IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i15p6787-d1710186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Policy Tools, Policy Perception, and Compliance with Urban Waste Sorting Policies: Evidence from 34 Cities in China

Author

Listed:
  • Yingqian Lin

    (College of Economics and Management, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha 410004, China)

  • Shuaikun Lu

    (College of Economics and Management, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha 410004, China)

  • Guanmao Yin

    (College of Economics and Management, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha 410004, China)

  • Baolong Yuan

    (College of Economics and Management, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha 410004, China)

Abstract

Promoting municipal solid waste (MSW) sorting is critical to advancing sustainable and low-carbon urban development. While existing research often focuses separately on external policy tools or internal behavioral drivers, limited attention has been given to their joint effects within an integrated framework. This study addresses this gap by analyzing micro-survey data from 1983 residents across 34 prefecture-level and above cities in China, using a bivariate probit model to examine how policy tools and policy perception—both independently and interactively—shape residents’ active and passive compliance with MSW sorting policies. The findings reveal five key insights. First, the adoption and spatial distribution of policy tools are uneven: environment-type tools dominate, supply-type tools are moderately deployed, and demand-type tools are underutilized. Second, both policy tools and policy perception significantly promote compliance behaviors, with policy cognition exerting the strongest effect. Third, differential effects are observed—policy cognition primarily drives active compliance, whereas policy acceptance more strongly predicts passive compliance. Fourth, synergistic effects emerge when supply-type tools are combined with environment-type or demand-type tools. Finally, policy perception not only directly enhances compliance but also moderates the effectiveness of policy tools, with notable heterogeneity among residents with higher cognitive or emotional alignment. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of compliance mechanisms and offer practical implications for designing perception-sensitive and regionally adaptive MSW governance strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Yingqian Lin & Shuaikun Lu & Guanmao Yin & Baolong Yuan, 2025. "Policy Tools, Policy Perception, and Compliance with Urban Waste Sorting Policies: Evidence from 34 Cities in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:15:p:6787-:d:1710186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/15/6787/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/15/6787/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    2. Fullerton, Don & Wolverton, Ann, 2005. "The two-part instrument in a second-best world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(9-10), pages 1961-1975, September.
    3. Dongliang Zhang & Guangqing Huang & Xiaoling Yin & Qinghua Gong, 2015. "Residents’ Waste Separation Behaviors at the Source: Using SEM with the Theory of Planned Behavior in Guangzhou, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Di Chen & Yue Wang & Yang Wen & Honglin Du & Xue Tan & Lei Shi & Zhong Ma, 2021. "Does Environmental Policy Help Green Industry? Evidence from China’s Promotion of Municipal Solid Waste Sorting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-15, March.
    5. ., 2017. "The concept of economic welfare," Chapters, in: Morality and Power, chapter 6, pages 59-68, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Søren C. Winter & Peter J. May, 2001. "Motivation for Compliance with Environmental Regulations," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 675-698.
    7. 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.
    8. David Roodman, 2011. "Fitting fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 11(2), pages 159-206, June.
    9. Zhuoya Ren & Ganggang Zuo, 2024. "Challenges of Implementing Municipal Solid Waste Separation Policy in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-18, September.
    10. Dan Pan & Huan Chen & Guzhen Zhou & Fanbin Kong, 2020. "Determinants of Public-Private Partnership Adoption in Solid Waste Management in Rural China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-14, July.
    11. Walker, Joan L. & Ehlers, Emily & Banerjee, Ipsita & Dugundji, Elenna R., 2011. "Correcting for endogeneity in behavioral choice models with social influence variables," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 362-374, May.
    12. Alessandro Bucciol & Natalia Montinari & Marco Piovesan, 2015. "Do Not Trash the Incentive! Monetary Incentives and Waste Sorting," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 117(4), pages 1204-1229, October.
    13. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    14. Qinyuan Wan & Wencui Du, 2022. "Social Capital, Environmental Knowledge, and Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    15. Hang Yin & Yixiong Huang & Kuiming Wang, 2021. "How Do Environmental Concerns and Governance Performance Affect Public Environmental Participation: A Case Study of Waste Sorting in Urban China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-16, September.
    16. Yanmin He & Hideki Kitagawa & YeeKeong Choy & Xin Kou & Peii Tsai, 2020. "What Affects Chinese Households’ Behavior in Sorting Solid Waste? A Case Study from Shanghai, Shenyang, and Chengdu," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nketiah, Emmanuel & Song, Huaming & Cai, Xiang & Adjei, Mavis & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Obuobi, Bright, 2022. "Citizens’ intention to invest in municipal solid waste to energy projects in Ghana: The impact of direct and indirect effects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PC).
    2. Patrick Krieger & Carsten Lausberg, 2021. "Entscheidungen, Entscheidungsfindung und Entscheidungsunterstützung in der Immobilienwirtschaft: Eine systematische Literaturübersicht [Decisions, decision-making and decisions support systems in r," Zeitschrift für Immobilienökonomie (German Journal of Real Estate Research), Springer;Gesellschaft für Immobilienwirtschaftliche Forschung e. V., vol. 7(1), pages 1-33, April.
    3. Thi Thu Tra Pham & Thai Vu Hong Nguyen & Son Kien Nguyen & Hieu Thi Hoang Nguyen, 2023. "Does planned innovation promote financial access? Evidence from Vietnamese SMEs," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 13(2), pages 281-307, June.
    4. Nik Masdek Nik Rozana & Wong Kelly Kai Seng & Mohd Nawi Nolila & Sharifuddin Juwaidah & Wong Wang Li, 2023. "Antecedents of sustainable food waste management behaviour: Empirical evidence from urban households in Malaysia," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 53-77, March.
    5. Chuanhui Liao & Hui Li, 2019. "Environmental Education, Knowledge, and High School Students’ Intention toward Separation of Solid Waste on Campus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Yongliang Yang & Yuting Zhu & Xiaopeng Wang & Yi Li, 2022. "The Perception of Environmental Information Disclosure on Rural Residents’ Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-22, June.
    7. van Wee, Bert & Witlox, Frank, 2021. "COVID-19 and its long-term effects on activity participation and travel behaviour: A multiperspective view," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    8. Hongjuan Zhang & Haibing Liu & Rongkai Chen, 2025. "Policy-Driven Dynamics in Sustainable Recycling: Evolutionary Dynamics on Multiple Networks with Case Insights from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-30, June.
    9. Savari, Moslem & Ghezi, Mohammadamin & Molavi, Homa, 2025. "Social capital and behavioral response to water scarcity: Sustainable agriculture policies pathways for adopting dry direct-seeded rice," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    10. Noeldeke, Beatrice & Winter, Etti & Ntawuhiganayo, Elisée Bahati, 2022. "Representing human decision-making in agent-based simulation models: Agroforestry adoption in rural Rwanda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    11. Mengge Hao & Dongyong Zhang & Stephen Morse, 2020. "Waste Separation Behaviour of College Students under a Mandatory Policy in China: A Case Study of Zhengzhou City," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-20, November.
    12. Bastian Mönkediek & Hilde Bras, 2018. "Family Systems and Fertility Intentions: Exploring the Pathways of Influence," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 34(1), pages 33-57, February.
    13. Zamri Ahmad & Haslindar Ibrahim & Jasman Tuyon, 2017. "Institutional investor behavioral biases: syntheses of theory and evidence," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(5), pages 578-603, May.
    14. Zhaoyun Yin & Jing Ma, 2022. "Rational Choice or Altruism Factor: Determinants of Residents’ Behavior toward Household Waste Separation in Xi’an, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-12, September.
    15. Nur Shafeera Mohamad & Ai Chin Thoo & Hon Tat Huam, 2022. "The Determinants of Consumers’ E-Waste Recycling Behavior through the Lens of Extended Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-27, July.
    16. Yi Feng & Yu Feng & Ziyang Liu, 2025. "Influencing Factors of Residents’ Green Perception Under Urban–Rural Differences: A Socio-Ecological Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-36, April.
    17. Jingkang Gao & Jinhua Zhao, 2017. "Normative and image motivations for transportation policy compliance," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(14), pages 3318-3336, November.
    18. Daxini, Amar & Ryan, Mary & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Barnes, Andrew P., 2019. "Understanding farmers’ intentions to follow a nutrient management plan using the theory of planned behaviour," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 428-437.
    19. Mariska van Essen & Tom Thomas & Eric van Berkum & Caspar Chorus, 2020. "Travelers’ compliance with social routing advice: evidence from SP and RP experiments," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1047-1070, June.
    20. Fengwan Zhang & Wenfeng Zhou & Jia He & Chen Qing & Dingde Xu, 2023. "Effects of Land Transfer on Farmer Households’ Straw Resource Utilization in Rural Western China," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-13, January.

    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:17:y:2025:i:15:p:6787-:d:1710186. 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.