Relationships between set-out rate, participation rate and set-out quantity in recycling programs

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-3449(97)01194-4Get rights and content

Abstract

The most often used indicators for participation in recycling programs are the set-out rate, the participation rate and the quantity of recyclables per recycler. The participation rate, measured from the set-out rate over a period of time, is often used to estimate the amount of recyclables to be collected. However, the behavioral mechanisms that underlie the set-out rate, and hence the participation rate and the estimation of amount of recyclables collected, are largely unknown. This paper briefly evaluates the factors contributing to public participation in recycling programs and discusses the factors influencing set-out rate and set-out frequency. The effective participation rate is introduced as the ratio of the amount of recyclables collected to the amount of recyclables generated. The relationships between the set-out rate, the participation rate as measured over a period time, and the amount of recyclables collected as measured through the effective participation rate, are simulated on the basis of two hypotheses for behavioural mechanisms. The simulation shows that a meaningful period for determining the effective participation rate largely depends on the relative storage capacity. The larger the storage capacity compared with the generation of recyclables, the longer the period that should be used to estimate the effective participation rate to predict more accurately the amount of recyclables collected. This paper provides a basis for further research by offering some insight into participation behavioural mechanisms.

References (19)

  • R. De Young

    Recycling as appropriate behaviour: a review of survey data from selected recycling education programs in Michigan

    Resour., Conserv. Recycl.

    (1990)
  • Litter and Recycling Research Association of Victoria (LRRAV)

    Recycling Audit and Garbage Bin Analysis

    (1995)
  • F.S. Wang

    SWIM — A Computer Model for Solid Waste Integrated Management

  • R.C. Curnow et al.

    Understanding Why People Recycle

  • R.C. Curnow et al.

    Making Recycling Work by Understanding the Community

    (1993)
  • K. Hageman

    How to make a good recycling program better

    BioCycle

    (1989)
  • J. Bagby et al.

    Participation in Seattle's curbside recycling collection program

    Resour. Recycl.

    (1992)
  • S. Gruder-Adams

    Recycling in multifamily units

    BioCycle

    (1990)
  • D.D. Burca et al.

    Assessing the role of kerbside recycling in municipal waste management in the Dublin Region

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (37)

  • Distance is a barrier to recycling – or is it? Surprises from a clean test

    2020, Waste Management
    Citation Excerpt :

    The days occurred in August, which was a convenience choice that we note here only for reference.) These indicators are standard ones used in other waste studies (Dahlén, 2005; DETR, 1999; Wang et al., 1997), in this case applied to each group of households on the same floor (F) of the same building a set distance (D) from the bins. ( Although our data is available daily, we have analysed it by month to be consistent with those standard indicators.

  • A case study of packaging waste collection systems in Portugal – Part I: Performance and operation analysis

    2017, Waste Management
    Citation Excerpt :

    More case studies of waste collection systems are needed to generate a greater knowledge base of such systems and to understand how they should be adapted in order to be successfully implemented. Source-separated waste collection systems for extracting recyclables from urban waste have been analyzed according to their performance in terms of costs (Rogge and De Jaeger, 2013; Teerioja et al., 2012), environmental impacts (Maimoun et al., 2013; Powell, 1996; Teixeira et al., 2014; Yildiz-Geyhan et al., 2016), recycling/collection rates (Wilson and Williams, 2007), and public participation and behavior (Bolaane, 2006; Martin et al., 2006; Shaw et al., 2006; Oskamp et al., 1996; Wang et al., 1997). Focusing on performance and operations, Huang et al. (2011) developed key performance indicators to assess the efficiency of municipal solid waste collection.

  • Exploring social dimensions of municipal solid waste management around the globe – A systematic literature review

    2016, Waste Management
    Citation Excerpt :

    Nixon and Saphores (2007) suggested that a high participation level could be achieved through improving recycling convenience, establishing “recycling goals,” assigning neighborhood leaders to encourage participation, and improving public education. The importance of the availability of curbside collection and convenience was further confirmed by researchers (Wang et al., 1997; Gonzalez-Torre et al., 2003; Chen and Tung, 2010; Largo-Wight et al., 2013; Rousta and Ekstrom, 2013; Wagner et al., 2013). The effects of education on bridging the gap between “having the right attitude and actualizing that in behavior” was highlighted by Neo (2010) and Massawe et al. (2014).

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text