Some five years ago, this very magazine published an article called ‘The psychology of recycling’. In it, the authors noted: ‘Recycling is not the “done thing”, practised by “normal people” and expected of other members of the community.’ Things have, very clearly, changed since then. The UK has made major strides when it comes to recycling, and no longer does there exist such an obvious divide between those that recycle and those that don’t; instead, the concern for the ‘grey area’ is getting the increasing number of those that do, to do more. While once perceived as a pastime for ‘hippies’, recycling, contrary to the above statement, has become commonplace around the country, and indeed, in many parts of the world. A waste awareness campaign in Georgia, America called ‘You Gotta Be Kidding’, features billboards emblazoned with the phrase ‘I don’t recycle’, which has caused a stir – it would seem that the very idea of ‘not recycling’ has become something of a taboo notion. However, if recycling is increasingly perceived as ‘the done thing’, and to publicly admit that you don’t recycle is so shocking, why is there still the battle to get people on board with consistent behaviour? Why does there exist a general endorsement for the practice that can’t be backed up by cold, hard statistics? For example, research commissioned by Guildford Borough Council back in 2003 revealed that while 57 per cent of the householders sampled claimed to be regular recyclers, only 41 per cent actually set out their recycling box during the measured period. Fast forward to 2009, and further studies (in this case, Halton Borough Council’s ‘Recycling in Halton’ report) still maintain: ‘Exaggerated self-reporting of recycling behaviour is a well known problem of empirical studies on recycling.’ So what of Guildford’s 16 per cent? What of the equivalent pocket of people that live in other councils around the country?Elementary barriers, of course, cannot be underestimated. A WRAP report, ‘Barriers to recycling at home’, states that less than half the sample of people questioned – 48 per cent – understood ‘very well’ what they are supposed to use their recycling containers for, and around a third said they would increase their recycling if they had better information about their service provision. However, 95 per cent also said that recycling had ‘become part of everyday household routine’. So there are bigger factors to be considered here.“It’s partly about being seen to be green”, says Dr Dennis Nigbur, Psychology Lecturer at Canterbury Christ Church University (who in fact co-wrote the article mentioned above). “Part of it is a general sense that pro-environmental behaviour is something that’s important to the communities we live in and to humanity itself. The whole ‘climate change’ topic has been successful in making people aware of general environmental behaviours.” And it’s because of this, Nigbur says, that “people may still feel the need to present themselves in a more positive light than what their behaviour actually suggests”, thus creating the gap between reported recycling rates and actual recycling rates.And herein lies the fundamental flaw in truly understanding the psychology of recycling. Lest councils send spies to observe each and every resident’s behaviour on collection morning, the bulk of our ‘understanding’ derives from questionnaires and surveys filled in by residents themselves. As Dr Nigbur says: “Even if questionnaires are anonymous, for behaviours which are quite strongly normative, like recycling, people may still work on the basis of what they feel they ought to be doing, or they might exaggerate in anticipation of trying harder.” Certainly, this is amplified in face-to-face interviews or street surveys, where the individual is visible and there are issues of identification at play. There are measures to combat false self-reporting, though. Dr Steven Guilbert, of Kingston University, is involved in a new project that will attempt to identify green champions and eco-refuseniks in the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, where questionnaires are being sent to one in 10 (or 6,300) households in the area. “There are a few people who are anti-recycling, and they’ll likely fill out the questionnaire to make their argument known”, he says. “Then there are people who are really enthusiastic about recycling, so they’ll fill it in too because it’s something they feel strongly about. The issue is reaching people in the middle.” To ensure that people in this group not only fill in the surveys, but do so in an accurate way, a number of steps have been taken. Firstly, the questionnaire has been incentivised with a prize draw, and people’s predicted concerns have been carefully considered. “Of course, it’s anonymous, and we emphasise that the data is confidential”, he says. “We also include a letter that tells the recipients that we’re keen to hear from every kind of recycler, and we reiterate that we’re independent from the local authority, that we’re not here to check up on them or catch them out.”But the question remains: Inaccurate self-reportage aside, if people are keen to be seen as green, and thus report themselves as such, why not simply follow through with the behaviour? It would seem that while environmental concerns are widely cited as a reason people (claim to) recycle, in our society that is bombarded daily with messages about climate change, global warming and green issues, people are becoming resilient to environmental warnings and thus global environmental factors alone are not enough to encourage recycling in the willing majority. David Uzzell, Professor of Environmental Psychology at the University of Surrey, believes that people, when questioned about their recycling habits, are likely to give ‘sound-bite answers’, yet “I don’t think ‘saving the environment’ really does much for people”, he says. “It’s like saying you’re ‘doing it for your children’s children’. It’s become a slogan. It may well be that people feel that the environment doesn’t belong to them.” As such, the accepted response to questions about recycling doesn’t match a belief that would drive the behaviour. Furthermore, there still exists the perception that ‘one person can’t make a difference’, with 29 per cent of people surveyed by WRAP saying they only recycle because the council tells them to, and 17 per cent simply because everyone else is doing it.“I don’t want to say that people have a cynical attitude towards [recycling],” Uzzell continues, “but people want to have these things expressed in more immediate, tangible ways. You’ve got to explain the benefits of recycling to people. Not in terms of saving the planet, but in terms that are personal, immediate, concrete and local.” This could be misconstrued as incentivisation, but as Uzzell says, people simply need to see that recycling has a beneficial effect on their local area, that their council is utilising their efforts (and the money saved through landfill diversion and earned through sale of recyclate) in a positive manner. “People have to see recycling as a benefit to them, that the money they save, for example, can be spent keeping council tax down, or go towards a new swimming pool for the area.” Indeed, the WRAP report reveals that 86 per cent of people would be encouraged to recycle more if they could see the practical impact of recycling in their local area. Concentrated efforts by local authorities to drive home the personal benefits of recycling would also go some way to overcoming another barrier: the temporary consideration it tends to be given. An Ipsos Mori report carried out for The Cabinet Office states that: ‘While the public considers the disposal of society’s waste a significant environmental concern, it is not an issue at the forefront of their minds. The transient nature in which it is considered appears insufficient to establish and maintain habitual patterns of recycling.’People are supportive of the need for greater advertising and information provision, in order to “jog” their memory. Many do not actually think about recycling unless it is brought to their attention, and very few actively seek out information on recycling services.’Certainly, with our hectic lifestyles, many people cite a lack of time as a barrier to recycling, but simply, there are other, more immediate things to think about. As Uzzell says: “People are concerned about healthcare, education, tax, their jobs, rising prices, and the environment is, in a sense, an easy option to put to one side.” Indeed, a Defra report indicates that a majority of people would like to see the government deal with the economy and unemployment before the environment. Furthermore, personal changes in our lives – moving house, having children, even the time of year – can have an impact on recycling behaviour. This is something Guilbert hopes to examine at length in the forthcoming work in Kingston upon Thames. “Our recycling attitudes are not fixed”, he says. “They change over time, as does our behaviour, not just from not-recycling to recycling, but through stages of life and events. It’s important not to simply categorise people into those that don’t recycle and those that do.” Continual reinforcement of the recycling message, then, is vital.The established ‘competences model’ (Dreyfus and Dreyfus, 1986) goes some way in explaining the route to habitual recycling, to ingraining it into people’s subconscious regardless of other concerns or life changes. A learned behaviour journeys through four stages: level one: unconsciously incompetent; level two: consciously incompetent; level three: consciously competent; and finally level four: unconsciously competent. As previously mentioned, much of the challenge facing recycling participation now isn’t simply getting people to recycle, but getting people to recycle consistently, and thoroughly, with ‘unconscious competence’. But again, the issues of truly understanding the psychology of recycling come to the fore here. “There are such a variety of lifestyle groups recycling”, says Guilbert. “And they need to be addressed differently in order to encourage them to do more, but until we know more about them, that’s a challenge, and we need to target them effectively in order to learn more about them!”And so it goes. As Nigbur notes: “One hundred per cent accuracy in gathering data in this area we can’t achieve. Everything in research is just trying to get as close as possible to that unobtainable objectivity.” However, what we are beginning to understand is that in order to get recyclers to recycle more, we need to look past the more commonly accepted barriers of time, space and convenience, and instead look at more abstract – and harder to quantify – concepts of immediacy, transience and wider societal concerns.