Theoreis for Waste Mgt

The concept of attitude and associated relationship with human behaviour has been a topic of interest among researchers for years. Attitude toward a concept can be defined as an individual or group of individuals, general feeling of favourableness or unfavourableness for that concept (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Many studies of knowledge and attitudes have found a positive and often significant relationship between the two variables. In a study of the effectiveness of a visitor education strategy in raising levels of knowledge and attitudes toward nature conservation, Olson, Bowman and Roth (1984) found a positive relationship between scores on the knowledge test and scores on the attitude test for all concepts measured. The programme was successful in raising both the levels of knowledge and improving attitudes toward environmental management. Similarly, Armstrong & Impara (1991) found that positive attitudes followed exposure to a K-7 environmental education publication on knowledge and attitudes about the environment. Many studies other have used the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) and its extension, the Theory Planned Behaviour (TPB), as a framework not only good for understanding, explaining and predicting behaviours, but also to provide a useful guide for designing intervention strategies to change or maintain behaviours. The theory is based on an assumption that individual behavioural intentions are directly related to their attitudes. The TRA views a person‗s intention to perform (or not perform) as the immediate determinant of the action. This behavioural intention, in turn, has two determinants. One is the attitude towards the behaviour—a person who believes that performing a given behaviour will lead to mostly positive outcomes will hold a favourable attitude toward performing the behaviour. The other is the subjective norm—a person believes that most referents with whom s/he is motivated to comply think s/he should perform the behaviour will perceive the social pressure to do so. The beliefs that underlie a person‗s attitude toward the behavior are termed behavioural beliefs, and those that underlie the subjective norm are termed normative beliefs (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) states that what an individual does is determined by personal motivation which is determined by attitude, social support and perceived behavioural control. These factors are grounded by the persons‗ perception of social, personal, and situational consequences of the specified action (Ajzen, 1985; Maddan, Ellen & Ajzen, 1992; Ajzen & Driver, 1992). TPB allows for a better evaluation of human behavior when participation decisions are voluntary and under an individual control. The Theory of Planned Behaviour has been widely used in environmental behaviour research to predict a person‗s intent to participate in a specified behaviour (Gamba & Oskamp, 1994; Scott & Willets, 1994; Kuhlemier, Van den Berg, & Lagerweij, 1999; Grodzinska-Jurczak, Agata, & Agata, 2003). TPB has been used successfully empirically and conceptually by many researchers in environmental behaviour to explore attitudes that trace the correlation of beliefs to behaviour. Apart from the TRA/TPB theories, the expectancy-value theory has also been identified in literature as capable of serving as framework for attitude-behaviour study of this nature (Van Der Pligt & De Vries, 1998). Many studies in the last two decades on socio-demographic variables and environmental perception have helped in understanding people‗s views, and thinking about the environment. They have attempted to predict environmental awareness and attitudes of people based on their socio-demographic characteristics. For instance, Raudsepp (2001) reported that age, education and gender have shown strong and consistent relations with environmentalism. Other researchers (Mensah & Whitney, 1991; Gigliotti, 1992; Sheppard, 1995; Eagle & Demare, 1999; Tikka, Kuitunen, & Tyns, 2000) have attempted to ascertain the correlates of environmental knowledge and environmental quality awareness and concern. Some others have also explored the influence of education, income, age, and gender on public awareness and attitude toward environmental quality issues. Chanda (1999) reported that environmental concerns among residents of Gaborone vary according to education and income levels, while age and gender do not seem to have any significant influence on variation in concern. Gender is a variable that has received consistent attention among researchers (Jones & Dunlap, 1992; Arcury & Christianson, 1993; Lyon & Breakwell, 1994; Petts, 1994). Raudsepp

(2001) found that women were significantly more likely than men to be concerned with environmental problems. Females have been consistently shown to have higher environmentally conscious attitudes than men. The common reason advanced for gender differences is the different socialization patterns between boys and girls (Raudsepp, 2001; Diamontopoulos, Schlegelmilch, Sinkovics, & Bohlen, 2003). More often than not, girls are made to carry out most of all the sweeping and cleaning activities; they are called upon more than their male counterparts to perform maintenance tasks at home or in schools. However, in other studies such as Van Liere & Dunlap (1981) gender was not a significant predictor of environmental concerns and attitudes as other socio-demographic variables. Eagle & Demare‗s (1999) comparison of the mean attitude scores on the pretest with gender showed that girls scored significantly higher moral attitude scores than boys; there was no significant difference in the ecologic attitude scores of boys and girls. Kellert (1985) found no gender difference in these two attitudes for U.S. children in the 2nd grade. Eagles and Muffitt (1990), in a study of Canadian students in 6th, 7th, and 8th grade, found no attitude differences between the sexes. There are studies that have examined public, households and students‗ knowledge and attitudes towards waste management (e.g. Barr, Gilg & Ford, 2001; Walling, Walston, Warren, Warshay & Wilhelm, 2004; Meyers, Glen & Anbarci, 2006; Sha‗Ato, Aboho, Oketunde, Eneji, Unazi & Agwa, 2007; Ssenyondo, et al. 2008). Bassey, Benka-Coker and Aluyi (2006) used both qualitative and quantitative methods to examine the types of and waste disposal techniques employed in the management of solid medical wastes in five selected hospitals in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja and reported that an average of 2.78 kg of solid waste were generated per bed/daily. In addition, 26.5% of the total waste was found to be hazardous in nature. No separation of waste was practised by any of the hospitals surveyed. Similarly, 18.3% of the hospitals incinerated waste was traced to a locally built brick incinerator; 9.1% buried; 36.3% burnt waste in open pits while 36.3% disposed waste in municipal dumpsites. Sha‗Ato, et al. (2007) also found that a substantial proportion of household waste consists of various organic materials (36-57%), while ash, dust and sand (combined) constitute between (21-41%). There was more paper from commercial and institutional premises (9-12%) than from household or small/medium scale industrial premises (2-4%). Glass (0.1-6.9%), metals (mostly cans and bottle taps, 0.7-3.4%) and textiles (0.3-6%) constitute minor proportion of the waste across the sampled areas. The study also reported that households daily generated 0.54 kg waste; 0.018 kg/m2 /day by commercial outlets; while small and medium scale industries, generated 0.47 kg/m2/day. Adara, O. A. (1997). Current state of the art of environmental education in Nigeria. In Lawal, M.B and Mohammed, A. A (Eds), Proceedings of the National Workshops on Popularising Environmental Education in Nigeria Universities. University of Calabar, Nigeria, 16-18 September Agunwamba, J. C. (1998). Solid waste management in Nigeria: Problems and issues. Environmental Management, 22(6), 849-856 . Agunwamba, J.C., Ukpai, O.K., & Onyebuenyi, I. C. (1998). Solid waste management in Onitsha, Nigeria, Waste Management & Research, 16(1), 23-31. Madden, T. J., & Ajzen, I. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behaviour: Attitudes, intentions and perceived behaviour control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453-474. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behaviour. In J. Kuhl & Bechkman (Eds), Action control: from cognition to behaviour. New York: Springer-Verleg Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. PrenticeHall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey

Ajzen, I., & Driver, B. L. (1992). Application of the theory of planned behaviour to leisure choice. Journal of Leisure Research, 24, 207-224. Arcury, T. A., & Christianson, E. H. (1993). Rural-Urban differences in environmental knowledge and actions. Journal of Environmental Education, 25(1), 19-25. Armstrong, J. B., & Impara, J. C. (1991). The Impact of an environmental education programme on knowledge and attitudes. Journal of Environmental Education, 22, 36-40. Barr, S., Gilg, A. W., & Ford, N. J. (2001). A conceptual framework for understanding and analysing attitudes towards household-waste management. Environment and Planning, 33, 2025-2048. Bassey, B. E., Benka-Coker, M. O., & Aluyi, H. A. S. (2006). Characterization and management of solid medical wastes in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja Nigeria. African Health Sciences, 6(1), 58-63. Bradley, J. C, Waliczek, T. M., & Zajicek, J. M., (1999). Relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude of High School Students. Journal of Environmental Education, 30(3), 1-21. Chan, K. (1998). Mass communication and pro-environmental behaviour: waste recycling in Hong Kong. Journal of Environmental Management, 52, 35-45. Chanda, R. (1999). Correlates and dimensions of environmental quality concern among residents of an African Subtropical City: Gaborone, Botswana Journal of Environmental Education, 30(2), 31-39. Diamontopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B. B., Sinkovics, R. R., & Bohlen, G. M. (2003). Can sociodemographic still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 56, 465-480. Duan, H., & Fortner, R.W. (2005). Chinese college students‗ perception about global versus local environmental issues. Journal of Environmental Education, 36(4), 23-32. Eagle, P. F. J., & Demare, R. (1999). Factors Influencing Children's Environmental Attitudes. Journal of Environmental Education, 30(4), 33-35. Eagles, P. F. J., & Muffitt, S. (1990). An analysis of children's attitudes toward animals. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 41-44. Eero, O., Grendstad, G., & Wollebak, D. (2001). Correlates of environmental behaviors: Bringing back social context. Environment and Behavior 33, 181-208. Ehrampoush, M.H., & Maghadam, B. (2005). Survey of knowledge, attitude and practice of Yazd of medical science students about solid waste disposal and recycling. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 2(2), 26-30. Fransson, N., & Garling, T. (1999). Environmental concern: Conceptual definitions, measurements, methods and research findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 369-582. Gamba, R., & Oskamp, S. (1994). Factors influencing community residents‗ participation in commingled curbside recycling programs. Environment and Behavior, 26, 587-612. Gigliotti, L. M. (1992). Environmental attitudes: 20 years of change? The Journal of Environmental Education, 24(1), 15-26. Hausbeck K.W., Milbrath L.W., & Enright, S. A. (1992). Environmental knowledge, awareness and concern among 11
th

grade students in New York State. Journal of Environmental Education, 24, 56-63. Jones, R. E., & Dunlap, R. E. (1992). The social bases of environmental concern. Have they changed over time? Rural Sociology, 57(1), 134-144. Joseph, K. (2006). Stakeholders participation for sustainable waste management. Habitat

International, 30, 863-871. Kellert, S. R. (1985). Attitudes toward animals: Age-related development among children. The Journal of Environmental Education, 16(3), 29-39. Kofoworola, O. F. (2007). Recovery and recycling practices in municipal solid waste management in Lagos, Nigeria. Waste Management, 27 (9), 1139-1143. Kuhlemeier, H., Van den Bergh, H., & Lagerweij, N (1999) Environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviour in Dutch secondary education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 30(2), 414. Longe, E. O., & Williams, A. (2006). A preliminary study of medical waste management in Lagos metropolis, Nigeria. Iran Journal of Environment Health Science and Engineering, 3(2), 133139. Lyon, E. & Breakwell, G. H. (1994). Factors predicting environmental concerns and indifferences in 13-16yrs. Environment and Behaviour, 26(2), 223-238. Grodzinska-Jurczak, M., Agata, B., & Agata, T. (2003). Evaluating the impact of a school waste education programme upon students‗, parents‗ and teachers‗ environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviour International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 12(2), 106-122. Maddan, T. J., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3-9. Mensah, J., & Whitney, H. A. (1991). Some Third World environmental perceptions and behaviours concerning urban waste: A survey of Techniman, Ghana. The Canadian Geographer, 35(2), 156-165. Meyers, G. D, Glen McLeod., & Anbarci, M. A. (2006). An international waste convention: measures for achieving sustainable development. Waste Management & Research, 24(6), 505-513. McKenzie-Mohr, D., Nemeroff, L.S.; Beers, L., & Desamrais, S. (1995). Determinants of responsible environmental behavior. Journal of Social Issues 51, 139-156. Ogu, V. I. (2000). Private sector participation and municipal waste management in Benin City, Nigeria. Environment and Urbanization, 12(2), 103-117. Ogunyemi, B. (1994). Towards better management of urban wastes in Nigeria: Environmental education approach. In Albert, I. O. (ed), Proceedings of the International Symposium on Urban management and Urban Violence in Africa, Vol.1., Ibadan, 7-11 November 1994. Ibadan: Institut de Recherche en Afrique (IFRA) Olson, E. C., Bowman, M., & Roth, R. (1984). Interpretation and non-formal environmental education in natural resources management. Journal of Environmental Education, 15, 6-10. Onibokun, A. G. (1999). Managing the Monsters: Urban waste and Governance in Africa. International Development Research Centre, Ottowa Osinowo, F. A. O. (2001). Towards effective waste management in Nigeria. Nigerian Conservation Foundation, Lecture Series No. 1, a publication of the NCF Palmer, J. A. (1995). Environmental thinking in the early years: Understanding and misunderstanding of concepts related to waste management. Journal of Environmental Education Research, 1(1), 35-45.

Petts, J. (1994). Effective waste management: Understanding and dealing with public concerns. Waste Management & Research, 12(3), 207-222. Rahardyan, B., Matstuto, T., Kakuta, Y., & Tanaka, N. (2004). Resident‗s concerns and attitudes towards solid waste management facilities. Waste Management, 24, 437-451. Raudsepp, M. (2001). Some socio-demographic and socio-psychological predictors of environmentalism. TRAMES, 5(4), 355-367. Scott, D., & Willets, F. K. (1994). Environmental attitudes and behaviour. Environment and

Behaviour, 26(2), 239-261. Sha‗Ato, R., Aboho, S.Y., Oketunde, F. O., Eneji, I. S., Unazi, G., & Agwa, S. (2007). Survey of solid waste generation and composition in a rapidly growing urban area in Central Nigeria. Waste Management, 27(3), 352-358. Ssenyondo, M. M., Naluweta, M., Lule, R., Namaganda, C. I., & Namugenyi, H. (2008). A knowledge, attitude, practice and beliefs study on waste management in Kampala DistrictKawempe Division. Waste: The Social Context ‗08 Urban Issues & Solution. Conference Proceedings, May 11-15, 2008, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Sheppard, J. A. C. (1995). The black-white environmental concern gap: An examination of environmental paradigms. Journal of Environmental Education, 26(2), 24-35. Tikka, P. M., Kuitunen, M., & Tyns, S. M. (2000). Effects of educational background on students, attitudes, activity levels and knowledge concerning the environment. Journal of Environmental Education, 31(3), 12-19. UNCED (1992). Report of United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I). Retrieved May 23, 2008 from Web site: http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm Van Liere, K. D., & Dunlap, R. E (1981). Environmental concern: Does it make a difference how it‗s measured? Environment and Behaviour, 13, 651-676. Van Der Pligt, J., & De Vries, N. K. (1998). Belief importance in Expectancy-Value Models of attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1339-1354. Walling, E., Walston, A., Warren E., Warshay, B., & Wilhelm, E. (2004). Municipal solid waste management in developing countries. NTRES 314. Retrieved May 23, 2008 from Web site: http//.www.dnr.cornell.edu/saw44/NTRES331%5CProducts%5CSpring%202004%5Cpapers %5CSolidwasteManagement.pdf

DETERMINING SUSTAINABLE WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY DINING SERVICES USING THE THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR
Unpublished Thesis

YING (ZOE) ZHOU B.A., Kansas State University, 2007 KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY

Manhattan, Kansas 2010
The primary purposes of this study were to ascertain what SWM programs have been implemented in college and university foodservices operations and determine how NACUFS members‘ attitudes, subjective norms, and barriers affect the implementation of additional SWM programs based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). A secondary purpose was to identify the differences in intention to implement sustainable waste management programs based on characteristics of the respondents‘ age, size of facility, region of the country and if the facility had a sustainable waste management committee. In this study, 2,184 NACUFS members whose e-mail addresses were listed in the NACUFS membership directory were selected as subjects. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 17.0. Multiple linear regression analysis, T-tests, and ANOVA were used

to test the hypotheses and research questions. Statistical significance was set at p=0.05. The total number of responses was 212 resulting in a 13.5% response rate. The majority of respondents had implemented SWM programs that don‘t require major resources. NACUFS members had positive attitudes about implementing a SWM program and their superiors, university administrators, and students‘ opinions were important others to consider when implementing a SWM program. Whether a college and university foodservice has a sustainability committee was the only demographic that significantly influenced NACUFS members‘ intentions to implement a SWM program. Overall, attitude and subjective norms were the only significant predictors of intention to implement a SWM program (p.05). Therefore, if NACFUS members have a positive attitude about sustainability, important others around them who agree and there is a sustainability committee within the operation, they are more likely to implement a SWM program.

For literature: Reflecting on the sustainability trend, some research initiatives have addressed growing awareness and attitudes about environmental management (Gustin & Weaver, 1996). In addition, a number of studies have focused on identifying sustainability initiatives for hotels and restaurants and their motivations for environmental management (Kirk, 1995; Bohdanowicz, 2005; Mensah, 2006).

Waste Management in the Hospitality Industry
The concepts of sustainability and sustainable development (SD) in sustainable waste management programs have begun to gain momentum in various functions and activities in the hospitality and tourism industries. Hotels and motels have implemented environmentally conscious practices or converted to the ―green movement‖ for many reasons (Wolfe & Shanklin, 2001). There are approximately 4.5 million rooms at 48,000 hotel and motel properties in the United States (American Hotel & Lodging Association [AH&LA], 2008). Although each of these properties has its own unique operating characteristics, they benefit from implementing innovative sustainable waste management strategies that: (1) protect the environment, (2) provide better ways to meet customers‘ needs in ―green‖ operations, (3) cut down waste and costs, (4) increase environmentallyrelated governmental policies and regulations, (5) gain more competition power for ―green‖ markets, (6) boost employee morale, (7) limit risks, and (8) build a strong reputation and improve public relations (Morgan, 2007). The ―green‖ hotel was produced with the support of world leaders in the hospitality industry, including Accor, Carlson Hotels Worldwide, Hyatt, Hilton, Intercontinental Hotel Group, Marriott, Rizidor, and Starwood (Enz & Siguaw, 1999).

Waste Management Initiatives in Hotels, Motels and Resorts
Recycling programs. Marriott preserves the environment with the ECHO
(Environmentally Conscious Hospitality Operations) program through eco-friendly

guidelines to all hotels and associates through the ―reduce-reuse-recycle‖ process‖. Hyatt Regency Scottsdale has formed an active Green Team to implement the container recycling system, which diverts plastic, metal, and glass containers from the resort‘s compactor. Color-coded bins have been distributed in all back of house areas to make it easier for employees to recycle reusable wastes. Hyatt Regency Chicago implemented a comprehensive recycling program that helped the hotel cut the waste costs in half and remove 25 % of hotel garbage from landfills (Bâli & Balfe, 1998, and Enz & Siguaw, 1999). Resources conservation. Kimpton Corp. uses an in-room recycling program, has introduced organic foods and beverages into hotel mini bars, and their EarthCare program sets standards across all Kimpton properties. More than 40 environmentally friendly practices encourage the preservation of energy, water, air and land (Mata & Ilana, 2007). Hilton announced its long term goals and objectives towards building sustainability by reducing energy consumption from direct operations by 20%, CO2 emissions by 20%, output of waste by 20%, and water consumption by 10% (Bain & Walker, 2008). Starwood has signed an exclusive three-year agreement with Philips Electronics to provide SmartPower energy efficient televisions to its 460 properties across North America (Wolf & Kavanagh, 2009). Accor has confirmed its sustainable environment commitment by offering special sustainability training for employees, encouraging customers to reuse, reduce and recycle, and donating 50% of the savings on laundry costs when guests keep their bath towels for more than one night (Baumgartner & Delrieu, 2008).

Food waste composting. Fairmont Hotels & Resorts composts excess food and
leftovers, provides complimentary parking for hybrid vehicles, and converts kitchen grease to bio-dynamic fuel (Fairmont, 2009). Many years ago, the Holiday Inn North in St. Paul, Minnesota asked employees to divert food waste from their small compactor in the kitchen. This simple action helped the hotel to recover approximately 75% of the total food waste produced. As a result, the recycling program cut waste costs around $500 each month (Bâli & Balfe, 1998).

Waste management initiatives in restaurants
Quick service restaurants. McDonald's with nearly 14,000 restaurants
nationwide, adopted EarthShell containers made from reclaimed potato starch, natural limestone and post-consumer recycled fiber to reduce risk to wildlife (Construction Art, 2008). Starbucks has used organic coffee grounds, smaller size paper napkins and garbage bags, and discounts to guests if they purchase a reusable tumbler. It has set its 2009 eco-friendly goals for all new company-owned stores to have 50% of energy come from renewable sources, which will be 25% more energy efficient (Schultz, 2007). Pizza Fusion is the only restaurant chain in the world to build all their restaurants to LEED certification standards. Their restaurants feature a number of unique, eco-efficient products, techniques and designs, such as, insulation made from recycled blue jeans, 30% recaptured industrial concrete, ceiling baffles made from recycled composite board, and countertops from reused glass bottles (Haley, 2007). KFC - Taco Bell leads in sustainability by using solar energy preheating of fresh air coming into the building, daylight harvesting and LED lights, green power purchasing through RECs (Renewable Energy Certifications) firms, rainwater collection for irrigation, low-flow plumbing

fixtures and composting and waste recycling, including enhanced cooking oil reclamation (Chain Leader, 2009). Other restaurant chains that have joined in the sustainability movement include Denny‘s Corp., Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., and Subway. With about 250,000 fast-food restaurants in the U.S., this industry could make a large contribution to energy-saving and environmental protection efforts (Construction Art, 2008).

Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). A theory that explains behavior as an antecedent of three variables: attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). According to Ajzen‘s (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) there are three predictors that determine whether or not a person intends to do something. These predictors include: (1) if the person is in favor of doing it (‗attitude‘); (2) how much the person feels social pressure to accomplish it (‗subjective norms‘); and (3) if the person feels in control of the action (‗perceived behavioral control‘).

Attitudes towards the behavior. Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) have found that
attitude towards the behavior is determined by a person‘s evaluation of that behavior, and attitude is one of the best predictors of behavioral intention. It is assumed that if the person is in favor of doing something, then he/she may have more intention to do so. The function of attitude toward the behavior is the behavioral beliefs of these expected outcomes and the evaluations of these expected outcomes (Ajzen, 1991). For example, if NACUFS members have a positive attitude toward sustainable waste management, they will more likely implement a ―sustainable waste management program‖ (Chen, 2008).

Subjective norms about the behavior. Ajzen and Madden (1986) stated that
subjective norms measure the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform a behavior. Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) explained that the subjective norm summarizes the beliefs of other people concerning how the individual should behave in a situation (normative beliefs) and how motivated the individual is to comply with those individuals (motivation to comply). For example, NACUFS members‘ intentions to implement a sustainable waste management program increases as subjective norms, such as customers, competitors, vendors and suppliers, employees, or superiors, become more favorable (Chen, 2008). Perceived behavior control of the behavior. Some internal factors of perceived behavior control include: individual differences, information, skills, abilities, and emotion; some external factors include: time, cooperation of others, and financial limitations (Ajzen, 1985). Ajzen (1991) postulated that people may have a positive attitude towards performing a behavior, but they may not intend to perform it when faced with perceived barriers. Perceived behavioral control refers to one‘s personal control over their behaviors and decision making, which also influences the judgment of risks and benefits of their performing the behavior. Thus, if a person

perceives more challenges in performing, then their intention to perform is lower. Several reports have shown that college and university foodservice directors, assistant directors, managers, and others are facing specific and unique challenges to implementing sustainable waste management programs (Chen, 2008; Shanklin et al, 2003; University of Vermont, 2007).

Behavioral intention. Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) stated that behavioral
intention is a combination of a person‘s attitude toward the behavior, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control.

THEORY OF REASONED ACTION (TRA) Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) formulated the theory of reasoned action (TRA) that assisted in explaining human behavior. The TRA explained that a behavior intention is based on the attitude toward the behavior and subjective norms. According to the TRA, if people evaluated the suggested behavior as positive (attitude), and if their surroundings wanted them to perform the behavior (subjective norm), this results in higher intention (motivation) and they are more likely to do so. This TRA was related to voluntary behavior. When behavior was not 100% voluntary, perceived behavior control was added to the model and was called the theory of planned behavior (TPB). TPB can be identified barriers that prevent individuals from performing behaviors (Ajzen, 1991). Both the TRA and the TPB showed that behavior is considered to be mediated through cognitions; that is, what we know and think affects how we act (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services [DHHS] & National Institution of Health [NIH], 2003). The conceptual model is shown in Figure 2.1.

35

Waste Reduction. Using source reduction, recycling, or composting to prevent or reduce waste generation (EPA, 2008c). Sustainable Development. It is a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (WCED, 1987).

Refernces Aber, J., Kelly, T., & Mallory, B. (2009). The sustainable learning community: One university’s journey to the future. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.). Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11- 39). New York: Springer-Verlag. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. Ajzen, I. (2006). TPB diagram. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA. Retrieved from http://www.people.umass.edu/aizen/tpb.diag.html Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453-474. Bohdanowicz, P. (2005). European hoteliers‘ environmental attitudes. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 46, 188-204.

Reference:

Michele Tonglet, Paul S. Phillips, , Adam D. Read. Using

the Theory of Planned Behaviour to investigate the determinants of recycling behaviour:a case study from Brixworth, UK. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 41
(2004) 191–214

Abstract”
New mandatory household recycling targets present a serious challenge to UK Local Authorities (LAs). The key to achieving these targets is participation by households in waste management and recycling schemes. However, for these schemes to be successful, they must be based on a thorough understanding of householder attitudes to recycling, and their perceptions of the barriers to recycling. The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), which provides a theoretical framework for systematically identifying the determinants of recycling behaviour, was used as the basis for a study of 191 participants in a local kerbside recycling scheme. The findings suggest that pro-recycling attitudes are the major contributor to recycling behaviour, and that these attitudes are influenced firstly, by having the appropriate opportunities, facilities and knowledge to recycle, and secondly by not being deterred by the issues of physically recycling (for example time, space and inconvenience). Previous recycling experience, and a concern for the community and the consequences of recycling are also significant predictors of recycling behaviour. The implications of the findings for the development and imple mentation of recycling schemes and for marketing and communication campaigns which advocate the use of these schemes are discussed.

The TPB (see Ajzen, 1991 for a full review of the theory and its application) provides a framework for systematically investigating the factors which influence behavioural choices, and has been applied successfully to such diverse areas as leisure choice (Ajzen and Driver, 1992), driving violations (Parker et al., 1992), investment decisions (East, 1993) and dishonest actions (Beck and Ajzen, 1991). The theory, which was developed from the earlier Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980), assumes that people behave rationally, in that they consider the implications of their actions. Both theories apply to situations involving a choice of behaviour, where reasons can be given for the choice made (East, 1993). The TRA (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) hypothesises that the immediate determinant of behaviour is the individual‘s intention to perform, or not to perform that behaviour. Intentions are, in turn, influenced by two factors: 1. attitude, the individual‘s favourable or unfavourable evaluation of performing the behaviour, and 2. the subjective norm, the individual‘s perception of social pressure to perform or not to perform the behaviour. The TRA assumes that most behaviour is under volitional control, in that the individual can decide at will whether or not to perform the behaviour. However, Liska (1984) argues that the performance of many behaviours will be constrained by the lack of appropriate opportunities, skills and resources. In recognition of this, the TPB extends the TRA to include a third variable, perceived behavioural control, a measure of the individual‘s perception of their ability to perform the behaviour in question. Recycling is a behaviour which requires considerable effort on the part of the individual as household waste must be sorted, prepared and stored (Boldero, 1995), consequently the recycling decision is likely to be complex, and a number of factors may be taken into consideration. The TPB provides a theoretical framework for systematically identifying the factors which influence the recycling decision, and several studies have confirmed its utility for investigating the determinants of recycling behaviour (see for example, Boldero, 1995; Chan, 1998; Cheung et al., 1999; Davies et al., 2002; Taylor and Todd, 1995; Terry et al., 1999). However, although there is considerable support for the TPB, several authors have argued that it does not adequately explain recycling behaviour and have suggested that additional variables should be included within the model (Boldero, 1995; Davies et al., 2002). In addition, there is concern that the measure, perceived behavioural control, does not appear to be a significant predictor of recycling behaviour and alternatives to this measure have been proposed (Boldero, 1995; Davies et al., 2002). Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) recognise that factors external to the TRA, for example personality, past experience and demographic characteristics, may also influence behaviour, however, they maintain that this influence is indirect, mediated through the components of the model. The TPB, however, allows for the incorporation of additional variables, provided that these variables make a significant contribution to the explanation of behaviour provided by the model (Ajzen, 1991). Thus, this study has incorporated the additional variables of: moral norm; past experience; situational factors; and consequences of recycling. 3.1. Moral norm The moral norm relates to the individual‘s personal beliefs about the moral correctness or incorrectness of performing a specific behaviour. Inclusion of a moral factor has significantly improved the prediction of intention in studies of behaviours which are either socially unacceptable, or which contain a moral dimension; for example cannabis use (Conner and McMillan, 1999); dishonest actions (Beck and Ajzen, 1991); committing driving violations (Parker et al., 1992); and shoplifting (Tonglet, 2000, 2002). As the recycling of household waste is a behaviour likely to contain elements of personal morality and social responsibility, it was considered appropriate to include this variable within the model. 3.2. Past experience Ajzen (1991) argues that as experience with a behaviour contributes to the formation of attitude, subjective norm and perceived control, it is not an additional variable to the model. However, several studies indicate that previous experience has a direct effect on intention

and/or behaviour not mediated by the variables contained within the model (Bentler and Speckart, 1979; Fredericks and Dossett, 1983). Macey and Brown (1983) report that past experience is the best predictor of conservation behaviour, and recycling studies indicate that previous recycling experience should be included when considering the prediction of recycling behaviour (Boldero, 1995; Cheung et al., 1999; Terry et al., 1999). 3.3. Situational factors Individuals may hold positive attitudes towards recycling, however, this does not necessarily mean that they will engage in recycling behaviour. They may be constrained by the lack of opportunities, skills or resources. Although perceived behavioural control is assumed to capture the individual‘s perception of these factors, recycling studies using the TPB (Boldero, 1995; Davies et al., 2002) report that this measure is not a significant predictor of recycling. Perceived behavioural control is usually operationalised by asking respondents directly about the amount of control they feel they have over their behaviour. However, Manstead and Parker (1992) also recommend the use of an indirect measure which addresses specific beliefs relating to the individual‘s perception of their ability to perform the behaviour in question. Consistent with this approach, Boldero (1995) argues that recycling behaviour is likely to be influenced by situational factors such a s the amount of effort involved, inconvenience, storage space and access to recycling schemes. In view of the significance of these factors in Boldero‘s study, a measure incorporating situational factors was included within the model. 3.4. Consequences Previous TPB studies (Ajzen and Driver, 1992; East, 1993) suggest that attitudes are composed of two components, instrumental (based on knowledge) and experiential (relating to feelings). Consistent with this approach Davies et al. (2002) argue for the importance of separating recycling attitudes into two components, affective (experiential) and cognitive (instrumental). Within the TPB, the attitude measure refers to the individual‘s favourable or unfavourable evaluation of performing the behaviour, and is usually operationalised by asking the individual their feelings about performing the behaviour, for example, whether the behaviour in question is good, rewarding, useful, responsible, etc. Whilst this measure captures the experiential/affective component of attitudes, it does not pay sufficient attention to the instrumental/cognitive element, which is based on the individual‘s knowledge of the outcomes or consequences of performing the behaviour. It was therefore considered important to incorporate within the model a measure which assessed the costs and benefits of recycling behaviour.
Ajzen I. The Theory of Planned Behaviour. Organisational Behav Hum Decision Proces 1991;50:179 –211. Ajzen I, Driver BL. Application of the theory of planned behaviour to leisure choice. J Leis Res 1992;24(3):207–24. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1980. Barr S, Gilg AW, Ford NJ. A conceptual framework for understanding and analysing attitudes towards household-waste management. Environ Plan A 2001;33(11):2025–48. Beck L, Ajzen I. Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behaviour. J Res Persona 1991;25(3):285 – 301. Bentler PM, Speckart G. Models of attitude–behaviour relations. Psychol Rev 1979;86(5):452–64. Boldero J. The prediction of household recycling of newspapers: the role of attitudes, intentions and situational factors. J Appl Social Psychol 1995;25(5):440–62. Chan K. Mass communication and pro-environmental behaviour: waste recycling in Hong Kong. J Environ Manage 1998;52(4):317–25. Cheung SF, Chan DK, Wong ZS. Reexamining the theory of planned behaviour in understanding waste paper recycling. Environ Behav 1999;31(5):587–617. Conner M, McMillan B. Interaction effects in the theory of planned behaviour: studying cannabis use. The Br J Social Psychol 1999;38(2):195–222. Davies J, Foxall GR, Pallister J. Beyond the intention–behaviour mythology: an integrated model of recycling. Market Theory 2002;2(1):29–113. Department of the Environment (DoE). This Common Inheritance: Britains Environmental Strategy. London; 1990. Department of the Environment (DoE). Making Waste Work: A Strategy for sustainable waste management in England and Wales. London; 1995. Department of the Environment (DoE). Northern Ireland, Belfast: Waste Management Strategy; 2000.

Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). Less Waste: more Value: Waste Strategy consultation paper for England and Wales. London; 1998. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). A Way with Waste: A draft waste strategy for England and Wales. London; 1999a. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). Monitoring and evaluating recycling, composition and recovery programmes. London: HMSO; 1999b. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). Waste Strategy for England and Wales. London, 2000. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Municipal Waste Management Statistics 2001/2002. London, 2003a. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Government Response to Strategy Unit report ‗Waste Not, Want Not‘. London; 2003b. East R. Investment decisions and the theory of planned behaviour. J Econ Psychol 1993;14:337–75. Emery AD, Griffiths AJ, Williams KP. An in-depth study of the effects of socio-economic conditions on household waste recycling practices. Waste Manage Res 2003;21(3):180–90. ENCAMS, Waste Segmentation Research. http://www.encams.org/publications/research; 2002. Environment Agency. London: Household Waste Survey; 2002. European Union. Landfill Directive 1999/31/EC. Official Journal of the European Communities, L182/1; 1999. Evison T, Read AD. Local Authority recycling and waste: awareness publicity and promotion. Resour Conserv Recycl 2001;32(3–4):275–92. Fredericks AJ, Dossett DL. Attitude–behaviour relations: a comparison of the Fishbein –Ajzen and Bentler–Speckart models. J Personal Social Psychol 1983;45(3):501–12. House of Commons: Environmental Audit Committee. Waste—An Audit. London: HMSO; 2003a. House of Commons: Environmental, Food and Rural Affairs Committee. The Future of Wastes Management. London: HMSO; 2003b. House of Commons. Household Waste Recycling Bill (Bill 120). London: HMSO; 2003c. Hummel J. Collection Cost Projections. London: Strategy Unit; 2002. Liska AE. A critical examination of the causal structure of the Fishbein/Ajzen attitude–behaviour model. Social Psychol Q 1984;47(1):61–74. McDonald S, Oates C. Reasons for non-participation in a kerbside recycling scheme. Resour Conserv Recycl 2003;39(4):369–85. Macey SM, Brown MA. Residential energy conservation: the role of past experience in repetitive household behaviour. Environ Behav 1983;15(2):123–41. Manstead A, Parker D. Evaluating and extending the theory of planned behaviour. Eur Rev Social Psychol 1992;77:317–26. MORI. Public Attitudes Towards Recycling and Waste Management. London: Strategy Unit; 2002. Northamptonshire County Council. Northampton: Northamptonshire Joint Waste Strategy; 2002. Office for National Statistics. http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/area; 2003. Parfitt JP, Lovett AA, Sunnenberg G. A classification of local authority waste collect ion and recycling strategies in England and Wales. Resour Conserv Recycl 2001;32(3/4):239–58. Parfitt J. Analysis of Household Waste Composition and Factors Driving Waste Increases. London: Strategy Unit; 2002. Parker D, Manstead ASR, Strading SG, Reason JT, Baxter JS. Intentions to commit driving violations: an application of the theory of planned behaviour. J Appl Psychol 1992;77:94 –101. Phillips PS, Holley K, Bates M, Fresstone N. Corby waste not: an initial review of the UKs largest holistic waste minimisation project. Resour Conserv Recycl 2002;36(1):1–33. Price JL. The landfill directive and the challenge ahead: demands and pressures on the UK householder. Resour Conserv Recycl 2001;32(3–4):333–48. Read AD. Making waste work- making UK national solid waste strategy work at the local scale. Resour Conserv Recycl 1999a;26(3/4):259–85. Read AD. A weekly doorstep recycling collection, I had no idea we could! Overcoming the local barriers to participation. Resour Conserv Recycl 1999b;26(3/4):217–49. Read AD, Reed S. How to exceed 50% waste diversion through composting and recycling from the kerbside. In: Proceedings of the ‗Waste in the 21st Century‘. Northampton: UCN; January 2001. Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). Edinburgh: National Waste Strategy Scotland; 2003. Strategy Unit. Waste Not Want Not: a strategy for dealing with the waste problem in England. London; 2002. Taylor S, Todd P. An integrated model of waste management behaviour: a test of household recycling and composting intentions. Environ Behav 1995;27(5):603–30. Terry DJ, Hogg MA, White KM. The theory of planned behaviour: self-identity, social identity and group norms. Br J Social Psychol 1999;38(3):225–44. Thomas C. Public understanding and its effect on recycling performance in Hampshire and Milton Keynes. Resour Conserv Recycl 2001;32(3/4):259–74. Tonglet M. Consumer misbehaviour: consumers‘ perceptions of shoplifting and retail security. Security J 2000;13(4):19–33. Tonglet M. Consumer misbehaviour: an exploratory study of shoplifting. J Consum Behav: An Int Rev 2002;1(4):336–54. Tucker P, Murney G, Lamont J. Participation in recycling: a comparative study of four kerbside collection schemes. J Waste Manage Resour Recov 1997;4:11–20. Tucker P, Speirs D. Model Forecasts of Recycling Participation Rates and Material Capture Rates. London: Strategy

Unit; 2002. Welsh Assembly Government. Wise about Waste: The National Waste Strategy for Wales. Cardiff; 2002. Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP). http://www.wrap.org.uk; 2003. Williams ID, Kelly J. Green waste collection and the publics recycling behaviour in the Borough of Wyre, England. Resour Conserv Recycl 2003;38(2):139–60.

Theory of Waste Management

Waste Management Theory (WMT) has been introduced to channel environmental sciences into engineering design. WMT is a unified body of knowledge about waste and waste management. It is an effort to organise the diverse variables of the waste management system as it stands today. WMT is considered within the paradigm of Industrial Ecology, and built side-by-side with other relevant theories, most notably Design Theory. Design Theory is a relatively new discipline, still under development. Following its development offers valuable insights about evolving technical theories. According to Love (2002), it is crucial to theory development to integrate theories from other bodies of knowledge, as well as the clarification of the definitionsof core concepts, and mapping out key issues, such as domains, epistemologies and ontologies. At the present stage of WMT development, scientific definitions of key concepts have been offered, and evolving of WMT under the paradigm of Industrial Ecology is in progress. The function of science is to build up systems of explanatory techniques; a variety of representative devices, including models, diagrams and theories (Toulmin 1953). Theories can be considered milestones of scientific development. Theories are usually introduced when previous study of a class of phenomena has revealed a system of uniformities. The purpose of theory is then to explain systems of regularities that cannot be explained with scientific laws (Hempel 1966). Formally, a scientific theory may be considered as a set of sentences expressed in terms of a specific vocabulary. Theory will always be thought of as formulated within a lingustic framework of a clear specified logical structure, which determines, in particular, the rules of deductive inference. (Hempel, 1965) Take the example of the definition of waste. The European Commission and Member States were gathered for a two-day workshop in Leipzig on February 25-26 2004, to discuss the classification of treatment operations and of the waste definition. One of the observations of the Leipzig workshop was that ―using the definition of waste is a tricky affair when determining when something becomes waste and when it stops being waste.‖ To the first situation belongs among others the placing of re-use, the application of the definition of waste to end-of- life vehicles. To the second belong for example treated construction and demolition waste (ISWA

2004). The basic proposal of WMT is that it is able to define waste unambiguously. Four waste classes have been defined (Table 1). Table 1 Classes of waste (Pongrácz and Pohjola 1997).
Class 1 Non-wanted things, created not intended, or not avoided, with no purpose. Class 2 Things that were given a finite purpose, thus destined to become useless after fulfilling it. Class 3 Things with well-defined purpose, but their performance ceased being acceptable due to a flaw in their Structure or State. Class 4 Things with well-defined purpose, and acceptable performance, but their users failed to use them for their intended purpose.

The taxonomy of waste in Table 1 was formulated using an object oriented modelling language, PSSP™, which is based on the ontological commitment that every real thing can be formalised as an object having four attributes: Purpose, Structure, State, and Performance (Pohjola and Tanskanen 1998). Using the taxonomy of Table 2, all of the problem waste definition areas defined in the Leipzig workshop were possible to identify as follows (Pongrácz et al. 2004): - Re-use happens when a thing that has just performed its purpose and momentarily no new purpose is assigned to it. This generally applies to wastes of class 2. A thing that has fulfilled its purpose is not necessarily useless. It is because usefulness is defined by structure and state, while re-use is subject of purpose. As long as structure and state allow performance with respect to the assigned purpose, re-usable things shall not be considered wastes. An empty bottle, whose Structure is undamaged is thus a useful non-waste. - End-of-life vehicles represent wastes of class 3. They are aggregate things composed of numerous structural parts. The loss of performance can be attributable to the inability of one or several structural parts to perform their purpose. Repair or changing the faulty structural parts can extend useful life. Table 2 Waste minimization measures vs. Industrial Ecology principles (Pongrácz).

Waste minimization – resources use optimization Prevention of waste creation is the main priority of waste management, which corresponds to the principal goal of waste management: conservation of resources. Moving toward waste minimisation requires that the firm commits itself to increasing the proportion of non-waste leaving the process. It has been agued that, it follows from the laws of thermodynamics, that producing by-products is concomitant of a main product (Baumgärtner & de Swaan Arons 2003). For this reason, industrial firms have to look beyond their factory walls, and seek for external utilization of their waste, in accordance with the principles of Industrial Ecology (IE). If we accept that waste minimization and resources us optimization is the most important objective of waste management (Pongrácz 2002), it is essential that WMT is to be considered together with IE, as resource use optimization considerations reach beyond the tradition scope of waste management. It was argued that there is considerable overlapping between the goals of IE and waste management where waste minimization in concerned. In Table 2, the principles of IE (Graedel and Allenby 1995), and waste minimization measures (Vancini 2000) are listed. eferences

R Baumgärtner waste. A th S & de Swaan Arons S (2003) Necessity and Inefficiency in the Generation of ermodynamic analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology 7(2):113-123. European Environmental Agency (1999) Making sustainability accountable: Eco-efficiency, resource productivity and innovation. Topic report No 11/1999. Graedel TE & Allenby BR (1995) Industrial Ecology. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N Jersey. Hempel, C.G. (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation. And other Essays in the Philosophy of Science . The Free Press, A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. New York. Hempel CG (1966) Philosophy of Natural Science. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. ISBN 0-13-663823-6. ISWA (International Solid Waste Association) 2004 EU newletter 38. ISWA General Secretariat, February & March 2004. Love T (2002) Constructing a coherent cross-disciplinary body of theory about designing and designs: some philosophic al issues. Design Studies 23(3): 345-361. Pohjola VJ & Tanskanen J (1998) Phenomenon driven process design methodology: Formal representation. Proc. CHISA´98 Conference, Aug. 23.-28. 1998, CD-ROM of full texts. Czech Society of Chemical Engineering. Software & design Magicware Ltd. Prague, Czech Republic. Ew Po vember 12-14 1997, Sophia Antipolis, France. pp.65-77. ngrácz E & Pohjola VJ (1997) The Conceptual Model of Waste Management Proc. ENTREE‘97, No Pongrácz E & Pohjola VJ (1998) Object Oriented Modelling of Waste Management. Proc. 14th International Conference on Solid Waste Technology and Management U.S.A., November 1-4, 1998. ngrácz E (2002) Re-defining the Concepts of Waste and Waste Management: Evolving the Theory of Waste Management. Doctoral Disser Process and Environmental Engineering, Oulu, Finland. Available online at URL: http://herkules.oulu.fi/isbn9514268210/. . Philadelphia, PA Po tation. University of Oulu, Department of ngrácz E, Phillips PS and Keiski RL (2004) Evolving the Theory of Waste Management. Accepted to the Waste Management 200 Po 4 Conference. To be presented in Rhodes, Greece, Po

ial Ecology journal. September 29
th

–October 1
st

2004. ngrácz E. Industrial ecology and waste management – from theories to applications. Submitted to the Progress in Industr Toulmin, Stephen (1953) The philosophy of science: an introduction. Hutchinson University Library. London. UK. Vancini F (2000) Strategic waste prevention, OECD reference manual. OECD ENV/EPOC/PPC(2000

Article reference: )5/FINAL Working party on Pollution Prevention and Control Pongrácz E, Phillips PS & Keiski RL (2004) Evolving the Theory of Waste Management – Implications to w aste minimization. In: Pongrácz E. (ed.): Proc. Waste Minimization and Resources Use Optimization Conference. June 10, 2004, University of Oulu, Finland. Oulu University Press: Oulu. p.61-67.