thed kkj

7/23/2019 thed kkj

1/10

Towards a sustainable consumer model: the case study of

Bulgarian recyclers

Elka Vasileva and Daniela Ivanova

Department of Natural Resources Economics, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria

Keywords

Bulgaria, packaging waste, recycling,

segmentation, separate collection.

Correspondence

Elka Vasileva, Department of Natural

Resources Economics, University of National

and World Economy, Studentski Grad Hristo

Botev, 1700 Sofia, Bulgaria.E-mail: [email protected]

doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12123

Abstract

For several years, Bulgaria has been implementing systems for separate collection of

packaging waste as elements of environment policy, which aims to decrease the quantity of

the municipal-generated waste deposited in land. The effectiveness of these systems is

largely determined by consumers recycling behaviour in post-socialist countries with

emerging sustainable behaviour patterns. The aim of this article is to identify different

segments among Bulgarians based on their attitudes towards recycling in order to highlight

the characteristics of recyclers and non-recycler groups and, subsequently, to elaborate onpossible tailored marketing and communication plans to promote recycling among Bul-

garians. A national survey was conducted with 968 people over 18 years of age from

the municipalities covered by the system for separate collection of packaging waste. The

cluster analysis of the results of the survey made possible the segmentation according to the

attitudes towards recycling. The following four clusters were identified: the Environmen-

tally sensitive (18.46%); the Inert who do not appreciate the benefits of recycling for the

environment (26.14%); the Indifferent to the separate collection of waste (29.57%); and

the Recycling (25.83%). The composition of each of the clusters is analysed both

according to recycling practices and according to other types of sustainable behaviour

(buying of organic foods, non-food ecological products, energy-efficient household appli-

ances, etc.). The contextual factors that have demotivating effects on consumer behaviour

for separate collection of waste in the country are also discussed. The correlations between

cluster belonging and socio-demographic characteristics of the participants in the study are

examined. The implications of the study may be associated with the development and

implementation of public policy strategies for the separate collection of waste and the

promotion of sustainable consumer behaviour patterns.

Introduction

Economic development in recent decades has led to more intensive

use of packaging materials and disposable goods. As a result,

municipal solid waste, including packaging waste, has signifi-

cantly increased. According to the Organization for Economic

Co-operation and Development (OECD), this problem is projected

to continue to grow, despite current efforts to reduce the materialcontent of products, and to stimulate the reuse of products and

packaging and the recycling of materials and substances (OECD,

2008).

Forecasts of the European Environment Agency (EEA) for the

period 20052020 predict that the annual amount of municipal

waste will increase by 25% (EEA, 2008). A key role in tackling

the environmental impacts of increasing waste volumes plays

increased recycling of waste and diverting them from disposing.

Recycling of waste is an appropriate way of saving or avoiding

greenhouse emissions, i.e. offsetting direct emissions.

According to data from EUROSTAT, the generated municipal

solid waste in Bulgaria for 2011 is 375 kg per capita and 93% of

it (349 kg per capita) is deposited onto or into land (EUROSTAT,

2011). These facts put Bulgaria among Member States of the

European Union (EU) with the highest share of landfill munici-

pal waste compared with the total waste collected. Reduction

of waste disposed in the country can be achieved through

recycling of packaging waste, which is associated with separatecollection.

Over the past 10 years, a system for separate collection of

packaging waste has been developed in Bulgaria. The system is

based on the regional activity of municipalities and the packaging

recovery organizations licensed by the Ministry of Environment

and Waters (MEW, 2013).

A successful recycling programme requires the population to

participate by sorting and disposing recyclable packaging waste in

the appropriate locations for subsequent selective collection.

The effectiveness of these systems is largely determined by

bs_bs_banner

International Journal of Consumer Studies ISSN 1470-6423

International Journal of Consumer Studies38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

475

7/23/2019 thed kkj

2/10

consumers recycling behaviour in post-socialist countries with

emerging sustainable behaviour patterns.

There are some visible efforts at national and regional levels to

promote recycling among the Bulgarians. According to the Bul-

garian Executive Environment Agency (BEEA), there are positive

indications for the development of the system for separate collec-

tion of waste, such as the growing number of disposal locations

and the constructed new industrial facility to upgrade the trialsystem (BEEA, 2011). At the same time, some of the packaging

recovery organizations did not manage well the collection and

transportation of the waste bins. This led to the revocation of the

licenses of some of them in 2010 and set a discouraging example

of recycling behaviour for Bulgarians (MEW, 2013).

When the system was implemented in 2004, a mass communi-

cation campaigns was launched on television, radio and billboards

to foster recycling behaviour. However, the few studies underline

the limited practice of separate collection of waste in households

in the country (Vitosha Research, 2006; Ivanova et al., 2010). A

sociological survey conducted in November 2006 showed that

Bulgarian citizens approve the implementation of a system of

separate collection of waste (Vitosha Research, 2006). At the same

time, the results highlighted the lack of experience and the needfor specific guidelines for this activity. Another survey conducted

among citizens from major Bulgarian cities encompasses the per-

ceptions, expectations and the attitudes to eco-labelling related to

separate collection of packaging waste (Ivanova et al., 2010). Irre-

spective of the fact that consumers find a direct link between the

separate collection of packaging waste and environmental protec-

tion, they expressed doubts about the effectiveness of eco-

labelling. According to the Eurobarometer reports, Bulgarian

citizens do not consider the separation of waste for recycling as the

most popular environmental activity in their daily life. In the

Eurobarometer study in 2011, only 19% of Bulgarians reported

that they separated most of their wastes for recycling, which rep-

resented scores much lower than the average for the EU of 66%.Bulgaria made exception to the trend for most EU Member States

of significant increase in respondents engaged in this activity. The

number of Bulgarian respondents participating in recycling pro-

grammes decreased from 24 to 19% during the period of the

survey 20082011 (Eurobarometer, 2008; Eurobarometer, 2011).

All this shows that the activities undertaken are insufficient and

largely inefficient. It outlines the need to create strategies and

policies, aimed at stimulating participation of Bulgarian citizens in

recycling activities.

The present research is directed to the segmentations of Bulgar-

ians based on their attitudes towards recycling and the description

of the different groups in relation to their recycling-related knowl-

edge and demographic profile, recycling practices and other types

of sustainable behaviour, and perceived contextual factors affect-ing the separate collection of waste. Segmentation allows to

develop marketing and communication plans to promote recycling

among Bulgarians. The different attitudes to the separation of

waste for recycling necessitate the use of a specific approach,

targeting specific groups.

Profiling the recyclers

It may be noted that in general there are no segmentation studies

applying a cluster analytic approach in identifying different pro-

environmental consumer groups. There are no published studies

regarding profiling of recyclers in Bulgaria.

In a cluster analytic approach, the selection of the segmentation

variables is crucial for the subsequently emerging consumer clus-

ters. Mainly two approaches are used in the published studies for

the purpose of profiling: description by socio-demographic criteria

and by using psychographic and behavioural criteria.

General values, lifestyle and psychologically different patternsof consumer behaviour are used as the segmentation base in some

of the energy consumer segmentation studies (Gatersleben et al.,

2002; Sutterlin et al., 2011). In other studies, the differentiation

between consumers who buy green products is based on environ-

mental and demographic variables (do Paco and Raposo, 2009;

Jansson et al., 2009). According to the environmental segmenta-

tion model developed by UK Department for Environment, Food

and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), the public is divided into seven clus-

ters through distinct set of attitudes and beliefs towards the envi-

ronment, environmental issues and behaviours (DEFRA, 2008). In

attempting to define the characteristics of recyclers and non-

recyclers, a number of studies have used attitudinal surveys to

produce segmentation models (Vicente and Reis, 2007; DEFRA,

2008). Other researchers explored the current barriers to recyclinghousehold waste, and along with attitudinal and behavioural cri-

teria they introduced competencies framework in the development

of a segmentation model (Jesson, 2009). This consumer-centred

social marketing approach was developed for the local level

authorities in charge of waste collection and disposal.

As the purpose of the present study is to serve as a basis for the

development of marketing and communication plans to promote

recycling among Bulgarians, attitudes towards recycling were

chosen as the segmentation base.

Understanding recycling behaviour

Scientific literature explores the ways in which to get citizensmore involved in recycling and the promotion of their pro-

environmental behaviours. There are numerous studies that

examine recyclers and non-recyclers analysing them according to

their economic status, environmental attitudes, beliefs and values,

the influence of family and friends and social norms, their access

to facilities and services that enable them to participate in recy-

cling, and their knowledge or lack of it.

Some authors often focus on profiling recyclers and understand-

ing why people do not recycle and the barriers they face (Vining

and Ebreo, 1990; Schultzet al., 1995). Other studies evaluate the

influence on peoples willingness to recycle in terms of the situ-

ational or structural factors that they face, such as access to facili-

ties and services that enable them to participate, and the

convenience of doing so (Valle et al., 2004; Maio et al., 2007).They also point to the understanding of the influence of socio-

demographic factors, and peoples knowledge and experience of

recycling (Gamba and Oskamp, 1994; Tucker, 2001; Thomas and

Sharp, 2013).

In other research studies, a wide range of psychological factors

and their relationship to recycling behaviour have been reviewed

including attitudes, beliefs and values, social influences and social

and personal norms, identity, perceived control and self-efficacy.

The role played by these potential behavioural determinants has

been examined in a wide range of papers (Bandura, 1977; Granzin

Towards a sustainable consumer model E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova



476

7/23/2019 thed kkj

3/10

and Olsen, 1991; Thgersen, 1994, 2009; Taylor and Todd, 1995;

Schultz, 1998; Barr, 2007; Biel and Thgersen, 2007; Vicente and

Reis, 2008; Thomas and Sharp, 2013).

Many conceptual models have been developed in order to

provide frameworks to help understand the social and psychologi-

cal influences on peoples behaviours: Ajzens theory of planned

behaviour, Sterns value-belief-norm theory and attitude-

behaviour-context model (Jackson, 2005). These models havebeen reviewed by many authors in relation to recycling and other

pro-environmental behaviours (Tucker, 2001; Jackson, 2005;

Stern, 2005; Darnton, 2008; Steg and Vlek, 2009; Timlett and

Williams, 2011).

This paper explores recycle and non-recycle segments by

describing them through: recycling-related knowledge and demo-

graphic profile, self-declared recycling practices and other types of

sustainable behaviour, and perceived contextual factors affecting

the separate collection of waste.

The aim of this study is to identify different segments among

Bulgarians based on their attitudes towards recycling in order to

highlight the characteristics of recycler and non-recycler groups

and, subsequently, to elaborate on possible tailored marketing and

communication plans to promote recycling among Bulgarians.

Methods

Sample and data collection

Selection of respondents

The survey is representative of the municipalities in whose terri-

tories the separate collection of packaging waste is done. Accord-

ing to the latest information from the BEEA (2011) in 2009, the

separate collection system covered 162 municipalities in the

country including the municipalities of Karlovo and Troyan which

have developed systems since 2004, built with municipalities ownfunds. The people in these 164 municipalities, covered by the

system for separate collection, are a total of 6 018 765 according

to the Unified System for Vital Statistics and Administrative Ser-

vices to the Population (ESGRAON, 2009). This represents 80%

of the population.

The study involved 968 adult (1000 planned) inhabitants of the

municipalities in whose territory the separate collection of pack-

aging waste was done. The sample was formed from the official

population database (electoral rolls) on the basis of two-stage

random cluster sample (100 clusters). Socio-demographic struc-

ture (gender, age, education and place of residence) of the sur-

veyed cluster reproduces that of the population in the country

(Table 1). The survey was conducted in SeptemberOctober 2011.

Information was collected through direct personal face-to-faceinterviews with the persons included in the surveyed group. The

socio-demographic characteristics of the participants are summa-

rized in Table 1.

Questionnaire

Structurally, the questionnaires used to research the knowledge

and attitudes towards recycling consist of six parts. A short over-

view of the purposes of the survey and examples of how to fill in

the questionnaires are presented in the introductory part.

The second part includes a set a nine items intended to measure

the respondents attitudes towards recycling. Each item is scored

on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally

agree). The original scale of specific attitudes towards recycling

comes from Schwartzs normative model and has already been

used by Vicente and Reis (2007).

The third part explores the level of information of the people

about the rules of separate collection and disposal of household

waste. This part includes a set of four statements which the

respondents should define as correct or incorrect. There is also theanswer I am not aware I do not know.

The fourth part includes basic questions organized in logical

sequence in order to gather information about the practice of

collection and disposal of waste and other types of sustainable

behaviour (buying of organic foods, non-food ecological products,

energy-efficient household appliances, etc.).

The fifth part explores how the respondents evaluate the exter-

nal conditions created for collection of waste. Four questions are

used there connected with: the availability of waste bins for sepa-

rate collection of waste near the home; the locality of the waste

Table 1 The demographic and social characteristics of the participants

and population in the country

Surveyed

group (%)

For population in

the countrya (%)

Gender

Male 50.2 48.4

Female 49.8 51.6

Total 100.0 100.0

Age

1829 17.1 17.0

3039 19.7 18.4

4049 18.5 17.0

5059 19.0 17.1

6069 16.7 15.2

70+ 8.9 15.3

Total 100.0 100.0

Education

University 16.8 14.0

Secondary 53.0 46.0

Primary or lower 30.2 40.0

Total 100.0 100.0

Social group

Employed 52.5

Students 3.1

Unemployed 14.7

Pensioners 25.1

Other 4.6

Total 100.0

Place of residenceb

Sofia 19.3 20.0

District town 43.7 47.1

Smaller town 23.8 22.6

Village 13.2 10.3

Total 100.0 100.0

aNSI (2011).bThe data about the country refer only to the municipalities included in

the system of separate collection of packaging waste.

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova Towards a sustainable consumer model



477

7/23/2019 thed kkj

4/10

bins conveniently spaced from home; the shape and dimensions of

the waste bins; and the waste tax that should be reduced for places

of residence where the separate collection of waste is organized

and carried out.

The last identification part includes questions of general infor-

mation describing the demographic and social attributes of the

respondents such as gender, age, educational level, place of resi-

dence, employment status, personal monthly income, maritalstatus and existence of children in the household.

Statistical data analysis

Principal component analysis (PCA) was carried out on the nine

items intended to measure the respondents attitudes towards recy-

cling. To assess the adequacy of PCA to the series of attitudinal

variables, the KaiserMeyerOlkin statistic was applied and the

Bartletts test was performed. The reliability of the new dimen-

sions was measured by means of Cronbachs alpha coefficient.

Cluster analysis

Cluster analysis is applied to segment Bulgarian customers

according to their attitudes to separate collection of waste. Con-

sidering the importance of attitudes for understanding participa-

tion in recycling, cluster analysis aims to classify respondents in

groups by looking at the similarities (or dissimilarities) between

them in relation to attitudinal variables.

Two methods of hierarchical cluster analysis are applied to the

answers of 964 respondents furthest neighbour and the Ward

method. The collected data are also analysed by non-hierarchical

clustering through K-means method. The contingency table and

the values of the contingency coefficient are calculated for a

pairwise comparison among the used methods of cluster analysis.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) test and Dunnetts C post hoc

test for valuation of significant differences between clusters areapplied. The resulting clusters are described by a set of attributes

associated with: the knowledge of the rules of separate collection

and disposal; recycling behaviours; and other types of sustainable

behaviour (buying of organic foods, non-food ecological products,

energy-efficient household appliances, etc.) and contextual

factors. The correlations between cluster belonging and socio-

demographic attributes of the participants in the study are

examined.

Results

Clustering based on recycling-related attitudes

The results of the application of the PCA to the nine itemsintendedto measure the respondents attitudes towards recycling are pre-

sented in Table 2. They show the presence of three latent compo-

nents that together account for 65.5% of the initial variance

(KMO = 0.756; Bartlett test P-value= 0.000; Cronbachs alpha

coefficient varies from 0.68 to 0.75). The disclosed factors can be

indicated as follows: component 1: pressure of social and personal

norms; component 2: indifference; and component 3: environmen-

tal protection.

Two methods for hierarchical clustering are applied to the

answers of 964 respondents furthest neighbour and the Ward

method. The presence of four clusters is established from the

dendrograms. The solutions obtained are analysed by non-

hierarchical clustering via the K-means method. The contingencytable and the values of the contingency coefficient are calculated

for a pairwise comparison among the used methods of cluster

analysis. The results (coefficients of contingency = 0.835,

P-value = 0.000) show strong association between the method of

Ward and non-hierarchical clustering. Four clusters are obtained

as a result of the application of a non-hierarchical clustering pre-

sented in Table 3.

The application of ANOVA test confirms the significant differ-

ences between clusters (P-value< 0.05) in attitudinal variables

towards recycling. Dunnetts C post hoc test is computed to assess

the differences between each pair of clusters. All four clusters have

a different pressure of social and personal norms (P-value < 0.05).

With respect to component 2: indifference towards recycling,

there are no significant differences between the second and thefourth clusters established with Dunnetts C post hoc test

(P-value> 0.05). The applied Dunnetts C post hoc test shows that

there are no significant differences between the second and the

third clusters (P-value > 0.05) with respect to component 3: envi-

ronment protection.

Table 2 Disclosed latent components after the application of principal component analysis of attitudes towards recycling

Components Loadings

% variance

explained

Cronbachs

alpha

Component 1: pressure of social and personal norms 23.2 0.75

I recycle because I see this action as meaningful 0.691I recycle because most people do it 0.763

I recycle because the waste in bins are separate according to type 0.805

I recycle because the wastes of different types of waste bins are not mixed together when transported 0.614

Component 2: indifference 17.9 0.75

Recycling is not my concern and is the care of the municipality 0.817

Recyclin g o f packag ing is n ot m y concern and is th e care o f produ ce rs and retail ers 0.811

Paying waste fees fulfils my personal commitment to waste collection 0.748

Component 3: environment protection 24.4 0.68

I recycle because everyone does it to protect the environment 0.839

I recycle because this facilitates environment protection 0.849




478

7/23/2019 thed kkj

5/10

As a result of cluster analysis, four clusters were identified on

the basis of the described three segmentation variables. The first

cluster is characterized by extremely high values for component

3: environment protection. Respondents in this cluster Environ-

mentally sensitive express an inner conviction that they protect

the environment through separate collection, they are not influ-

enced strongly by social and personal norms, while at the sametime they are slightly indifferent towards recycling. The second

cluster Inert is described by the average values of all three com-

ponents. It covers people who barely appreciate the benefits of

recycling to environment protection. They are not indifferent

towards recycling but are relatively poorly influenced by social

and personal norms. The third cluster has extremely low values

with regard to component 2: indifference towards recycling.

Respondents exhibiting strong indifference to the separate collec-

tion of wastes with relatively low environmental attitudes are

grouped in the third cluster Indifferent. The cluster is character-

ized by an average impact of social and personal norms. The

fourth cluster Recycling shows extremely high values of com-

ponent 1: pressure of social and personal norms. The cluster is

strongly influenced by the pressure of social and personal norms

and the respondents are not indifferent towards recycling and

show average environmental attitudes.

Recycling-related knowledge and

demographic profile

There are significant differences between the clusters in the social

and demographic attributes of the study participants (Table 4).

Exceptions are the attributes gender, marital status and existence

of children in the household.

Third age respondents with low levels of education dominate

in cluster 2. The respondents from cluster 3 have the lowest levels

of education, where only 7.4% have post-secondary education.Highly educated respondents are distributed between cluster 4 and

cluster 1. In these two clusters, more than two-thirds of the

respondents live in the capital and major cities. Among them are

the participants in the survey who report the highest monthly

personal income. At the same time, in cluster 2 and cluster 3 over

40% live in small towns or villages. In cluster 2, about one quarter

of the respondents live in villages and 30.2% are retired. The

highest percentage of unemployed participants is concentrated in

cluster 3 (19.6% of the respondents in the cluster) who declare the

lowest incomes in the study.

Analysis of the composition of each cluster with respect to the

knowledge of people about the rules of separate collection of

waste is made in order to highlight more clearly the differences

between the clusters. Table 4 presents the composition of each

cluster for these attributes.

To determine the level of knowledge of the rules of separate

collection and disposal of household waste, the respondents wereasked to indicate whether the four statements in Table 4 were

correct or incorrect. The results obtained from this mini-test show

that a good level of information was achieved and the majority of

the respondents know the rules that should be followed for the

collection and disposal of household waste. However, differences

can be observed in the individual clusters. Cluster Recycling is

characterized by the highest level of information as the positive

answers to the first and the fourth statements are more than 90%.

Good knowledge is shown also by the respondents in cluster

Inert. In group of Indifferent, the percentage of correct answers

to the four statements is from 41.9 to 70.5%, similar to those in

cluster Environmentally sensitive. Fairly problematic appears to

be the case with the requirement for the packaging to have infor-

mation about the material of which they are made in all clusters

the correct answers are with the lowest values compared with the

rest.

This is confirmed by the analysis of data on the behaviours of

respondents in recycling in Table 5. Segment Recycling is asso-

ciated with the greatest attention to the labelling of the packaging

material in disposal of household waste. Although they demon-

strate good knowledge of this, the people of cluster Inert and

cluster Indifferent do not take into account the labelling in real-

life situation. Only 12.4% of the Inert comply with this labelling

when disposing of household waste.

Recycling practices and other types of

sustainable behaviour

Table 5 contains the results of analysis of the clusters in terms of

the self-declared practice of collection and disposal of waste and

other types of sustainable behaviour (buying of organic foods,

non-food ecological products, energy-efficient household appli-

ances, etc.). The respondents in Recycling manifest the highest

activity in the separate collection of packaging waste, where more

than half of them (54.7%) do so permanently or with a few excep-

tions. About one-third of the Environmentally sensitive report

that their household collects accumulated packaging waste

Table 3 Description of clusters in terms of mean value of attitudinal components

Attitudinal components

Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Environmentally sens itive Inert Indifferent Recy cling

Component 1: pressure of social and personal normsa,b 0.410 0.892 0.025 1.168

Component 2: indifferencea,c 0.207 0.744 1.146 0.707

Component 3: environment protectiona,d 1.423 0.493 0.451 0.002

No. of respondents 178 252 285 249

aSignificant differences between clusters with ANOVA (P-value < 0.05).bSignificant differences between clusters two by two with Dunnetts C post hoc test (P-value < 0.05).cNo significant differences between the second and fourth clusters have been identified with Dunnetts C post hoc test (P-value > 0.05).dNo significant differences between the second and the third clusters have been identified with Dunnetts C post hoc test (P-value > 0.05).




479

7/23/2019 thed kkj

6/10

Table 4 Description of the clusters with respect to the knowledge of the rules of separate collection and disposal of household waste and their

demographic attributes

Attributes


Environmentally sensitive Inert Indifferent Recycling

Knowledge of the rules of separate collection and disposal of household waste

When paper, glass, metal, plastic waste is collected separately, each type is

placed in a different waste bin (% correct responses)a74.7 85.7 70.5 92.8

Each packaging must have a special label indicating what kind of material it

is made of (% correct responses)a79.2 60.6 41.9 59.3

In separate collection of waste, paper is not collected separately (% correct

responses)a55.1 76.9 60.4 73.8

In separate collection of waste from various materials, it is disposed in

waste bins with different colours (% correct responses)a71.9 82.3 68.6 93.5

Social and demographic attributes

Age (%)a

1839 44.4 24.6 39.6 40.2

4059 30.4 43.3 36.5 38.6

60+ 25.2 32.1 23.9 21.2

Education (%)a

University 24.1 14.3 7.4 31.5

Secondary 57.9 45.4 49.1 55.2

Primary or lower 18.0 40.3 43.5 13.3

Place of residence (%)a

Sofia and district town 67.9 59.1 50.9 77.5

Smaller town and village 32.1 40.9 49.1 22.5

Social group (%)a

Employed 55.6 49.2 54.4 51.6

Pensioners 21.9 30.2 22.8 25.0

Unemployed 16.9 14.3 19.6 7.7

Other 5.6 6.3 3.2 15.7

Income (%)a

099.99 euro 23.9 24.3 31.5 23.0

100199.99 euro 39.8 45.8 36.4 39.2

200299.99 euro 27.3 23.5 27.9 29.8

300+ 9.0 6.4 4.2 8.0

aChi-square test (P-value 0.05).

Table 5 Description of the clusters with respect to the practice of the collection and disposal of waste and other types of sustainable behaviour

Attributes



Separate collection of household waste (% positive responses)a 33.7 6.3 2.1 54.7

Attention for marking the packaging material for disposal of household waste

(% positive responses)a12.4 2.8 4.6 23.3

Place of disposal of used batteries (%)a

Special containers or look for companies for special waste 18.0 7.5 10.5 40.6

In the waste bins for household waste 82.0 92.5 89.5 59.4Place of disposal of old electrical appliances in the household (%)a

Look for companies for special waste or return them to the shop when

buying new appliances

17.5 16.3 16.1 24.5

In/near the waste bins for household waste 62.3 60.3 57.2 61.8

Repair them 20.2 23.4 26.7 13.7

When buying an electric appliance you are interested in its energy efficiency

(positive responses, %)a79.2 61.9 55.0 82.8

When purchasing food you look for organic food (% positive responses) a 45.0 21.1 14.3 38.6

When purchasing non-food you look for green goods (% positive responses)a 42.7 13.1 6.6 30.1





480

7/23/2019 thed kkj

7/10

separately. According to the responses of the majority of Inert

(93.7%) and Indifferent(97.9%), waste is collected and disposed

in their homes without being sorted by type. Separate collection

practices in these clusters are an exception.

Questions relating to their consumption of organic foods, non-

food ecological products, energy-efficient household appliances,

separate collection of hazardous household waste, etc. were asked

in order to establish the extent to which survey respondents tend tohave sustainable behaviours in their daily lives. The results are

summarized in Table 5.

As a whole, the observed picture is very diverse and heteroge-

neous in each of the groups, related with psychologically different

patterns of consumer behaviour. In some cases, this type of behav-

iour is demonstrated by the majority of participants, while in

others it is almost completely absent.

Separate disposal of other types of hazardous household waste

is a practice which does not enjoy great popularity. However,

40.6% of the respondents from Recycling dispose exhausted

batteries only in specially designated areas in stores or seek the

services of companies for special waste. These companies are

sought by 24.5% of the respondents in this group to dispose old

appliances, or they return them to the store when purchasing newones. When buying an electric appliance, 82.8% of the respond-

ents from this cluster are always interested in its energy efficiency.

They show interest in ecological products and 38.6% seek to

purchase organic food products. When purchasing non-food items,

30.1% of the respondents in the cluster frequently or regularly

look for ecological products.

Environmentally sensitive self-declare also a similar sustain-

able behaviour. Here 15.2% of the respondents dispose the used

batteries to designated areas in stores and 2.8% give them to

special companies that collect hazardous waste. A smaller part of

the respondents, compared with Recycling (17.5%), hand over

obsolete electric appliances for recycling. Labelling for energy

efficiency is sought always or almost always by 79.2%. The analy-sis of the results shows that in this cluster, compared with Recy-

cling, the interest in environmental products is bigger and those

who look for organic foods constantly are 45.0%. Similarly, the

interest in non-food green products is also higher (42.7%).

Inert and Indifferent tend to show examples of unsustainable

practices. The explanation for this can be found in the lower

income and education levels in these groups. The participants in

these clusters 92.5 and 89.5%, respectively dispose exhausted

batteries in waste bins for general use without taking account the

hazards. About two-thirds of the respondents in each cluster leave

old appliances near the waste bins (to be used in some way by the

poor who earn their living by filtering the contents of the waste

bins). Compared with Environmentally sensitive and Inert, a

smaller proportion of the respondents in these clusters look for

labelling for energy efficiency (from 55 to 61.9%). Only 21.1% of

segment Inert and 14.3% of Indifferent seek organic products

when buying foods.

Perceptions of contextual factors affecting the

separate collection of waste

The effectiveness of the system for separate waste collection is

determined to a large extent by good organization. The vast major-

ity of respondents report numerous loopholes in the system for

separate collection of packaging waste. Each cluster is analysed in

terms of respondents perceptions of contextual factors influenc-

ing the practice of collection and disposal of waste. The results are

presented in Table 6.

In cluster Recycling are the most numerous supporters of the

current distribution of waste bins for separate collection. More

than half of the group (57.4%) declare that they have waste binsnear their homes, and 48.2% say that the shape and the dimensions

are appropriate. According to 39.4% of them, the waste bins are

located at a suitable distance from their homes. In cluster Envi-

ronmentally sensitive, the positive opinion about the organization

of separate collection diminishes. About one-third see waste bins

around their homes and for a quarter they are at an appropriate

distance. In clusters Inert and Indifferent, there was an increase

of disapproval of the established separate waste collection system.

More than half of the respondents in these groups (66.3 and

69.5%, respectively) believe that there are no waste bins for sepa-

rate waste collection near their homes. Only 23.0% of Inert and

14.4% of Indifferent have waste bins at an appropriate distance

from homes, where they can dispose separately their householdwastes.

Assessing the external factors affecting the separate waste col-

lection, we should pay attention to another contextual attribute

reduction in the amount of waste tax for residents of municipalities

and regions where well-organized and efficient separate waste

collection functions. More than half of the respondents from each

cluster (from 54.7% of the participants in cluster Indifferent to

76.4% of the participants in cluster Environmentally sensitive)

support such a proposition.

Table 6 Description of the clusters with respect to contextual factors affecting the separate collection of waste

Attributes



Bins for separate collection of waste are conveniently spaced from home


Availability of bins for separate collection of waste near the home


Bins for separate collection of waste are of suitable shapes and sizes


Waste tax that should be reduced for places of residence where the separate

collection of waste is organized and carried out (% positive responses)a76.4 69.7 54.7 76.2





481

7/23/2019 thed kkj

8/10

Discussion

The cluster analysis of the results of the survey made possible the

segmentation according to the attitudes towards recycling. The

following four clusters were identified: the Environmentally sen-

sitive (18.46%); the Inert who do not appreciate the benefits of

recycling for the environment (26.14%); the Indifferent to the

separate collection of waste (29.57%); and the Recycling(25.83%). Possible solutions relating to the implementation of

recycling in Bulgaria based on the segmentation and the identified

specific barriers were offered.

Despite the different basis for segmentation or criteria used in

other studies, some of the identified segments are similar to those

already established in previous research (Vicente and Reis, 2007;

DEFRA, 2008; Jesson, 2009).

The analysis showed that the participants in cluster Recy-

cling realize in the highest degree the necessity of separate col-

lection of packaging waste and approve the created organization.

They tend to use other sustainable practices such as consumption

of organic foods and non-food ecological products. They under-

stand the meaning of the labelling for energy efficiency and look

for it when purchasing electrical appliances. The respondents inthis cluster are strongly influenced by the pressure of social and

personal norms. Taylor and Todd found that the programmes for

social pressures are particularly effective in the early stages of

setting up systems for waste management, as is the case in Bul-

garia (Taylor and Todd, 1995). In this context, communication

messages addressed to them must activate these norms in order

to influence their pro-environmental behaviours (Biel and

Thgersen, 2007; Thomas and Sharp, 2013). Regardless of the

self-declared highest activity in recycling compared with others,

over 40% of the respondents in the group do not separate their

wastes. Therefore, messages with examples of best practices of

neighbours and friends and the influence of members of the

household can lead to positive results (Granzin and Olsen, 1991;Gamba and Oskamp, 1994). Providing evidence that their efforts

were not in vain, as well as examples of sustainable behaviour,

could motivate them further. Feedback leads to a growing

sense of individual and collective efficacy. Supply of information

from the local media about the achievements of the region, com-

pared with other regions of the country, can affect social and

personal norms and lead to a change by increasing the sense of

pride in participating in similar projects (Bandura, 1977; Schultz,

1998).

The cluster of Environmentally sensitive is characterized by

strongly manifested attitudes to environmental protection through

separate collection. The average age of this group is the lowest.

The majority of the respondents in it grew up in a time when the

issues related to the problems of the environment were muchdiscussed in the school and in the media. This is one of the reasons

they appreciate the need for specific actions to protect the envi-

ronment. This awareness can provide a valuable basis on which to

build plans for encouragement of their participation in recycling

which, according to the study results, is not high. At the same time,

they declare the greatest interest in organic food and green prod-

ucts. This cluster has the highest percentage of actively working

whose incomes are comparatively high. They tend to invest in

energy-efficient appliances that reduce maintenance costs without

affecting the quality of life. The communication campaigns should

provide information on the costs and benefits of recycling when

targeting this segment.

The Environmentally sensitive evaluate most the opportunities

to reduce waste tax in municipalities with separate waste collec-

tion. Several studies show that cost reduction can be a driver for

environmental behaviour (Tucker, 2001; Sutterlin et al., 2011).

Therefore, the development of new rules for the formation of the

waste tax would attract more players in this segment of separatecollection.

Unlike Recycling here, the disapproval of the context of recy-

cling is clearly shown. The lack of sufficient and conveniently

located waste bins, which the survey registered, does not espe-

cially encourage citizens to separate their household wastes.

Surely, this fact affects negatively the attitudes of people who are

generally ready and willing to do so. According to Triandis, the

presence or absence of facilitating conditions constrains behav-

ioural choice (Darnton, 2008). Other studies even show that the

intervention related to improvement of external conditions is more

profitable in terms of behaviour change (Maioet al., 2007). In this

regard, we can assume that the improvement of the organization

will increase the activity in the separate collection of waste in this

cluster.Similar intervention may be efficient among the Inert and

Indifferent where there is also disapproval of contextual char-

acteristics. Separate collection practices in these clusters are

rather the exception. The belief that the separate collection of

waste leads to environmental protection lacks in these clusters.

Therefore, the communication programme should be aimed at

transforming negative attitudes into positive ones. The benefits of

recycling should be presented with specific examples, easy for

adoption. For example, the number of trees saved by a certain

amount of recycled papers and the amount of recycled wastes in

comparison with the period when there was no system for sepa-

rate collection.

At the same time, representatives of the Inert are not indiffer-ent and realize their commitments related to recycling. This group

has the highest average age and thus the largest percentage of

pensioners. Considering that the incomes of this population are in

the low range, economic factors that influence their behaviours can

also be used. Such a tool could reduce the amount of waste fee for

residents of municipalities and regions where a well-organized and

efficient separate waste collection functions. The survey results

show a very high support for this proposal by the respondents of

this cluster.

Less educated inhabitants and lower income people of small

towns and villages predominate in the cluster Indifferent. They

think that recycling is not my concern. With their indifference,

they become perhaps the most difficult segment to influence. The

attitude of indifference can be diminished in two ways (Vicenteand Reis, 2007). First is with the message that anyone who creates

problems should be involved in their solution. In this case, the

generation of waste can be reduced through recycling. The other

way is to show that recycling is not an isolated act done by a

minority of citizens but an activity enjoying a growing interest in

the community.

Participants of the clusters with low activity towards recycling

(Inert and Indifferent) need additional training, including

instructions that explain how to separate household waste and

where to discard it. Information should be easily accessible so as




482

7/23/2019 thed kkj

9/10

to provide a constant reminder of this possibility. Jesson focused

on even more intensive methods of communication, such as

door knocking and local events, combined with outdoor adver-

tising at municipal level to raise awareness of recycling (Jesson,

2009). Linking these methods with a national media campaign can

provide the basis for behavioural changes. The messages that are

used need to improve the understanding that recycling is a good

thing, and disposal of waste in landfills is detrimental to theenvironment.

Conclusions

The method of cluster analysis for segmentation of Bulgarian

consumers according to their attitudes towards waste collection

was applied in this study. Four segments were identified based on

recycling-related attitudinal variables and only one of them is

characterized by a positive attitude towards recycling. The discov-

ery of the Environmentally sensitive among the other three seg-

ments is interesting for future marketing and communication

interventions. Participants are less motivated to engage in separate

waste collection, but they are aware of and appreciate the need forrecycling to protect the environment. Communication campaigns

related to the provision of information about the benefits of recy-

cling would increase interest and improve the results of the sepa-

rate collection of waste.

The other two clusters are Inert and Indifferent. The repre-

sentatives of these groups should be trained further to collect

separately household waste. They should be subject to targeted

marketing and communication strategy by which to weaken the

negative attitudes and reinforce positive behaviour towards

recycling.

The survey results show the strong disincentive effects of the

undeveloped infrastructure and service of recycling, especially on

clusters whose members are less motivated to separate household

waste. Removing these barriers would facilitate and promote sus-

tainable pro-environmental patterns of behaviour.

Segmentation of consumers creates a good basis for facilitating

the recycling marketing and communications campaigns and to be

better targeted and personalized around specific barriers and

household circumstances. The implications of the study may be

associated with the development and implementation of public

policy strategies for the separate collection of waste and the pro-

motion of consumer behaviour patterns.

Although the obtained results from segmentation study on recy-

cling participation in Bulgaria, the effort to pursue strategies with

positive results on Bulgarians participation in recycling must

continue and be sustained by future empirical knowledge. Future

research may be extended to other approach of using behaviouralvariables and variables directly related to behaviour, such as

beliefs and motives, as a segmentation base.

Acknowledgements

The financial support provided by the National Science Fund and

the Ministry of Education and Science for the Project Sustainable

Consumption in Bulgaria changing patterns is gratefully

acknowledged.

References

Bandura, A. (1977) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral

change. Psychological Review, 84 , 191215.

Barr, S. (2007) Factors influencing environmental attitudes and

behaviors: a U. K. case study of household waste management. Envi-

ronment and Behavior, 39 , 435473.

BEEA (2011) Bulgarian executive environment agency. In Report to the

Objectives of the Republic of Bulgaria for Recycling and Recovery ofPackaging Waste. BEEA, Sofia, Bulgaria.

Biel, A. & Thgersen, J. (2007) Activation of social norms in social

dilemmas: a review of the evidence and reflections on the implica-

tions for environmental behaviour. Journal of Economic Psychology,

28, 93112.

do Paco, A. & Raposo, M. (2009) Green segmentation: an application

to the Portuguese consumer market. Marketing Intelligence & Plan-

ning, 27 , 364379.

Darnton, A. (2008) GSR behaviour change knowledge review reference

report: an overview of behaviour change models and their uses. UK

Government Social Research Unit. London. [WWW document].

URL http://www.defra.gov.uk/ (accessed on 10 February 2014).

DEFRA (2008) A framework for pro-environmental behaviours. Report.

London: UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

2008. [WWW document]. URL http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/

files/pb13574-behaviours-report-080110.pdf (accessed on 10 February

2014).

EEA (2008) European Environment Agency. Municipal Waste Manage-

ment and Greenhouse Gases. ETC/RWM, Brussels, Belgium.

ESGRAON (2009) Unified System for Vital Statistics and Administra-

tive Services to the Population in Bulgaria. Database. [WWW docu-

ment]. URL http://www.grao.bg/tables.html (accessed on 30

November 2013).

Eurobarometer (2008) Attitudes of European citizens towards the

environment (Special Eurobarometer). [WWW document].

URL http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_295_en.pdf

(accessed on 10 February 2014).

Eurobarometer (2011) Attitudes of European citizens towards the

environment (Special Eurobarometer). [WWW document].

URL http://ec.europa.eu/environment/pdf/ebs_365_en.pdf


EUROSTAT (2011) The Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs).

[WWW document]. URL http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/ (accessed

on 30 November 2013).

Gamba, R. & Oskamp, S. (1994) Factors influencing community resi-

dents participation in comingled curbside recycling programs. Envi-


Gatersleben, B., Steg, L. & Vlek, C. (2002) Measurement and determi-

nants of environmentally significant consumer behavior. Environment

and Behavior, 34 , 335362.

Granzin, K. & Olsen, J. (1991) Characterising participants in activities

protecting the environment: a focus on donating, recycling and con-

servation behaviours. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 10 ,

127.

Ivanova, D., Vasileva, E., Stefanov, S. & Tipova, N. (2010) Sustainable

consumption and recycling of household waste in Bulgaria. Romanian

Journal of Quality, 11, 10831088.

Jackson, T. (2005) Motivating sustainable consumption: a review of evi-

dence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change. In Report to

the Sustainable Development Research NetworkCentre for Environ-

mental Strategy, University of Surrey, Surrey, UK.

Jansson, J., Marell, A. & Nordlund, A. (2009) Elucidating green con-

sumers: a cluster analytic approach on proenvironmental purchase

and curtailment behaviors. Journal of Euromarketing, 18 ,

245267.




483

7/23/2019 thed kkj

10/10

Jesson, J. (2009) Household waste recycling behavior: a market

segmentation model. Social Marketing Quarterly, 15,

2538.

Maio, G., Verplanken, B., Manstead, A., Stroebe, W., Abraham, C.,

Sheeran, P. & Conner, M. (2007) Social Psychological factors in life-

style change and their relevance to policy. Social Issues and Policy

Review, 1 , 99137.

MEW (2013) Ministry of Environment and Water of Republic Bulgaria.

Register of packaging recovery organizations. [WWW document].URL http://www.moew.government.bg/ (accessed on 10 February

2014).

NSI (2011) National Statistical Institute. Statistical Reference Book

2010. Education and Science inc. Co., Sofia, Bulgaria.

OECD (2008) Household Behaviour and the Environment Reviewing the

Evidence, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Paris, France.

Schultz, P., Oskamp, S. & Mainieri, T. (1995) Who recycles and when?

A review of personal and situational factors. Journal of Environmental

Psychology, 15 , 105121.

Schultz, P.W. (1998) Changing behavior with normative feedback inter-

ventions: a field experiment on curbside recycling. Basic and Applied

Social Psychology, 21, 2536.

Steg, L. & Vlek, C. (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour:

an integrative review and research agenda. Journal of EnvironmentalPsychology, 29 , 309317.

Stern, P. (2005) Understanding individuals environmentally significant

behavior.Environmental Law Report, 35 , 785790.

Sutterlin, B., Brunner, T. & Siegrist, M. (2011) Who puts the most

energy into energy conservation? A segmentation of energy consum-

ers based on energy-related behavioral characteristics. Energy Policy,

39, 81378152.

Taylor, S. & Todd, P. (1995) An integrated model of waste management

behavior: a test of household recycling and composting intentions.

Environment and Behavior, 27 , 603630.

Thomas, C. & Sharp, V. (2013) Understanding the normalisation of

recycling behaviour and its implications for other pro-environmental

behaviours: a review of social norms and recycling. Resources, Con-

servation and Recycling, 79, 1120.

Thgersen, J. (1994) A model of recycling behaviour with evidence

from Danish source separation programmes. International Journal ofResearch in Marketing, 11, 145163.

Thgersen, J. (2009) The motivational roots of norms for environmen-

tally responsible behaviour. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31 ,

348362.

Timlett, R. & Williams, I.D. (2011) The ISB model (infrastructure,

service, behavior): a tool for waste practitioners. Waste Management,

31, 13811392.

Tucker, P. (2001) Understanding Recycling Behaviour. University of

Paisley, Paisley, Scotland.

Valle, P., Reis, E., Mendes, J. & Rebelo, E. (2004) Behaviour determi-

nants of household recycling participation: the Portuguese case. Envi-


Vicente, P. & Reis, E. (2007) Segmentation householders according to

recycling attitudes in a Portuguese urban area. Resources, Conserva-

tion and Recycling, 52, 112.Vicente, P. & Reis, E. (2008) Factors influencing households participa-

tion in recycling. Waste Management & Research, 26 , 140146.

Vining, J. & Ebreo, A. (1990) What makes a recycler? A comparison of

recyclers and nonrecyclers. Environment and Behavior, 22 , 5573.

Vitosha Research (2006) Rapport: citizens and separate waste collection.

Sofia. [WWW document]. URL http://www.vitosha-research.com





484

Documents

thed kkj