Using Behavior Change Theories to Promote Recycling

Many models of behavior change can be useful for understanding how to promote environmental behaviors. But since human behavior is complex, a single theory may not be sufficient to fully understand a behavior. The authors of this article show how two behavior change models can be applied together to understand recycling behavior and to identify appropriate approaches for changing waste-related behavior.

The theoretical domains framework (TDF) is a model that combines multiple behavior change theories. Elements of the TDF that help explain behavior change include knowledge, intention, and social influences. The behavior change wheel (BCW) is another model that pulls together many theories for understanding and changing behavior. The BCW is based on specific conditions for behavior, namely physical opportunity, psychological ability, and motivation. The authors of this article note that the elements of the TDF complement the behavioral conditions within the BCW. The BCW also points to recommended behavior change methods or tools based on whether certain conditions are present or absent.

This study took place in a single building on the campus of a university in London, England. The authors offered a prize incentive to recruit 20 participants who spend time working or studying in the building. The participants included undergraduate and postgraduate students, as well as administrative and academic staff members. The authors interviewed participants about their recycling knowledge and behavior and collected demographic data. The authors designed their interview questions based on elements of the TDF, then connected the results to the BCW to recommend appropriate tools for changing the participants' recycling behavior.

The results show that most participants intend to recycle, but the intent is not strong enough to overcome certain barriers. Participants reported that sometimes recycling bins were not be available when and where they were needed. Some participants also reported a lack of adequate signage or information to explain how to dispose of certain items. These barriers correspond to elements of the TDF, mainly resources and knowledge. The authors then connected these elements to conditions for behavior change from the BCW, specifically a lack of physical opportunity and a lack of psychological capability.

The authors acknowledge that this study represents a small sample in a very specific context. Similar studies among larger samples and in different locations would provide more insight on the effectiveness of the combined TDF and BCW method. However, the authors' conclusions corroborate previous research that identified a gap between recycling intentions and behavior.

The authors suggest that methods to change recycling behavior in this case should not focus on increasing participants' motivation to recycle. Instead, they recommend approaches that would improve knowledge about what and how to recycle, as well as making recycling more physically convenient. One method could be to develop signage or training specifically focused on recycling in the building. Another approach could be physically restructuring the workspaces in the building to ensure that recycling bins are easily accessible. Importantly, the authors' recommendations were not implemented in this study; these conclusions are based on models rather than evidence that these methods of behavior change were effective.

This case study provides the first example of applying both the TDF and the BCW to explain behavior and options for promoting desired changes. The authors conclude that the two models are complementary, and can provide a systematic approach to understanding recycling behavior and developing appropriate behavior change methods. This approach could also be used to understand and identify methods for promoting other environmental behaviors, such as reducing energy or water use.