Motivation or Inconvenience—What matters most? Understanding recycling behavior of healthcare waste

IF 3.7 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Cleaner and Responsible Consumption Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.clrc.2024.100240
Cecilie Wagner Harden, Torben Pedersen, Peter D. Ørberg Jensen
{"title":"Motivation or Inconvenience—What matters most? Understanding recycling behavior of healthcare waste","authors":"Cecilie Wagner Harden,&nbsp;Torben Pedersen,&nbsp;Peter D. Ørberg Jensen","doi":"10.1016/j.clrc.2024.100240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Recycling programs are widely used to address global environmental challenges, with the active participation of end users being crucial for the successful return of products at the end of use. However, individuals have different motivations for recycling and face various obstacles in doing so. We lack an understanding of these motivations and the inconveniences of engaging in this behavior, especially within the healthcare industry. By drawing insights from the take-back program Returpen<sup>TM</sup>, which was introduced in Denmark and the UK, this study addresses how different types of motivation influence end-user participation in take-back programs and the extent to which motivation offsets the inconveniences. The results showed that individuals' underlying motivations vary, with altruism emerging as the primary motivator, followed by social norms, while direct personal benefits play a relatively minor role. While 92% of respondents indicated their intention to engage in the take-back program, the actual return rate in the Danish program was approximately 22%, which points to a clear intention-behavior gap.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":34617,"journal":{"name":"Cleaner and Responsible Consumption","volume":"15 ","pages":"Article 100240"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleaner and Responsible Consumption","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666784324000731","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recycling programs are widely used to address global environmental challenges, with the active participation of end users being crucial for the successful return of products at the end of use. However, individuals have different motivations for recycling and face various obstacles in doing so. We lack an understanding of these motivations and the inconveniences of engaging in this behavior, especially within the healthcare industry. By drawing insights from the take-back program ReturpenTM, which was introduced in Denmark and the UK, this study addresses how different types of motivation influence end-user participation in take-back programs and the extent to which motivation offsets the inconveniences. The results showed that individuals' underlying motivations vary, with altruism emerging as the primary motivator, followed by social norms, while direct personal benefits play a relatively minor role. While 92% of respondents indicated their intention to engage in the take-back program, the actual return rate in the Danish program was approximately 22%, which points to a clear intention-behavior gap.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
动机还是麻烦——哪个更重要?了解医疗废物的回收行为
回收计划被广泛用于应对全球环境挑战,最终用户的积极参与对于产品在使用结束时的成功回收至关重要。然而,每个人都有不同的回收动机,在这样做的过程中面临着各种各样的障碍。我们缺乏对这些动机的理解,以及从事这种行为的不便,特别是在医疗保健行业。通过借鉴在丹麦和英国推出的回收计划ReturpenTM的见解,本研究解决了不同类型的动机如何影响终端用户参与回收计划,以及动机在多大程度上抵消了不便。结果表明,个体的潜在动机各不相同,利他主义是最主要的动机,其次是社会规范,而直接个人利益的作用相对较小。虽然92%的受访者表示他们有意参与回收计划,但丹麦计划的实际回报率约为22%,这表明了明显的意图-行为差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption
Cleaner and Responsible Consumption Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
99 days
期刊最新文献
More green thoughts than actions: Insights from marketing instructors at a Canadian University Everyday circular literacy in Singaporean households: Informal relational pedagogies in teaching and learning about circular R-behaviours Environmental innovation and carbon emissions reduction in European healthcare: The moderating role of environmental monitoring practices Supply chain disruption indicators: Vulnerability and resilience in the garment industry in Vietnam Sustainable waste management strategies for multilayer plastic in Indonesia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1