaming & Cai, Xiang & Adjei, Mavis & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Obuobi, Bright, 2022. "Citizens’ intention to invest in municipal solid waste to energy projects in Ghana: The impact of direct and indirect effects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    2. Dingde Xu & Chen Qing & Yang Chen & Jia He & Fengwan Zhang, 2023. "Sustainable Development of Rural Human Settlements in the Information Age: Can Internet Use Drive Farmers to Participate in Garbage Classification?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Briguglio, Marie & Delaney, Liam & Wood, Alex, 2018. "Partisanship, priming and participation in public-good schemes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 136-150.
    4. Wang, Xiaonan & Tzeng, Shian-Yang & Mardani, Abbas, 2022. "Spatial differentiation and driving mechanisms of urban household waste separation behavior in Shanghai, China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    5. Xu Geng & Honghao Li & Xiaoyu Liu & Huayun Liu & Miaoxin Huang, 2023. "The Effect of the Evaluation of Trash Can Removal Policy under the “Compulsory Times” of Waste-Sorting in Longhua District in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-14, June.
    6. Hilary Nixon & Jean-Daniel Saphores, 2009. "Information and the decision to recycle: results from a survey of US households," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(2), pages 257-277.
    7. Lim-Wavde, Kustini & Kauffman, Robert J. & Dawson, Gregory S., 2017. "Household informedness and policy analytics for the collection and recycling of household hazardous waste in California," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 88-107.
    8. Saphores, Jean-Daniel M. & Ogunseitan, Oladele A. & Shapiro, Andrew A., 2012. "Willingness to engage in a pro-environmental behavior: An analysis of e-waste recycling based on a national survey of U.S. households," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 49-63.
    9. Luisa Corrado & Andrea Fazio & Alessandra Pelloni, 2020. "Pro-environmental attitudes, local environmental conditions and recycling behavior," Working Paper series 20-21, Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis, revised Nov 2021.
    10. Rizal Edy Halim & Shinta Rahmani & Gita Gayatri & Asnan Furinto & Yudi Sutarso, 2022. "The Effectiveness of Product Sustainability Claims to Mitigate Negative Electronic Word of Mouth (N-eWOM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-18, February.
    11. Yixuan Wang & Xingle Long & Liang Li & Qinglin Wang & Xiping Ding & Sijia Cai, 2021. "Extending theory of planned behavior in household waste sorting in China: the moderating effect of knowledge, personal involvement, and moral responsibility," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 7230-7250, May.
    12. Qi Wang & Yue’e Liao & Jun Gao, 2022. "Rural Residents’ Intention to Participate in Pro-Poor Tourism in Southern Xinjiang: A Theory of Planned Behavior Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-17, July.
    13. Jing Liu & Khairul Manami Kamarudin & Yuqi Liu & Jinzhi Zou & Jiaqi Zhang, 2022. "Developing a Behavior Change Framework for Pandemic Prevention and Control in Public Spaces in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-24, February.
    14. Hamid Rastegari Kopaei & Mehdi Nooripoor & Ayatollah Karami & Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag & Dacinia Crina Petrescu, 2021. "Drivers of Residents’ Home Composting Intention: Integrating the Theory of Planned Behavior, the Norm Activation Model, and the Moderating Role of Composting Knowledge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    15. Deliberador, Lucas Rodrigues & Santos, Alexandre Borges & Carrijo, Pâmella Rodrigues Silva & Batalha, Mário Otávio & César, Aldara da Silva & Ferreira, Luís Miguel D.F., 2023. "How risk perception regarding the COVID-19 pandemic affected household food waste: Evidence from Brazil," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 87(PA).
    16. Lin Shen & Hongyun Si & Lei Yu & Haolun Si, 2019. "Factors Influencing Young People’s Intention toward Municipal Solid Waste Sorting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-19, May.
    17. Liu, Jing & Lin, Hua & Hu, Bing & Zhou, Zixiong & Agyeiwaah, Elizabeth & Xu, Ye, 2022. "Advancing the understanding of the resident pro-tourism behavior scale: An integration of item response theory and classical test theory," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 113-125.
    18. Kun Shi & Yi Zhou & Zhen Zhang, 2021. "Mapping the Research Trends of Household Waste Recycling: A Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-23, May.
    19. Saif Ullah & Ali Abid & Waqas Aslam & Rana Shahzad Noor & Muhammad Mohsin Waqas & Tian Gang, 2021. "Predicting Behavioral Intention of Rural Inhabitants toward Economic Incentive for Deforestation in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, January.
    20. Zhuling Liu & Janet Z. Yang & Susan S. Clark & Michael A. Shelly, 2022. "Recycling as a planned behavior: the moderating role of perceived behavioral control," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(9), pages 11011-11026, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8577-:d:861905. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.