P. WESLEY SCHULTZ PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY OCTOBER, 2011 Promoting Recycling Behavior: What Works. Presentation delivered at.

P. WESLEY SCHULTZPROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

OCTOBER, 2011

Promoting Recycling Behavior:What Works.

Presentation delivered at the 2011 KAB Re:cycology symposium, Columbus, Ohio.

Recycling FiguresRecycling Figures

Average American generates 4.5 pounds of trash per day

Municipal waste (2008) Residential, commercial, institutional Not hazardous, industrial, or construction

Diversion rates vary widely CA at 60% diversion

Many notable programs Ready-Set-Recycle (competition in Alameda, CA) Fork it over! (Portland, OR) Green-Dot (Germany, and Europe) Anheuser-Bush “Brewing a Better Environment” Organics recycling in Halifax, Canada MilwaukeeRecycles.com (Recycle for Good)

Community-Based Social MarketingCommunity-Based Social Marketing

www.cbsm.comEffective approach to behavior changeOrigins in behavioral science researchFive step, data-driven process“Community” basedRemoves barriers and enhance benefits

The Science of BehaviorThe Science of Behavior

Osbaldiston & Schott (2011) Review of behavioral science40 years of data on proenvironmental

behavior (35 with recycling)253 experimental treatments

(primarily recycling, conservation)10 types of treatmentsDifferentiated public recycling,

curbside recycling, central recycling

What Works.What Works.

Convenience Social Modeling

Prompts Cognitive Dissonance

Justifications Feedback

Education Commitment

Rewards Goal Setting

What Works?What Works?

Meta analysis of recycling studies, combined across three types of programs. N=41 public, N=52 curbside, N=18 central collection. Osbaldiston & Schott (2011)

Different Types of RecyclingDifferent Types of Recycling

Meta analysis of recycling studies, combined across three types of programs. N=41 public, N=52 curbside, N=18 central collection.

1. Information is (generally) Not Sufficient

Knowledge-deficit model Knowledge is (often) correlated

with behavior Education and information can

increase knowledge Increasing knowledge will

(typically) not result in behavior change.

Can be a very useful tool for promoting recycling.

Public and durable Specific (time, place, material) Be mindful of individuals who choose not to sign.

2. Pledges and Commitments

“We, the residents of the 2nd floor, are willing to participate in the paper recycling project

sponsored by the Reed College Environmental Group. It is understood that any recyclable paper can be placed in the

“RECYCLE” garbage can. We commit ourselves to participating in this recycling project for the next four weeks.” – Wang &

Katzev

2. Pledges and Commitments

I PLEDGE TO:

Learn. about the recycling option in my community. I will find out what materials are collected for recycling in my community at americarecyclesday.org.

I PLEDGE TO:

Act. Reduce my personal waste by recycling. Within the next month, I will start to recycle one new type of material.

Incentives can change behavior Will hear more from John

Thogersen tomorrow But:

1. Framing behavior as transaction creates expectations

2. Behavior and context specific3. Size matters4. Undermining

3. Financial Incentives

Make it EASYReduce uncertainty (shapes of the holes, signage)

Allow people to anticipateEntry and exit locations

Proximal to behaviorRemove barriers

for example, lids

4. Infrastructure

Will hear more from Carol Werner tomorrow.

Signs can make a big difference (both positive AND negative)

Positive, simple behavior, already motivated, prompts, proximal

Mindful of contextual norm

5. Signage

Can have a role, but perhaps limited

“Behaving people into thinking differently”

Some evidence for personal norms (moral obligation).

Hard to promote through messaging, better to induce behavior first

6. Persuasion

Social Norms

Social Norms

Normative Social Influence --Curbside recycling

Curbside recycling (Schultz, 1999)Mandated by most CA cities in order to meet

50% diversion requirements set by State.Field experiment with 600 households for 8

weeksInformation, no treatment control, descriptive

normative feedbackBaseline (4 weeks), intervention (4 weeks),

follow-up (4 weeks)

7. Social Norms

Normative-based Messages

NormativeFeedback

InformationOnly

No Treatment(control)

Change from baseline to follow-up for the normative feedback condition is significant (p<.05), and corresponds to a 19% increase in recycling rates!

Source: Schultz, P. W. (1999). Changing behavior with normative feedback interventions: A field experiment of curbside recycling. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 25-36.

Recycling is a behavior Behavioral scientists have been studying recycling for 35+ years

Some clear lessonsEncourage programs to draw on this knowledge

Get to know your local behavioral scientist

Conclusions

Social Norms

Social Norms

References

Bator, R., Bryan, A., & Schultz, P. W. (2011). Who gives a hoot? Intercept surveys of litterers and disposers. Environment and Behavior, 43, 295-315.

Osbaldiston, R., & Schott, J. (in press). Environmental sustainability and behavioral science: Meta-analysis of pro-environmental behavior. Environment and Behavior.

Schultz, P. W., Bator, R., Tabanico, J., Bruni, C., Large, L. B. (in press). Littering in context: Personal and environmental predictors of littering behavior. Environment and Behavior.

Schultz, P. W., Khazian, A., & Zaleski, A. (2008). Using normative social influence to promote conservation among hotel guests. Social Influence, 3, 4-23.

Schultz, P. W. (1999). Changing behavior with normative feedback interventions: A field experiment of curbside recycling. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 25-36.

Schultz, P. W., & Kaiser, F. G. (in press, estimated 2011). Promoting proenvironmental behavior. In S. Clayton (Ed.), Handbook of environmental psychology. Oxford University Press. Oskamp, S., Zelezny, L., Schultz, P. W., Hurin, S., Burkhardt, R., (1996). Commingled versus separated recycling: Does sorting matter? Environment and Behavior, 28, 73-91. 

Schultz, P. W., & Oskamp, S., & Mainieri, T. (1995). Who recycles and when: A review of personal and situational factors. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 105-121.

Don’t Throw in the Towel!

Note: My appreciation to the team of CSUSM students who worked on this experiment: Azar Khazian, Michelle Hynan, Joy Francisco, Christine Jarvis, and Jenny Tabanico.

Old Message:

Different Rooms

Hotel Study -- New Message

Social Norm Messages

Hotel Intervention

• Study focused on 132 condo units (separate studies of hotel)

• Randomly assigned rooms to experimental (N=102) or control (N=30)

• Total of 794 guest “stays” were analyzed (each stay = 1 week)

• Number of towels taken from the room (continuous up to 4)

ResultsNumber of towels taken out of the room on the first towel replacement day.

F(1,792)=13.40; p<.001). A 25% reduction in the number of towels used!

Note: Data also tested in HLM with participant “nested” within room. ICC=.07; At level 2, treatment effect ( γ01=-.57, t(142.14)=-3.25, p<.001)