Recycling Behavior amid Disruptions

Introduction

Urbanization along with consumption and population growth has amplified the waste production rate worldwide. The annual generation of waste is estimated to increase at an increment of 70% and to reach approximately 3.4 billion tons in 2050 (Kaza et al., 2018). The lack of sustainable waste management severely affects low-income countries where most of the garbage is disposed of in unregulated landfills or is openly burned (Fernández-González et al., 2020). These malpractices are a breeding ground for viruses and bacteria and lead to crucial environmental disasters. The landfilling contamination affects air quality, water sources, ecosystems, and human health. Therefore, engineered waste solutions became vital to separate, treat, and safely dispose of all types of waste.

Municipal solid waste (MSW), which corresponds to household type of waste, is a burden for societies with poor financial resources and weak planning systems. Such solid wastes include organic waste, paper/cardboard, metal, plastics, glass, and others. However, in developing countries, the dominant portion is organic waste. It makes up around 68 to 70% of the total amount generated (Fernández-González et al., 2020). Since the weight of organic waste generated will increase in the same way as the total amount of waste, it became imperative for different countries to consider appropriate solutions for solid waste management. As a result, the World Bank and the United Nations (UN) put on high priority the need to guarantee safe disposal and public health while managing MSW (Azzi, 2017).

The world is converging toward a zero-waste management system. MSW management is basically the control of waste from source to disposal while implementing the optimal principles of public welfare in terms of economics, conservation, health, aesthetics, and environmental concerns (Sukolthaman et al., 2016). And here lies the importance of recycling. Bendak and Attili (2016) argue that recycling consists of using discarded materials in an industrial productive process in order to preserve nonrenewable sources of energy and minimize landfilling rates. This technique reduces the exploitation of raw materials, minimizes pollution rates, and diminishes waste generation. Indeed, natural resources are very scarce, and reusing them is vital for future generations (Ugulu, 2015), and a necessary step for implementing recycling is the separation of the household solid waste, MSW, at source.

Zhang et al. (2015) believe that the adoption of a separation at source strategy, for the recycling process, requires high levels of governmental regulations and involvement to trigger and boost effective public participation. In the long run, it is anticipated that such processes reduce the amount of solid waste generated and sent to landfills. Thus, pollution rates will decrease, and a cleaner and sustainable environment will be secured. In fact, environmental problems are mainly caused by the human beings’ behavior and can be mitigated by a simple change in such behaviors. Hence, before designing any solid waste management (SWM) system, social assessment of citizens’ behaviors is required. Educating people is deemed necessary to overcome any future barrier to recycling, and to implement an effective strategy. Citizens’ behaviors are affected by multiple parameters. The most frequent variables revealed by scholars, tackling recycling intentions and behaviors, are attitude, social or subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (PBC). These variables are the fundamentals of the theory of planned behavior (TPB), which will be further elaborated in this study. In addition, and in order to conduct more comprehensive studies, a few influencing factors such as environmental awareness, governmental role, and situational factors are added to further back up suggested hypotheses (Aboelmaged, 2020; Al Mamun et al., 2018; Delcea et al., 2020; Jigani et al., 2020).

Review of Literature

Government, along with few NGOs, is assumed to be the main provider of adequate infrastructure and environmental awareness. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the link between the measures taken and the public’s response. The TPB provides a strong basis for a model of recycling decisions. It offers a theoretical background for the identification of factors influencing waste separation (Ajzen, 1991), and environmentally friendly behaviors (Wan & Shen, 2013). It reveals that ability and motivation are the basic predictors of behaviors in various situations. Since source separation is the first step toward a successful SWM, the discussion of TPB is required for a better understanding of separation behaviors. Ajzen (1991) believes that the three major factors that directly affect behavioral intentions are as follows:

Attitude, the individual’s subjective perception of the performance of a certain behavior.

Attitude and social norms are motivational factors for a person’s intention to achieve a certain behavior. Afterwards, the person’s behavior will be predicted by his/her own intention to perform it. When it comes to PBC, it should be noted that this parameter could actually affect the execution of an intended behavior. Therefore, PBC acts as a motivator for the person’s intention, and together with the intention, directly influence behavior (Stoeva & Alriksson, 2017). Ajzen (1991) confirms that the power of predicting the control of perceived behavior on behavior actually increases with the realistic perception one has over a situation. Also, intention is tightly linked to people’s motivation to achieve what is expected from them. Thus, the following model, advanced by Ajzen (1991) includes independent variables (attitude, social norms, and PBC), a mediator (intention), and a dependent variable (behavior) (Figure 1).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Source: Ajzen (1991).

This theory had been extensively adopted in attitude-behavior studies including public transportation, smoking, technology reception, and others. It has been similarly applied for recycling behaviors. Ajzen (1991) confirmed that TPB is extensively flexible and tolerates extra variables for further clarifications and better validity. Researchers complement the classical model of TPB with multiple variables to better predict citizens’ behaviors. A larger emphasis should be accorded to identify the factors that influence separation and recycling behaviors.

For instance, in Australia, conscientiousness and self-identity affected indirectly the citizens’ recycling behaviors and were included under attitude (White & Hyde, 2012). Zhang et al. (2015) confirmed that the neighbors’ activities strongly modified recycling behaviors in households and constituted a sort of social pressure on these individuals. They revealed that attitude, PBC, situational factors, social norms, and intentions significantly forecasted solid waste separation behaviors in China. In Sweden, research revealed that PBC, satisfaction with local facilities, social norms, and attitude have an impact on people’s intention and behavior (Stoeva & Alriksson, 2017). Environmental knowledge of Indonesian citizens is found to have a major influence on separation intentions and recycling effectiveness (Ulhasanah & Goto, 2018). Within the same context, Oztekin et al. (2017) found that female recycling intentions are modeled by PBC and innate recycling attitudes, whereas men recycling intentions are modeled by their past behaviors, and habits specifically. Furthermore, Ulhasanah and Goto (2018) showed how habit and government involvement affected positively the daily recycling behaviors of households in Indonesia. In Greece, spatial planning of recycling bins had been added to the model; however, the results did not confirm its impact on citizens’ recycling behaviors (Kechagias & Dimitriadis, 2020).

To our knowledge, no study has explored MSW separation behaviors in Lebanon while adopting the TPB perspective. Thus, the findings would help understand what interventions could be the most efficient in influencing positively the behavioral changes among Lebanese. Given that TPB is a fruitful starting point for tackling intentions and behaviors in a specific field, this study discusses the relationship between attitude, social norms, and PBC of Lebanese citizens and their intention to recycle. In addition, it describes the effect of environmental awareness, the presence of a strong governance, and appropriate situational factors in shaping eco-friendly behaviors. Literature pertaining to each of the just highlighted variables is reviewed.

Attitude

Attitude refers to the beliefs of an individual as well as his/her subjective assessment of a specific behavior (Wan & Shen, 2013), and is highly dependent on the consequences desired (Yahya et al., 2016). Assessing attitudes can provide further insights about possible recycling behaviors, as residents’ attitudes are found to be a key parameter for the success of recycling programs (Bendak & Attili, 2016). To secure higher participation rates, Bendak and Attili (2016) argue that it is crucial to better recognize those who recycle, to understand the reasons behind their engagement in such activity, and to assess the way they perform this process.

In fact, the “conservation psychology” focuses on identifying the reasons making people behave or not in a specific manner, as well as the ways this specific behavior is encouraged (Soutter & Mottus, 2020). Wallen and Landon (2020) define the conservation psychology as the study of relationships between human beings and nature, being tightly oriented toward conserving natural resources and preserving the quality of life. It is applied to waste management research and has two main parameters of interest: environmental attitudes and behaviors (Soutter & Mottus, 2020), where environmental attitude is defined as a person’s tendency to achieve a favor toward the nature and the environment (Hawcroft & Milfont, 2010).

Several studies have explored the link between attitudes and intentions. As discussed earlier, attitude is a positive or a negative feeling that rises whenever an individual adopts a new behavior (Delcea et al., 2019). Zhang et al. (2015) argue that environmental knowledge and moral obligations are the two factors shaping Chinese attitudes, as environmentally knowledgeable individuals tend to have a positive attitude toward recycling, thus creating significant intentions to participate in such a process. Besides, they added that having strict moral obligations modifies people’s behaviors in their daily life and let them form strong environmental attitudes. Studies conducted across the globe (e.g., China, Romania, etc.) reveal that attitudes are found to have a strong positive correlation with household waste separation intentions (Delcea et al., 2019; Karim et al., 2013; Nigbur et al., 2010; Song et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2015) and in young people’s intention to recycle (Halder & Singh, 2018). Therefore, a positive attitude intensifies recycling intentions and triggers environmental behaviors. Attitudes seem to push people to engage and boost their intention to participate in waste separation practices.

On the other hand, few other studies did not support such positive correlation, revealing that attitude does not have any significant influence on recycling intentions, but even affects it negatively (Nguyen et al., 2017; Ng, S.L., 2019). Such a negative relationship is due to impediments including far recycling bins and a shortage in their number (Bendak & Attili, 2016). While UAE residents have a positive attitude toward environmental practices, the majority do not recycle but are willing to engage as long as they have accessibility to proper recycling infrastructure (Bendak & Attili, 2016). Indeed, attitude changes toward environmental matters do not come overnight (Soutter et al., 2020), thus, adopting environmental practices requires a thorough understanding, for future generations to fully encompass such behaviors and to incorporate them into their daily routines.

Social Norms

Social norms are the way individuals perceive what others, in the same society, would expect them to do. They encompass and determine the types of accepted behaviors or the encouraged ones. They include social pressure concepts as well and alter people’s willingness to engage in different activities (Zhang et al., 2015). Social pressures emanate from neighbors, family, friends, or the community as a whole, and impact others significantly. In fact, groups of people sharing the same physical borders, although not intimately related, create social norms (Janmaimool, 2017). Moreover, “personal norms,” a parameter that may complement the concept of social norms, define how people should behave in order to be in harmony with all the societal rules. Adopting a specific set of social norms leads to their transformation to personal norms that shape human behavior differently (Bortoleto, 2015). Complying with rules and personal norms boosts people’s satisfaction, whereas their violation creates some feelings of guilt (Jigani et al., 2020). These personal norms have a significant impact on behaviors, as individuals are inclined to escape the guilt feeling that rises after a specific incorrect behavior (Bortoleto, 2015).

Social norms are found to be active influencers on environmental behaviors (Abrahamse & Steg, 2013). Studies tackling human behaviors highlighted social norms, as being one of the most crucial variables, impacting recycling intentions among Malaysians (Amini et al., 2014), Malaysian students (Mahmud & Osman, 2010), Indian ones (Halder & Singh, 2018), as well as Lithuanians (Miliute-Plepiene et al., 2016), and people in China (Yuan et al., 2016). However, such findings are not conclusive, as other research did not support the conclusion arguing that social norms, mainly social pressure, being a crucial factor affecting people’s intention to separate waste (Nguyen et al., 2015). Ulhasanah and Goto (2018) found it to be the least effective in Indonesia, while law enforcement being the most influential factor of recycling behaviors. In addition, Silberer et al. (2020) revealed that the effectiveness of social norms highly relies on the degree of residents’ involvement, where people with low participation in the sustainability endeavor seem to be more influenced by social norms than their counterparts who are already tightly engaged.

Perceived Behavioral Control

Zhang et al. (2015) defines PBC as a reflection on past experiences and an expectation of potential obstacles. Delcea et al. (2020) suggest that PBC includes the individual’s beliefs toward the difficulty of achieving a specific behavior. Indeed, a behavior with more opportunities and fewer projected obstacles, boosts PBC, which will consequently enhance its chances for occurrence (Zhang et al., 2015). Not to forget self-efficacy, being the ability to perform a specific behavior or task (Lin et al., 2021), as it directs people toward deciding on the amount of effort they will dedicate for a certain task or practice and the amount of time they will persist when encountering complications.

D’Adamo (2019) argued that PBC redirects two different dimensions. The first includes the external circumstances of an individual that can modify the ability to perform a specific behavior, and the second encompasses the projected ability to execute or implement this same behavior. While external circumstances include the appropriate awareness, adequate attitude, and surrounding social pressure, projected ability embodies the availability of proper situational factors and the easiness to reach labeled recycling bins. Indeed, holding slight control over a behavior would directly lower the intention to perform it. However, the adoption of an easy behavior could be the path to adopt further challenging behaviors (Thogersen & Crompton, 2009). This approach is called the foot in the door effect and states that complying with a “small demand” encourages complying with a “bigger demand” (Arnold & Kaiser, 2018).

Multiple studies embraced this approach. For instance, daily eco-friendly behaviors boost the acceptance of environmental policies like wind power generation (Thogersen & Noblet, 2012), and water preservation resources on a small scale can push individuals to be active participants in more challenging water conservation activities and projects (Laurent et al., 2016). Therefore, a gradual increase in the difficulty of engagements would foster the implementation of difficult behaviors or actions (Arias & Trujillo, 2020). It is important to highlight that waste recycling involves a series of routine behaviors or patterned behaviors including washing, collecting, sorting, separating, incinerating, returning, disposing, and reusing. Knussen and Yule (2008) designate this set of actions as repetitive-habitual patterns. Individuals will have the tendency to do them without a lot of analysis or conscious reasoning. Habit and past behaviors are a fundamental part of PBC, and Colesca et al. (2014) claimed that habit has a significant role in environmentally oriented behaviors. Since waste disposal behaviors happen frequently in the same settings (at households), and take little amounts of time and thinking, Comber and Thieme (2012) expect it to become a daily life habit.

Research reveals that PBC influences intentions independently of social norms and attitudes, being one of the most influencing factors on recycling intentions (Ajzen & Madden, 1986), especially when accompanied with awareness campaigns (Zhang et al., 2015), leading to more effective recycling behaviors (Bortoleto et al., 2012; Mahmud & Osman, 2010). Within the same context, Strydom (2018) reported a significant effect of PBC on behaviors and a minor effect on recycling intentions, arguing that PBC better shapes intentions whenever factors such as motivation and proper infrastructure are available. For instance, Romanian residents consider waste separation an easy task to perform and demonstrate high PBC, as they face few difficulties in achieving recycling activities (Delcea et al., 2020).

Environmental Awareness

An individual’s knowledge and awareness predict his/her behavior (Mosler et al., 2008). Thus, examining them in a study of recycling behaviors seems crucial. Environmental awareness is the rise of a sustainable public concern toward the waste’s impact on the environment (Yahya et al., 2016), and environmental knowledge is the sum of knowledge and awareness concerning environmental concerns and key solutions (Zsoka et al., 2013). However, awareness and knowledge could be used interchangeably, especially when tackling environmental topics (Kwatra et al., 2014).

When tackling recycling in research, scholars are interested in revealing the main characteristics of those who recycle, being their knowledge about recycling, attitudes, personality traits, as well as their demographics (Schultz, 1995). Meng et al. (2019) found that awareness had the strongest influence, among all other variables, on the separation behaviors among Chinese. Research confirms that environmental awareness/knowledge is tightly linked to people’s intention to get involved, considered as a mediator, which affects their behaviors at a later stage. In fact, the state of an individual’s knowledge affects his/her decision-making process, as people are inclined to avoid circumstances for which they have little knowledge because guidance seems missing. While an adequate amount of environmental knowledge makes people keen to invest in environmental projects (Amyx et al., 1994), a lack of awareness and eco-friendly knowledge hinders this process (Chan, 2011).

Indeed, high levels of environmental knowledge could shape residents’ environmental behaviors (Chana et al., 2014), and residents, with a high level of knowledge about solid waste separation at source, are more likely to recycle properly (Tudor et al., 2008). Moreover, Al-Shemmeri and Naylor (2017) found that those who got involved in environmental behavioral changes, were backed up with significant environmental knowledge. Furthermore, research revealed that Indonesians’ remarkable environmental knowledge and awareness led to a noticeable recycling intention as well as an involvement in environmental friendly activities (Ulhasanah & Goto, 2018). A finding that is supported in China too, where environmental knowledge is shown to have a noteworthy impact on the Chinese’s recycling behaviors (Meng et al., 2019). Moreover, Meng et al. (2019) included awareness under attitudes and found a high impact on disposal behaviors. An Australian study highlighted that awareness affects recycling behaviors by influencing other variables like intention, social norms, and attitude (Kite et al., 2018). In addition, Yahya et al. (2016) concluded that awareness is the variable that had the most positive effect on, and closest association with recycling behaviors. Similarly, different studies showed that awareness has a high impact on recycling behaviors along with habit and responsibility attribution (Bezzina & Dimech, 2011; Klöckner & Oppedal, 2011). Actually, the government, along with other NGOs and educative authorities, can play a major role in this respect.

Role of Government

The government has a fundamental role in saving the environment and preserving it. A set of regulations, decrees, and laws aiming for environmental protection and targeting waste reduction represents the sum of governmental procedures (Yahya et al., 2016). In order to induce and boost the sustainability concepts and recycling practices in any society, governmental institutions are to consider three components: publicity, education, and promotion (Bendak & Attili, 2016). Proper awareness campaigns targeting the right individuals and using the appropriate learning tools are deemed crucial. Indeed, spreading awareness and environmental education should be put on high priority, as improving the individuals’ understanding of environmental practices and their benefits is a major pillar for project success (Ulhasanah & Goto, 2018). Zhang et al. (2015) reported that campaigns could stimulate public participation by stressing on the “moral obligation” of individuals to separate their waste in households. Moreover, they affirmed that the government is the main responsible entity for organizing environmental activities and scheduling awareness campaigns in schools and municipalities. Incentives would be then developed to boost active public engagement. In addition, Jigani et al. (2020) focused on the importance of promotion to stimulate individual’s responsibility and create a positive influence on their behaviors. Saladie and Santos-Lacueva (2016) identified a moderate influence on separation rates with proper awareness campaigns.

In addition to spreading awareness and promoting environmental practices, the government’s role becomes even more crucial in drafting and securing the implementation of specific laws, as public participation is highly encouraged by local regulations. In Palestine, for instance, the lack of motivation and regulations imposed by local authorities discourages the adoption of recycling procedures (Al-Khateeb et al., 2017). The researchers emphasized the role of strict rules that deem necessary to endorse source separation and facilitate waste treatments, regardless of their types. In Macau-China, 95.7% of the respondents showed willingness to sort at source if the government had made the practice mandatory (Song et al., 2016). Within the same context, Delcea et al. (2020) found that strict governmental measures and recycling behavior are positively correlated. In UAE, 83% of the surveyed people even went further by revealing their strong attitude toward the need for the government to set regulations forcing industries to use recyclables in their packages (Bendak & Attili, 2016). Thus, intention and attitude might be positive, but reinforcement from the government’s side seems needed. In China, 98.8% of the respondents showed their willingness to undertake the effort required in order to protect their environment (Song et al., 2016). Moreover, Bendak and Attili (2016) argued that the majority of UAE’s society suffers from the lack of environmental awareness, revealing that, in order to increase the efficiency of household recycling practices, public awareness campaigns should be held intensively by high authorities who will then reinforce regulations.

Moreover, since the government is the first entity responsible for recycling procedures, it should gain public trust. Jigani et al. (2020) stated that trust is a combination of specific behaviors that demonstrate the expectations of residents toward multiple entities, mainly high authorities, and focuses on all the strategies adopted by the latter to encounter waste management situations. Trust in government had the greatest impact on recycling intentions in Vietnam (Nguyen et al., 2015). Trust in governmental authorities is found to trigger a direct positive attitude toward recycling, even without offering any kind of incentives to residents (Rompf et al., 2017). When trust is boosted, allocating benefits turns out to be irrelevant. On another note, Sonderskov (2011) reported a consistent and significant effect of social trust on recycling behaviors, arguing that social trust endorses the positive expectations of individuals toward the cooperation and trustworthiness of governmental institutions. High levels of trust could indeed boost the residents’ willingness to engage in eco-friendly practices (Scafuto et al., 2018).

Collection Infrastructure and Situational Factors

Collection infrastructure refers to the accessibility of citizens to waste collection stations (Meng et al., 2019). It encompasses the capacity of the facilities’ storage, the number of stations, and the bins indications. Such infrastructure makes it convenient for people to commit to sorting while teaching them the proper practices and encouraging them all the way through. In fact, Meng et al. (2019) confirmed that these infrastructures have a major impact on shaping recycling behaviors, as the lack of effective infrastructure highly limits recycling intentions and eliminates its realization (Zhang et al., 2016). Timlett and Williams (2011) highlighted the positive influence of the infrastructure’s convenience and availability on the efficiency of waste separation rates. Thus, considering contextual and situational factors is as crucial as personal factors like attitudes, habits, and norms. In Romania, 93.38% of the respondents agreed that the large number of collection points, when wisely managed, increases the recycling effectiveness (Jigani et al., 2020). In addition, Jigani et al. (2020) revealed that 80.29% of Romanians would have the intention to separate their household waste whenever the government provides adequate and accessible assemblage infrastructure. Thus, situational factors are a main parameter affecting recycling behaviors directly (Zhang et al., 2015). This variable is measured in terms of its possible barriers including space, inconvenience, and time. The waste separation’s rate and the residents’ level of engagement would be highly affected by the lack or the availability of time and space required to accomplish proper recycling practices.

Metcalfe et al. (2013) suggested that, rather than modifying people’s attitude or creating recycling intentions; governments should focus on implementing proper infrastructure for household waste collection. They affirmed that adopting such a strategy could minimize barriers for recycling behaviors. Furthermore, accessibility to waste collection infrastructure influences majorly behaviors in all its aspects (Zhang et al., 2016). It describes the ease of accessing recycling centers as well as its abundance in multiple spots. Drop-off services or collection programs may facilitate recycling practices and make it an easy to go option. In addition, “proximity,” the distance from households to recycling locations, is a crucial factor that needs to be highlighted. The closer the recycling bins are, the easier the recycling process is, and the more likely that people’s recycling behavior is boosted. Jigani et al. (2020) revealed that 77.84% of people highlighted the importance of the recycling collection bins to be close to their household. Within the same context, Du Toit et al. (2017) shed light on the challenges faced in South African townhouses where the backyards or kitchens’ small spatial areas are not suitable for multiple recycling bins. Indeed, residents having positive attitude toward recycling will not be inclined to recycle properly if the process ends up being inconvenient (Chen & Tung, 2010). Consequently, attitudes will have a less significant impact on recycling intentions and behaviors. Zen and Siwar (2015) affirmed that the recycling collection center in Kuala Lumpur-Malaysia had the most significant influence on the residents’ recycling intention. To conclude, although developing infrastructure has multiple obstacles linked to administration, funds, and misusages (Musella et al., 2019), its crucial positive impact on recycling behaviors is not debatable.

Intention

Intention is a measure of people’s desire to adopt a specific behavior and theoretically determines the type of the behavior (Jigani et al., 2020). Pakpour et al. (2014) noted a strong relationship between intention and recycling behaviors. Therefore, intention could be a mediating variable between the independent parameters highlighted in the sections above and the recycling behavior, being the dependent variable.

Attitude, PBC and social norms are, according to the TPB, the major parameters making up intentions (Zhang et al., 2015). Positive attitude, strong social norms, and high behavioral control lead to stronger intentions and, thus, to higher achievement rates of a given behavior. Further, the more influencing the intention is, the more likely individuals will behave in compliance with such intention. In their study, Huang and Tseng (2020) used behavioral intentions as a mediating variable that affects recycling behaviors. They confirmed that the consumer’s behaviors are highly influenced by their intention to accomplish a specific set of tasks.

Multiple studies determined the factors that could shape individuals’ recycling intentions, and social norms came out to be a prominent one in inducing intention and engagement (Silberer et al., 2020). Moreover, attitude, PBC, social norms, and satisfaction with governmental procedures are found to affect intention and project more efficient recycling behaviors in Sweden (Stoeva & Alriksson, 2017).

Delcea et al. (2020) and Strydom (2018) found a noteworthy impact of intention on waste separation behaviors. Furthermore, intention, along with high levels of awareness, is found to positively affect household separation behaviors in Romania, while the most influencing variables on intention are shown to be responsibility, proper infrastructure, and PBC (Jigani et al., 2020). Nduneseokwu et al. (2017) proved that proper waste collection infrastructure affected positively recycling intentions and behaviors. Many scholars revealed that intention is mostly influenced by PBC (Halder & Singh, 2018; Wang et al., 2019; Yuan et al., 2016). Passafaro et al. (2019) argued that neighbors and family members’ behaviors have a considerable impact on modifying people’s intentions to recycle. Pikturniene and Baumle (2016) determined that attitude is the primary parameter to track in order to better predict recycling intentions. In Indonesia, intention is found to be determined by multiple factors including environmental awareness, role of government, social norms, habits, environmental knowledge, and law enforcement (Ulhasanah & Goto, 2018).

To sum up, the reviewed literature discussed the possible variables that can be used in assessing individuals’ recycling intentions and behaviors. It showed the importance of the TPB in proposing major predictors of recycling intentions and behaviors, with the addition of crucial variables such as awareness. Moreover, it highlighted the importance of few influential variables, governmental role, and infrastructure, which are expected to moderate the relationship between intention and behavior. Accordingly, Figure 2 shows the hypothetical model for recycling behaviors, adopted in the study, being the basis for hypotheses development, presented below:

H ₁ : A positive attitude toward recycling affects positively the Lebanese’s behaviors to recycle their household waste, and this relationship is mediated by intention.

OPEN IN VIEWER Figure 2.

Research Framework.

Research Methodology

Instrumentation

Churchill (1979) has developed a set of principles to design research instruments. In this study, the instrument is developed following Churchill’s procedures: identification of construct’s domain, generation of items through existing literature and focus group discussions, categorization of items into determinants, initial data collection, and purification (including expert validation; pilot testing; and scale modification, refinement, and finalization), data collection, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using IBM SPSS 26, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using IBM SPSS AMOS 22.

Domain’s Construct Identification : The domain for this study’s construct is recycling intentions and behaviors of Lebanese citizens.

Item Generation and Categorization : To develop the instrument’s multiple statements and sections, and validate its outcome, two methods have been followed. First, a comprehensive literature review was conducted and presented earlier, englobing different parameters that could shape people’s recycling intentions and behaviors. Second, group discussions were held and directed to collect different opinions and generate diverse items shaping such intentions and behaviors.

Discussion sessions were organized with key professionals from various industries (engineering, management, and education) and with different educational levels (bachelor, master, and PhD). During these brainstorming sessions, notes were recorded and evaluated at a later stage to detect all relevant keywords that could be helpful in developing the questionnaire. These keywords were linked to the categories already found in the literature. The demographic information of people involved in these discussion sessions are presented in Table 1. Three group discussion meetings were conducted with several members each. During these sessions, the discussion moved on by stating and arguing on the different variables affecting the recycling intentions and behaviors while taking the Lebanese society and context into consideration. Keywords were highlighted and notes were taken under each for comprehensive statement development. At the end of the sessions, 38 meaningful statements were developed and divided into eight different categories titled as follows: attitude with 4 statements, social norms (5), perceived behavioral control (5), awareness (5), role of government (4), infrastructure (4), intention (5), and behavior (4).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Demographics of the Discussion Groups’ Members.

Demographics	Group One	Group Two	Group Three
Gender	2 females, 1 male	3 females	1 female, 2 males
Age	24, 25, and 42 years old	25, 30, and 45 years old	24, 25, and 53 years old
Education	PhD, BS in Law, and BE in chemical engineering	BS in economy, BS in finance, and BE in chemical engineering	BE in chemical engineering, BE in civil engineering, and BS in law

Initial Data Collection and Purification : After the instrument validation made by the groups’ members, a pilot study was conducted to make sure that all statements are clear and fit under the targeted factor/section that the researchers linked them to. The pilot study was conducted with 20 participants. Few commented on the fact that the statements under intention and behavior were close in terms of meaning and are therefore confusing. Consequently, an introductory sentence was added before each set of statements to clarify the exact aim of each section. The final refined version of the questionnaire was then made ready for data collection.

The questionnaire is divided into nine parts. Part I includes the respondents’ demographic information. Part II contains statements assessing the respondents’ attitude toward waste separation activities. Part III comprises statements that evaluate the way individuals perceive what others, in the same society, would expect them to do (i.e., social norms). In Part IV, people’s reflection on past experiences of waste sorting and separation, as well as their expectations of potential obstacles are tackled (i.e., PBC). Knowledge and awareness concerning environmental issues and key solutions are presented in Part V. The Lebanese’s governmental role and responsibilities are discussed in Part VI. Part VII sheds light on how the accessibility to, and the efficiency of waste separation/collection means would affect the intention to sort waste (i.e., infrastructure). Part VIII presented the Lebanese’s intention to be involved in appropriate waste separation activities. Finally, Part IX concludes how intention would be translated into active involvement in waste separation activities, (i.e., behavior). Part II to IX are assessed using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), neutral (3), agree (4) to strongly agree (5).

Data Collection

After the approval of the university’s Institutional Research Board (IRB), an online version of the questionnaire was shared through different social media platforms with potential participants, including a consent form to ensure that respondents’ participation is voluntary, and that their data will remain confidential and anonymous. The data collection process stretched over a two-week period. After reviewing the final data Excel sheet, each statement was coded using the first three letters corresponding to the factor it belongs to, followed by a numerical digit. For instance, the first statement for attitude is coded ATT1. Table 2 presents the variables with their corresponding statements coded.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

The Eight Variables Along with Their Statements.

Factors	Statement Code	Statements
Variable One: Attitude	ATT1	I believe that efficient waste separation processes lead to a clean environment
	ATT2	I feel glad to engage in any waste management/separation plan
	ATT3	I feel that I have a responsibility to reduce the amount of waste generated
	ATT4	I believe that waste separation at home is the key starting point for the whole waste management process
Variable Two: Social norms	SN1	People around me are interested in protecting the environment
	SN2	People around me have a concern about/responsibility for the waste problem in our community
	SN3	People around me participate in environmental activities
	SN4	People around me will criticize me if I do not separate waste.
	SN5	If people around me separate their waste, I will start separating mine too
Variable Three: Perceived behavioral control	PBC1	Separating waste at home is something complicated and hard to do.
	PBC2	Waste separation takes too much time.
	PBC3	Waste separation takes up too much room/space.
	PBC4	Lack of satisfactory facilities (such as coded recycling bins for waste separation and collection means) prevents me from separating waste.
	PBC5	It is not easy to change my habits, as I am not used to separate waste
Variable Four: Awareness	AWA1	I am aware that the risks associated with waste problems are true and serious
	AWA2	I am aware that the waste problem poses a threat to my health and my family’s health
	AWA3	I am aware how to separate my waste correctly and what are the types of waste that can be recycled.
	AWA4	I am aware that waste separation brings about economic benefits (natural fertilizer, electricity, selling used glass/aluminum…)
	AWA5	I am aware that waste separation at source helps reduce wastes accumulating in landfills and protects the environment
Variable Five: Governmental role	GOV1	I sort my waste selectively, if/because Government/Municipality educates me about waste separation
	GOV2	I sort my waste selectively, if/because Government/Municipality does enough to fix the garbage problem in my village/city/country
	GOV3	I sort my waste selectively, if/because Government/Municipality is a truthful authority, so I cooperate with any waste management
	GOV4	I sort my waste selectively, if/because Government/Municipality imposes fines/penalties on those who do not obey the rules of waste separation
Variable Six: Infrastructure	INF1	I have enough space for multiple waste separation bins in my house
	INF2	Government/municipality provides a modern collection infrastructure (appropriate recycling bins, guiding protocols, etc.)
	INF3	Government/municipality provides a convenient collection infrastructure (Recycling bins that are close to my home, colorful waste bags for different waste categories, etc.)
	INF4	Government/municipality provides timely waste collection services (e.g. daily)
Variable Seven: Intention	INT1	I have the intention to increase my environmental discipline (example: avoid using plastic cups, bring reusable bag to the supermarket, etc.)
	INT2	I have the intention to learn how to separate my garbage appropriately
	INT3	I have the intention to obey the rules related to waste separation
	INT4	I have the intention to participate in environmental activities in my community
	INT5	I have the intention to pay higher municipal fees in order to solve the waste problem
Variable Eight: Behavior	BEH1	I would learn how to separate my garbage properly
	BEH2	I would be more responsible for my waste
	BEH3	I would support any recycling effort encouraged by the community/municipality
	BEH4	I would separate waste regardless of whether there are community incentives, or even governmental fines or penalties

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

An EFA was conducted to confirm the relationship between the statements and the factor they loaded on. It is a tool used to discover which items in the instrument fit together while disregarding any previous prejudice of the scholar. It is adopted whenever all the variables in the model are assumed to be measured/studied (Fontaine, 2005), aiming to reduce the amount of data collected by grouping them. Communality, being a squared variance calculated for reflecting statistically the amount of variance represented by the factors in the model (Lewis-Beck et al., 2004) is checked. In this study, three statements had low communality levels: PBC5, AWA3, and INF1. They were removed and communalities were reobserved. Moreover, factor analysis makes use of factor loading analysis, being “the proportion of the variance of the variable that is accounted for by the common factors,” to group statements with the most suitable factors (Ferron et al., 2005, p. 204). This study has adopted a rigorous cutoff value for factor loading of 0.6, considered very good (Comrey & Lee, 1992). Consequently, BEH4 and SN5 were excluded. Thus, the final set included 31 statements loading under eight different factors (using Varimax rotation, Table 3), which accounted for 73.326% of the variation in the data. As a general rule, this should be at least 50% (Streiner, 1994). To note that there was no cross loading, and all the statements loaded on the factor that they were supposed to load on. The remaining analysis section (Cronbach’s alpha, CFA, path analysis) is based on the retained statements making up each factor, as revealed in Table 3, noting that the mean of each set of statements is used in the path analysis, named using the first three letters of the variable/factor (without any following number), such as ATT for attitude.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Rotated Component Matrix (with Varimax Rotation).

	Component
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
GOV4	0.857
GOV2	0.841
GOV3	0.833
GOV1	0.831
INT4		0.756
INT1		0.741
INT3		0.74
INT2		0.712
INT5		0.67
SN2			0.866
SN1			0.861
SN3			0.826
SN4			0.727
AWA1				0.821
AWA5				0.79
AWA2				0.773
AWA4				0.743
PBC2					0.87
PBC1					0.844
PBC3					0.796
PBC4					0.615
ATT1						0.777
ATT4						0.767
ATT2						0.748
ATT3						0.681
INF3							0.873
INF2							0.863
INF4							0.862
BEH2								0.805
BEH1								0.791
BEH3								0.703

Cronbach’s alpha is calculated to test the internal consistency of the Likert scale responses of the instrument. Cronbach’s alpha values typically range between 0 and 1, and any value above 0.7 is considered excellent, indicating the instrument’s strong reliability (Kline, 1999). In this study, it is 0.849, showing a very good internal consistency. The results are also great for each factor, factor one, “Governmental Role” (α = 0.904), factor two, “Intention” (α = 0.849), factor three, “Social Norms” (α = 0.85), factor four, “Awareness” (α = 0.851), factor five, “Perceived Behavioral Control” (α = 0.803), factor six, “Attitude” (α = 0.796), factor seven “Infrastructure” (α = 0.959), and factor eight, “Behavior” (α = 0.886).

Additionally, the researchers conducted the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) test, which assesses the suitability of the data for factor analysis. This test evaluates the sampling adequacy for each variable in the model and the overall model. It measures the extent to which the variables share common variance, representing the proportion of variance among variables. Higher values (ranging from 0.5 to 1) generally suggest that the data is suitable for factor analysis, with values closer to 1 being more favorable. KMO values between 0.8 and 1 indicate that the sample is sufficient. In this study, it is 0.843, showing that the sampling adequacy is high. Moreover, The Bartlett’s test of sphericity showing the overall significance of the correlation matrix, is run. It is found significant (0.000), meaning that matrix is not an identity matrix, that is, the variables do relate to one another, enough to run a meaningful EFA. The results showed that collectively the correlations were significant.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

The findings from CFA supported the distinction of eight factors (i.e., ATT, SN, PBC, INF, INT, GOV, INF, and BEH). CFA is used to validate a prespecified structure and to quantify the fit of each model to the data. In this study, a confirmatory factors analysis was used to confirm a hypothesized factor model/structure (Lee & Comrey, 1992); in other words, to examine the fit of the 31-item, 8-factor model.

The measurement model is tested using SEM, a set of statistical techniques used to measure and analyze the relationships of observed and latent variables. It can estimate a series of interrelationships among latent constructs concurrently in a model. Awang (2015) argues that SEM is the most efficient method for CFA to validate latent constructs and analyze the causal paths among these constructs in a structural model. Moreover, he adds that SEM could be employed to test the hypotheses for mediators and moderators in a model. In this study, CFA and path analysis, with a one mediator and two moderators, are run.

IBM-SPSS AMOS 20 is used to assess the goodness of fit, composite reliability (CR), convergent, and discriminant validity. The measurement model determines the relationship between the latent variable and its corresponding observed measures and checks if the data fits the model well (Henseler et al., 2009) (see Figure 3 for the built model, after covarying for e14 & e16 and e15 & e17, with M.I. values of 46.926 and 32.714, respectively, as suggested by AMOS).

OPEN IN VIEWER Figure 3.

The Measurement Model.

The model’s goodness of fit is evaluated using the following criteria: normed fit index (NFI), comparative fit index (CFI), and Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), with values of 0.889, 0.949, and 0.941, respectively (range from 0 to 1, higher values indicate better fit, the usual rule of thumb of ≥ 0.90 is indicative of a good fit), parsimonious comparative fit index with a value of 0.825 (values > 0.50 considered acceptable), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.049 (being excellent). The CMIN/df acceptance varies across researchers, ranging from less than 2 (Ullman, 2001) to less than 5 (Schumacker & Lomax, 2004), being 1.733 for this model, thus considered excellent. Moreover, the standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR) is found to be 0.053, considered excellent (<0.08, is excellent) (Hu & Bentler, 1999). To conclude and based on the above-discussed indices (see also Table 4), the eight-factor model fits the data well.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 4.

Model Fit Measures.

Measure	Estimate	Threshold	Interpretation
CMIN	700.117	–	–
DF	404	–	–
CMIN/DF	1.733	Between 1 and 3	Excellent
CFI	0.949	>0.95	Acceptable
SRMR	0.053	<0.08	Excellent
RMSEA	0.049	<0.06	Excellent
Pclose	0.614	>0.05	Excellent

Source: Gaskin, J. & Lim, J. (2016), “Model Fit Measures,” AMOS Plugin.

Table 5 shows that all the CR values are between 0.959 and 0.801 (well above 0.7), showing that this study’s measures are reliable (Kline, 2010). When it comes to validity, two aspects of construct validity are targeted, convergent, and discriminant validity. When a block of items measuring the same construct converges in the representation of the underlying construct, convergent validity is established. In order to assess and establish the convergent validity, average variance extracted (AVE) statistic is calculated, and values should be of 0.50 or higher (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Since AVE values for all the constructs are found to be over 0.50, convergent validity is established (Table 5). Moreover, discriminant validity concerns the extent to which the instrument differs from a measure of a dissimilar construct (Streiner & Norman, 2008). According to Zikmund et al. (2013), discriminant validity is established when a scale that should not correlate too highly with a measure of a different dimensions actually does not correlate very highly. According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), AVE is established if constructs’ AVE (shown in bold along the diagonal in Table 5) is greater than the squared intercorrelations of other constructs. The results show that AVE was greater than the squared correlation between each pair of constructs, thus, providing evidence for discriminant validity, in addition to the MSV figures being less than the AVE ones.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 5.

Model Validity Measures.

	CR	AVE	MSV	MaxR(H)	1 (GOV)	2 (INT)	3 (SN)	4 (AWA)	5 (PBC)	6 (ATT)	7 (INF)	8 BEH
1	0.905	0.704	0.454	0.908	0.839
2	0.866	0.568	0.472	0.887	0.082	0.754
3	0.854	0.598	0.057	0.890	0.116†	0.168*	0.774
4	0.855	0.597	0.323	0.862	0.048	0.568***	0.135*	0.773
5	0.811	0.533	0.054	0.877	0.143*	–0.194**	–0.041	–0.232***	0.730
6	0.801	0.503	0.330	0.815	0.102	0.575***	0.239***	0.466***	–0.192**	0.710
7	0.959	0.886	0.454	0.966	0.674***	0.035	0.110†	0.078	0.130*	0.042	0.942
8	0.887	0.724	0.472	0.888	0.148*	0.687***	0.067	0.473***	–0.114†	0.473***	0.140*	0.851

Note: The bold numbers listed diagonally are the square root of the variance shared between the constructs and their measures. They are the square root of AVE.

Path Analysis

To find out the impact of the different variables set in this study, on recycling behavior, a path analysis is conducted using Process Macro. Hayes’s Model 16 is considered, given the presence of one mediator (INT) between the independent variables and the dependent one (BEH), and two moderators (GOV and INF) on the relationship between the mediator and BEH. Each time one independent variable is assumed, the other three are put as covariates, as per Hayes’s (2018) recommendations. Figure 4 shows that positive and significant direct effects are revealed between each of attitude, social norms, and awareness on one side and intention on the other. However, PBC showed no significant effect, thus considered not to be a reliable predictor of recycling intentions. Intention and behavior are positively and significantly correlated where positive recycling intentions are found to trigger positive recycling behaviors. Moreover, intention is found to mediate the relationships between three independent variables (attitude, awareness, and social norms) and behavior. Thus, intention is shown to be a partial mediator in the attitude/behavior, social norms/behavior, and awareness/behavior relationships; however, no mediation role is revealed in the PBC/behavior relationship. When it comes to the moderators (role of government and infrastructure), they were found to be positive influencers on behavior. Nonetheless, no statistical significance of a moderated-mediation relationship is present by both moderators on the intention/behavior relationship. Tables 6 and 7 present parts of the path analysis output enabling the researchers to draw conclusions and accept or reject the hypotheses, pertaining to the mediation and the moderation role that intention, role of government, and infrastructure respectively play. To note that R-sq is found to be 0.4158, thus 41.58% of the variance in behavior is explained by the factors assumed in this study’s model, providing a fair indication of how well these variables predict the variation in citizens’ recycling behavior.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 4.

* Significant at p < 0.05.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 6.

The Mediation Output.

Hypothesis	Path	Direct Effect	Indirect Effect	Significance of Indirect Effect	Total Effect	Conclusion
H 1	ATT-INT-BEH	0.1356*	0.2437	Significant	0.3793	Partial mediation
H 2	SN-INT-BEH	–0.0753*	0.0555	Significant	–0.0198	Partial mediation
H 3	PBC-INT-BEH	0.0404	–0.0176	Not significant	0.0228	No mediation
H 4	AWA-INT-BEH	0.1292*	0.2285	Significant	0.3577	Partial mediation

Note: * sig. at p < .05, ** sig. at p < .01.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 7.

The Moderation Output.

Hypothesis	Moderator	Direct Effect on BEH	p-Value	Moderating Effect	p-Value	Conclusion
H 5	GOV	0.0304	0.8656	–0.0026	0.9483	No moderation
H 6	INF	0.1772	0.2472	–0.0338	0.3337	No moderation

Discussion of Findings

This section discusses the results pertaining to the direct and indirect effects between the variables and assesses the mediating role of intention in each relationship. It also analyzes the moderating effect of both, the governmental role and the availability of adequate infrastructure. First, behavior is found to be directly affected by attitude, awareness, and social norms. The most influencing factor, directly, and positively shaping environmental behaviors, is found to be people’s attitude (0.1356), followed by their awareness level (0.1292). While social norms are shown to negatively and significantly affect recycling behaviors, PBC is revealed to have no effect on environmental behaviors in the Lebanese community (no statistical significance). Second, intention is found to be a partial mediator in the attitude/behavior, awareness/behavior, and social norms/behavior relationships. However, no mediation role is depicted in the PBC/behavior relationship. As for the moderating effect of the governmental role and the presence of appropriate infrastructure, no significant effect is spotted. Detailed discussion, tackling each variable/hypothesis follows. Direct and indirect effects are highlighted while dissecting the indirect effects.

Findings reveal that a positive attitude toward recycling affects positively the Lebanese’s intention and behavior to recycle their household waste. These findings support previous studies conducted showing that positive environmental attitudes would lead to higher recycling intentions and more efficient engagement (Song et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2015). Hasan et al. (2021) argue that a positive attitude is developed toward the adoption of a specific behavior whenever its perceived value is high, given that this value or perspective is formed based on each individual’s altruistic values in the community. In fact, an altruistic personality tends to have a positive attitude and intention to engage and would implement eco-friendly behaviors easily (Hasan et al., 2021). The altruistic disposition of the Lebanese community (Helou, 2020) might explain the positive and significant effect of attitude on intention and behavior, where intention plays a partial mediator role in the attitude/behavior relationship. Thus, a positive green attitude could shape behaviors directly or indirectly by creating positive recycling intentions. On another note, Bendak and Attili (2016) argued that identifying people that would recycle is the first step toward a successful centralized waste management plan. In fact, the generation that an individual belongs to has been shown to be one of the main demographic characteristics to identify, for higher environmental engagement percentages and higher green attitudes (Tyson et al., 2021). Chen (2010) confirmed that every 1% increase in age composition in a society leads to a decrease in MSW disposed of by around 0.0224 kg/day. Around 55% of the Lebanese respondents in the current study belong to the Gen Z age generation (9 to 24 years old), which explains the positive attitude revealed and the way it is positively affecting their intention to and their engagement in recycling behaviors. This finding supports previous research highlighting young people’s strong intention to recycle (Halder & Singh, 2018). Indeed, generation Z is characterized by its high concern toward different environmental issues (Dangmei & Singh, 2016), and is known to be the most knowledgeable about water and energy shortages and the importance of renewable sources of energy. Citizens in this age group tend to be more responsible toward the preservation of natural resources and have the necessary green attitudes to engage properly.

When it comes to social norms, depicting the citizen’s perception toward others’ behavioral acts, they are found to positively affect the Lebanese recycling intentions, supporting similar findings reached in Malaysia, India, and China (Amini et al., 2014; Miliute-Plepiene et al., 2016; Yuan et al., 2016). They are all Asian countries, embodying the collectivistic societies where harmony between their citizens is safeguarded. In fact, harmony is associated with productivity since people would tend to be courteous and kind even if they disagree with the other person’s beliefs or practices. Such societies are characterized by the balance and unity in their societies leading to proper management and implementation of different projects, and recycling ones specifically. Different scholars revealed that the performance of environmental practices is tightly linked to the cultural system cherishing collective intentions (Lalwani et al., 2006; Oyserman et al., 2002). Indeed, Pratarelli (2010) revealed that living in a collectivistic harmonious society and sharing a similar set of values, would encourage and favor community-based recycling initiatives, and consequently create favorable recycling intentions.

Hofstede (1991) revealed that Arab countries, including Lebanon (Mattar, 2021), are highly collectivistic societies. Citizens in such countries prefer group decision making and highly value cooperation and consensus. Lawler and Hundley (2008) argued that Lebanese citizens lean toward obedience and shared responsibilities and have a participative decision-making system; and their motivation to participate in collective work derives from their deep sense of belonging and their loyalty to their group. Thus, individuals in collectivistic societies, like Lebanon (Mattar et al., 2022, 2024), tend to be group-centric (Neuliep, 2020). They could be bonded by religion, education, ethnicity, or other traits, share a common history, and have a sense of responsibility toward their community. This explains the way Lebanese people tend to feel responsible for their waste and for polluting their environment; thus, they would have the intention to actively sort their waste and recycle whenever the proper management system is applied. They would be inclined to imitate their neighbors/families in such eco-friendly practices. Thus, the significant positive relationship between social norms and recycling intentions is emanated from the fact that Lebanese are well rooted in a collectivistic culture where they have the intent to work cooperatively for the sake of their community.

However, the direct relationship between social norms and behavior is found out to be negative and significant. This could be explained by the social loafing (Latane et al., 1979) and the conservation of resources (COR) (Hobfoll, 1989) theories. The social loafing theory discusses how a person’s contribution to a group work decreases in comparison with his/her performance alone, assuming that an individual would have a lower sense of responsibility while working in a group, thus, exercising less effort to achieve tasks divided among many participants (Schwarz, 2006). The chances for social loafing increases anytime the individual’s personal resources are in danger, thus, triggering a protection mechanism, which is the main idea behind COR (Hobfoll, 1989). To shield themselves and what is left of their resources after the drain caused by the devastating economic and financial conditions that Lebanon has been passing through, Lebanese seem to count on others, who they believe might be boosted by the social norms assumed strong in a collectivistic culture, to recycle. Although technically speaking, people work individually when sorting and recycling within the larger group, the social loafing effect still affects their performance (Latane et al., 1979). Thus, social norms seem to induce Lebanese intention, but not their behavior. Heavier loads are on the Lebanese’s shoulders make them prioritizing survival activities in such unprecedented circumstances.

Thus, although social norms seem to affect intentions positively and significantly, they are shown to impact behaviors negatively and significantly. The positive effect on intention is emanated from the collectivistic nature of the Lebanese society, where harmony between citizens is always sought. The Lebanese deep sense of belonging and their loyalty to different members in the community trigger their intention to recycle their waste and their willingness to be involved in collective activities with fruitful outcomes on the whole society. However, when it comes to the actual behavior, some other factors seem to outride social norms and make their impact on behaviors, negative. The COR, along with devastating economic and financial conditions in the country, might give some fruitful insights into the relationship depicted and the way social loafing might occur. Social loafing might explain the results obtained in this study tackling the impact of social norms on behaviors and came in accordance with the findings that Ulhasanah and Goto (2018) highlighted in Indonesia. In Vietnam, social norms are found to have no impact on recycling behaviors (Nguyen et al., 2015).

Directly related to what is discussed above, comes the effect of PBC on intention and behavior. Hypothesis three (H₃), suggesting that PBC affects positively the Lebanese’s recycling behavior and this relationship is mediated by intention, is rejected. PBC is found to positively affect the Lebanese’s recycling behaviors but with no statistical significance. PBC, being a sort of reflection on previous life experiences, is found to have no effect on the Lebanese’s intentions to sort and recycle their waste. Different scholars revealed that PBC consists of two different constructs: self-efficacy and controllability (Mendez et al., 2020; Rhodes & Courneya, 2010; Tavousi et al., 2009). Many argued that PBC and self-efficacy highlight the same concept, where self-efficacy modifies the individual’s intention to perform a designated behavior (Bandura, 1982; Conner & Armitage, 1998). Nevertheless, the findings in this study are not in line with the previously mentioned argument. Indeed, Norman and Hoyle (2004) believe that PBC and self-efficacy are considered two different concepts due to some external attributes such as income, time, and ease of performance. In 2021, the mid of a financial collapse of the Lebanese government and a fatal pandemic (Abi Rached & Dlwan, 2020), the Lebanese’s major concern has been their own survival rather than environmental issues. Lira devaluation (from 1,500 pounds per one U.S. Dollar to around 100,000 pound/$1 USD), bank liquidity issue, and limits set on cash withdrawal (Abu Ismail, 2020) had already led to an exponential increase in unemployment and poverty (Abi Rached & Dlwan, 2020). The demographic data revealed that 27.8% of the respondents in this study do not work, thus, have no income. Their limited resources have been spent on necessities like food, medicine, and rent. The conservation of resources theory helps explain the phenomenon, by describing how people always attempt to safeguard their resources and any resource loss would trigger the resource protection mechanism (Hobfoll, 1989). This is the reason making Lebanese inclined to avoid any additional drain through the withdrawal from any other form of obligations, being waste separation in this case.

In addition, the corrupted governmental entities have not been financially capable of supplying the proper trucks for daily waste pickup. Therefore, sorting at source would be seen by citizens as a difficult process that is not worth their time and effort. Moreover, it is worth noting that most participants (74%) live in apartments, usually small ones relatively, with multiple family members (49% live in the same apartment with five or more family members). Thus, they lack the physical space required for several recycling bins dedicated for waste separation, making the waste separation process hard to implement.

Moreover, the idea of sorting waste at source is a relatively new concept in the Lebanese community, as most of the Lebanese had never undergone a similar process or participated in such activities. They lack the required code of practice to engage in environmental activities, such as sorting at source (Azzi, 2017), given that encouragement and guidance by the government are not in real action. To be further involved in waste separation activities, a person needs to acquire that habit, which will in turn trigger continuous recycling behaviors (Colesca et al., 2014; Yeow & Loo, 2018). Habit arises when a familiar set of conditions activates behaviors learned through previous execution, thus, its formation is a crucial mechanism for sustaining beneficial behavior over a long period of time without the loss of motivation (Gardner et al., 2020). This will lead to lower self-control of people and push them to act habitually when dealing with waste source separation without the intervention of intentions. Unfortunately, recycling habits seem to be not yet initiated and safeguarded in the Lebanese community. Thus, PBC have no role in shaping, neither directly or indirectly, the recycling intentions and behaviors in the Lebanese community due to all the drastic factors being lately faced.

In shedding light on environmental awareness, findings reveal a positive and significant relationship between awareness and both, recycling intentions and behaviors. Intention is found to partially mediate the relationship between awareness and environmental behaviors. Schmidt (2007) revealed that students enrolled in an environmental course were more aware of environmental hazards and had better pro-environmental behaviors, linking the environmentally conscious intentions and attitudes to higher levels of participation and engagement. In fact, boosting people’s environmental awareness would make green concerns more relevant and accessible. Omran et al. (2009) emphasized the role of education in eliminating prospect barriers preventing people from recycling. Minimizing obstacles, such as ignorance here, would lead to a more efficient implementation procedure. Research revealed that every 1% increase in the educational level of citizens would lead to a decrease of 3 kg of waste from the annual per capita base (Grazhdani, 2016). In China, the educational level of restaurant proprietors highly affected the amount of food waste produced daily (Lang et al., 2020). Within the same context, Babaei et al. (2015) revealed that educational level (Bachelor’s degree and above), gender (female), and occupation (government employees) are highly linked to environmental awareness, depicting the highest level of consistency in waste separation activities at the source. Women tend to adopt eco-friendlier lifestyle, convey greater scientific knowledge of climate change than do men (McCright, 2010), show a more positive green consumption intention, consume less carbon, and purchase green products more frequently (Ziyue et al., 2021). Moreover, Brough et al. (2016) revealed that women litter less, recycle more, and leave a smaller carbon footprint. These findings have something in common with what our research, conducted in Lebanon, has revealed. Indeed, 89.2% of the participants are holders of at least a bachelor’s degree (i.e., BA/BS, Master’s, PhD), 67.9% are female, and around 15% work in the educational sector. These percentages explain the positive relationship between awareness and environmental intentions and behaviors. Being well-educated, participants in this research would be more aware of the different types of recyclables, the benefits of recycling and the effects of waste segregation on human health. Furthermore, the relatively high percentage of female respondents explains the positive relationships discussed above. Brough et al. (2016) argued that women prioritize the altruism concept, and men worry that eco-friendly behaviors would brand them as feminine. This gender gap gives the feminine participants the advantages of high environmental awareness.

In highlighting the mediating role that intention plays on the relationship between attitude, social norms, PBC, and awareness on one side, and recycling behaviors on the other side, one should recall the work of different scholars. Kok and Siero (1985) revealed that recycling intentions, established by social norms, PBC, and attitude, determine recycling behaviors. In compliance with the TPB, intention mediates the effects of the variables that serve as predictors of behaviors (Ajzen, 1991), suggesting that intention is the most influential predictor (Ajzen, 2002). Additionally, Linan et al. (2005) identified intention as being the immediate antecedent of behaviors. In this study, the relationship between recycling intentions and behaviors is noted to be a positive one, with a significant p-value. Lebanese citizens expressing positive recycling intentions have higher chances to adopt recycling practices. Gollwitzer and Schaal (1998) explored the motivational processes responsible for creating behavioral intentions (intentions that would be translated into behaviors). They showed that a behavioral intention would produce a sense of commitment to produce the desired response under specific circumstances, as individuals would delegate control of their goal-directed behaviors to the situation desired. Intention created would then activate a mental representation of the situation and make it accessible. Therefore, encountering the exact situation (like sorting waste) would not require any conscious intent and would be achieved automatically. This phenomenon is named the hallmark of automaticity (Bargh, 1996). At this stage, intentions can be considered equivalent to habits with the single difference that habits are repeated and reinforced actions whereas intentions are a set of automated actions. Considering the mediating effects of intention, this study showed partial mediation of intention between attitude and behavior, awareness, and behavior, as well as social norms and behavior. In this case, positive recycling attitudes and a high level of environmental awareness, in addition to social norms could create effective recycling behaviors directly or indirectly by creating positive recycling intentions first, translated then into recycling actions. However, no mediation effect is spotted between PBC and behaviors.

When it comes to the moderating role that the Lebanese government and the presence of proper infrastructure might play on the relationship between intention and behavior, Hypotheses five and six (H₅, H₆) are both rejected. As discussed earlier, Lebanon has been facing, for the past three years, one of the worst financial and economic crises in the world according to the World Bank (Mroue, 2021). It has led to a three-digit inflation rate and to the depletion of the country’s gross foreign reserve base. The devaluation of the currency hit almost 90% causing high prices of food, health care services, and fuel, among others (Chehayeb, 2022). Human Rights Watch (2022) reported that around 36% of the Lebanese population live in extreme poverty, and more than 80% do not have access to basic human rights like education, electricity, and health. The World Bank (2022) confirmed that the crisis in Lebanon is mainly due to the lack of effective decision making and the mismanagement of political parties and leaders. In 2022, the Lebanese parliament eventually reduced subsidies on medicine, wheat, and fuel and failed to develop a proper social protection scheme for vulnerable people. To top it off, after Beirut’s port blast on August 4, 2020, which killed around 220 people and devastated the capital, no one has been held accountable to this day (Human Rights Watch, 2021). Moreover, with the monetary crisis that Lebanon has been undergoing since 2019, the government has not been able to finance the waste collection charges, and consequently, garbage bags are piled all over the streets. The Lebanese citizens lost motivation to sort their waste as only 15% of the collected waste is treated and 8% is recycled (Abbas et al., 2019).

Unfortunately, whenever sequential preventable accidents or events occur in a country over an extended period of time, public trust is naturally eroded. In fact, the relationship between citizens and their government is based on the extent of public trust. The latter enables effective policy development by gaining citizens’ compliant behavioral responses. Zhu et al. (2021) acknowledged the importance of social trust in promoting green public governance and emphasizing environmental behaviors. It actually pushed farmers toward more frequent soil tests, more responsible fertilizers usage and organic waste composting. Social trust emanates from both, interpersonal trust and institutional one (Peng et al., 2020). Interpersonal trust englobes the trust of family members and neighbors, whereas institutional trust comes out from the trust of political and legal entities. Harring et al. (2019) and Daxini et al. (2019) showed that institutional trust has a significant positive impact on environmental behaviors. High levels of social trust would raise the people’s willingness to cooperate and abide by their government’s policies and regulations (Scafuto et al., 2018). In addition, fair legal ruling by governmental authorities increases the percentages of acceptance and execution of specific green procedures. Thus, governmental trust is a main parameter fostering recycling behaviors in communities. Unfortunately, the Lebanese government has shown to be unable to exhibit and sustain effective governance over the years and, thus, incompetent to establish and sustain a trustworthy outlook. Abou Assi (2006) confirmed that less than a fifth of Lebanese citizens trust their governmental institutions due to decades of corruption. This missing trust in the Lebanese government explains the absence of the influential governmental role in fostering the relationship between recycling intentions and behaviors in Lebanon. People do not trust the government and are less apt to engage in sorting and recycling behaviors; believing that their efforts will be lost in vain as no governmental institution will take proper care of the sorted garbage.

On another note, Bell et al. (2010) demonstrated that with the presence of stricter laws, the access to and availability of recycling centers tend to arise. Indeed, after the eruption of the Lebanese waste crisis in 2015, new concepts and changes were introduced in the community. However acute shortages of fuel for both the private and the public sectors, severe electricity blackouts, and high transportation costs have been lately experienced. Consequently, the application of waste sorting and recyclables collection laws vanished. The absence of the operations of pickup vehicles and the termination of composting activities (since it needs electricity) were all impediments facing the application of environmental laws in Lebanon. In the UAE, the positive recycling attitude of citizens was not translated into high levels of engagement in recycling practices for the only reason that long distance is present to recycling bins, in addition to their inconvenient availability (Bendak & Attili, 2016). Therefore, the presence of numerous recycling bins, large collection points, and appropriate pickup vehicles are all facilitators for waste sorting implementation. However, their current absence explains the missing moderating role that infrastructure was assumed to play on the relationship between intention and behavior in Lebanon. Therefore, infrastructure in this study had no moderating effect in emphasizing the relationship between Lebanese recycling intentions and their behaviors.

Conclusion and Recommendations

This research revealed that positive recycling intentions in the Lebanese community are created by attitude, social norms and awareness. PBC had no role in shaping these intentions fruitfully. As for the direct effect of these independent variables on recycling behavior, attitude, and awareness were noted as positive effective triggers for such behaviors. Intention partially mediated the attitude/behavior, awareness/behavior, and social norms/behaviors relationships. The absence of the significant role of PBC is well understood. As people’s self-efficacy is highly influenced by their income level, the required time for performing waste sorting and the ease of such activities’ performance, these three parameters can highly alter people’s recycling intentions. As already discussed, Lebanon has been going through a financial collapse and a pandemic, which lowered people’s productivity and their engagement at all levels. Similarly, PBC seems not to affect recycling behaviors since it is considered a matter of developed habits. Waste sorting becomes an easy task for individuals to perform as it is frequently repeated. This habit seems to be not yet acquired by the Lebanese, which explains the results obtained.

As for social norms, Lebanese tend to have recycling intentions in order to eliminate all the hazards that could be caused by waste accumulation but do not act accordingly due to the absence of proper waste collection services. The positive environmental intentions recorded are probably linked to the collectivistic aspect of the Lebanese society that created interrelated responsible citizens. However, being a member of a group seems to decrease the efficiency of the individual citizens’ performance, through relying on others to achieve the required purposes.

Moreover, the absence of the proposed moderating role of the governmental role and infrastructure is explained by the lack of trust that Lebanese citizens show toward their government in solving the solid waste crisis. Public trust is noted as highly important in increasing the effectiveness of environmental initiatives, as people would tend to engage better when they trust their public institutions. Moreover, the presence of recycling bins and adequate infrastructure were recorded as facilitators for environmental behaviors. Nevertheless, with the shortage of funding and proper governance, they are not available. Thus, no effect was recorded for the role of government, and the presence of infrastructure in moderating the relationship between green intentions and behaviors.