IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i11p6454-d823755.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Encouraging Reuse in the Corrugated Packaging Industry Using Persuasion and Operant Conditioning

Author

Listed:
  • Harshwardhan Ketkale

    (Systems Engineering Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • Steven Simske

    (Systems Engineering Department, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

Abstract

Greenhouse gas emission is a major contributor to climate change and global warming. Many sustainability efforts are aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These include recycling and the use of renewable energy. In the case of recycling, the general population is typically required to at least temporarily store, and possibly haul, the materials rather than simply throwing them away. This effort from the general population is a key aspect of recycling, and in order for it to work, some investment of time and effort is required by the public. In the case of corrugated cardboard boxes, it has been observed that there is less motivation for the general population to recycle them. This paper explores different means of motivating people to reuse, and not just recycle, with different types of incentives. The paper addresses the use of persuasion techniques and operant conditioning techniques together to incent the general population to adopt sustainable efforts. The paper makes an attempt to segment the general population based on persuasion preference, operant condition preference, and personality type to use different forms of incentives and motivational work unlike any approaches found in the literature review. Four types of persuasion techniques and four types of operant conditioning are combined to give 16 different types of incentives. Two online surveys are conducted, and their data are analyzed (using entropy, Hamming distance, chi-square, and ANOVA). The results indicate that “positive reinforcement ethos” is a cost-effective way to incent the general population. The results of this study can be applied to a wide range of applications such as incentives for solar panels, incentives for vaccination, and other areas wherein sustainability-centric behavior is encouraged.

Suggested Citation

  • Harshwardhan Ketkale & Steven Simske, 2022. "Encouraging Reuse in the Corrugated Packaging Industry Using Persuasion and Operant Conditioning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-28, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6454-:d:823755
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6454/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6454/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Seonghoon Hong & Richard M. Adams, 1999. "Household Responses to Price Incentives for Recycling: Some Further Evidence," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(4), pages 505-514.
    2. Gilli, Marianna & Nicolli, Francesco & Farinelli, Paola, 2018. "Behavioural attitudes towards waste prevention and recycling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 294-305.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Harshwardhan Ketkale & Steven Simske, 2023. "Demographic Considerations in Incenting Reuse of Corrugated Cardboard Boxes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-23, July.
    2. Harshwardhan Ketkale & Steven Simske, 2023. "A LifeCycle Analysis and Economic Cost Analysis of Corrugated Cardboard Box Reuse and Recycling in the United States," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, February.

    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. Viscusi, W. Kip & Huber, Joel & Bell, Jason, 2023. "Changes in household recycling behavior: Evidence from panel data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    2. Harshwardhan Ketkale & Steven Simske, 2023. "Demographic Considerations in Incenting Reuse of Corrugated Cardboard Boxes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-23, July.
    3. Valente, Marica, 2023. "Policy evaluation of waste pricing programs using heterogeneous causal effect estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    4. Maarten A. Allers & Corine Hoeben, 2010. "Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 405-428, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Chiara Franco & Claudia Ghisetti, 2022. "What shapes the “value-action” gap? The role of time perception reconsidered," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 1023-1053, October.
    7. Nick Johnstone & Julien Labonne, 2004. "Generation of Household Solid Waste in OECD Countries: An Empirical Analysis Using Macroeconomic Data," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(4).
    8. Heller, Marit H. & Vatn, Arild, 2017. "The divisive and disruptive effect of a weight-based waste fee," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 275-285.
    9. Keren Kaplan Mintz & Jenny Kurman, 2020. "A cross-cultural perspective on facilitators of recycling," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6627-6643, October.
    10. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2003. "Willingness to pay for different degrees of Abundance of Elephants," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48966, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    11. Scott, Sue & Watson, Dorothy, 2006. "Introduction of Weight-Based Charges for Domestic Solid Waste Disposal," MPRA Paper 107713, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Bueno, Matheus & Valente, Marica, 2019. "The effects of pricing waste generation: A synthetic control approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 274-285.
    13. Hai-Lan Yang & Robert Innes, 2007. "Economic Incentives and Residential Waste Management in Taiwan: An Empirical Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(3), pages 489-519, July.
    14. Scott J. Callan & Janet M. Thomas, 2006. "Analyzing Demand For Disposal And Recycling Services: A Systems Approach," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 32(2), pages 221-240, Spring.
    15. Chamizo-Gonzalez, Julián & Cano-Montero, Elisa Isabel & Muñoz-Colomina, Clara Isabel, 2016. "Municipal Solid Waste Management services and its funding in Spain," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 65-72.
    16. Bohara, Alok K. & Caplan, Arthur J. & Grijalva, Therese, 2007. "The effect of experience and quantity-based pricing on the valuation of a curbside recycling program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 433-443, December.
    17. Chenlu Ouyang & Huiqi Jiang & Qing Sheng & Guannan Liu & Minghui Jiang, 2022. "Tripartite Evolutionary Game Analysis for Plastic Pollution Prevention and Control under the Background of China’s Plastic Ban," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    18. Sidique, Shaufique F. & Joshi, Satish V. & Lupi, Frank, 2010. "Factors influencing the rate of recycling: An analysis of Minnesota counties," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 242-249.
    19. Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2006. "Policy Watch: Examining the Justification for Residential Recycling," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 219-232, Fall.
    20. 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.

    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:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6454-:d:823755. 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.