________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

Surveying the Influence of Scientific Information on

Recycling Behaviors

By: Zach Hull & Brendan McConnor

________________________________________________________________________
Environmental Science 497 Senior Research

Abstract
Increasing amounts of waste have required citizens to question the materials in
products they use and at what rate they are being consumed. According to Sandy Crooks,
the Moscow recycling education and outreach coordinator, paper alone makes up 2/3 of
all waste produced by the city of Moscow, Idaho. Understanding the attitudes towards
recycling, and citizens perceptions of the barriers to recycling is important. We will be
using the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), which will provide a theoretical framework
for systematically identifying the determinants of recycling behavior among University of
Idaho students. Investigating the influence on recycling behaviors, specifically paper,
particularly the level of influence of scientific information on these behaviors, is the goal
of the research that has been conducted.
Expected influences will be, access to the appropriate opportunities, facilities and
the knowledge to recycle. Also by not being deterred by the issues of physically
recycling, things like time space and inconvenience. Previous recycling experience,
concern for consequences of recycling, like energy use, can also be seen as significant
predictors of recycling paper behavior. (Science)
Introduction
There is a lack of information regarding the issue of why and whether or not
people recycle paper. More specifically, if and why young adults studying at the
University of Idaho recycle. We are curious to understand how many students participate
in waste reduction activities, specifically related to paper. There is not a lot of scientific
literature on the influence science has on recycling behavior. We are investigating
whether it is scientific evidence, awareness or social pressures that get people to recycle.
The reason we are curious to understand this relationship, is because paper plays an
important role in the carbon cycle, and this role is often overlooked. It should be
understood why this role is so important and whether or not recycling paper is more
efficient, in terms of energy use, monetary and environmental costs, as opposed to
disposal into a landfill. Theoretically, disposal of paper would act as a carbon sink,
through a process known as sequestration, requiring more trees to be grown, thus
sequestering even more carbon, while recycling is possibly requiring more energy due to
shipping costs, material recovery, and repurposing, and being sent back through the cycle
up to four times.
According to the director of the Environmental Protection Agencys Solid Waste
Office, Michael Shapiro, A well-run curbside recycling program can cost anywhere
from $50 to more than $150 per tontrash collection and disposal programs, on the other
hand, cost anywhere from $70 to more than $200 per ton. This demonstrates that, while
theres still room for improvements, recycling can be cost-effective. The nation's two
leading influential environmental organizations, Natural Resource Defense Council and
Environmental Defense, issued reports detailing the benefits of recycling and showing
how municipal recycling programs reduce pollution and the use of virgin resources while
decreasing the sheer amount of garbage and the need for landfill space. Manufacturing
products from recovered materials is less polluting than producing the same products
from newly harvested or extracted virgin materials. Making paper from recycled fibers,
for example, uses less energy and water and produces less air and water pollution than
making paper from trees.

There has been a fair amount of research done on how the public understands
science, and it will be interesting to compare our results to research campaigns.
Expanding the knowledge on this issue is important because, according to our contact at
Moscow Recycling, two-thirds of all waste produced in Latah County is paper products.
We will question students here at the University about their behaviors regarding paper
recycling and examine the decisions they make after being presented with scientific
information. We plan to collect the information regarding behavior changes, and identify
influences, and determine whether or not they are due to an understanding of science, or
simply a social pressure.

Methods
We will be using The Theory of Planned behaviors or TPB, which is a
systematical model that can be applied in measuring and understanding the underlying
causes behind certain behaviors (Ajzen 1991). A college student chooses to recycle based
on the variables of their situational opportunities, attitudes towards science, environment,
and social pressures. The TPB uses these three factors, (attitude, subjective norms,
perceived behavioral control) to calculate the perceived intentions of persons behaviors.

We have developed a survey to try and measure the influence of science on the
intentions of recycling paper. We have issued a survey questioning peoples behaviors
and influences on those behaviors. We organized our questions into three categories,
subjective norms, perceived behavioral controls, and the attitude towards the behavior.
Our participants were asked to rate their level of agreement on a likert scale of 1-4,
ranging from all of the time to never, or from strongly agree to strongly disagree. On our
survey we asked participants the following questions; what products do you recycle? The
options provided were: aluminum (soda/beer cans), tin (soup cans), paper/cardboard,
plastic, and glass. The rest of the questions were based on the three factors from the TPB
model.

Perceived Behavioral Controls

Perceived behavioral controls represents the opportunities to recycle, or the
amount of effort it takes an individual to recycle. In the area of perceived behavioral
controls we asked participants to indicate their level of agreement with the following
questions:
- I know what items of household waste can be recycled.
- I know where to take my household waste for recycling,
- The county picks up my recycling,
- Recycling paper at their residence is easy,
- Recycling paper in public areas is easy, and
- Recycling paper on campus is easy.

Attitudes Towards Recycling Behaviors

Our next section was based on attitudes toward the behavior of recycling, which,
has many variables that can be measured. One will be the attitude of University of Idaho
students toward the science behind recycling paper, in particular, and will allow us to
extrapolate the influence and gain an understanding it has on the intentions to recycle.
We broke our questions into four parts so we could specifically identify attitudes
towards certain behaviors, and why participants do or do not engage in the particular
behavior. We allowed for an other option for each section (not fully shown), as to
hopefully understand more clearly other positive or negative incentives. We asked the
participants to check all that apply in each section.

I recycle because
- It would be wrong of me not to recycle my household waste if possible.
- Not recycling goes against my principles.
- Recycling is environmentally responsible.
- Recycling saves me money.
- Of my knowledge of the recycling process.
- It reduces the effects of Climate Change.
Other?__________________________________________________________________

I recycle Paper because

- I want to save trees from being cut down.
- It is good for the environment.
- It reduces the effects of Climate Change.

I do not recycle because

- Recycling is a waste of time.
- There is no personal benefit.
- It is too much effort to recycle my household waste.
- The evidence in support of recycling is not conclusive.

I do not recycle paper because

- Recycling paper is a waste of time.
- There is no personal benefit to recycling paper.
- It is too much effort to recycle my household paper waste.
- The evidence in support of recycling paper is not conclusive.

Subjective norms
Subjective norms refer to the influence of social pressures on individuals to
recycle. These are social pressures that an individual takes into account and are usually
people or groups of people that the person admire and/or trust. We asked participants to
indicate their level of agreement, from agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, and
disagree.
- How much does scientific information influence your recycling behaviors?
- I grew up with recycling in my hometown community.
- I agree with the recycling policy of my hometown.
- I look up to recycles his or her household waste.
We then intervene with scientific information about the energy efficiency, and
environmental costs of recycling certain products, as opposed to others. The information
we provided follows.
Knowing what to recycle can be hard each material has different costs and
benefits both financial and environmentally. The EPA suggests that recycling in the U.S.
reduces the same amount of greenhouse gas pollution as taking more than 38 million cars
off the road.
An aluminum container can be recycled endlessly with no loss of quality. And
recycling an aluminum container uses less than 5% of the energy that it takes to refine the
bauxite ore into fresh aluminum1. Recycling a tin package uses fewer resources and
energy than other materials. Each tin can contains between 25 and 60% recycled steel2.
Petroleum based plastic is an environmental hazard because it arguably will never
biodegrade without sunlight and even with sunlight it can take hundreds of years to
biodegrade. Recycling glass saves energy, but much less energy per ton of glass than
other products. According to a study done by NYU, glass is more efficient being reused
rather than being recycled3.
Last year in the United States, according to the EPA, 16.7 million tons of
carbon was sequestered (stored) via wood products, like paper, through disposal in
landfills. That's 61.1 million tons of carbon dioxide, which would otherwise be floating
around in the atmosphere, equivalent to 10.7 million cars annual emissions4. According
to Sandy Crooks, Education and Outreach coordinator at Moscow Recycling, 2/3 of all
waste produced in the city is made of paper products. Paper may be recycled up to four

1 Biello,

D. (2015, January 28). Is Recycling Worth the Effort? Retrieved February 10, 2015,
from http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/is-recycling-worth-the-effort/
2 Tins Made From Steel. (n.d.). Retrieved February 10, 2015, from
http://www.independentcan.com/sustainability
3 Is recycling glass worth it? (2006, January 20). Retrieved February 19, 2015, from
http://grist.org/article/pain-in-the-glass/

4 GHG Reporting Program Data Sets. (n.d.). Retrieved February 19, 2015, from
http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/ghgdata/reportingdatasets.html

times, however, the shipping cost, material recovery, repurposing, and reduced
productivity of the fiber, decreases the efficiency of recycling paper.
We would expect our information to persuade one who is influenced by scientific
information to see how they would change their intentions regarding the benefit or nonbenefit of recycling paper. We will derive the difference of the perceived recycling habits
of paper and compare this to previous research as well as correlations between
demographics and other influences of recycling behavior results in our survey.
The following questions are taken after the first set is answered, and the information has
been read:
Knowing this; would you recycle these products?
(All the time) (Most of the time) (Sometimes) (Never)
1
2
3
___ Aluminum (soda/Beer cans)
___Tin (soup Cans)
___Paper/Cardboard
___Plastic
___Glass

I am confident that I can trust the information presented. (circle one)

(Agree) (Somewhat Agree) (Somewhat Disagree) (Disagree)
1
2
3
4
Comments? (optional) __________________________________________________
I am confident that I can trust the information presented about paper. (circle one)
(Agree) (Somewhat Agree) (Somewhat Disagree) (Disagree)
1
2
3
4
Comments?
(optional)______________________________________________________________
I would be willing to share this information with others. (circle one)
(Agree) (Somewhat Agree) (Somewhat Disagree) (Disagree)
1
2
3
4

Data Analysis:
The overall result will be hard to predict. We are not sure what will be most
commonly recycled or why. We predict that the biggest constraints on recycling behavior
are the perceived behavioral controls; more specifically the effort takes to recycle
household waste. We would expect our information to persuade one who is influenced by
scientific information. The positive information on recycling aluminum, tin, plastic, and
glass is positive so we should see an increase in perceived recycling behavior. The

information about recycling paper is negative so we should see an overall decrease in

perceived recycling behavior.
We will derive the difference of the perceived recycling habits of paper and
compare this to previous research as well as correlations between demographics and other
influences of recycling behavior results, in our survey. Behaviors that are perceived are
different from the behaviors we actually perform. We will use additional research to find
other influences of scientific information on our actual behaviors.

Time Line & Budget

January 12th - 23rd Formulate Survey Questions

February 23rd - February 6th Get permission from professors for distribution
February 7th - March 1st Administer Surveys
March 1st - April 30th Data Collection/Analysis
Estimated Costs-- $15 for surveys/goodies for taking survey
-- $50 final poster

Works cited (APA)

Top 10 Reasons to Recycle. (n.d.). Retrieved December 9, 2014, from
http://www.starkstate.edu/green/reasons-to-recycle
(n.d.). Retrieved December 1, 2014, from
http://environment.about.com/od/recycling/a/benefit_v
Tonglet, Phillips, Read, M. (2004). Using the Theory of Planned Behavior to investigate
the determinants of recycling behavior: A case study from Brixworth, UK. Resource,
Conservation, and Recycling, 41(3), 191-2014. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344903001629
Versin, P. (2014, November 3). Striving for a Climate Change. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/article/Seeking-a-Climate-Change/149707/
Myers, D. (2008). Behavior and Attitudes. In Social psychology (9th ed., pp. 120-128).
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Theory of Planned Behavior/ Reasoned Action. (n.d.). Retrieved December 10, 2014,
from http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/theory clusters/health
communication/theory_planned_behavior/
Ajzen, I. (n.d.). Download PDFs. Retrieved December 11, 2014, from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/074959789190020T