Exploring Household Recycling Intentions in South Korea:A Moral-Psychological and Contextual Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior

I. Introduction

The production of household waste stems from the fundamental activities of daily human existence. Every member of society generates some sort of waste (Muthukumari, Ahn and Kim, 2024). The global waste challenge has worsened because of fast urban growth and expanding populations together with rising incomes and irregular waste sorting practices and excessive waste production (Lu, Zhou, Wang, Jackson and Kempes, 2024). The World Bank predicts that worldwide waste generation rates will increase by 70% by 2050 until they reach 3.40 billion tons starting from 2.01 billion tons produced in 2016 (Kaza, Yao, Bhada-Tata and Woerden, 2018). Waste outputs amounting to 3.40 billion tons by 2050 will be split nearly equally between all regions of the planet but East Asia and Pacific leads with 23% indicating strong waste-management systems are essential. The absence of waste management systems makes it impossible for communities to achieve sustainability and inclusivity and health due to ecosystem destruction through wrong waste management methods that also endanger human health and fuel climate change (Yadav, Kumar, Yadav, Patel, Birla and Singh., 2024).

Recycling stands among the highest waste management approaches that conserve environmental resources through proactive methods to minimize environmental impact. Global governments implement multiple strategies for recycling promotion through essential laws, paid discard systems and yard pickup services coupled with community waste sorting containers and educational outreach programs (Thomas and Sharp, 2013; Wilson, Velis and Cheeseman., 2006). The results that waste management programs deliver depend completely on how well people participate. Policymakers together with researchers must obtain thorough knowledge of what makes people form intentions about recycling if they want to develop effective interventions for higher recycling rates (Muthukumari et al., 2024).

The South Korean waste-management is internationally recognized in terms of stringent volume-based system on waste-fees as well as mandatory recycling guidelines. But according to recent surveys, residential recycling engagement is already starting to decline (Chang, Karunarathne and Kim, 2022) and the general amount of generated household waste has grown, especially during and after the COVID-19 pandemic (Chang et al., 2022; Song and Park, 2024). In spite of the introduction of infrastructure expansion and awareness campaign, there is a gap in the comprehension of the role that internalized moral obligations play in the recycling functions when integrated with convenience of infrastructure. There is a weakness in the fact that the previous studies concerning the prediction of behavioral intentions related to recycling in Korea have been predominantly discussed based on either psychological factors or the envisagement of situational circumstances on their own and without incorporating moral scales, e.g. SD and practical variables, e.g. CARI, in one integrated model.

To counter this weakness, the current paper suggests the expanded TPB model that combines SD, AC, and CARI to better clarify South Korean household recycle intentions. In addition to identifying theoretical predictors, this study also aims to generate actionable policy recommendations to improve household recycling practices in South Korea.

Ⅱ. Literature Review

Ⅲ. Research Methodology

1. Data collection

In this research, the authors created the survey instrument and subsequently partnered with a well-known professional survey firm to administer the survey instrument to the probable respondents. The survey company gave professional advice on questionnaire distribution options, tips on how to curb down sampling bias and suggestions on how to maximize response rates.

Data was collected by selecting the adult population residing in households and aged 20 years old and above during the 14-day period in both the metropolitan cities and the provinces in addition to all the 17 metropolitan cities and provinces in mainland Korea as well as the entire Jeju Island.

A geographically stratified sampling procedure was adopted, which resulted in the proportionate representation of the number of respondents of the individual cities and provinces of the national population. Moreover, the sample was equalized in terms of gender (250 male and 250 female respondents), and thus depicted the national gender distribution properly.

The completed responses were 500 in number, because the discarded responses were incomplete or inconsistent, and these were the final valid data. The questionnaire was grouped into three sections that include demographic characteristics, TPB construct assessment items, and other variables of the extended model. There are 24 items to measure latent constructs, being taken after scales that are already proved valid in the studies of household recycling behavior (Ahmad, Bazmi, Bhutto, Shahzadi and Bukhari, 2016; Chen and Tung, 2010; Fan, Yang and Shen, 2019; Razali et al., 2020; Wan et al., 2021). (All items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).

The detailed demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 1.

<Table 1>

Demographic characteristics

Ⅳ. Results

The measurement model’s reliability and validity were assessed first. Table 1 summarizes the convergent validity, discriminant validity, and internal consistency reliability results. All constructs achieved acceptable CR values above 0.7 and AVE values exceeding 0.5. VIF values for all constructs were below the recommended threshold of 3.3, confirming no multicollinearity issues.

Path analysis was then conducted to test the proposed hypotheses. As shown in Table 2, SD had a strong positive effect on AT (β = 0.656, p < 0.001), confirming H6.

<Table 2>

Validity and Reliability

In turn, AT significantly influenced IR (β = 0.185, p < 0.001), supporting H1. SN also had a positive and significant effect on IR (β = 0.127, p = 0.002), supporting H2.

PBC’s relationship with IR was positive but marginal and statistically non-significant (β = 0.059, p = 0.091), partially supporting H3 and aligning with previous findings in contexts with well-established infrastructure. Both AC (β = 0.335, p < 0.001) and CARI (β = 0.108, p = 0.007) exerted significant positive effects on IR, confirming H4 and H5.

The extended TPB model explained 46% (R² = 0.46) of the variance in recycling intention, indicating moderate predictive power.

Ⅴ. Discussion

The research reveals essential information about household recycling practices in South Korea through an extended application of the TPB. The research establishes SD as the main factor which drives recycling intentions among participants (β = 0.656, p < 0.001; Table 3). Past studies proved moral responsibility to be an essential predictor of environmental behavior which this research supports (Chen and Tung, 2010; Kaiser, Hübner and Bogner, 2005). According to research data, a well-developed moral responsibility within individuals serves as a motivational force which drives them toward sustainable waste handling behavior.

<Table 3>

Results of Hypotheses testing

Recycling behavior research validates the impact of AC on recycling behavior as observed by both Schultz (2002) and Bamberg and Möser (2007). In this study, AC showed a strong positive effect on recycling intentions (β = 0.335, p < 0.001; Table 3), confirming that disclosure of waste-related environmental impacts in society leads people toward better waste disposal behavior.

Research by Saphores, Ogunseitan, and Shapiro(2012) and Thi Thu Nguyen, Hung, Lee and Thi Thu Nguyen (2018) support the finding that easily accessible facilities for recycling enhance participation rates in recycling programs. The current study’s results indicate that improvements in CARI significantly influence recycling intentions (β = 0.108, p = 0.007; Table 2), reinforcing the importance of infrastructure availability. Policymakers need to provide necessary infrastructure support because it determines whether household-level recycling initiatives will achieve success.

Results concerning SN influence matched previous findings identified by Park and Ha (2014) and Botetzagias, Dima, and Malesios (2015), with SN positively influencing recycling intentions (β = 0.127, p = 0.002; Table 3). This study discovered the lack of the significant impact of the PBC on recycling intentions (β = 0.059, p = 0.091; Table 3). Perceptions of behavioral control may not be as important in decision-making because of South Korea's highly standardized and established recycling infrastructure, which has decreased practical barriers to recycling. In socio- environments where recycling systems are well defined, accessible, and known to the public, PBC has a reduced value, as similar results have been reported in institutionalized waste management scenarios. South Korean society maintains significant social and community influence regarding environmentally responsible actions while its inhabitants also embrace personal moral responsibility to protect their environment.

Ⅵ. Conclusion and Future Directions

The determinants of household recycling intentions in South Korea were investigated in this study, using TPB extended with SD, the AC and CARI. With the help of a quantitative survey and PLS-SEM analysis, this research brought new understanding of the synergistic effect of psychological, moral, and infrastructural factors on recycling behavior.

The results emphasize the importance of internalized moral obligations (especially SD) that predict recycling intentions, which remain under-considered in traditional models. Moreover, the study highlights the importance of infrastructural convenience and awareness of the environment for the promotion of sustainable waste practices. These results answer recently made calls for the incorporation of moral-psychological and contextual variables into models of pro-environmental behavior, particularly in quickly urbanized contexts such as South Korea.

Based on these results, several practical policy implications can be proposed.

First, environmental agencies should implement value-based environmental education programs starting in schools and community centers to instill a personal moral sense of environmental responsibility from an early age. Second, local governments and waste management authorities should improve the visibility, accessibility, and clarity of recycling infrastructure, including clear labeling of bins and waste sorting instructions, especially in high-density residential areas and mixed-use complexes. Third, public awareness campaigns should not only promote recycling habits but also emphasize the moral and social responsibility of protecting one’s community environment, highlighting the societal benefits of proper waste separation and recycling.

These combined efforts can improve recycling participation by addressing both the moral-psychological drivers and practical infrastructural realities that shape behavior, as this study’s integrated TPB extension suggests.

Despite the contribution to environmental behavior research, the following limitations exist. The cross-sectional design precludes causal interpretation, and other variables such as habit strength or trust in public services were not considered. Further research should use longitudinal approaches as well as expand the model to different cultural settings to enhance generalizability and theoretical robustness. Comparative studies in diverse cultural settings would also be valuable in confirming the generalizability of this extended TPB framework.

In conclusion, this study not only advances theoretical understanding of pro-environmental behavior but also offers clear, actionable guidance for policymakers and community leaders seeking to strengthen household recycling practices in South Korea and similarly urbanized societies.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the 2025 education, research and student guidance grant funded by Jeju National University

References

• Ajzen, I., 1991, “The theory of planned behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), pp.179–211. [https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T]
• Ahmad, M. S., A. A. Bazmi, A. W. Bhutto, K. Shahzadi and N. Bukhari, 2016, “Students' responses to improve environmental sustainability through recycling: quantitatively improving qualitative model,” Applied Research in Quality of Life, 11(1), pp.253–270. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-014-9366-7]
• Bamberg, S. and G. Möser., 2007, “Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), pp.14–25. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002]
• Botetzagias, I., A. F. Dima and C. Malesios., 2015, “Extending the theory of planned behavior in the context of recycling: The role of moral norms and of demographic predictors,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 95, pp.58–67. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.12.004]
• Cecere, G., S. Mancinelli, and M. Mazzanti., 2014, “Waste prevention and social preferences: The role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations,” Ecological Economics, 107, pp.163–176. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.08.009]
• Chang, M., W. A. H. M. Karunarathne and M. C. Kim., 2022, “Residents’ perceptions of household food waste during the COVID-19 outbreak in Korea,” Heliyon, 8(11). [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11439]
• Chen, M.-F. and P.-J. Tung., 2010, “The moderating effect of perceived lack of facilities on consumers' recycling intentions,” Environment and Behavior, 42(6), pp.824–844. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916509352833]
• Comber, R. and A. Thieme., 2013, “Designing beyond habit: Opening space for improved recycling and food waste behaviours through processes of persuasion, social influence, and aversive effect,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(6), pp.1197–1210. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-012-0587-1]
• Dong, Z., C. He, T. Hu and T. Jiang., 2024, “Integrating values, ascribed responsibility and environmental concern to predict customers’ intention to visit green hotels: The mediating role of personal norm,” Frontiers in psychology, 14, 1340491. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1340491]
• Fan, B., W. Yang and X. Shen., 2019, “A comparison study of 'motivation–intention–behavior' model on household solid waste sorting in China and Singapore,” Journal of Cleaner Production, 211, pp.442–454. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.168]
• Hua, Y. and F. Dong., 2022, “Can environmental responsibility bridge the intention-behavior gap? Conditional process model based on valence theory and the theory of planned behavior,” Journal of Cleaner Production, 376, 134166. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134166]
• Kaiser, F. G., G. Hübner and F. X. Bogner., 2005, “Contrasting the theory of planned behavior with the value‐belief‐norm model in explaining conservation behavior,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(10), pp.2150–2170. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02213]
• Kaza, S., L. Yao, P. Bhada-Tata and F. Van Woerden., 2018, What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050, World Bank Publications. [https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0]
• Kim, S., 2023, “Antecedents of Compliance Intention and Its Impact on Waste Separation Behaviour: Based on Rational Choice Theory and Deterrence Theory,” Behavioral Sciences, 13(5), 424. [https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13050424]
• Kim, W. H., J. Kim, J. Oh, S. Lee, J. Chang and Y. Kim., 2025, “Unexpected effects of pandemic-related changes on mental health: Evidence from a nationwide survey in South Korea,” PloS one, 20(1), e0317493. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317493]
• Kollmuss, A. and J. Agyeman., 2002,“Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour?,” Environmental Education Research, 8(3), pp.239–260. [https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401]
• Kumar, A., 2019, “Exploring young adults’e-waste recycling behaviour using an extended theory of planned behaviour model: A cross-cultural study,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 141, pp.378-389. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.013]
• Lee, J. Y., S. Moon, S. H. Cho, H. Kim, H. J. Kang, S. Y. Kim et al., 2024, “The Relationship Between Fast Food Consumption and Daily Lifestyle Changes During School Closures Following the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study Among Adolescents in Korea,” Psychiatry Investigation, 21(6), pp.610-617. [https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2023.0283]
• Li, D., L. Zhao, S. Ma, S. Shao and L. Zhang., 2019, “What influences an individual’s pro-environmental behavior? A literature review,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 146, pp.28-34. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.03.024]
• Linder, N., S. Rosenthal, P. Sörqvist and S. Barthel., 2021, “Internal and external factors’ influence on recycling: Insights from a laboratory experiment with observed behavior,” Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 699410. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.699410]
• Lu, M., C. Zhou, C. Wang, R. B. Jackson and C. P. Kempes., 2024, “Worldwide scaling of waste generation in urban systems,” Nature Cities, 1(2), pp.126-135. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s44284-023-00021-5]
• Macklin, J., J. Curtis and L. Smith., 2023, “Interdisciplinary, systematic review found influences on household recycling behaviour are many and multifaceted, requiring a multi-level approach,” Resources, Conservation & Recycling Advances, 18, 200152. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcradv.2023.200152]
• Miliute-Plepiene, J., O. Hage, A. Plepys and A. Reipas., 2016, “What motivates households recycling behaviour in recycling schemes of different maturity? Lessons from Lithuania and Sweden,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 113, pp.40–52. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.05.008]
• Muthukumari, W. A. C. S., J. Ahn and M. Kim., 2024, “Impact of information publicity on Korean residents’ E-waste recycling intentions: Applying the norm activation model and theory of planned behavior,” Heliyon, 10(14). [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34319]
• OECD, 2017, OECD guidelines on measuring trust, https://www.oecd.org/, .
• Onel, N. and A. Mukherjee., 2017, “Why do consumers recycle? A holistic perspective encompassing moral considerations, affective responses, and self-interest motives,” Psychology & Marketing, 34(10), pp.956–971. [https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21035]
• Park, J. and S. Ha., 2014, “Understanding consumer recycling behavior: Combining the theory of planned behavior and the norm activation model,” Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 42(3), pp.278–291. [https://doi.org/10.1111/fcsr.12061]
• Ramayah, T., J. W. C. Lee and S. Lim., 2012, “Sustaining the environment through recycling: An empirical study,” Journal of environmental management, 102, pp.141-147. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.025]
• Razali, F., D. Daud, C. Weng-Wai and W. R. A. Jiram., 2020, “Waste separation at source behaviour among Malaysian households: The Theory of Planned Behaviour with moral norm,” Journal of Cleaner Production, 271, 122025. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122025]
• Saphores, J. D. M., O. A. Ogunseitan and A. A. Shapiro., 2012, “Willingness to engage in a pro-environmental behavior: An analysis of e-waste recycling based on a national survey of US households,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 60, pp.49–63. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.12.003]
• Sapienza, E., 2021. Trust in public institutions. A conceptual framework and insights for improved governance programming. Oslo: United Nations Development Programme. https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/migrafion/oslo_governance_centre/Trust-in-Public-Insfitufions-Policy-Brief_FINAL.pdf.
• Scafuto, F., V, Sodano., and F, La Barbera., 2018, “What drives recycling behavior? The role of social trust, perceived risk, and self-efficacy,” Calitatea, 19(S1), pp.463-469.
• Schultz, P., 2002, “Environmental attitudes and behaviors across cultures,” Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 8(1), 4. [https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1070]
• Schwartz, S. H., 1977, “Normative influences on altruism,” In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221-279. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5]
• Seadon, J. K., 2010, “Sustainable waste management systems,” Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(16-17), pp.1639–1651. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.07.009]
• Song, U. and H. Park., 2024, “Plastic recycling in South Korea: problems, challenges, and policy recommendations in the endemic era,” Journal of Ecology and Environment, 48(1), pp.74-84. [https://doi.org/10.5141/jee.23.083]
• Srun, P. and K. Kurisu., 2019, “Internal and external influential factors on waste disposal behavior in public open spaces in Phnom Penh,” Cambodia. Sustainability, 11(6), 1518. [https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061518]
• Thi Thu Nguyen, H., R. J. Hung, C. H. Lee and H. Thi Thu Nguyen., 2018, “Determinants of residents' E-waste recycling behavioral intention: A case study from Vietnam,” Sustainability, 11(1), 164. [https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010164]
• Thomas, C. and V, Sharp., 2013, “Understanding the normalisation of recycling behaviour and its implications for other pro-environmental behaviours: A review of social norms and recycling”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 79, pp.11-20. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.04.010]
• Wan, C., G. Q. Shen and S. Choi., 2021, “The place-based approach to recycling intention: Integrating place attachment into the extended theory of planned behavior,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 169, 105549. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105549]
• Wei, S., J. Xu, S. She, Y. Wang and Y. Zhang., 2021, “Are recycling people also saving? Costliness matters,” Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 609371. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.609371]
• Wilson, D. C., C, Velis., and C, Cheeseman., 2006, “Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in developing countries,” Habitat International, 30(4), pp.797-808. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2005.09.005]
• Xu, L., M. Ling, Y. Lu and M. Shen., 2017, “External influences on forming residents’ waste separation behaviour: Evidence from households in Hangzhou, China,” Habitat International, 63, pp.21–33. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.03.009]
• Yadav, S. L., D. Kumar, M. Yadav, K. C. Patel, D. Birla and P. Singh., 2024, “Environmental resource management with reference to global climate change,” In Environmental Nexus for Resource Management (pp. 330-350). CRC Press. [https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003358169-17]
• Yang, K. and M. Holzer., 2006, “The performance–trust link: Implications for performance measurement”, Public Administration Review, 66(1), pp.114–126. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00560.x]
• Yumitro, G., S. Oktaviani and S. M. Deniar., 2024, “How South Korea's waste management system becomes a model for the world: What Indonesia can learn from South Korea's experience,” Communications in Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(1), pp.22-28. [https://doi.org/10.21924/chss.4.1.2024.71]
• Yuriev, A., M. Dahmen, O. Boiral and L. Guillaumie., 2020, “Pro-environmental behaviors through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: A scoping review,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 155, 104660. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104660]