IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i12p5205-d1417900.html

“Waste Is Wealth”: Circular Economy Strategies from Media Persuasion to Utilization

Author

Listed:
  • Panida Jongsuksomsakul

    (Department of Communication Arts, Faculty of Business Economics and Communications, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok 65000, Thailand)

Abstract

Circular economy strategies encompassing “Waste is Wealth” (also known as “Waste is Gold”) policies in Thailand have been popularised through various media. This study focused on a community of people in the central north of Thailand and their ”return waste for money” practices, with 403 participants surveyed in mid-2022. The analysis of their responses, using descriptive and inferential statistics, identified the factors contributing to the gap between the available information in the media regarding the existence of regulations and policies addressing the recycling and reusing of waste and people’s responses to that information. Residents’ knowledge and understanding of proper waste management, derived from the media, were essential elements in educating communities. The collection and disposal of garbage were handled very differently between the rural and urban communities, with different municipalities making different provisions for residents’ waste disposal. Our analysis showed that a holistic approach was needed, particularly including the publication of comprehensive and understandable information on government policies and regulations, the differentiation of waste material types, garbage and waste collection, and disposal methods, including returning, recycling, and reuse, which were identified as being necessary for effective and efficient waste disposal and encouraging recycling and reuse. It was shown that without valid information available via social media and the mass media, peoples’ attitudes and behaviours will not change and the recycling of plastic waste materials will be limited, even with the promise of Waste is Wealth.

Suggested Citation

  • Panida Jongsuksomsakul, 2024. "“Waste Is Wealth”: Circular Economy Strategies from Media Persuasion to Utilization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:12:p:5205-:d:1417900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/12/5205/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/12/5205/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marie Lynn Miranda & Jess W. Everett & Daniel Blume & Barbeau A. Roy, 1994. "Market-based incentives and residential municipal solid waste," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 681-698.
    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. Joyashree Roy & Sirayuth Thongprasert & Prathana Panwar & Angga Prabowo & Satabdi Datta & Joyee Shairee Chatterjee, 2026. "Transition to Circular Plastic Economy: How It Is Unfolding in Developing Countries," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 1-42, April.

    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. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    2. Thomas C. Kinnaman & Don Fullerton, 2002. "The Economics of Residential Solid Waste Management," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 1, pages 1-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Vincent Linderhof & Heleen Bartelings, 2000. "Effective Landfill Taxation: a Case Study For the Netherlands," Regional and Urban Modeling 283600055, EcoMod.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Geum-Soo Kim & Young-Jae Chang & David Kelleher, 2008. "Unit pricing of municipal solid waste and illegal dumping: an empirical analysis of Korean experience," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 9(3), pages 167-176, September.
    7. Scott, Sue & Watson, Dorothy, 2006. "Introduction of Weight-Based Charges for Domestic Solid Waste Disposal," MPRA Paper 107713, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. 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.
    9. Scott J. Callan & Janet M. Thomas, 2001. "Economies of Scale and Scope: A Cost Analysis of Municipal Solid Waste Services," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 548-560.
    10. repec:ejw:journl:v:4:y:2007:i:1:p:83-111 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Don Fullerton & Wenbo Wu, 2002. "Policies for Green Design," Chapters, in: Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman (ed.), The Economics of Household Garbage and Recycling Behavior, chapter 5, pages 102-119, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Mariana Saidón, 2014. "Climate change: perceptions, behaviors and policies considering aggregate phenomena," Economía, Instituto de Investigaciones Económicas y Sociales (IIES). Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales. Universidad de Los Andes. Mérida, Venezuela, vol. 39(38), pages 87-109, july-dece.
    13. Donald N. Dewees & Michael J. Hare, 1998. "Economic Analysis of Packaging Waste Reduction," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 24(4), pages 453-470, December.
    14. Calcott, Paul & Walls, Margaret, 2005. "Waste, recycling, and "Design for Environment": Roles for markets and policy instruments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 287-305, November.
    15. 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.
    16. Daigee Shaw & Yue-Mi Tsai, 2004. "Assessing Alternative Policies for Reducing Household Waste in Taiwan," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 04-A010, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    17. Palmer, Karen L. & Walls, Margaret, 1999. "Extended Product Responsibility: An Economic Assessment of Alternative Policies," Discussion Papers 10830, Resources for the Future.
    18. Yen-Lien Kuo & Charles Perrings, 2010. "Wasting Time? Recycling Incentives in Urban Taiwan and Japan," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(3), pages 423-437, November.
    19. Xu, Ying & Wheeler, Sarah Ann & Tchatoka, Firmin Doko, 2023. "Evaluating policy changes on council waste generation and diversion: Evidence from South Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(04), August.
    20. Meens-Eriksson, Sef, 2023. "Does costlier waste treatment lead to less residual waste? Evidence from Swedish municipalities," Umeå Economic Studies 1015, Umeå University, Department of Economics, revised 03 Feb 2024.
    21. Lakhan, Calvin, 2015. "Diversion, but at what cost? The economic challenges of recycling in Ontario," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 133-142.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:12:p:5205-:d:1417900. 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.