Socio-Spatial Factors Affecting Household Recycling in Townhouses in Pretoria, South Africa

Abstract

Abstract:Although social factors affecting recycling have been widely researched, the effect of spatial and physical factors posed by medium-density housing, such as townhouses, is less understood. Using the Theory of Planned Behaviour, the relative effect of three sets of factors on household recycling in townhouses are examined, including 'attitude' (about recycling), 'subjective norm' (social pressure), and 'perceived behaviour control' (ability to recycle). A questionnaire survey of 300 households was conducted in Equestria, an enclosed middle-income residential estate consisting of several townhouse complexes. Confirmatory factor analysis verified the three factor measurement model for recycling participation. Both recyclers and non-recyclers showed positive attitudes toward recycling and felt social pressure to recycle. Non-recyclers, however, felt significantly less able to recycle. Most recyclers as well as non-recyclers indicated that certain proposals for increasing recycling may cause them to recycle more, in particular a system through which the management agency arranges access for a recycling company to collect recyclables from strategically located collection points inside the complex. Urban planning and design recommendations for facilitating recycling in townhouses are discussed.

The Effect of a Weekly Comingled Kerbside Collection Service on Household Recycling in a Gated Community in Pretoria, South Africa

“…The construct validity in this study differs to the validity we obtained in our study in townhouses, in which a confirmatory factor analysis on the same questionnaire verified the three-factor model of the TPB [11]. Respondents in the exclusively higher income communities of Boardwalk Meander and Silver Lakes are arguably more homogeneous in terms of socio-demographic profile and economic status compared to respondents in the middle income townhouse estates, suggesting that respondents in Boardwalk Meander and Silver Lakes perhaps do not really differentiate between their own attitudes towards recycling and the perceived expectations of their neighbours (hence, their neighbours' own attitudes towards recycling).…”

“…Table 1 shows the items we formulated to measure the constructs of 'attitude' (towards recycling), 'subjective norm' (social pressure), and PBC (ability to recycle). We discuss the formulation of these items in more detail in a similar study about recycling in townhouses in the same special issue of Waste, Space, and Place [11]. The main points are summarised below.…”

Household Waste Sorting Participation in Developing Countries—A Meta-Analysis

“…Situational factors not only have a direct influence on the participation in waste sorting but they also influence attitudes and perceived behavior control, thereby influencing waste sorting participation indirectly [45,52,58]. As mentioned earlier, regardless of principally positive attitudes to waste sorting, low participation rates can occur when people find it hard to adapt to waste sorting because it is not (yet) a habitual task of daily routines or a learned behavior [103].…”

“…Subjective norm refers to the perception of expectations to participate in waste sorting [64,89]. Part of subjective norms are social norm [66,67,[69][70][71], social motivation [25,44,45,48,68,84], social pressure [25,58,67,90] and perceived reputation [58,61], i.e., the way opinions of others, and the importance of those opinions, are perceived in terms of the standing in society.…”

“…Multiple included studies found that subjective norms significantly positively influence participation in household waste sorting in developing countries [66,67,[69][70][71]. On the other hand, some studies found that subjective norms less significantly influence the tendency to sort the waste in developing countries [25,[44][45][46]68,84] because internally generated motivation is thought to be more likely to lead to participation in sorting than the influence of family, peers or others [68].…”