{"id":65488,"date":"2020-04-28T10:45:13","date_gmt":"2020-04-28T14:45:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/brocku.ca\/brock-news\/?p=65488"},"modified":"2020-04-28T10:46:51","modified_gmt":"2020-04-28T14:46:51","slug":"brock-niagara-region-research-shows-why-people-do-do-not-divert-their-organic-waste","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/brocku.ca\/brock-news\/2020\/04\/brock-niagara-region-research-shows-why-people-do-do-not-divert-their-organic-waste\/","title":{"rendered":"Brock-Niagara Region research shows why people do, do not divert organic waste"},"content":{"rendered":"

The \u2018Green Bin Challenge,’ also dubbed\u00a0Mission: Possible<\/a>\u00a0by the Niagara Region, encourages residents to\u00a0collect food scraps from residential areas and divert organic waste to an area where it can be composted.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a concrete step that people can take to free up space in landfills \u2014 as much as 53 per cent \u2014 and cut methane gas emissions, says Brock University Professor of Biological Sciences and Psychology Gary Pickering.<\/p>\n

Yet, not everyone is taking advantage of the Region\u2019s organic waste diversion program to play their role in preserving the environment, a situation that puzzles Pickering.<\/p>\n

\u201cNot using the Green Bin program means that you\u2019re not doing all that you can to mitigate the release of greenhouse gasses,\u201d he says. \u201cWe\u2019re trying to understand why people do, and do not, participate in the Green Bin program and to see what the best messaging approach is to encourage them to participate in the program.\u201d<\/p>\n

To that end, Pickering led a four-person Brock-Niagara Region research team that polled 2,621 Niagara area residents on a range of questions about their environmental behaviours and attitudes that motivate those behaviours.<\/p>\n

Of those the team polled, 80 per cent reported partaking in Niagara Region\u2019s organic waste diversion program.<\/p>\n

Those participants were presented with nine statements reflecting a range of reasons why they may have chosen to participate in the program. They were asked to rank these motivators from \u201cextremely important\u201d to \u201cnot at all important.\u201d<\/p>\n

The top three statements they identified as being \u201cextremely important\u201d and \u201cvery important\u201d were: \u201cIt helps reduce waste going to landfill;” \u201cIt\u2019s the right thing to do environmentally;” and \u201cHelps me reduce household garbage.\u201d The bottom two statements ranked as being \u201cslightly important\u201d or \u201cnot at all important\u201d were: \u201cIt\u2019s a bylaw requirement and I don\u2019t want to be fined;” and \u201cOthers are doing it so I feel I should,\u201d indicating overall that environmental concern was a prime motivator for current participants.<\/p>\n

The 20 per cent of those polled who did not participate in the organic waste diversion program were asked to \u201cagree,” \u201cneither agree nor disagree,\u201d or \u201cdisagree,\u201d with 14 possible reasons for not diverting organic wastes.<\/p>\n

The top four factors they identified were: \u201cthe smell of sorting\/storing organics;” \u201cconcerns about animals opening the bins and making a mess;” \u201cinconvenience of purchasing compostable bin liners;” and \u201ccost of purchasing compostable bin liners.\u201d<\/p>\n

Pickering considers those results to be good news.<\/p>\n

\u201cThese four factors, which are the most dominant reasons why people don\u2019t participate, are all things that can be fixed,\u201d he says. \u201cThe Region, for instance, could consider subsidizing the cost of bin liners or engineering better bins that keep the smell in and animals out, therefore addressing the main barriers for current non-participants in the program.\u201d<\/p>\n

One challenge, he says, is reaching those people who don\u2019t divert their organic waste because they don\u2019t believe that human activities contribute to climate change. Low acceptance of the role of humans in climate change was a key predictor of non-participation in the Green Bin program.<\/p>\n

The research team wondered whether the messenger of information about pro-environmental behaviours, such as participating in organic waste diversion, makes a difference in how that message is received, especially by climate change deniers.<\/p>\n

\u201cOur expectation was that trust in the communicator is a big issue in environmental communications,\u201d says Pickering. \u201cWe thought that your acceptance of environmental science in general and how much you act on that is mediated by how much you trust the source of the environmental information.\u201d<\/p>\n

When they completed the survey, research participants were presented with educational statements about the environmental benefits of diverting organic waste away from landfills. The statements were attributed to either Brock, the Niagara Region or a made-up organization called the Canadian Composting Initiative.<\/p>\n

These were randomly distributed to the research participants. Those who divert their organic wastes were then asked, \u201cHow likely are you to continue to participate in the Green Bin program for organic material?\u201d while those who didn\u2019t were asked, \u201cHow likely are you to participate in the future in the Green Bin program for organic material?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIt didn\u2019t matter what the perceived source was,\u201d Pickering says of the results. \u201cThey responded the same to the message. No more or less people said they would start the Green Bin program if they thought this was coming from Brock, the Niagara Region or the Canadian Composting Initiative.\u201d<\/p>\n

Pickering was pleased that 42 per cent of non-participants reported they would be more likely to participate in the Niagara Region\u2019s organic waste diversion program, showing \u201cthere is a role for continuing public education on waste diversion programs.\u201d<\/p>\n

The research team\u2019s findings also showed that those who divert their organic waste tend to:<\/p>\n