IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i19p8697-d1494622.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ease of Recycling in Glendale, Salt Lake City, Utah: Dissecting Recycling Efforts by Household Size, Age, Income and Gender

Author

Listed:
  • Ivis García

    (Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77840, USA)

Abstract

This study investigates the perceived ease of recycling in Glendale, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, by household size, age, income, and gender. While existing research has broadly explored how sociodemographic factors impact recycling, there is a lack of comprehensive studies analyzing these factors within specific local contexts. This study aims to identify specific barriers and motivators across different demographics to enhance local recycling efforts using Glendale as a case study. Data were collected through an online survey of 111 respondents and analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative methods. The survey included questions about the demographic information, perceptions of recycling ease, and barriers to recycling. The analysis revealed that one-person households and young adults (18–35) face constraints such as limited space for recyclables, a lack of access to recycling bins in rental units, or high costs. Older adults (56 years or older) are highly committed but may face physical challenges. Higher-income households report higher participation due to better access and awareness, whereas lower-income households encounter significant barriers such as limited facility access and insufficient information. Gender differences indicate that women are slightly more proactive and committed to recycling compared to men. Recommendations include expanding recycling facilities, targeted educational campaigns, and economic incentives to encourage lower-income households, males, younger, and older adults. Addressing these demographic-specific barriers can improve recycling rates and contribute to more sustainable communities. Future studies should include in-person surveys as one of the limitations of this study is that an online survey format may introduce biases and the exclusion of residents without internet access.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivis García, 2024. "Ease of Recycling in Glendale, Salt Lake City, Utah: Dissecting Recycling Efforts by Household Size, Age, Income and Gender," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-16, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:19:p:8697-:d:1494622
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/19/8697/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/19/8697/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susan D. Clayton & Panu Pihkala & Britt Wray & Elizabeth Marks, 2023. "Psychological and Emotional Responses to Climate Change among Young People Worldwide: Differences Associated with Gender, Age, and Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Hage, Olle & Söderholm, Patrik & Berglund, Christer, 2009. "Norms and economic motivation in household recycling: Empirical evidence from Sweden," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 155-165.
    3. Barr, Stewart & Gilg, Andrew & Ford, Nicholas, 2005. "Defining the multi-dimensional aspects of household waste management: A study of reported behavior in Devon," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 172-192.
    4. Torgler Benno & Frey Bruno S. & Wilson Clevo, 2009. "Environmental and Pro-Social Norms: Evidence on Littering," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-41, April.
    5. Suttibak, Samonporn & Nitivattananon, Vilas, 2008. "Assessment of factors influencing the performance of solid waste recycling programs," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 45-56.
    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. Wallin, Are & Zannakis, Mathias & Johansson, Lars-Olof & Molander, Sverker, 2013. "Influence of interventions and internal motivation on Swedish homeowners’ change of on-site sewage systems," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 27-40.
    2. Keramitsoglou, Kiriaki M. & Tsagarakis, Konstantinos P., 2013. "Public participation in designing a recycling scheme towards maximum public acceptance," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 55-67.
    3. Caroline M. Y. Law & Ernest K. S. Lee & K. L. Au, 2022. "Hong Kong Citizens’ Socio-Demographic Dynamics of Urban Yard Waste Facilities Siting and Legislation Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-13, May.
    4. López-Mosquera, Natalia & Lera-López, Fernando & Sánchez, Mercedes, 2015. "Key factors to explain recycling, car use and environmentally responsible purchase behaviors: A comparative perspective," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 29-39.
    5. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani, 2016. "Labor Donation Or Money Donation? Pro-Sociality On Prevention Of Natural Disasters In A Case Of Cyclone Aila, Bangladesh," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 61(01), pages 1-26, March.
    6. Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2011. "Farmers adoption of integrated crop protection and organic farming: Do moral and social concerns matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1536-1545, June.
    7. Yangyang Zhang & Wenfang Huang, 2021. "Analysis on the Effectiveness of the Input in Household Waste Classification of Residents—Taking S City in China as an Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Volland, Benjamin, 2017. "The role of risk and trust attitudes in explaining residential energy demand: Evidence from the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 14-30.
    9. Fahr, René, 2006. "The Wage Effects of Social Norms: Evidence of Deviations from Peers’ Body-Mass in Europe," IZA Discussion Papers 2323, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Dong, Bin & Dulleck, Uwe & Torgler, Benno, 2012. "Conditional corruption," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 609-627.
    11. García-Valiñas, María A. & Macintyre, Alison & Torgler, Benno, 2012. "Volunteering, pro-environmental attitudes and norms," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 455-467.
    12. Wadehra, Shivani & Nie, Zihan & Alpizar, Francisco, 2024. "Disentangling the chicken or egg causality dilemma of household waste sorting and segregated waste collection: A randomized controlled trial in India," EfD Discussion Paper 24-8, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    13. Chuanhui Liao & Hui Li, 2019. "Environmental Education, Knowledge, and High School Students’ Intention toward Separation of Solid Waste on Campus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-15, May.
    14. Timo Herberz & Claire Y. Barlow & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2020. "Sustainability Assessment of a Single-Use Plastics Ban," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-22, May.
    15. Dhokhikah, Yeny & Trihadiningrum, Yulinah & Sunaryo, Sony, 2015. "Community participation in household solid waste reduction in Surabaya, Indonesia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 153-162.
    16. Achtnicht, Martin & Madlener, Reinhard, 2014. "Factors influencing German house owners' preferences on energy retrofits," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 254-263.
    17. 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).
    18. Pfister, Naomi & Mathys, Nicole A., 2022. "Waste taxes at work: Evidence from the canton of Vaud in Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    19. Vásquez, Óscar C. & Álvarez, Adolfo & Silva, Julio & Muga, Alicia Pincheira, 2014. "Towards the estimation of demand for recycling in Chile: The case of Santiago," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 94-102.
    20. Ayisha Siddiqua & Maisa El Gamal & Waheed Kareem Abdul & Lama Mahmoud & Fares M Howari, 2022. "E-Device Purchase and Disposal Behaviours in the UAE: An Exploratory Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-23, April.

    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:16:y:2024:i:19:p:8697-:d:1494622. 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.