IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i5p2286-d1606294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Heterogeneity in the Relationships Between Psychological Drivers and Construction and Demolition Waste Management Intention and Behaviors Among Tunnel Construction Managers: Insights from Personality Profiles

Author

Listed:
  • Yanjie Li

    (School of Engineering, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu 610101, China)

  • Guanfeng Yan

    (School of Engineering, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu 610101, China
    School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China
    Key Laboratory of Transportation Tunnel Engineering, Ministry of Education, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China)

Abstract

Effective tunnel construction and demolition (C&D) waste management is a critical issue in the context of sustainable development, and C&D waste management measures guided by 3R principles (Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) comply with the circular economy. In this study, an extended theory of planned behavior model based on the existing literature was proposed to identify the drivers of tunnel construction managers’ intention to implement effective waste management measures; then, the respondents were classified into four groups according to personality traits to explore the effects of personality profile on the heterogeneity in relationships between psychological drivers and C&D waste management intention and behaviors. The results show that all TPB constructs, policies, and environmental concern are significant predictors of managers’ intention to manage C&D waste properly. Then, considerable variance in the driving effects of various psychological drivers across different groups is witnessed. For the positive and temperate participants, subjective norms and policies are the most effective driving factors. However, PBC and environmental concern show a stronger relationship with the conservative and introverted participants’ intentions to adopt effective waste management measures. The findings are beneficial to developing corresponding management measures to promote effective C&D waste management.

Suggested Citation

  • Yanjie Li & Guanfeng Yan, 2025. "The Heterogeneity in the Relationships Between Psychological Drivers and Construction and Demolition Waste Management Intention and Behaviors Among Tunnel Construction Managers: Insights from Personal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:5:p:2286-:d:1606294
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/5/2286/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/5/2286/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tan, Yang & Ying, Xiaoyu & Ge, Jian & Gao, Weijun & Zhang, Li & Wang, Shuai, 2024. "Driving role of perceived psychological factors in households’ low-carbon behaviors: A study based on the Chinese household carbon generalized system of preferences," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    2. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Hair, Joseph F. & Astrachan, Claudia Binz & Moisescu, Ovidiu I. & Radomir, Lăcrămioara & Sarstedt, Marko & Vaithilingam, Santha & Ringle, Christian M., 2021. "Executing and interpreting applications of PLS-SEM: Updates for family business researchers," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3).
    4. Zezhou Wu & Ann T.W. Yu & Chi Sun Poon, 2020. "Promoting effective construction and demolition waste management towards sustainable development: A case study of Hong Kong," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1713-1724, November.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Lu, Weisheng & Chen, Xi & Peng, Yi & Shen, Liyin, 2015. "Benchmarking construction waste management performance using big data," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 105(PA), pages 49-58.
    7. He, Pan & Veronesi, Marcella, 2017. "Personality traits and renewable energy technology adoption: A policy case study from China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 472-479.
    8. Ali Turkyilmaz & Mert Guney & Ferhat Karaca & Zhanar Bagdatkyzy & Aiganym Sandybayeva & Gulzat Sirenova, 2019. "A Comprehensive Construction and Demolition Waste Management Model using PESTEL and 3R for Construction Companies Operating in Central Asia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, March.
    9. Jiawen Cao & Jin Chen, 2021. "The Impact of an Authoritarian Personality on Pro-Environmental Behaviour for Air Pollution Mitigation through Interactions with Social Norms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Mohammad Sharghi & Hoyoung Jeong, 2024. "The Potential of Recycling and Reusing Waste Materials in Underground Construction: A Review of Sustainable Practices and Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-34, June.
    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. Spandagos, Constantine & Baark, Erik & Ng, Tze Ling & Yarime, Masaru, 2021. "Social influence and economic intervention policies to save energy at home: Critical questions for the new decade and evidence from air-condition use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Shrestha, Sujata & Shrestha, Uttam Babu & Shrestha, Bibek Raj & Maharjan, Shirish & Udas, Erica & Aryal, Kamal, 2024. "Determinants of adoption of climate resilient agricultural solutions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    3. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia & Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2019. "How do motives and knowledge relate to intention to perform environmental behavior? Assessing the mediating role of constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Jabeen, Gul & Ahmad, Munir & Zhang, Qingyu, 2021. "Perceived critical factors affecting consumers’ intention to purchase renewable generation technologies: Rural-urban heterogeneity," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    6. Hasan Fehmi Topal & Dexter V. L. Hunt & Christopher D. F. Rogers, 2021. "Exploring Urban Sustainability Understanding and Behaviour: A Systematic Review towards a Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-33, January.
    7. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2022. "Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. repec:grz:wpsses:2021-05 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Philippe Coent & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2021. "Farmers Follow the Herd: A Theoretical Model on Social Norms and Payments for Environmental Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 287-306, February.
    10. Tiening Cui & Mengdie He, 2023. "Study on the Influence of Social Norms and Public Orientation on Domestic Waste Classification Behavior-Taking Beijing’s Garbage Classification as an Example," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 13(2), pages 1-3.
    11. Ziqian Luo & Junjie Li & Zezhou Wu & Shenghan Li & Guoqiang Bi, 2022. "Investigating the Driving Factors of Public Participation in Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Projects—A Case Study of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-20, April.
    12. Qiao, Kunyuan & Dowell, Glen, 2022. "Environmental concerns, income inequality, and purchase of environmentally-friendly products: A longitudinal study of U.S. counties (2010-2017)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    13. Murat Okumah & Julia Martin-Ortega & Paula Novo & Pippa J. Chapman, 2020. "Revisiting the Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behaviour to Inform Land Management Policy: A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Model Application," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-33, April.
    14. Mi, Lingyun & Zhu, Hanlin & Yang, Jie & Gan, Xiaoli & Xu, Ting & Qiao, Lijie & Liu, Qingyan, 2019. "A new perspective to promote low-carbon consumption: The influence of reference groups," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 100-108.
    15. Ropret Homar, Aja & Knežević Cvelbar, Ljubica, 2021. "The effects of framing on environmental decisions: A systematic literature review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    16. Hao-Fan Chumg & Jia-Wen Shi & Kai-Jun Sun, 2019. "Why Employees Contribute to Pro-Environmental Behaviour: The Role of Pluralistic Ignorance in Chinese Society," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Vu, Ha Thu & Tran, Duc & Goto, Daisaku & Kawata, Keisuke, 2020. "Does experience sharing affect farmers’ pro-environmental behavior? A randomized controlled trial in Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    19. Caferra, Rocco & Morone, Andrea & Morone, Piergiuseppe, 2025. "After the storm: Environmental tragedy and sustainable mobility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    20. Junling Jiang & Zhaoxin He & Changren Ke, 2023. "Construction Contractors’ Carbon Emissions Reduction Intention: A Study Based on Structural Equation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-21, July.
    21. Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Alhusen, Harm, 2019. "On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 350, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2019.

    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:17:y:2025:i:5:p:2286-:d:1606294. 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.