IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rim/rimwps/20-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pro-environmental attitudes, local environmental conditions and recycling behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Luisa Corrado

    (University of Rome Tor Vergata, Italy; Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis)

  • Andrea Fazio

    (University of Rome La Sapienza, Italy; University of Pavia, Italy)

  • Alessandra Pelloni

    (Department of Economics and Finance, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Italy; Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis)

Abstract

The paper uses Italian official survey data collected in 2012 from more than 20 thousand households to shed light on the determinants of people’s pro-environmental behavior, more specifically the differentiation of domestic waste disposal. A rich interdisciplinary literature has developed to explain why people may make eco-friendly choices, which come at a personal cost and provide benefits accruing largely to other people. The paper contributes to this investigation by jointly considering non-economic (a declared general interest in environmental issues), economic (easy access to recycling bins) and contextual (the perceived condition of the local environment) determinants of recycling. Main results are that a higher general interest in environmental issues pushes people, on average, to increase recycling by 7.5 percentage points, while easy access to facilities increases recycling by 5.3 percentage points. More educated households are also more inclined to behave pro-environmentally: a university degree or a Ph.D. increases the probability of recycling by 5.2 percentage points. Finally, the paper provides evidence that people locally perceiving environmental degradation are 5.8 percentage points less likely to recycle. These results may be explained by bounded rationality and/or to conditional social cooperation, which both may lead to an environmental poverty trap. The final message is that the evidence so gathered on the role of intrinsic motivations, bounded rationality and social preferences in governing behavior is difficult to reconcile with the “homo oeconomicus” hypothesis still prevailing in standard economic theory and that these “non economic” determinants have to be properly considered in the formulation of effective environmental policies.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:rim:rimwps:20-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://rcea.org/RePEc/pdf/wp20-21.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Simon Gächter, 2000. "Fairness and Retaliation: The Economics of Reciprocity," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 159-181, Summer.
    2. Becker, Gary S, 1974. "A Theory of Social Interactions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(6), pages 1063-1093, Nov.-Dec..
    3. Damiano Fiorillo, 2013. "Household waste recycling: national survey evidence from Italy," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(8), pages 1125-1151, October.
    4. Ida Ferrara & Paul Missios, 2005. "Recycling and Waste Diversion Effectiveness: Evidence from Canada," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(2), pages 221-238, February.
    5. Massimiliano Agovino & Alessandro Crociata & Pier Sacco, 2016. "Location matters for pro-environmental behavior: a spatial Markov Chains approach to proximity effects in differentiated waste collection," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 56(1), pages 295-315, January.
    6. Stefania Capecchi & Maria Iannario & Rosaria Simone, 2018. "Well-Being and Relational Goods: A Model-Based Approach to Detect Significant Relationships," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 729-750, January.
    7. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    8. Jean Tirole & Roland Bénabou, 2006. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1652-1678, December.
    9. Frey, Bruno S. & Torgler, Benno, 2007. "Tax morale and conditional cooperation," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 136-159, March.
    10. Ankinée Kirakozian, 2016. "The determinants of household recycling: social influence, public policies and environmental preferences," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(16), pages 1481-1503, April.
    11. Fischbacher, Urs & Gachter, Simon & Fehr, Ernst, 2001. "Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 397-404, June.
    12. Bente Halvorsen, 2008. "Effects of Norms and Opportunity Cost of Time on Household Recycling," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(3), pages 501-516.
    13. Cecere, Grazia & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2014. "Waste prevention and social preferences: the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 163-176.
    14. Brandon C. Koford & Glenn C. Blomquist & David M. Hardesty & Kenneth R. Troske & Margaret Hughes & Fred Morgan, 2012. "Estimating Consumer Willingness to Supply and Willingness to Pay for Curbside Recycling," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(4), pages 745-763.
    15. Brekke, Kjell Arne & Kverndokk, Snorre & Nyborg, Karine, 2003. "An economic model of moral motivation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(9-10), pages 1967-1983, September.
    16. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    17. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    18. Ricardo Pagan, 2016. "Are Relational Goods Important for People with Disabilities?," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 11(4), pages 1117-1135, December.
    19. Agovino, Massimiliano & Crociata, Alessandro & Quaglione, Davide & Sacco, Pierluigi & Sarra, Alessandro, 2017. "Good Taste Tastes Good. Cultural Capital as a Determinant of Organic Food Purchase by Italian Consumers: Evidence and Policy Implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 66-75.
    20. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    21. Abbott, Andrew & Nandeibam, Shasikanta & O'Shea, Lucy, 2013. "Recycling: Social norms and warm-glow revisited," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 10-18.
    22. Leonardo Becchetti & Elena Giachin Ricca & Alessandra Pelloni, 2012. "The Relationship Between Social Leisure and Life Satisfaction: Causality and Policy Implications," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 453-490, September.
    23. Krupka, Erin & Weber, Roberto A., 2009. "The focusing and informational effects of norms on pro-social behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 307-320, June.
    24. Crociata, Alessandro & Agovino, Massimiliano & Sacco, Pier Luigi, 2015. "Recycling waste: Does culture matter?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 40-47.
    25. Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Jeroen Bergh, 2011. "Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 263-304, June.
    26. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    27. W. Kip Viscusi & Joel Huber & Jason Bell, 2011. "Promoting Recycling: Private Values, Social Norms, and Economic Incentives," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 65-70, May.
    28. D'Amato, Alessio & Mancinelli, Susanna & Zoli, Mariangela, 2016. "Complementarity vs substitutability in waste management behaviors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 84-94.
    29. Markus Pasche, 2013. "What Can be Learned from Behavioural Economics for Environmental Policy?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-020, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    30. Antoci, Angelo & Borghesi, Simone, 2012. "Preserving or escaping? On the welfare effects of environmental self-protective choices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 248-254.
    31. Ferrer-i-Carbonell, Ada & Gowdy, John M., 2007. "Environmental degradation and happiness," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 509-516, January.
    32. Christopher F Baum, 2006. "An Introduction to Modern Econometrics using Stata," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number imeus, March.
    33. Bowles, Samuel & Hwang, Sung-Ha, 2008. "Social preferences and public economics: Mechanism design when social preferences depend on incentives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1811-1820, August.
    34. Van de Ven, Wynand P. M. M. & Van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1981. "The demand for deductibles in private health insurance : A probit model with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 229-252, November.
    35. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    36. Antoci, Angelo, 2009. "Environmental degradation as engine of undesirable economic growth via self-protection consumption choices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1385-1397, March.
    37. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    38. Simona Rasciute & Paul Downward & William H Greene, 2017. "Do Relational Goods Raise Well-Being? An Econometric Analysis," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 563-579, September.
    39. Jenkins, Robin R. & Martinez, Salvador A. & Palmer, Karen & Podolsky, Michael J., 2003. "The determinants of household recycling: a material-specific analysis of recycling program features and unit pricing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 294-318, March.
    40. Menz, Tobias, 2011. "Do people habituate to air pollution? Evidence from international life satisfaction data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 211-219.
    41. Gilli, Marianna & Nicolli, Francesco & Farinelli, Paola, 2018. "Behavioural attitudes towards waste prevention and recycling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 294-305.
    42. Rabin, Matthew, 1993. "Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(5), pages 1281-1302, December.
    43. Berglund, Christer, 2006. "The assessment of households' recycling costs: The role of personal motives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 560-569, April.
    44. Pullinger, Martin, 2014. "Working time reduction policy in a sustainable economy: Criteria and options for its design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 11-19.
    45. Claudia Schmiedeberg & Jette Schröder, 2017. "Leisure Activities and Life Satisfaction: an Analysis with German Panel Data," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 12(1), pages 137-151, March.
    46. Venkatachalam, L., 2008. "Behavioral economics for environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 640-645, November.
    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. Barbara Bigliardi & Domenico Campisi & Giovanna Ferraro & Serena Filippelli & Francesco Galati & Alberto Petroni, 2020. "The Intention to Purchase Recycled Products: Towards an Integrative Theoretical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-20, November.

    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. Cecere, Grazia & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2014. "Waste prevention and social preferences: the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 163-176.
    2. Ankinée Kirakozian, 2016. "One Without The Other? Behavioural And Incentive Policies For Household Waste Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 526-551, July.
    3. Marie Briguglio, 2016. "Household Cooperation In Waste Management: Initial Conditions And Intervention," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 497-525, July.
    4. D'Amato, Alessio & Mancinelli, Susanna & Zoli, Mariangela, 2016. "Complementarity vs substitutability in waste management behaviors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 84-94.
    5. Damiano Fiorillo & Luigi Senatore, 2020. "Pro-social behaviours, waste concern and recycling behaviour in Italy at the end of the 1990s," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(2), pages 127-151, April.
    6. Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Jeroen Bergh, 2011. "Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(2), pages 263-304, June.
    7. Gilli, Marianna & Nicolli, Francesco & Farinelli, Paola, 2018. "Behavioural attitudes towards waste prevention and recycling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 294-305.
    8. Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Vittucci Marzetti, Giuseppe, 2019. "Recycling and Waste Generation: An Estimate of the Source Reduction Effect of Recycling Programs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 321-329.
    9. Fiorillo, Damiano & Senatore, Luigi, 2016. "Self Image and Environmental Attitude and Behavior," MPRA Paper 74888, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Briguglio, Marie & Delaney, Liam & Wood, Alex, 2018. "Partisanship, priming and participation in public-good schemes," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 136-150.
    11. Christophe Charlier & Ankinée Kirakozian, 2020. "Public policies for household recycling when reputation matters," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 523-557, April.
    12. Yokoo, Hide-Fumi & Kawai, Kosuke & Higuchi, Yuki, 2018. "Informal recycling and social preferences: Evidence from household survey data in Vietnam," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 109-124.
    13. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2008. "Anonymity, reciprocity, and conformity: Evidence from voluntary contributions to a national park in Costa Rica," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1047-1060, June.
    14. Guy Meunier & Ingmar Schumacher, 2020. "The importance of considering optimal government policy when social norms matter for the private provision of public goods," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(3), pages 630-655, June.
    15. Marco Vincenzi, 2023. "Mapping the empirical relationship between environmental performance and social preferences: Evidence from macro data," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2023(1), pages 85-102.
    16. Brekke, Kjell Arne & Kipperberg, Gorm & Nyborg, Karine, 2009. "Reluctant Recyclers: Social Interaction in Responsibility Ascription," Memorandum 16/2007, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    17. Agnès Festré & Pierre Garrouste & Ankinée Kirakozian & Mira Toumi, 2017. "The Pen Might Be Mightier than the Sword: How Third-party Advice or Sanction Impacts on Pro-environmental Behavior," GREDEG Working Papers 2017-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France, revised Aug 2017.
    18. Ann-Kathrin Koessler & Stefanie Engel, 2021. "Policies as Information Carriers: How Environmental Policies May Change Beliefs and Consequent Behavior," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-31, July.
    19. Gorm Kipperberg & Douglas Larson, 2012. "Heterogeneous Preferences for Community Recycling Programs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(4), pages 577-604, December.
    20. Crawford, Ian & Harris, Donna, 2018. "Social interactions and the influence of “extremists”," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 238-266.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pro-Environmental Behavior; Intrinsic Motivation; Recycling; Environmental Degradation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:rim:rimwps:20-21. 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: Marco Savioli (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rcfeait.html .

    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.