Understanding the determinants of households’ intention to practise solid waste segregation-at-source: Theoretical framework development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The level of the environment is gradually declining, especially with regard to the serious problem of solid waste. Solid waste segregation-at-source is seen as the most essential approach to helping the natural environment minimize the amount of waste generated before being transferred to waste disposal sites and landfills in many rapidly growing towns and cities in developing countries. However, a number of previous environmental-based research have focused only on the general scope of recycling, sustainable development, and the purchase intention for sustainable food products. This situation has led to useful and relevant information on the research scope of households’ intention to segregate solid waste at source, which remains largely unanswered. The aim of this paper is, therefore, to provide a literature review to develop a novel theoretical framework in understanding the determinants of households’ intention to practise solid waste segregation-at-source. Theoretical framework: The study provides a detailed explanation of the application of the Theory of Reasoned Action, the Fietkau-Kessel Model, the Focus Theory of Normative Conduct, and the Value-Basis Theory to predict the relationship between attitude, subjective norms, environmental concerns, and environmental knowledge of households on intention to practise solid waste segregation-at-source. Design/methodology/approach: This research is descriptive in nature. Findings: A better understanding of the potential mediator and moderator is needed to contribute to the body of knowledge on the causal relationship between the studied variables. In conclusion, the researchers discuss how the framework can be used to address future research implications as more evidence emerges. Research, practical and social implications: The current study is expected to broaden previous research in order to improve general understanding of attitudes and subjective norms towards the specific research scope of solid waste segregation-at-source.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".