Abstract   Purpose   Background   The Study   Discussion   Conclusion  

Background Research

 

I have not found any studies that have been done that are very similar to my recycling study, although I have found a few that are related to recycling and the study that I will be conducting under the keywords “recycling studies” in the Google engine, which include:

 The “Environmental Benefits of Recycling Study,” found at http://swmd.net/documents/EBRReport-Feb05.pdf, is a related study in which the purpose of their study “was to measure and document the positive effects on the environment gained from recycling, reuse and waste reduction performed by the residents and businesses” in the St. Louis-Jefferson Solid Waste Management District. This study looked at air quality, conservation of energy, water quality, and conservation of natural resources, and the effects of recycling and reusing programs currently operating. Knowing that recycling can extend the lifespan of landfills and save energy and natural resources, the East-West Gateway Council of Governments were looking to see the amount that was been saved in this particular area. They found that by recycling over 116,000 tons of paper over a year period, 1.8 million trees were saved, and that about 45% of what was going to landfills is now being diverted to other uses. They also found that the recycling in this District could reduce 536,912 metric tons of carbon equivalent each year-a leading contribution to global climate change. By recycling, significant amounts of energy and natural resources were conserved, reducing and eliminating pollution.

The study “Residential Recycling in Wisconsin: 1990-2006” I have found at http://dnr.wi.gov/org/aw/wm/recycle/recyclefullrpt06.pdf. This study on Wisconsin’s recycling was a survey to analyze the progress of residential recycling.  They used 555 state residents of Wisconsin, asking a series of questions on recycling participation periodically between the years 1990 and 2006. They have found that the scope of Wisconsin’s recycling program has increased significantly over the past 16 years, as have the amount of recycled materials that homes are now recycling. In 1991, when participants were asked if they thought that they were recycling more, less, or the same as the previous two years, there was a very significant increase in the amount of people recycling, presumably because the program was just being introduced and more people were exposed to the possibility of recycling. In 2006, when participants were asked the same question, the majority replied that they were recycling the same amount.

The “2004 North/Northeast Portland Low Participation Recycling Project” is found on http://www.portlandonline.com/osd/index.cfm?c=41795&a=111091. This study focused on implementing a system of letters, postcard mailings, and Master Recycler visits to residents to see if there was an increase in curbside recycling. Since, in some areas, the recycling rate was well over 50%, they looked at communities with recycling rates as low as 30%. This study was based on a 2002 study based posters and phone calls, which concluded that both of these two educational practices improved recycling rates compared to the control group with no significant difference between the two. 649 household were randomly assigned to four groups receiving different treatments which would be analyzed by students from CES. They found that the hauler letter had the greatest impact on properly setting up recycling bins, and the Master Recycler had the greatest influence on recycling participation.

The “2006-07 New Jersey Recycling Study,” found at http://www.epa.gov/osw/rcc/resources/meetings/rcc-2008/sessions/msw/attitudes/watson.pdf, was conducted to asses: awareness and knowledge of available recycling options, attitudes or beliefs towards recycling, barriers hindering recycling in New Jersey, and current behavior among New Jersey residents. It was found that people of age 65 or older recycle significantly more than those of ages between 18 and 34. There was no difference in recycling rates between genders. From the focus group, it appears that more people are now recycling more due in part to environmental effects and global warming.

I found that more recycling studies were being done than I had thought before. These studies show that recycling is a great alternative to simply throwing refuse away, and in doing so, there were many positive impacts it had on the environment, such as a decline in forestation and saving natural resources. It was also interesting to see how different implemented programs affected people and their participation towards recycling.