EPA

United States Policy, Planning EPA530-SW-89-066

Environmental Protection And Evaluation (PM-223) September 1989

Agency Solid Waste And

Emergency Response (OS-305)

Promoting Source

Reduction

And Recyclability

In The Marketplace

Printed on recycled paper
PROMOTING SOURCE REDUCTION AND RECYCLABILITY

IN THE MARKETPLACE:

A Study of Consumer and Industry Response to

Promotion of Source Reduced, Recycled, and

Recyclable Products and Packaging

September 1989

Prepared for:

Richard M. Kashmanian, Ph.D.

Work Assignment Manager

Regulatory Innovations Staff PM-223) (

Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

401 M Street, S.W.

Washington, DC 20460

Prepared under:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Contract No. 68-02-4283
Disclaimer

The mention of commercial products in this report

does not indicate endorsement or approval of use

by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Acknowledgments

This report was prepared under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Contract

No. 68-02-4283 under the direction of Richard Kashmanian, EPA Work Assignment

Manager. The following individuals provided useful comments in review of drafts:

Carole Bell

Sarah Carney

W. David Corm

Truett DeGeare

Raymond De Young

Gregory Erickson

Trisha L. Ferrand

Edward A. Fox

E. Scott Geller

Richard Kashrnanian

Richard Katzev

Tapio Kuusinen

Peter Larkin

Howard Levenson

Barbara McConnell

Mark Michaels

Chaz Miller

Jerry Powell

Nancy VandenBerg

Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management

U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste

Center for Environmental and Hazardous Materials Study,

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste

School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan

Packaging Magazine

Ferrand Associates

Procter & Gamble Company

Department of Psychology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and

State University

U.S. EPA Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation

Psychology Department, Reed College

U.S. EPA Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation

Food Marketing Institute

U. S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment

New Jersey Food Council

World Waste Magazine; People’s Technologies

Glass Packaging Institute

Resource Integration Systems/Resource Conservation Consultants

Markets for Recycled Products, New York City
Table of Contents

Page

I.

II.

III

IV.

V.

VI.

Executive Summary ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ..

A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. Major Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . ........ . .

C. Program and Policy Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A. The Municipal Solid Waste Management Crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. Looking for Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C. Study Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D. Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Discussion and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Factors Influencing the Success of Consumer Education Programs . . . . . . .

A. Level of Consumer Awareness of MSW Management Crisis

and Environmental Consequences of Purchase Decisions . . . . . . . . . .

B. Content and Quality of Consumer Education and

Promotional Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C. Involvement of Different Interest Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D. Development of Consumer Education Programs Designed

for the Long Term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Understanding the Marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .

A. Industry Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. Consumer Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C. Government Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Influencing the Relationship Between Consumers and Marketers . . . . . . . .

A. Public Sensitivity to Environmental Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B. Cause Related Marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

C. Environmental Shopping Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

D. Letter-Writing Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

E. Labeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

1

3

4

8

8

10

13

14

15

17

17

22

26

28

31

31

33

34

36

39

42

43

45

47
Table of Contents

(Cont.)

Page

VII. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .. ....... 53

A. Major Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 53

B. Program and Policy Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . .. 55

C. Activities for Industry, Federal, State, and Municipal

Governments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . .. 56

D. Activities for Consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

References

Appendix A:

A.1

A.2

A.3

A.4

A.5

Appendix B:

Appendix C:

Exhibit 1.

Exhibit 2.

Exhibit 3.

Exhibit 4.

Exhibit 5.

Exhibit 6.

Exhibit C-1.

❵ 60

Annotated Bibliography

Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . ... .. A-1

Survey s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-9

Research Reports and Policy Papers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-15

Current Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . . A-37

Educational and Resource Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-51

Organizations and Individuals Contacted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1

Materials in the Solid Waste Stream and

Selected Products That May Help to Mitigate

the MSW Management Crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1

Table of Exhibits

Marketplace Inter-relationships Between Consumers,

Industry, and Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 2

Recycled/Recyclable Logos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... 6

Quantity of MSW Per Person Per Year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Total Quantity of MSW Per Year . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 9

Constituents of the MSW Stream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Examples of Recycling Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 49

Recyclable Constituents of the MSW Stream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-2
I. Executive Summary

A. Introduction

Over the next ten years, Americans will generate enough municipal solid waste

(MSW) to cover the District of Columbia in 77 feet of trash. At this rate, one-third of

the nation’s existing available landfill capacity will be exhausted in the next six years.

Although the supply of adequate landfill capacity varies by region, EPA recognizes that

the most important step in addressing the MSW management crisis is to reduce the

amount of MSW destined for Iandfilling and incineration and has established a national

goal of 25 percent reduction in the amount of MSW disposed by 1992. Source reduction

and recycling our waste materials are two ways to contribute to meeting this target.

Source reduction activities include methods to reduce toxicity and volume of materials in

products and packaging, extend product useful life, and reuse products and packaging.

A successful recycling program must include four stages:

1) the recyclable material must be recovered from the MSW waste

stream;

2) the material must be delivered to a manufacturer for processing;

3) manufacturers must use reclaimed material in their production

processes; and

4) consumers must purchase the finished product containing the

recycled material.

While all four steps are necessary for recycling to occur, most of the research and policy

emphasis has been placed on the first three stages. For example, to conserve scarce

landfill space, municipalities often collect recyclable materials such as aluminum cans,

glass bottles, and newspapers. This report focuses on the fourth step by exploring the

role of household consumer demand in the recycling process. In particular, the report

reviews existing research, surveys, and existing consumer-oriented education programs to

learn how consumers, through their purchasing decisions, can promote source reduction

and recyclability. Exhibit 1 shows the general inter-relationships between consumers,

industry, and government that affect consumer demand.

Unfortunately, the dearth of data and experience limit the ability to quantify

the effectiveness of consumer-oriented education programs. The report does provide a

convenient summary of existing information campaigns and research, and outlines some
Exhibit 1.

Marketplace Inter-relationships Betweeen Consumers, Industry, and Government

Consumer

b

\

Industry
general principles contributing to successful consumer-oriented programs. The report is

aimed at solid waste officials, consumer interest groups, manufacturers, and marketing

consultants charged with developing strategies to reduce our MSW.

B. Major Findings

While solid waste officials confront tough MSW disposal decisions on a daily

basis, consumer-oriented and marketplace initiatives promoting source reduction and

recyclability offer innovative and long lasting solutions to the nation’s MSW management

crisis. A 1988 survey by the National Solid Wastes Management Association (1988a)

found that Americans ranked garbage disposal second only to improving education as the

most serious problem facing local officials. In a recent Gallup poll, fifty percent of

Americans stated that they would change their purchasing habits to buy foods and

beverages that are sold in recycled or recyclable containers (Modern Brewery Age,

1988). In addition, ninety percent of the 1,000 respondents to an October 1988 survey

felt that recycling and biodegradability will help alleviate the solid waste problem

(Robert Marston and Associates, 1988). (Also, see Erickson (1988) and Resource

Recycling (1986) for similar consumer support for purchasing recycled and recyclable

packaging materials.) This change in attitudes since the early 1980s reflects an

increased awareness and concern for the environment. As noted by Geller (1986),

increased consumer awareness of environmental problems, generated by national media

coverage of incidents such as the odyssey of the Islip, New York garbage barge and their

relationship to purchase decisions, bodes well for the success of future consumer

education campaigns related to this issue.

This study found several consistent themes in the projects and research

reviewed, and identified strategies that can be successful in stimulating household

demand for products and packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability. For

example, the general principles listed below were shown to enhance the effectiveness of

consumer-oriented programs designed to promote source reduction and recyclability:

● Attention-getting techniques for education programs must compete with other advertising. To be successful, educational programs must be of high quality and as sophisticated as other

advertising in targeting appropriate messages to various

audiences.

3
● Long-term changes in consumer behavior depend upon changing

basic consumer attitudes and motives. Consumer education

programs should not be limited to short-term, non-durable

incentives, but should be combined with self-sustaining

motivation (having long-term durability).

● Household consumer awareness programs should make consumers

feel that their participation will be a positive contribution to the

solution of an important problem.

● In order to increase product choices available to consumers,

upstream decision-makers such as marketers, manufacturers, and

product designers must be educated about the desirability and

advantages of source reduction and product/packaging

recyclability, as well as the economic and image enhancement.

● Definitions, labeling, and other important messages must be standardized, simple, and well publicized, so that they are readily

recognized and understood by consumers.

C. Program and Policy Needs

Continued research is essential to determine the effectiveness and impacts of

programs and strategies designed to increase consumer demand for products and

packaging that will help mitigate the MSW management crisis. In addition, the success

of intervention programs and strategies will be enhanced if governments, consumer

groups, industry, and retailers develop supporting activities. Additional research and

program development is required in the areas described below. (This discussion is

expanded in Section VII.)

Provide technical guidance/information dissemination. This task can be

addressed by establishing a clearinghouse, providing a hotline service, and promoting

policy debates and program initiatives in forums such as trade association meetings,

technical journals, and conferences. These activities can provide information

appropriate to different audiences, such as:

● solid waste officials (e.g., guidance documents for national, state,

or local consumer education and environmental awareness

campaigns, cost and performance information on rnaterials,

procurement transactions, advertising campaigns, environmental

shopping databases, and a database of legislative activities);

● state and local governments and groups (e.g., guidance documents

on how to increase local awareness of the MSW management

crisis as well as effective activities to stimulate consumer

demand for products and packaging promoting source reduction

and recyclability);
●❵ the general public (e.g., information on buying source reducing or

recycled products and packaging). Public awareness efforts, such

as the “Gray is Beautiful” campaign sponsored by the American

Paper Institute, complement public sector and public interest programs; and

● industry (e.g., cost and performance information on materials,

procurement standards, update of Federal activities and

procurement transactions).

Develop and adopt standardized definitions. Without standardized labeling,

“contains recycled material” and “does not damage the environment” claims may become

overused and, in many cases, misleading. Consistent definitions will help solid waste

officials, industry, and consumers to understand the difference between products and

packaging that can mitigate the solid waste crisis and those that do not.

Develop labeling requirements and standards based on national consensus. Use

of environmental logos, symbols, and labeling (e.g., “made from recycled material,”

“recyclable”) in advertising and product and packaging promotion should be based on

establishing requirements and standards for their use. Such actions will maintain the

integrity of labeling claims. For example, a simple label, such as “environmentally

friendly,” may be preferable to specific terminology referring to recycled content or

toxicity, but the label needs to be uniformly understood. The most commonly used

symbols associated with recycled content are shown in Exhibit 2.

Support community-based pilot projects. Community or state pilot projects

(especially if done on a comprehensive scale) can be used to demonstrate the feasibility

of, and gain acceptance for, consumer education programs and other social marketing

techniques that increase consumer awareness and encourage participation of state solid

waste management offices, municipal officials, businesses, and households. Focus groups

(including representatives from consumer groups, industry, government, and research

organizations) may be appropriate for designing pilot projects and getting key players to

participate.

Support economic and technical research. While some people will readily

accept products with recycled content, further research may be needed to demonstrate

to a wider constituency that “buy recycled” and related programs benefit society as a

whole and that the cost of environmental impacts resulting from MSW disposal is paid for

by each of us. This research might support economic studies to determine the social and

community impacts of changes in consumer habits on the standard of living. Other

5
Exhibit 2.

Recycled/Recyclable Logos

Many companies which package their products in recycled paperboard use the

recycling symbol to indicate that the carton is made from recycled paper.

Companies producing paper products that are recyclable use the reverse of this

symbol.

6
research might include the effectiveness, appropriate levels, and targets of economic

incentives and disincentives, and development of innovative or existing reclamation and

recycling technologies.

Support socio-behavioral research. The relationship between consumer

education efforts and changes in purchasing decisions is complex and not fully

understood. Further research in this area will give industry, government, and consumer

groups a better understanding of how to design strategies to promote source reduction

and recyclability of products and packaging. Examples of research include determining:

ways of using informational strategies to promote intrinsic motives to conserve; ways of

combining intrinsic and extrinsic motives to produce more durable behavioral change;

what variables, not directly related to attitudes,

possibility of an increase in consumers’ quality of

appropriate behavior.

Facilitate interaction between consumers

ment could enhance the feedback loop between consumers and manufacturers/product

designers. Focus groups might alert industry to the product and packaging concerns of a

community or market segment and permit them to respond proactively to consumers’

concerns.

affect consumer behavior; and the

life from adopting environmentallyand industry. All levels of governFoster data collection. Tracking industry’s use of recycled materials through

the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Annual Census of Manufacturers could provide valuable information on existing practices and the success of various initiatives attempting

to encourage the use and purchase of recycled materials.

7
II. Background

A. The Municipal Solid Waste Management Crisis

In 1987, the town of Islip, New York found that a barge hauling its trash up and

down the East Coast had become a regular feature of the national news. However, the

problems that Islip was experiencing in disposing of its solid waste were by no means that

unusual. Consumption of manufactured and processed goods inevitably generates waste.

Each year Americans throw away an increasing amount of materials, while at the same

time the nation’s landfill disposal capacity is decreasing. If this trend continues, not only

towns but cities, regions, states, and the nation as a whole will be confronting serious

municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal problems in the coming years. New York State, for

example, currently generates 20 million tons of MSW each year. According to the New

York State Legislative Commission on Solid Waste Management (1988), all 241 of the

state’s active landfills will reach their capacity and close by 1995 unless the generation

rate of MSW is curbed. To add to the state’s planning problems, only one new landfill site

has opened since 1986.

On the national level, MSW problems are equally daunting. In 1988, over 1,300

pounds of MSW, between three and four pounds per day (Exhibit 3), were generated by

each American; population growth in the United States will further exacerbate the MSW

management crisis. As shown in Exhibit 4, the total amount of MSW generated annually

is expected to increase by 20 percent to 193 million tons by the year 2000 (USEPA,

1988a). At this rate, the EPA estimates that nearly one-third of the nation’s MSW

landfills will be full within six years (Porter, 1988). This lack of adequate disposal

capacity, coupled with increased solid waste generation and rapidly rising disposal fees,

form the crux of the MSW management crisis.

New disposal facilities (i.e., landfills and incinerators) often face considerable

public opposition because of real or perceived public health threats (Michaels, 1988).

While local opposition is a major obstacle to siting new MSW disposal facilities, public

concern is not limited to issues of health risks associated with disposal facilities.

Increasingly, the American public is thinking about a broader range of environmental

consequences resulting from the manufacture or disposal of products that they purchase

and the problems of MSW disposal. These environmental consequences include beach and

ocean litter, depletion of natural resources) impacts on wildlife and aquatic ecosystems

(e.g., ingestion of plastics by marine life), crop damage, and the human health impacts of

Iandfilling and incineration of MSW.

8
.

5

4

3

2

1

0

Exhibit 3.

Quantity of MSW Per Person Per Year

POUNDS PER DAY

I

I

l —

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

YEAR

 GROSS DISCARDS

{U.S. EPA. 1988a)

Exhibit 4.

Total Quantity of MSW Per Year

MILLIONS OF TONS PER YEAR

200

150

100

50

0

1960 1970 1980 1990

YEAR

7

2000

 GROSS DISCARDS

(U.S. EPA, 1988a)
B. Looking for Solutions

MSW disposal has become a significant local and regional problem and a growing

number of communities face a crisis of what to do with today’s and tomorrow’s trash. In

light of the MSW management crisis, the EPA is interested in examining a number of

strategies to reduce the amount and toxicity of waste disposed in the U.S. On April 13,

1988, then Administrator Lee Thomas (1988) testified before the House Committee on

Energy and Commerce that the Agency is committed to “holistic solutions to our waste

problems” and acknowledged the need to depart from our historical dependence upon

landfill disposal. According to EPA (1988a) estimates, 83 percent of MSW is Iandfilled,

6 percent is incinerated, and 11 percent is recycled through material recovery or energy

programs. In contrast to current MSW management practices, the EPA has established a

preferred hierarchy:

1) Source Reduction activities can reduce the toxicity and the amount of

materials used in products and packaging that are ultimately disposed

of. Through improved design of products and packaging, source reduction prevents waste from having to be managed. Household consumers

can influence manufacturers’ and packagers’ source reduction activities

by preferentially purchasing products and packaging that contain less

material, last longer, or are less toxic than conventional products and

packaging. In addition, repair and renovation improve a product’s

longevity and reduce demand for new products.

Reuse of packaging and other “disposable” goods also enhances source

reduction goals by lowering demand for, and consumption of, virgin

materials. Each time a good is reused, a new one need not be

manufactured, purchased, and ultimately disposed. Products and

packaging designed to be reusable do not need frequent replacement

and, over time, should not create as large a disposal problem as

disposable goods.

2) Recycling and Composting (later referred to collectively as recycling)

are MSW management techniques that reduce the amount of waste sent

to landfills and incinerators (thereby saving waste disposal capacity and

perhaps reducing human health and environmental risks), and contribute

towards recovery of materials.

3/4) Incineration or Landfilling are the preferred waste disposal techniques

that are necessary for MSW remaining after undertaking source

reduction, reuse, and recycling to the greatest extent possible. Proper

measures are needed to increase the safety of these disposal methods.

Incineration is useful in reducing the volume of waste which must be

Iandfilled and can also generate usable thermal and electrical energy.

Landfilling is essential to handle non-recyclable and non-combustible

wastes and incinerator ash. However, current overdependence on

landfills for management of over 80 percent of the nation’s MSW is

quickly exhausting the existing capacity of this disposal method.

10
EPA’s previous Administrator stressed that policy solutions and programs “at

the front end of the process” should focus on preventing or minimizing the introduction

of wastes (Thomas, 1988). Each year, millions of tons of MSW are incinerated or

landfilled that could otherwise be reclaimed and recycled. Exhibit 5 illustrates that

paper and paperboard and yard wastes account for almost 60 percent of MSW. Programs

designed to promote source reduction and recyclability of these materials could result in

large reductions in the quantity of MSW disposed. More generally, source reduction,

reuse, and recycling will reduce the amount, and, in some cases, the toxicity of MSW

destined for incineration or Iandfilling and will extend the useful lives of existing

landfills, delay the need for construction of new disposal facilities, reduce the potential

for environmental damage from disposal, save energy, and reduce depletion of renewable

and non-renewable resources.

EPA has set a goal of reducing the amount of MSW destined for Iandfilling and

incineration by 25 percent by 1992. While some source reduction and recycling already

occur in many communities throughout the U. S., if the national goal of 25 percent

reduction in MSW is to be met, the following need to be accomplished:

● Local and state governments need to actively pursue source

reduction and recycling with requirements, voluntary measures,

incentives, and disincentives;

. All levels of government and industry will have to work together

to encourage markets for source-reduced, recycled, and

recyclable goods (e.g., minimum recycled content requirements

for government procurements); and

● Household, government, and industry attitudes and behaviors will

have to change in order to encourage greater availability and

increase purchases of products and packaging that promote source

reduction and recyclability.

It is this last point that is the focus of this report.

Household consumer purchase of products and packaging that promote recycling

can help to close the recycling loop by increasing demand for recycled or recyclable

materials. Purchase of these types of products and packaging helps to mitigate the MSW

management crisis by stimulating markets for recycled materials and reducing the

amount of MSW disposed.

11
Exhibit 5

Constituents of the MSW Stream

Misc.

Plastics

DPW

41.0% Paper and Paperboard

(U.S. EPA, 1988a)

12
In 1988, almost half of surveyed American consumers claimed that they “often"

or “sometimes” considered the recyclability of packaging material when making a

product purchase decision (Erickson, 1988). Stronger markets for these products and

packaging will in turn encourage greater supply of these goods from manufacturers and

greater recovery of materials from the MSW stream. Cutler (1988) asserts that

mandatory source-separation programs will not provide large-scale solutions to the MSW

management crisis until stable markets for recycled products are created. In other

words, recovering materials from the MSW stream will do little good until there is a

demand for the products they are used to create.

In addition, household consumer purchase of products and packaging that

promote source reduction can lessen the amount of this material in the waste stream, or

lower the toxicity of wastes, and ultimately reduce the adverse environmental impacts of

MSW disposal.

C. Study Description

A key task of this study is to summarize the relevant studies, research, and educational programs related to household consumer demand for products and packaging that

promote source reduction and recyclability. To this end, this report reviews previous

studies, research, surveys and other relevant information on approaches to increase

household consumer demand for products and packaging which either promote source

reduction (i.e., are less wasteful, more durable, or less toxic than conventional products

and packaging, or are reusable) or promote recyclability (i.e., contain recycled materials

or are recyclable).

This report also categorizes successful features of education programs designed

to promote consumers’ awareness of the environmental consequences of their purchase

decisions. By environmental consequences of purchase decisions we mean the environmental impacts associated with the manufacture, use, or disposal of purchased products

and packaging. The study focuses on educational campaigns designed to increase

consumer awareness of such environmental consequences. The report also discusses the

factors that influence consumer responses to programs designed to stimulate demand for

these products. Obviously, the consumer product marketing factors characterized as the

four P’s -- product (e.g., quality), place (e.g., availability), promotion, and price -- are

principal determinants of consumer demand (McCarthy, 1975). Finally, the means by

which consumer groups, governments, and industry (including marketers and retailers)

can influence the marketplace to increase the availability and use of products and

13
packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability are examined. A

comprehensive national strategy which includes both educational programs and marketbased efforts could aid in attaining the national MSW source reduction and recycling goal

by 1992.

D. Limitations of the Study

The findings of this study are primarily intended for use in designing future

programs targeted towards households and consumers. Therefore, the project scope was

limited to products and packaging that are available to household consumers and does not

necessarily apply to commercial products such as building materials. Because of the

interrelationships among product and packaging availability? economies of scale in

production, and social trends, a wide variety of industry and governmental activities

should also be considered part of the nation’s comprehensive MSW reduction policy.

14
III. Discussion and Results

This section presents findings based on a survey of relevant literature and on

informal telephone interviews with experts in the field (see Appendix B). The interviews

provided information on current activities and program experience, both published and

unpublished. Key factors influencing the success of programs and projects designed to

stimulate consumer demand for products and packaging that promote source reduction

and recyclability are discussed in the following three subsections. Section IV includes a

discussion of factors which affect the likelihood of success of household consumer

education programs. (Several more general guidelines for education programs are found

in Section VII.) In order to actively change purchase decisions, program planners and

manufacturers must understand the varied responses of households to the awareness of

the environmental consequences of their purchase decisions. Section V introduces the

marketplace relationship between consumers and product and packaging marketers and

manufacturers. This is followed by a discussion in Section VI of how governments,

consumer groups and industry can influence consumer demand for products and packaging

promoting source reduction and recyclability. Appendix A provides summaries of most of

the references used in this report. Organizations and individuals contacted for this study

are listed in Appendix B. Appendix C provides background information on constituents of

the MSW stream and opportunities for source reduction and recycling.

There are four general approaches to stimulating consumer demand for products

and packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability:

Household consumer education depends primarily on intrinsic rewards for altering purchase behavior. A wide range of programs fall under this category; they vary

according to their goal, audience, and targeted behavior. A short list includes: “buy

recycled” environmental shopper programs for households, product or shelf labeling programs at the retail level, environmental awareness programs for the community, and

school-based awareness programs and activities. Geller and Lehman (1986) found that

education programs alone will not change consumers’ purchasing decisions.

Marketplace initiatives, for the most part, are under the control of industry

decision-makers. However, they are also influenced by consumer activism and social

trends. These initiatives can lead to a change in the availability and price of products

and packaging. Some marketers already promote their products and packaging as having

fewer environmental impacts (e.g., containing recycled materials, thereby reducing the

15
consumption of virgin materials and disposal of post-consumer materials) and others may

be influenced to follow if the promotion increases a product’s competitiveness in the

marketplace. Consumer activism may take the form of selective buying campaigns,

letter writing campaigns, or, in some cases, product boycotts. As society becomes

increasingly aware of the environmental consequences of purchase decisions, product

manufacturers and packagers may be encouraged to respond.

Economic incentives or disincentives can create an extrinsic reward to increase

purchases of products that have fewer adverse environmental consequences, or impose a

penalty for purchase of environmentally undesirable goods. Economic incentives for

manufacturers and households include subsidies, rebates, and credits for manufacturing

or purchasing products and packaging that promote source reduction and recycling. Policies that could provide economic disincentives

consumers include taxes on virgin materials (or

packaging using recovered materials) and taxes on

material at the point of manufacture or sale and

to manufacturers and household

a tax exemption for products or

the type and amount of packaging

pay-per-container charges (Riggle,

1989; and Sproule and Cosulich, 1988). In general, incentives and disincentives targeted

at the manufacturer level appear to be a more direct approach to promote source

reduction and recycling.

Mandatory requirements and restrictions, by definition, stipulate that certain

choices such as purchase of source reduced goods or goods containing recycled materials

must be undertaken by those individuals, communities, governments, and industries

subject to the requirements. Requirements and restrictions may be turned to if markets

for recycled materials are not developed or manufacturers or consumers do not respond

favorably. Such requirements or restrictions on product or packaging content or availability applied at the retail level can affect household purchase decisions. For example,

a government authority may implement a program where products or packaging are

reviewed and approved for use by an oversight group. The major advantage of mandatory

requirements is that participation rates may be higher than in most voluntary programs.

The public may, however, react negatively to required changes.

This study examines how voluntary efforts, such as household consumer

education and certain marketplace initiatives can be used to alter consumers’ purchase

behavior. Economic incentives and disincentives and mandatory requirements can also be

used to change product and packaging availability and composition but are not examined

in detail in this study.

16
IV. Factors Influencing the Successor Consumer Education Programs

Several factors were found to affect the success or failure of educational and

social marketing programs designed to stimulate consumers’ demand for products and

packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability. Consideration of these

factors can help in the design of successful consumer education programs. The factors,

though not always mutually exclusive, include:

● consumer awareness of the MSW management crisis and

environmental consequences of purchase decisions;

● content and quality of consumer education

activities;

. involvement of different interest groups; and

. development of consumer education programs

and promotional

designed for the

long term.

The discussion of these factors is followed by

the retail marketplace and how these can

Underlying the success of these programs is

an evaluation of the competitive forces in

be used to stimulate consumer demand.

the availability of products and packaging

included within the education program. These and other marketing factors, discussed in

Sections V and VI, will determine what options are available to consumers in the

marketplace.

A. Level of Consumer Awareness of MSW Management Crisis and Environmental

Consequences of Purchase Decisions

The success of an educational program designed to change consumer buying

habits to purchase products and packaging promoting source reduction and recyclability

depends in part on generating and maintaining a high level of awareness about the MSW

management crisis and the environmental consequences of household consumer

purchasing decisions. Without this knowledge, individuals have little motivation to

change their behavior (Taylor, 1988; and Tracy and Oskamp, 1984). Tracy and Oskamp

(1984) found that individuals and households often lacked knowledge of what they could

do to avoid environmental problems. In this case, lack of knowledge of the

environmental impacts of household activities caused lower rates of participation in

ecologically responsible behavior. Kinnear and Taylor (1973) measured the association

between ecological concern and product brand perception using statistical analyses of

17
consumer responses to questions about brand preferences and environmental concerns.

They determined that consumers who were aware of the impacts of phosphates on the

environment viewed laundry detergents containing phosphates as contributing to the

pollution of lakes and streams. Low- or non-phosphate detergents were seen as helping

to mitigate the problem of water pollution. These observations suggest that generating

awareness of, and concern for, environmental issues will add another dimension to

consumer purchasing decisions. Young and Storey (1988) recently found that education

can be effective in raising citizens’ awareness of the need to minimize waste generation.

Education Methods - Programs aimed at generating higher levels of consumer

awareness of the MSW crisis and the environmental consequences of purchase decisions

take many forms, such as leaflets, brochures, and booklets written and distributed by

industry, retailers, academia, community, state, and national groups, as well as public

service spots and news coverage on both radio and television. These programs typically

inform the target audience about the MSW management crisis and its causes, and tell

how they, as consumers, can adjust their product and packaging purchasing, usage, and

disposal habits to lessen the environmental consequences. Each type of program has its

own set of strengths and weaknesses. Because brochures available upon request usually

reach interested and informed consumers (those willing to make the effort to pick up a

brochure), the information they contain may be more detailed. Fliers and pamphlets

inserted with other mailings, such as a utility bill, will get into many more households but

must be eye-catching and should contain a simpler message. Larson and Massetti-Miller

(1984) determined that sole reliance on mass-media channels was not effective in

changing recycling behavior. Taylor (1988) found that publicity of local problems and

changes in local waste collection practices produced the greatest awareness in solid

waste problems. Publicity of a national problem produced “moderate” awareness, while

regular news coverage generated no awareness.

A variety of promotional and informational materials have been developed

which address source reduction/reuse/recycling (API, 1988; EDF, 1988; Hurst and Relis,

1988; MDNR, 1988; PRC, 1988; USEPA 1988b, 1979; CFE, 1987; Brandt and Swanson

1984; EAF, 1980s; and League of Women Voters, 1975, 1972), packaging (City of

Berkeley, 1980s; EAF, 1980s; SED, 1980s; ODEQ, 1980; and USEPA, 1976), and household

hazardous wastes (EFE, 1988; CPCB, 1986; Chown and Fridgen, 1986; HPDC, no date; and

MDEM, no date). The recycling/reuse pamphlets describe the benefits of recycling and

reuse (e.g., conserving raw materials and reducing disposal costs) and urge readers to

participate in ongoing recycling programs or to try to start one in their own

18
communities. Other pamphlets included in this review describe how, oftentimes,

products are overpackaged and suggest what consumers can do to minimize buying excess

packaging. Identification of less toxic substitutes and appropriate disposal techniques for

household

pamphlets

(1984) has

Natural.

materials

hazardous wastes (with a list of do’s and don’t’s) are the subjects of the

(referenced above) addressing household hazardous wastes. In addition, Dadd

compiled a listing of non-toxic alternatives to many products in Nontoxic and

No information was uncovered that described the effectiveness of these

in raising consumer awareness and changing purchase behavior. The

importance of properly evaluating promotional materials is discussed in Section IV.D.

Education Programs - “Environmental shopping” campaigns have made efforts to

increase consumer awareness of the MSW management crisis and the environmental

consequences of purchase decisions and solid waste disposal. Awareness of

environmental issues has been generated by various groups using in-store posters,

promotional announcements, brochures, and press releases (e.g., API, 1970s-1980s). For

example, a survey conducted after an environmental shopping campaign in the Von’s

grocery store chain found that 71 percent of the respondents from the stores in which the

campaign had been active agreed that there was a garbage crisis in California. Only 51

percent of the survey respondents from the stores which did not participate in the

awareness program felt that there was such a crisis (PRA, 1981). This campaign was

expanded throughout the San Diego area and similar campaigns have been conducted in

Palo Alto, California, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin (Gallager, 1984; Conservation News,

1976; EAF, 1976; Red Owl Stores, 1973; PAMRRP, 1970s; and USEPA, 1970s).

Educating children (i.e., future consumers) may be a key to longer-term success

of any program. According to O’Leary and Walsh (1988), there are curricula available

that teach children about waste generation, the environmental problems that can result

from waste disposal, and the benefits of recycling. These programs can have a dual

effect in that the children grow up with this environmental awareness and also pass on

what they have learned to their parents. Several programs targeted at elementary and

high school students in Florida, Missouri, Ohio, and New York City, promote an

awareness of recycling and other aspects of waste disposal (Browne, 1988) (also, see Bell

and Schwartz, 1989; NJDEP, 1989; and USEPA, 1980). Mikitka (1985) proposes that

school-based curricula be developed which complement and strengthen environmental

shopping campaigns in the community.

19
I

Education activities should also include the wide range of professionals involved

in the recycling loop. Such groups include consumers, procurement specialists, MSW

management officials, marketers) and product and package designers/manufacturers.

Targeting Education Programs - A key element of widespread consumer

acceptance and program success is a solid understanding of the consumers whom the program is seeking to influence. Educational campaigns should tailor promotional messages

to fit each of the different groups that their programs seek to reach. One California

survey found no significant difference in recycling rates between social classes; however,

the reasons for participation varied among the groups. It found that individuals with

higher incomes are more likely to recycle for ecological reasons and individuals with

lower incomes are more likely to recycle for economic or monetary reasons (Mikitka,

1987). Similar purchasing preferences were revealed in a 1988 Gallup poll in which 60

percent of Americans with incomes over $40,000 said that they would switch to a product

in a recyclable container if offered the choice (Modern Brewery Age, 1988). It follows

that program organizers need to know the audience to which they wish to appeal.

Strategic preliminary research is necessary for a program to target

message effectively towards several different audiences.

The importance of effective targeting is emphasized by Geller 

the appropriate

 (1989), who

states that behavior-change strategies work best when they are aimed at specific,

carefully defined behaviors. Targeting allows for more effective reinforcement of

desired behavior changes because incentives and disincentives, rewards and punishments,

can be tailored to the behavior. For large-scale programs, Geller and Lehman (1986)

conclude that a program using a diverse set of strategies to induce (e.g., rebates for

returning recyclable) and promote (e.g., public service announcements touting the social

benefits of participating) desired behaviors (e.g., buying products and packaging that

promote source reduction or recyclability) are more likely to be successful because each

person responds to a different stimulus. However, it needs to be pointed out that there

may be a discrepancy between attitudes/preferences and actual behavior (Geller, l981).

Because of the expected link between awareness of the MSW management crisis

and greater consumer demand for products and packaging that promote source reduction

or recyclability, future pilot programs designed to influence consumer purchasing habits

might be most successful if they are aimed at areas where consumer awareness of environmental ‘problems is already high but where relatively little consumer education to

change purchasing habits has occurred. States such as New Jersey and Connecticut have

imposed deadlines (1989 for New Jersey, and 1991 for Connecticut) requiring each

20
disposal area (town, city, or county) to recycle 25

and CFE, 1987, respectively). Such legislation, as

solid waste issues, generates greater community

crisis so that an education program will not have

percent of its trash (Mattheis, 1987,

well as the public debate surrounding

awareness of the MSW management

to devote as much time, money, and

effort convincing consumers of the benefits in changing their purchase decisions. Other

communities which might make good hosts to future demonstration projects (e.g., an

environmental shopping campaign) would be those that have developed strong voluntary

recycling programs. Mary Shiel, head of New Jersey’s Office of Recycling, said that

without widespread awareness of the state’s solid waste disposal dilemma generated by

voluntary recycling programs at the municipal level, introduction of the State’s

mandatory recycling program would have created chaos (Mattheis, 1987). Eco-Haul, a

Californian recycling company contracting to city and county sanitation departments,

has pioneered many recycling programs, some of which have been in existence for over

12 years (Salimando, 1986). In these cases, community groups and industries already have

done much to raise public awareness, a key to changing consumers’ behavior and program

success (Mattheis, 1987; Salimando, 1986; and API, undated).

Recent developments suggest that social marketing efforts to promote recycling are becoming more widespread and sophisticated. The Environmental Defense Fund,

with the co-sponsorship of the National Ad Council and co-funding from U.S. EPA and

several states, launched a nationwide advertising campaign to promote recycling. In

addition, EDF has met with script writers of major television programs to try to convince

them to insert recycling activities into their programs (Ferrand, 1988c). On the other

hand, De Young (1987) conducted a survey among Michigan residents and found that

changing attitudes should not be so heavily emphasized in the state’s resource recovery

programs since so many respondents already considered recycling to be important.

Behavioral Considerations - It is important to note that changes in awareness of

the MSW management crisis do not necessarily result in changes in consumer attitudes or

behaviors. Geller and Lehman (1986) claim that general informational pamphlets alone

are not effective in changing behavior (concerning energy conservation), but when

combined with extrinsic incentives or disincentives) such as credits or taxes, they

improve the likelihood that consumer habits will change. De Young (1985-1986) found

that much of an individual’s everyday conservation behavior was intrinsically motivated,

and that a program should not invest all of its effort in developing extrinsic incentives

but rather should focus on enhancing people’s discovery of these internal motives.

21
B. Content and Quality of Consumer Education and Promotional Activities

Before embarking on a new consumer education program, designers and organizers should determine what tools are already available to them, what methods have been

used elsewhere, and research the successes and failures of previous programs. As one

publication advises, “don’t waste your energy reinventing the wheel” (Enterprise for

Education, 1988).

Numerous publications and materials have been designed to assist in the development and implementation of consumer education programs. These include: pamphlets

and books on such topics as public access to radio and television; strategies for approaching the media and for raising money; educational slide shows on the MSW management

crisis; source reduction or recycling activities; posters about recycling and environmental

shopping; and T-shirts imprinted with the recycled/recycling symbol. The St. Louis

County (Minnesota) Health Department developed a twenty-minute slide and tape show

describing how consumers, governments, and community groups can work together to

help solve MSW management problems (Brandt and Swanson, 1984). Informational

pamphlets and materials have been developed by a wide variety of groups dedicated to

finding solutions to the MSW management crisis. These include state solid waste

agencies, such as the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (1988), Pennsylvania

Resources Council (1988), Seattle Engineering Department ( 1980s), and the Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality (1980), Federal agencies, such as the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency ( 1988b, 1976), and interest groups, such as the Council

on Economic Priorities (1988) and the National Solid Wastes Management Association

(1988a, b) and Enterprise for Education ( 1988).

Several key characteristics determine how consumer education programs are

received by their audience, and are considered below:

. content of program;

● simplicity, convenience, and quality of program;

●

tone of message; and

● timing of program.

Content of Program - A key component for education programs to encourage

recycling or other resource conservation behavior is to provide information -- e.g., what

to do, how to do it, where to do it (De Young, 1987; and Conn, 1980). Furthermore, small

initial commitments to purchase products and packaging promoting source reduction and

recyclability may be more effective in starting, sustaining, and expanding this behavior

(Katzev and Pardini, 1987-88; Stern, 1984; and Pardini and Katzev, 1983-84).

22
I

Targeted strategies designed to change consumer behavior, as well as purchase

decisions, are more likely to gain widespread consumer acceptance and to produce lasting

changes in buying habits than are programs that focus solely on attitudes (Geller, 1986).

Geller et al. (1983) and Geller (1981) contend that education and feedback techniques

should be combined with rewards to promote high participation rates in resource

conservation.

An important element in attitude-change strategies is intrinsic motivation.

According to De Young (1984), individuals are more likely to continue intrinsically motivated behaviors because they feel that the behavior is worthwhile “for its own sake, ” and

not necessarily because any rewards could be gained. De Young also argues that

recycling programs are too often designed solely around economic (i.e., extrinsic)

incentives, and that programs combining extrinsic and intrinsic incentives could achieve

more effective and enduring results. After incentives are removed, individuals may

return to their previous behavior (Katzev and Pardini, 1987-88; De Young, 1984; and

Pardini and Katzev, 1983-84). Furthermore, over-reliance on incentives may make

consumers overlook their intrinsic motivations (De Young, 1984).

Beyond convincing consumers that their individual actions can be effective,

education programs need to dispel misconceptions, such as inferior quality, about

recycling. Marketers do not typically promote the recycled material content in products

and packaging if they expect consumer preference for non-recycled materials. Public

opinion polls, however, indicate that as many as one half of American consumers would

prefer to buy foods and beverages in containers that are, or can be, recycled (Modern

Brewery Age, 1988). Similar results are reported in Erickson (1988), Robert Marston and

Associates (1988), and Resource Recycling (1986). However, as noted earlier, there may

be a discrepancy between individual attitudes/preferences and actual behavior (Geller,

1981).

Simplicity, Convenience, and Quality of Program - Both the message to

consumers and their desired behavior changes must be simple and readily

understandable. If consumers and store personnel cannot quickly and easily understand a

program, or if the program requires consumers to alter their shopping behavior

significantly, the program becomes a burden and may be ignored or rejected. The

experience of one food store chain illustrates this problem. In 1973, the Red Owl stores

in Wisconsin initiated a program to encourage consumers to reuse containers

(Conservation News, 1976; EAF, 1976; Red Owl Stores, 1973; and USEPA, 1970s). The

stores promoted the program using posters and mentioned the program on their regular

23
newspaper advertisements. Consumers were given small cash refunds at checkout for

refilling paperboard egg cartons, plastic milk bottles, and plastic soda bottles, and for

reusing paper and plastic grocery bags. However, among other problems, store workers

had difficulty keeping track of all of the reused containers, and consumers often forgot

to bring containers back to the stores.

De Young (1987) asserts that future education programs should devote more

time to help people overcome perceived barriers to recycling, encouraging consumers to

convert good intentions to actual behaviors. Taylor (1988) found that where public

awareness programs for recycling were poorly run, households were confused and

uncooperative.

Research suggests that simplicity and convenience are largely matters of perception. For example, Crosby and Taylor (1982) found that after participating in a

recycling program for a few months, consumers began to consider the program more

convenient and less burdensome than when it began. The authors state that as a new

behavior is learned and becomes more efficient, "[i]t will tend to be perceived as more

convenient.” One goal of start-up programs is to keep consumers participating long

enough for this to happen. Fountain Fresh Beverage Company operates in-store bottle

washing and refill units for soft-drinks. The company reports that consumers have

responded positively to the program, with some even attracted by the novelty of the

product (Stone, 1988).

Tone of Message - The message that a consumer education program presents

should be positive. For example, “We can do it!,” or “Be a part of the solution,” or “You

can help,” are more enticing than reprimands such as “Quit your wasting!” A program

can inform consumers of the magnitude of the MSW management problem, but it should

focus on how the individual consumer can make a difference by making a simple change

in his or her behavior. Consumers should feel that by participating in the program they

are contributing to the solution of an important problem. They should not feel

overwhelmed by the problem to the point that they think individual actions are futile.

Two examples illustrate this point well. The first example, an environmental shopping

program implemented by the Pennsylvania Resources Council was severely under-funded

and limited in scope, but the consumers who were reached received it enthusiastically

(Becker, 1987). A major reason for their enthusiasm was that the program emphasized

the effectiveness of individual actions, and reminded consumers that they could help

solve the MSW management crisis. The second example, a research study of ecologically

concerned consumers (Kinnear et al., 1974), indicates that people who actively recycle

24
are motivated by, among other factors, a strong sense of consumer effectiveness against

generating pollution. The authors of the study suggest that public education campaigns

should heavily emphasize consumer effectiveness in mitigating environmental impacts.

In general, individuals should not be made to feel that they are losing control of their

environment or standard of living by recycling or other resource conservation activities

(Corm, 1988b; Ferrand, 1988a, b; De Young and Kaplan, 1985-86; and Stern, 1984). It is

important for education programs to counteract assumptions of losing control or a

lowered standard of living by stressing the relationship between source

reduction/recyclability and environmental effects and associated societal benefits.

Timing of Program - Because consumer education programs seek to influence

household purchasing habits, they are, by their very nature, in competition with the

myriad of other advertisements and inducements vying for shoppers’ attention. This

applies to everything from informational pamphlets put in shopping bags, to posters hung

in store windows, to product and shelf labels. For instance, a shopper awareness program

conducted in San Diego, California Safeway grocery stores was judged to be ineffective

due to competing promotional campaigns (Gallager, 1984; SDEC, 1982). The program was

designed to increase shoppers’ awareness of the “recycle symbol” and products packaged

in recycled material, and to inform shoppers of the contribution that recycled packaging

makes to solid waste reduction. Markers and signs identifying products with packaging

made from recycled materials were placed in the stores, workers wore badges explaining

the recycle symbol, shopping bags were imprinted with an environmental shopping

message, and media promotions were used.

During the time the program was operating, however, the Safeway stores were

also running an advertising campaign promoting their produce and were only able to

emphasize one poster in their window display. The competing produce campaign appears

to have taken a great deal of attention away from their environmental shopping program, In fact, only seven percent of the shoppers surveyed after the environmental

shopping program was completed recalled seeing anything about environmental shopping

in their supermarkets. Despite the program’s lack of effectiveness in changing attitudes,

90 percent of shoppers interviewed, regardless of whether they noticed the in-store

promotion or not, felt that using recycled packaging would help to reduce solid waste

disposal. The same percentage claimed that all other things being equal, they would

prefer to buy products in recycled packaging (SDEC, 1982). This case study highlights

the fact that consumers are faced with an overwhelming amount of information each

day. If a consumer education program is to succeed, its message must be well delivered

and stand out.

25
C. Involvement of Different Interest Groups

A household consumer education program seeks to change the behavior of

people from many different sectors of society. To affect behavior, a consumer education

program must establish credibility with, and build a consensus among, the different interest groups in the town, city, state, or nation in which it operates. If it fails to establish

credibility, the program will be rejected by many of the people it is attempting to

influence, who may perceive it as ineffective or not serving that group’s goals. If it fails

to build a consensus, the program is likely to be compromised by lack of coordination or

disagreement. An effective way for a consumer awareness program to establish its

credibility and engender consensus is to involve as many different interest groups as

possible from an early stage of the project.

Interest group inclusion - Interest group inclusion is an integral part of Canada’s

“Environmentally-Friendly Goods Campaign” (McMillan, 1988). The program will label

products that are determined to be environmentally safe, such as those made from

recycled materials. Representatives from key interest groups, e.g., consumers,

government, trade unions, business, environmental groups, and academia will serve as

advisors. These advisors will review products and services in the marketplace to determine which ones merit the “environmentally friendly” label. Interest group inclusion

appears to have paid off well for the Canadian program. Although still in its preliminary

stages, the program is already enjoying vigorous support from many interest groups,

including business.

Another example of interest group inclusion is Michigan’s “Buy Recycled” program, which focuses primarily on purchases of recycled paper, plastics, retreaded tires,

and re-refined automotive oil (MDNR, 1988). The program’s first step is the compilation

of a catalog of selected products and their recycled materials content. The compilation

will be done by environmental, civic, and recycling activists (along with anyone else who

wants to be involved), who will meet with interested businesses and trade organizations

to discuss the materials most relevant to particular consumer groups (Michigan Recycling

Coalition, 1986). As in the Canadian program, the emphasis is on involving many

different interests as early as possible. When people play active and essential roles in

the development and implementation of a consumer education program, they are likely to

give the program longer-lasting support.

Cooperation of retailers - Retailer cooperation is essential to the success of

consumer education programs such as “Environmental Shopping Campaigns.” These

programs typically have taken place within limited areas and in grocery stores of the

26
same chain. Past “campaigns” have consisted of explanatory posters, media

announcements, checkout bag stuffers, and product labeling for recycled content or

recyclability (SDEC, 1982; PRA, 1981; and PAMRRP, 1970s). To publicize their shelfIabeling program, the Palo Alto Material Resource Recovery Program attracted

customers’ attention with large in-store posters resembling traffic lights. This design

grabbed shoppers’ attention, and thus the same three colors were used on shelf labels to

identify packaging characteristics: refillable (green), recyclable (yellow), and costly to

recycle (red) (PAMRRP, 1970s).

According to the conclusions from the Red Owl Stores’ “Bring ‘Em Back, Repack

and Save” program (Conservation News, 1976; EAF, 1976; Red Owl Stores, 1973; and

USEPA, 1970s), stores that are enthusiastic about their programs will fare better with all

types of consumers than stores that have little enthusiasm will fare even with environmentally aware consumers. It was also felt that store employees were not knowledgeable

enough about their program to be able to answer all questions from customers.

The San Diego Environmental Shopping/Solid Waste Awareness Project

(ES/SWAP) demonstrated the importance of retailer cooperation to the success of a

community-wide consumer education project (Gal lager, 1984; and SDEC, 1982). This

project worked through the Safeway grocery store chain in San Diego for approximately

eighteen months during 1981 and 1982. Apparently, the inflexibility of store policies

diminished the project’s effectiveness; that is, the store had a policy that only one theme

at a time could be advertised in store windows. At the time of the consumer education

project, the store’s own “Produce” theme was already active, so the ES/SWAP received

no window space. Store managers also asked that the number of in-store posters and

product markers on the shelves be reduced dramatically from what the program

organizers had originally intended. In addition, the posters were located in obscure areas

and not easily noticed by shoppers.

Safeway store employees were to wear “recycle symbol” badges as another

aspect of the promotional campaign. However, use of these badges was inconsistent. In

addition, the imprints and logos for packaging materials arrived late, after the kick-off

date. This lack of coordination compromised the program’s promotional campaign. Furthermore, the wording “contains recycled material” on egg cartons was not graphically

outstanding and might have been misinterpreted to mean that the eggs, not the

packaging, contained recycled material. As mentioned previously, a survey completed

after the promotional campaign indicated that a very low percentage (seven percent) of

the shoppers in stores with active programs were even aware of the program. Still, 80

21
percent of all those interviewed felt that the recycle symbol should appear on all

containers made from recycled material and 90 percent felt that using recycled

packaging would help reduce the amount of solid waste disposal (SDEC, 1982). The

failure of this program to inform its target audience can be attributed, at least in part,

to the problems associated with the less-than-full cooperation for in-store promotion.

D. Development of Consumer Education Programs Designed for the Long Term

Consumer education programs must last long enough for consumers to take

notice, to be educated, and to modify their attitudes and behaviors (Geller, 1986; and

Geller and Lehman, 1986) and should be an integral part of recycling programs. Geller

(1986) concludes that intervention and education programs are most likely to achieve

their goals if carried out on a community-wide basis (including national and international

scale efforts) and over a long period of time. Geller and Lehman (1986) note that in

order to change underlying attitudes effectively, reward strategies must remain in place

long enough for the more immediate behavioral changes to become second nature. In

most cases, this means that the programs must be long-term endeavors, lasting for more

than one year. Three factors are of key importance in determining whether or not programs will endure. However, these factors should not be viewed in a vacuum but rather

in the context of the education program’s goals and design. These factors are:

● funding;

● feedback; and

● adaptability.

Funding - Producing a high-quality consumer education program, initiating large

outreach efforts to include many interest groups, or doing any kind of planning, is

unlikely without an adequate, reliable, and long-term supply of funding. Programs

reviewed for this study frequently depended upon one-time federal and state grants or

piggy-backing on retailers’ advertising budgets which dried up within a few months. To

ensure long-term support, consumer education and “buy recycled” programs should seek

funding from a variety of sources and minimize dependence on one-time contributions

and government grants for program start-up. Ideally, those responsible for MSW disposal

(usually the municipality or state) have the most to gain from a successful local or state

campaign, and they often see the need for funding a project over the long term. Without

question, the extent to which outside funding is possible varies with the type of program,

but one common ingredient for success appears to be acquiring at least partial funding

from a variety of sponsors including industry. Industry is acutely aware of both the

28
growing consumer support for source reduction and recycling and the increasing demand

for products and packaging which help to mitigate the MSW management crisis. In

addition, industry knows that the costs of traditional waste disposal (landfilling and

incineration), which are paid for by their customers, are rising rapidly, and that characteristics such as lower toxicity, recycled content, and recyclability are attractive to

greater segments of their household consumer market (Dolmark, 1988; and API, undated).

Certain firms can use consumer awareness programs to capitalize on the growing consumer demand for products and packaging that promote source reduction and

recyclability in various ways. To reinforce continual sponsorship, industry sponsors of

consumer awareness programs receive goodwill advertisements. The Canadian

“Environmentally-Friendly Goods Campaign” program is tapping the desire of industries

to use consumers’ environmental concerns as a marketing tool by charging industries both

to evaluate their products and to license the use of the “environmentally friendly” logo

(McMillan, 1988).

Consumer education programs can also enlist the funding support of companies

that already produce recycled products and packaging, as well as those that want to

begin producing them (for marketing or other reasons) but are not certain that demand

for recycled products and packaging is sufficient to support a change in production. In

the case of the latter group of companies, a relatively small investment (and

involvement) in consumer awareness programs might allow them to maintain or expand

their market share or move into new areas of sales. Any given company’s strategy will

depend upon their competitors’ and their customers’ responses.

One example of a company actively engaged in consumer education programs

and recycling programs is FSC Paper, a producer of 100 percent recycled newsprint. FSC

has implemented its Total Recycling program in several Midwestern cities. Under the

program, FSC works with a community to develop a comprehensive newspaper recycling

program, and agrees to buy all the waste newspaper the community collects in exchange

for purchase of the recycled newspaper by the local newspaper publisher. In any community in which FSC operates a program, the company staff spends a large amount of

time working with newspaper publishers, community groups and environmentalists to

design education programs and newsprint collection programs. The company’s education

program focuses on the benefits of using recycled newsprint and encourages citizens to

petition their local newspaper publisher to use recycled newsprint. The Total Recycling

program operates effectively on the local level, which suggests that some future

recycling initiatives may not necessarily need government funding (FSC, 1988; and

Watson, 1988a).

29
Another example of corporate involvement in consumer awareness programs is

the Brown Paper Company’s promotion of the American Paper Institute’s “Gray is

Beautiful” campaign on the local level. The company supported a contest run by the

local Woman’s Club to promote awareness and selective purchase of recycled paperboard

packaging (Hoosier Purchasor, 1970s).

Feedback - Programs should be designed with mechanisms to frequently monitor

their success or failure in changing consumer behavior. Equally important, programs

should monitor public behavior and attitudes toward the program itself (RickmersSkislak, 1988; Geller, 1986; and Geller and Lehman, 1986). Surveys conducted before and

after several educational campaigns took place provided program organizers with a clear

indication of whether consumer attitudes and behaviors changed (SDEC, 1982; and

PAMRRP, 1970s). Program directors will want to know, for example, if consumers

respond favorably to informational pamphlets put in their grocery bags, or feel that the

large posters hanging in the store aisles are excessive or heavy-handed. This feedback

will enable organizations to modify the program as appropriate to fit their audience. In

addition, feedback should be provided to the consumer to indicate the effectiveness and

progress of the education program. This transfer of information helps to make the

consumer’s efforts personal, tangible, and “visible,” and enhances the credibility and

effectiveness of the program, as well as the value of individual actions (Geller, 1986;

Stern, 1984; and Conn, 1980).

Adaptability - Education programs should have a unified theme and should not

be designed along rigid, preconceived lines, but should be flexible enough to respond to

feedback and open to modifying their techniques (Rickmers-Skislak, 1988). For example,

program designers who decide ahead of time to spend 80 percent of their promotionalmaterials budget on large, in-store posters will regret that decision later on if they

discover that consumers resent the posters’ presence or otherwise do not respond to that

medium.

30
V. Understanding the Marketplace

Attempts to stimulate demand for products and packaging that promote source

reduction and recyclability do not take place in a vacuum; there is dynamic interplay

between the marketplace variables (which for the most part industry decision-makers

determine), consumer concerns (which may be reflected in their purchase decisions and

through other channels), and government policies. This section presents a short overview

of market forces, looking at industry, consumer, and government roles in the marketplace. Each of the key players, i.e., industry, consumers, and government, can take

advantage of changes in the marketplace. It is important that program organizers

understand and work within the established structure of the marketplace. For companies

to maintain or gain market shares in the future, they may have to respond to consumer

and social concerns about the MSW management crisis. All levels of government must

coordinate their own actions to guide the relationship between consumers and industry

towards increasing the availability and purchase of products and packaging that promote

source reduction and recyclability.

A. Industry Roles

Company product and packaging marketing strategies are traditionally

described by the four P’s: product, place, promotion, and price. Geller (1988) adds two

more market influences to this list that are not under marketers’ control: politics and

public opinion. The four P’s represent marketing areas in which the management of a

company has control (Becker, 1981).

create a

Product: The characteristics of the product which is being marketed

(e.g., design, quality, safety, aesthetics, convenience and the

environmental consequences of production, use, and disposal).

Place: The distribution of a product, including where and how much of

a product will be made available.

Promotion: The advertising campaign or campaigns which the management chooses to use for selling a product.

Price: The cost of a product to consumers.

Industry decision-makers continually adjust these market variables in order to

. product which they feel will be competitive in the marketplace. A product

need not necessarily be competitive across all variables. For example, a higher-priced

31
product can compete successfully with lower-priced products if the quality of the

product is superior to the competition and/or the promotional campaign convinces

consumers that the quality of the higher-priced product is superior. Over the same time

period, more durable products need fewer repairs and less frequent replacement than do

less durable products. These products’ increased utility can often result in long-term

cost savings to consumers. Indeed, car manufacturers such as Volvo and household

appliance manufacturers such as Maytag have based promotional campaigns on the

quality and durability of their products.

Generally speaking, the quality of products containing recycled materials has

been vastly improved in the last twenty years. However, there has been relatively little

effort aimed at changing consumer misconceptions. The quality of recycled products

needs to be demonstrated, advertised, and used as a selling point rather than hidden and

considered detrimental (Vandenberg, 1988, 1987). For example, in the 1960’s, the rerefined oil industry was forced to label its products as containing recycled content. This

connoted a lower quality to many consumers and led, along with other factors, to a

decline in this industry (Elliot, 1987; and Brinkman, 1986).

As awareness of the MSW management crisis and other environmental consequences of purchase decisions continues to grow, it will be increasingly important for

industry decision-makers who are concerned with maintaining their companies’ market

position to develop products, packaging, and promotional campaigns which address these

issues (e.g., using cost-consumer materials, helping to develop standards for recycled

content, and marketing these features to consumers). There are already several

publications, or shopping guides, which rate individual products’ environmental

consequences and companies’ environmental records (CEP, 1988; and Dadd, 1988). This

suggests that in the future, in order to remain competitive, product marketers may have

to address consumer concerns over the MSW management crisis.

Societal concerns determine how consumers will react to a product or package

which industry makes available. Consumers can affect the types of products and

packages that are available and can determine the success or failure of a product if—

manufacturers and marketers believe that consumer concerns are strong and

widespread. Industry, in turn, uses market surveys to monitor and react to trends in

consumer concerns. For example, between the 1986 and 1988 Packaging magazine

surveys, the number of respondents who claimed they “often” or “sometimes” considered

the recyclability

(Erickson, 1988).

of packaging rose from 36.2 percent in 1986 to 48.4 percent in 1988

Becker (198 1) has specified eight issues that consumers take into

32
account when making purchase decisions: information, health and safety, repair and

servicing, pricing, pollution, market concentration, product quality, and consumer

representation before government. Becker suggests that there is an opportunity matrix

for business management which relates consumer issues to marketing decision variables.

In order to take advantage of this opportunity matrix, a company needs to identify

potential conflicts between consumer concerns and their products and packaging in order

to tailor their marketing strategy (product, price, promotion, and place) to reflect

consumer concerns. In support of the importance of these issues to consumers, Kinnear

and Taylor (1973) found that decisions concerning the purchase of laundry detergents

were related to the ecological concern of consumers. This suggests that consumers who

are concerned with the environment are willing to re-evaluate their purchase decisions in

order to account for a product’s or package’s environmental consequences if their

awareness is raised. A product or package that is known to have comparatively fewer

environmental impacts than its competitors may have an advantage among consumers

who are environmentally concerned.

B. Consumer Roles

Consumer groups may attempt to influence industry decision-makers to take

notice of consumer issues in several ways. Letter writing campaigns, such as those

encouraging Coca-Cola to discontinue using a combination plastic and metal can, or

encouraging Recycled Paper Products, Inc. to use recycled feedstock for all of their

greeting cards (or else not market virgin paper cards under their company name), not

only demonstrate how many consumers are concerned, but also generate good or bad

publicity for the targeted companies (Ferrand, 1988c). preferential consumer purchasing

on a large scale can impart economic gains to a selected company or product line. Alternatively, consumer boycotts, which can be combined with letter writing campaigns, can

inflict economic losses on corporations that do not heed consumer concerns. Recycled

packaging awareness campaigns, such as the Palo Alto and San Diego programs, generate

awareness of the MSW management crisis and encourage the purchase of products that

have fewer environmental impacts (Gallager, 1984; SDEC, 1981; and PAMRRP, 1970s).

Such promotions can provide a competitive advantage to companies that sell products

with fewer environmental consequences.

33
C. Government Roles

Governmental

can affect the types,

regulations, taxation, funding, and education/oversight policies

prices, and the promotion of products which industry makes

available to consumers. Government-imposed bans on packaging, such as a ban on the

use of styrofoam containers in Portland, Oregon restaurants can directly affect an

industry’s product marketing strategies, albeit attacking a very small percentage of the

MSW stream. Differentiated sales taxes/credits based on container recyclability have

been proposed in Maine, New Jersey, New York and other states. These taxes/credits

may affect prices and may create a competitive advantage for products and packaging

with recycled content or those that are recyclable (Environmental Action Foundation,

1988). However, there has been little experience with these types of taxes, and even less

consideration of the size of an effective tax and their placement. Regardless of how

credits or taxes are imposed (at the industry or consumer level), an extrinsic incentive or

disincentive should be combined with an awareness program in order to inform consumers

about which, how much, and why products are being credited or taxed. For example,

Geller et al. (1983) found that both tangible extrinsic rewards, such as monetary savings,

and informational feedback, were needed to motivate residential conservation of water.

Government activities that may improve the quality (actual and perceived) of

recycled products include the preferred purchasing of products which meet minimum

standards for recycled content and establishment of standards for, and definitions of,

recycled content. Because government purchases represent a large market

(approximately 20 percent of the gross national product -- Case, 1989), it is believed that

they can strengthen the industry and lead to greater availability of recycled products

(Keller, 1988). Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the EPA has

established guidelines for purchase of five categories of products: paper, lubricating oils,

tires, concrete and cement, and thermal insulation. Government purchases also

represent a quality endorsement of a product (Brinkman, 1986).

concerns about the quality of recycled materials might fade if

government requisition quality specifications.

Household consumer

such materials met

While some products and packages are marketed as high-quality durables, and

reusables, others are promoted for their disposability. Many consumers have been

convinced that disposable products, as well as certain types of packaging, are more

convenient (Erickson, 1988). To allow consumers to make informed tradeoffs between

convenience and other implications of product and package usage, awareness programs --

by government, industry, retailers and other groups -- could identify the environmental

34
I

costs of disposable products and promote the high-quality attributes (e.g., containing less

materials, longer lasting) of source-reduced products and packages and encourage their

use. In addition, these programs could highlight the quality of life improvements that

can be expected with lessened environmental impacts. That is, a counteracting

marketing campaign could identify and creatively illustrate the social costs associated

with environmental cleanup and pollution control due to disposable products for society

as a whole. For example, governments, retailers, or others could educate consumers of

the cost savings and environmental benefits of using durable eating utensils or buying

certain goods with source reduction (e.g., purchased in bulk or minimum packaging) or

recyclability (e.g., made with recycled or recyclable materials) attributes in order to

minimize materials or packaging used and disposed, though convenience would be

lessened.

One major problem faced by consumers is the lack of standardized definitions

and labeling for recycled content or recyclability. Exhibit 6 presents a few of the

variety of symbols in use today connoting recycled, recyclable, and “environmentally

friendly” products and packaging. Many products and packaging that promote source

reduction and recyclability, such as products which use recycled paperboard in their

packaging, are not labeled as such (API, 1988). Other products and packaging that do not

promote source reduction and recyclability use company names or have worded labels

that imply that they do. For example, a greeting card company called Recycled Paper

Products markets under its company name some of its greeting cards that do not contain

recycled paper (ANJR, 1988).

Government, industry, consumers, academia, and other interested groups can

adopt and promote a simple standardized system of definitions and labels for products

and packaging with information about their environmental consequences.

Standardization of labeling can allow consumers to identify quickly and easily products

which have a minimum recycled content or are recyclable (Vandenberg, 1988).

Widespread use and publicity of a consistent definition is also important to the integrity

of a product label or endorsement. In order to further facilitate consumers’ search for

products and packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability, state and local

governments have already developed shopping guides listing supply houses or the

manufacturers of these products and packaging (MDNR, 1988; PRC, 1988; CFE, 1987;

City of Berkeley, 1980s; and SED, 1980s).

35
VI. Influencing the Relationship Between Consumers and Marketers

This section briefly reviews the problem of promoting recycled content in the

marketplace. This is followed by an examination of several new developments in the

marketplace that appear to be improving the climate for the advertising of products and

packaging promoting source reduction and those that have recycled content or are

recyclable. The “marketplace” refers both to individual consumers and to companies that

design, manufacture, package, distribute and advertise products. The discussion that

follows is intended especially for consideration by marketers, to evaluate how the

context for revealing recycled content is changing.

Recent marketplace developments that encourage the purchase of products and

packaging made from recycled materials or that are recyclable can be summarized by

four general trends. First, recent public opinion polls reveal a heightened public

awareness of, and desire to be involved in solving, environmental problems, particularly

as related to recycling and solid waste management (e.g., Erickson, 1988; Modern

Brewery Age, 1988; NSWMA, 1988a; and Robert Marston and Associates, 1988). Second,

“cause related marketing” is being used by product marketers to capitalize on consumers’

interest in supporting various socially and environmentally beneficial causes by linking

financial support of these causes to product purchases. Third, consumer activism is being

used by non-profit groups to promote environmental shopping and letter writing

campaigns. Fourth, selective use of labels can be used to designate products as having

fewer environmental impacts (i.e., less toxic, made from recycled material, recyclable,

etc.).

When evaluated together, these developments are cause for optimism. Each

lends strong encouragement to manufacturers and marketers to not only use ‘recycled

materials, but also to integrate recycling-related concepts into their publicity and advertising strategies. One leading package designer already has declared “recyclable” a new

market "hot button.” Despite a history of somewhat negative connotations, use of the

term “recycled” might become increasingly attractive.

An important component of a comprehensive solid waste management strategy

is to enhance the image of recycled content to attract new consumers of, and increase

demand for, material being reclaimed through collection programs. There are, however,

several major barriers to manufacturers’ voluntary use of recycled content. First is the

belief that recycled materials are inferior in performance and appearance to their virgin

36
material counterparts. Second, many manufacturers who do use recycled content

generally have been reluctant to publicize this to their customers, for fear that their

products may be perceived as inferior by consumers. From the point of view of the solid

waste planner, a most unfortunate consequence of the “hidden use of recycled content”

is the missed opportunity to enhance the reputation of recycled content.

In some cases, goods made with recycled materials may be more expensive than

goods made with virgin materials until large markets are developed. State and Federal

agencies are entertaining a wide range of innovative proposals, and, in some cases,

legislation to provide financial incentives and disincentives for the use of recycled

material and recyclable packaging. For recycled content, mandatory government

procurement quotas, modification of restrictive procurement specifications, and

preferential pricing are among the most widely adopted policies thus far. Financial

disincentives, such as packaging material surcharges and taxes, also are being considered

to offset the effect of some of the subsidies available to virgin materials industries, to

discourage use of nonrecyclable or excess packaging, and to reward purchase of products

and packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability. These actions will be

more effective if there is more voluntary marketplace acceptance of recycled content.

Instilling consumers with pride, similar to the intent of the “Buy American” campaign,

could be the most cost-effective way to assist the growth of markets for recycled

materials.

To overcome negative associations with the concept of recycled content,

industries need compelling evidence that items with recycled content can perform

equivalently to items without recycled content, and that consumers will respond

favorably to the designation “contains recycled material.” Establishing the case that

consumers might prefer recycled content, or at the least not be prejudiced against it, is

difficult, both for lack of good research data on the subject, and because negative

attitudes are so strongly held on the part of manufacturers and packagers. With few

exceptions, American manufacturers and marketers that use recycled content are not yet

convinced that it has become “safe” to promote the label “recycled” in association with

their products, or that the word “recyclable” offers a strong competitive advantage.

However, network television advertisements were shown nationally May/June 1989 by

Alcoa (1989) and the Glass Packaging Institute (1989) promoting the benefits from

recycling aluminum and glass containers, respectively.

37
Despite the success of its “Gray is Beautiful” campaign promoting recycled

paperboard packaging, Rodney Edwards (1987), President of the American Paper

Institute, believes that the packaging industry is well justified in its aversion to the use

of a label to identify “recycled” content. He reported that the market for items made

with reprocessed wool went “rapidly downhill” shortly after a 1935 law was passed

requiring it to be labeled as such. This not only gave virgin wool a market advantage, it

also established a stigma for the word recycled that endures and acts as a barrier to the

promotion of other recycled materials in today’s marketplace.

Edwards (1987) also cited an instance where a company discontinued use of the

recycled symbol because letters from consumers praised their product, but never mentioned the recycled symbol. This firm discontinued using the recycled symbol rather than

take the risk that if it were not considered a positive attribute, there might be a negative association.

Another industry representative confided that his company routinely tests the

recycled paper packaging it uses, as a precaution against the occurrence of PCBs (banned

in the 1970s from multi-copy paper) in the material. This is in reaction to the finding a

few years ago that a load of recycled paper had been contaminated at a mill by carbon

papers that were mixed into the recycled feedstocks. This company does not no w

advertise its recycled content but is organizing an internal committee to re-evaluate the

company’s stance on this.

Albin Voegele, President of Vermont Republic Industries, which manufactures

products from recycled plastic, has a pessimistic view of the feasibility of promoting

recycled content:

. . . given the symbolism inherent in language, the use of the word

“virgin” should not be used in association with the concept of

recycling. The word “recycled”, indicating the reuseableness of a

material in contradistinction to “virgin” indicating that the material is

being used for the first time, puts the concept of “recycling” in an

uphill, and potentially losing, battle to (re)gain a connotative and

“affective” response of positiveness. We have to move from the

connotation of using soiled and stained materials towards a

reincarnate (i.e., designed) use of materials for a series of sequential

products.” (Voegele, 1989)

Whatever drawbacks are associated with using products and packaging that promote

source reduction and recyclability, there are several ways to offset the negative

associations consumers may have with non-virgin materials. Furthermore, marketing

experts are now touting environmentally conscientious marketing as a way to profit from

38
growing consumer concerns about environmental degradation. The remaining subsections

deal with four aspects of the marketplace (i.e., public sensitivity to environmental issues,

cause-related marketing, environmental shopping and letter-writing campaigns, and

labeling issues) that influence the success of programs designed to increase consumer

demand for products and packaging that result in reduced environmental impacts.

A. Public Sensitivity to Environmental Issues

The problems encountered with promotion of recycled content in the past,

should be viewed in their historical context, juxtaposed against social values about consumption. When disposable containers were first introduced, one advertisement portrayed the tossing of a convenient, throw-away bottle, out of a car window, and into a

lake, as a desirable action. This advertisement would not be looked upon favorably in

today’s pollution conscious society.

Because social attitudes and values related to consumption and environmental

degradation have changed, marketplace conditions are now more favorable for promoting

recycled content. Several recent public opinion polls have established that the public is

aware of, and greatly concerned about, solid waste management and threats to the

environment from improper management (e.g., National So1id Wastes Management

Association, 1988a; and Robert Marston Associates,

found that while only 20 percent of Americans identify

only 31 percent say they are Democrats, 39

environmentalists (Research Alert, 1988).

1988). For example, a 1988 survey

themselves as Republicans, and

percent describe themselves as

One example of increasing social concern about the environment is the January

1989 issue of Time magazine which named the Earth as Planet of the Year in lieu of the

usual Man or Woman of the Year. The cover photo depicted an earth globe wrapped in

plastic and bound in knotted rope, as the editorial said, to emphasize “earth’s vulnerability to man’s reckless ways.” Solid waste was described as one of the four top threats

to the environment. In terms of per capita waste generation rates for cities around the

world, New York City topped the ranking at 4 pounds per capita per day, the next highest

being 3 pounds per capita in Tokyo, with many other cities elsewhere in the world

showing as little as 1 to 2 pounds per capita (Miller, 1989).

In a similar vein, the December 1988 National Geographic also featured articles

on world environmental crises. Its cover photo was a holographic image of an exploding

planet with the caption: “Can man save this fragile earth?”

portraits of the daily lives of five families to illustrate

39

One article then presented

differences in the average
standard of living in each of their respective countries. The effect was to convey the

magnitude of difference that exists between the standard of living for Americans and the

rest of the world:

The birth of a baby in the United States imposes more than a hundred

times the stress on the world’s resources and environment as a birth

in, say, Bangladesh. Babies from Bangladesh do not grow up to own

automobiles and air conditioners or to eat grain fed beef . . . Central

American forests are destroyed in part for pastureland to make pet

food and convenience food in the United States slightly cheaper; in

Papua New Guinea, forests are destroyed to supply cardboard packaging for Japanese electronic parts (Ehrlich and Ehrlich, 1988).

Certain industry leaders have recognized this social trend and have declared

that environmental and solid waste management concerns hold promising opportunities

for marketers. The journal, American Demographics, routinely tracks all kinds of polls

and surveys for its readers, and offers advice on new market trends. In its February 1989

issue, editor Cheryl Russel exhorted marketers to take advantage of consumer interest in

the environment:

. . . nearly half of Americans believe the environment around them is

getting worse -- a proportion that is up 14 percentage points in just

one year, according to a survey by Cambridge Reports Trends & Forecasts of Cambridge, Massachusetts,

Americans are in a fix. Every day they eat 14 million hamburgers (rain forests are being cleared to make way for grazing beef

cattle), throw away half a million razors (not to mention 5 million

diapers), and buy 25,000 air conditioned cars (each of which dumps

five tons of carbon dioxide a year into the atmosphere). Americans

want to do right by the environment, but almost everyone does it

wrong. This fix is a hot button for marketers.

Thirty-nine percent of Americans strongly identify themselves as environmentalists, according to a Gallup survey for the

Times Mirror. Environmentalists are themselves a bigger market than

some of the hottest markets of the 1980s -- such as Hispanics (8 percent of the population), married couples with children (20 percent), or

even the baby boom (31 percent).

Forty-seven percent of all consumers . . . are “much” or

“somewhat” more inclined to go to a store or restaurant that is committed to reducing its use of plastic containers and utensils (Russel,

1989).

Ahern & Heussner Advertising in New York City (which names Conde Nast

[publisher of Glamour, GQ, and other magazines], British Airways, and Chemical Bank

among its clients) recently conducted a research project that involved interviewing

experts about solid waste and recycling issues. Ahern & Heussner explain that their

40
focus on environmental issues stems from a “personal and intuitive belief in the

importance of these issues to the average consumer.” They used results of these

interviews and information from published literature, to create a brief primer and

proposal for prospective clients. As a promotional device for their firm, they also are

developing a brochure which features their top ten predictions about consumer

preferences. Draft copy of these predictions reads as follows:

● Garbage will become big business. Packaging will become a dirty

word.

● With most landfills expected to be filled by 1995, recycling will

likely be mandatory in most municipalities.

• Consumers will make the nasty chore of sorting trash more

manageable with a host of new home appliances and recycling

containers like partitioned trash cans. Procter and Gamble and

other consumer goods marketers will have to figure out ways to

“unpackage “ their goods as trash weary consumers lean toward

products that avoid unnecessary overwrap (Ottman, 1989).

Although the pricing of trash disposal on a user fee basis is relatively new, it is

expected to become widespread, and will create disincentives to generating wastes, resulting in more households paying even closer attention to how they manage their

wastes. John Naisbitt, author of the best selling book, Megatrends, offers marketers this

advice in his February 16, 1989 “Trend Letter”:

In an age of spiraling municipal costs for trash disposal and increasingly scarce landfill sites, a pay-by-the-bag garbage system could

spread across the U.S. and in cities abroad. . . . By making households

individually accountable for the cost of disposing of their trash, communities would give a significant boost to recycling programs. Sales

of kitchen disposal units and compactors would escalate (Naisbitt,

1989).

The December 1988 issue of Metropolis, the Architecture and Design Magazine

of New York, featured a cover story titled: “Garbage of the Future.” The major point of

the story was to explain that package designers must begin to consider the solid waste

impacts of their designs, not only because of negative consumer perceptions about the

wastefulness of packaging, but also because leading experts in the field of marketing

have declared it a profitable way to attract consumer interest.

Stewart Mosberg, President of the Package Design Council, has recently

founded the Packaging Coalition for Solid Waste Management. The Coalition is intended

to persuade packaging designers that they have a problem that can be turned to their

41
advantage. In regard to looking at recyclability, Metropolis quotes Mosberg:

We’ve worked hard to establish credibility in the marketing mix. Now

we’re getting a bum rap: “You designed it, you get rid of it. You guys

design this stuff. Design something easy to get rid of.”

About the words “New! Recyclable!”, Mosberg says: “I believe it is going to be a market

position in the 1990s.” Richard Gerstman, a leading packaging design consultant is

quoted as saying:

In general, those of us involved in packaging have a tremendous opportunity, now at the threshold of the nineties, to be the good guys in the

tumultuous decade to come (Jacobs, 1988).

As consumers become educated about the environmental consequences of waste

disposal, they will look for ways to mitigate these impacts. The greatest contribution

individual consumers can make is to purchase products and packaging that minimize

adverse environmental consequences and promote source reduction and recyclability.

Furthermore, corporate America is also becoming more sensitive to environmental

issues. This growing public and corporate awareness is evident from a 1988 survey of

sixty-seven Fortune 500 companies and is expected to continue over the next few years

(Meeker & Associates, 1988).

B. Cause Related Marketing

Cause related marketing promotes social or environmental benefits of a product’s purchase along with traditional product characteristics such as price, quality, and

personal satisfaction. These are not products that have been manufactured expressly as

fund-raising mechanisms for the causes promoted; rather, they are mainstream consumer

products with social or environmental benefits which may have only recently been

promoted. The priority concern is that of seeking new customers, while the social or

environmental benefits generally are a secondary concern to the marketers (Becker,

1981).

Although the product or service is enhanced by association with a moral cause,

and is intended to present a strong inducement for the consumer to buy, the product or

service may also be bought by consumers who have no concern for the cause.

Nonetheless, product manufacturers may view these appeals as an additional means by

which they can favorably differentiate their products or services from the competition.

Marketers usually consider differentiation in itself to be a desirable attribute. It is likely

that as a few leading companies prove successful with this approach, more companies

42
will follow suit. A few examples illustrate the variety of products and services that have

successfully applied cause related marketing techniques.

● During May/June 1989, Alcoa (1989) and the Glass Packaging Institute (1989)

sponsored national television advertisements promoting the recyclability of aluminum

and glass containers, respectively, and the benefits of reducing the MSW management

crisis through their recycling.

● Working Assets VISA is a credit card service that donates 5 cents to groups

that work for peace, human rights and the environment, each time the credit card is used

(Working Assets).

● Polaroid will donate $5 to one of four causes as a reward for responding to a

brief marketing questionnaire that accompanies the purchase of a camera. These causes

are: Ronald McDonald House, American Heart Association, United Negro College Fund,

and Yosemite Association (Polaroid Consumer Center).

● The Social Investment Forum is a clearinghouse of information on special

investment funds that uses various social criteria as “screens” in qualifying corporations

for their stock portfolios. The Forum reports that in 1984, $40 billion was invested with

reference to these screens. By 1988, this rose to $450 billion. Initially, these programs

were related chiefly to divestitures in South African related businesses, but they now

also include environmental and other criteria (Davidson, 1989).

If the phenomenon of cause related marketing proves to increase sales

measurably, consumer demand could increase to the point where private consumption

routinely leverages cause related benefits. Recycling activities could be promoted as a

"cause related” benefit (e.g., see above discussion of efforts by Alcoa and Glass

Packaging Institute), if the financial consequences (or social costs) of such behavior could

be convincingly presented to consumers.

and Kaplan (1985-86), it was determined

satisfaction from conservation behavior.

C. Environmental Shopping Campaigns

In research by De Young (1985) and De Young

that a broad cross-section of Americans derive

Mark Silbergeld, an attorney for Consumers Union (which publishes Consumer

Reports, a periodical devoted to product comparisons), has pointed out that it is not

necessary for all of the buying public to shift its purchase habits at once. A substantial

segment of the buying public could have a significantly favorable impact on the

situation. Therefore, the task is to identify a segment of the market that can be

43
persuaded to support recycled content. He also remarked that it probably is not possible,

nor desirable, to provide recycled content alternatives for all the virgin materials used in

products and packaging now available, even if a segment of the consumer market could

absorb all supply.

In an interview conducted for this report, Mark Silbergeld was asked whether

Consumers Union might not incorporate environmental and solid waste impacts analysis

into some of its product testing and evaluation reports. He responded that a new product

or product characteristic must first become widely available “on the shelf” and offered

by a number of different companies, so that meaningful comparisons can be made among

brands. Comparisons of general types of packaging would not fall within their normal

evaluation procedures unless there were environmentally preferable alternatives among

the competing brands. In the context of product comparison reporting, Consumer

Reports would not usually comment on desirable innovations that have not reached the

market (Silbergeld, 1989).

As is the case with cause related marketing, environmental shopping campaigns

are not likely to attract 100 percent participant ion, yet they can have a positive effect on

a significantly influential segment of the consumer market. The Council on Economic

Priorities (CEP), is a non-profit public interest research organization that recently

published Rating America’s Corporate Conscience. The book’s subtitle describes its

purpose: “A Provocative Guide to the Companies Behind the Products You Buy Every

Day” (Lydenberg, Marlin, Strub, and CEP, 1986). CEP rates 130 companies on their

performance in seven issue areas. In response to the success of the book, CEP next

published “Shopping For A Better World,” a 3 1/2” by 5 1/2” booklet, intended to be used as a

reference guide when shopping. It summarizes, in chart form, information on 1,300

products and 138 companies, including environmental concerns. Leslie Gottlieb (1989), a

staff member of CEP, explained the purpose of the guide: "[t]he Guide is in response to

consumer demand. We know we are on to something. People want to know the policies

behind the companies they buy from, beyond the advertising.” As a measure of their

popularity, the first three printings (of 300,000 copies in bulk and individual sales) sold

out in just six months. Additional shopping guides, such as “The Official Recycled

Products Guide” (Boulanger, undated), are available from a variety of other groups and

businesses.

In 1986, the Pennsylvania Resources Council (PRC) created an Environmental

Shopping program that now includes publication of a brochure and a booklet titled:

“Become an Environmental Shopper: Vote for the Environment” (PRC, 1988). The

44
booklet advises consumers to look for packaging codes, and reusable and recyclable

packaging, to avoid throw-sways, and to write to manufacturers to encourage them to

shift to reusable and recyclable materials. The guide also advises groups on how to

organize Environmental Shopping campaigns in their communities. The Pennsylvania

Food Merchants Associations cooperating with this work. PRC also intends to develop a

“good environmental housekeeping seal of approval” that they would invite qualified

manufacturers to display on their products. PRC also has plans to develop a video

(Becker, 1988).

Many consumers have become environmental shoppers and buy products with a

preference for reusable, recyclable, or compostable packages, or bulk purchases (e.g.,

Esco, 1988). Reusable shopping bags are also being offered as an alternative to paper and

plastic bags.

alternative to

is offering a

environmental

Various groups are currently promoting reusable shopping bags as an

paper and plastic bags. For example, the Coalition for Recyclable Waste

cooperative marketing program to individuals and other recycling and

groups who want to sell canvas shopping bags to displace paper and

plastic. The PRC also has plans

D. Letter-Writing Campaigns

to market a cotton mesh shopping bag.

Consumer activism in the 1960s and 1970s focused chiefly upon truth in advertising, proper product labeling, and the identification of negative effects of products on

individual safety and health. This led to the passage of many laws, such as the Consumer

Product Safety Act, regulating production of products and requiring testing, disclosure,

and labeling of health effects. In addition to traditional consumer concerns, the

consumer movement of the 1980s reflects societal concerns about the effects of products

on the environment.

Although it is true that there is strength in presentations and appeals by organized groups, the potential impact of individual interactions with industry and government

agencies is underestimated by the average consumer. Letter writing campaigns have

proven particularly effective in influencing both government and industry consideration

of the environmental impacts of solid waste by encouraging or discouraging certain

policies or behaviors (Ferrand, 1988a).

John Goodman is a principal of the Technical Assistance Research Programs

Institute, a consulting firm that advises major corporations on customer relations.

Goodman (1989) advises that there are three major factors which, when occurring

together, will virtually guarantee the personal attention of the chief executive officer of

45
a corporation. First, environmentally-related complaints are registered not just by avid

environmentalists, but by a cross-section of their customers who have purchased their

products over a period of time. Second, complaints are evaluated as part of a persistent

trend as opposed to a transient reaction. The third factor that affects whether a

company respond to letter writing campaigns is whether the number of complaints from

unaffiliated consumers reaches 100. Though there is no data to support this last point,

Goodman is confident, based on his own experience, that this usually holds true whether

the product is an expensive car or a bottle of shampoo. These factors indicate that an

effective means of influencing the relationship between consumers and marketers is to

provide good educational materials to a large audience, to encourage individuals to

respond in their own words, and to sustain the program over a long period of time.

This approach has been successfully demonstrated by the Coalition for Recyclable Waste. Under the coalition’s leadership, hundreds of consumers, including

recyclers, environmentalists, students, state and local government officials, and

recycling industry representatives contacted Coca-Cola to protest the test marketing of

a can made of a polyethylene terephthalate body, polyvinyl chloride label, and aluminum

top. Environmentalists, recyclers, local municipal and state, government officials,

aluminum processors, and incinerator engineers protested the use of this plasticaluminum can because it was considered a poor replacement for aluminum cans. The

container was difficult to economically separate for recycling and posed contamination

problems for both aluminum recycling and MSW incineration. It also bore the label,

“recyclable”, even though opportunities to recycle were limited to the use of a half dozen

reverse vending machines. To its credit, Coca-Cola terminated its test marketing with

the announcement that it would not pursue this package until the “recyclability issues

can be resolved.” An outgrowth of this campaign, the first for the Coalition for

Recyclable Waste, is a network of hundreds of opinion and policy leaders who are

interested in using letter writing campaigns again to affect a variety of other issues

related to product and packaging design and recyclability (Coalition for Recyclable

Waste, 1989).

As a related example, consumer interest in healthier diets has encouraged

markets to provide and promote food products which appeal to this increasing segment of

the population. Similar results can occur if consumers state and follow-through on their

desire for products and packaging promoting source reduction and recyclability (Hurst

and Relis, 1988).

46
E. Labeling

This section briefly discusses a variety of labeling schemes that could be used,

or which are already in use, to support recycling and other solid waste management

objectives. Standardized labels, codes, or symbols can be used to accomplish any of a

variety of goals: to educate and encourage consumers to buy products and packaging

that promote source reduction and recyclability; to identify recycled or recyclable

materials used in products and packaging, thereby improving recovery and reuse of postconsumer materials; to create an incentive for industries to earn positive recognition for

their products and packaging; and to indirectly stimulate manufacturers to change their

production or packaging practices.

In conjunction with local and state environmental and waste management

officials, and its own members, the National Paint and Coatings Association (NPCA)

developed a disposal labeling statement for its consumer paint products. NPCA’S efforts

were undertaken in response to local and state waste management officials concerns and

expected state labeling initiatives.

For solvent-based paint products, the label reads:

“For disposal guidance of unused amount contact a household

hazardous waste program, or your local or state government

environmental control agency.”

For latex and water-based paints, the label reads:

“For disposal guidance of unused amount contact your household

refuse collection service, or your local or state government

environmental control agency.”

Use of these labels will be phased in over time

1989).

(Household Hazardous Waste Management,

Another approach that could be used to achieve these goals would be to label

magazines according to the type of binding glue used and inform household recyclers

about their differences in recyclability. Most magazines today use hot melt glues for

bindings and mailing labels that are not typically water-soluble. It is expensive and

difficult to remove this type of wastepaper in the recycling process. Water soluble

alternatives do exist that would be compatible with recycling, but to date there appears

to be no mechanism to persuade companies to favor its use. Yet if labeling of such

products were done, it could improve the recyclability of wastepaper.

47
Watson (1988 b) explains that there is only one newsprint de-inking mill in North

America, Quebec and Ontario Paper Co. Ltd., that is using significant quantities of

magazine wastepaper. Its mix is 45 percent virgin wood pulp and 55 percent recycled

paper. Of the recycled portion, 65 percent is old newspaper and 35 percent is magazine

wastepaper. Increased use of magazine stock could actually improve the strength and

brightness of newsprint.

If publishers that do use water-soluble glues could prominently display an

approved logo to that effect, then households (and wastepaper collectors and processors)

could perhaps be taught that it is okay to add these magazines to their to-be-recycled

paper mix. Such labeling would also be helpful in building visibility for the idea of

recycle-friendly products, and could reward magazine publishers with favorable publicity.

A labeling scheme for plastic containers being developed by the Society of the

Plastics Industry (SPI) appears rather straightforward, but has generated some

controversy. Because a number of businesses (and states) are preparing to adopt this

system, there is an urgent need to develop a broad-based national consensus on the

definition of “recyclable.” Exhibit 6-C shows one set of symbols proposed by the plastics

industry to identify the type of resin used in products and packaging in order to enhance

their recyclability. If states vary in their adoption of standards and regulations for

describing products as recyclable, businesses could incur considerable additional expense

to accommodate differences among states.

The basic elements of the SPI voluntary coding system have met virtually unanimous support: each of seven different plastic resin types is to be designated by a number

imprinted on the bottom of the containers. The primary aim is to assist recycling

processors, not consumers, to make proper separation of resin types as may be

appropriate to their recycling operations. A few companies already have begun to

modify their production processes to accommodate this scheme.

However, SPI has proposed that these numerical codes be enclosed by a

three-arrow triangular symbol. This has met with opposition from ten states represented

by members of the Council of State Governments’ Eastern Regional Conference

Northeast Recycling Council (NERC): Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts,

New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. In

most of these states, the average consumer does not have a means to conveniently

48
Exhibit 6

Examples of Recycling Symbols

Examples of symbols designed t o

facilitate ‘Environmental shopping ”

and recycling . Exhibit A shows a

variety of recycling symbols from

different sources (Mikitka et al. ,

1984) . Exhibit B shows Canada’s

"Environmentally Friendly Goods ”

symbol (McMillan, 1988) . Exhibit C

shows the Society of the Plasti c

Industry’s container coding system.

A

Recycle

Recycled

Recyclable

100% Recycled

Paper

Made from 100%

Recycled Fibres

Made Primarily from

Recycled Fibres

Recycled

Paper

Recycled

Fibres

Symbols reprinted by permission of McGraw-Hill (A), National Associalion of Recycling Industries (B and C), Container Corporation of America

(D), Aluminum Association (F), Aluminum Company of America (G),

Reynolds Aluminum (H), Glass Packaging Institute(l), and the advertising firm of Cunningham, Black and Farley (J).Origin of "E“ is unknown.

B

c

(PET)

49
recycle plastic containers. NERC endorsed the

codes, but unanimously adopted a formal resolution

● . . use of a three arrow, or other similar,

adoption of the seven identification

which declares, in part:

recycling symbol on plastics

for which a viable recycling system has not been demonstrated is

likely to subvert such symbols’ generally understood meaning, and is

likely to be detrimental to recycling programs.

. . . whereas, (NERC) supports uniformity in plastic material identification codes, NERC opposes the use of a recycling symbol in conjunction with plastic material identification codes (NERC, 1989).

SPI maintains that use of the symbol is necessary to maintain visibility and

avoid confusion by separating the code from other markings on the containers. SPI’S

members are also engaged in major research efforts to improve the recyclability of

plastics. SPI members are also pursuing publicity campaigns to change the public’s

perception of plastics as non-recyclable (Erickson, 1988).

New Jersey’s mandatory recycling act, passed in 1987, has, in effect, already

imposed a performance criterion that would limit the use of words or symbols designating

items as recyclable. Other states are considering the adoption of similar language. An

excerpt of this statute reads:

No plastic or hi-metal beverage container shall be identified as a

recyclable container unless the department determines that a convenient and economically feasible recycling system for that specific container is available (P.L. 1987, c. 102, section 10)

NERC'S resolution against the SPI’S proposed symbol is not the first time that it

has taken action on a problem of definitions. In June 1988, the same ten states and the

City of Philadelphia voted unanimously to adopt standard definitions for describing “postconsumer material, “ “recovered mater ial,” and “recovered

1989). In addition, NERC has also recommended definitions

each major type of recycled paper product.

paper material” (NER C,

for recycled content for

postconsumer material means only those products generated by a

business or consumer which have served their intended end uses, and

which have been separated or diverted from solid waste for the

purposes of collection, recycling disposition.

recovered material means material and byproducts which have been

recovered or diverted from solid waste, but such term does not include

those materials and byproducts generated from, and commonly reused

within, an original manufacturing process (such as mill broke or home

scrap).

50
recovered paper material means paper waste generated after the

completion of a papermaking process, such as postconsumer material,

envelope cuttings, bindery trimmings, printing waste, cutting and

other converting waste, butt rolls and mill wrappers, obsolete

inventories, and rejected unused stock. Recovered paper material,

however, shall not include fibrous waste generated during the

manufacturing process such as fibers recovered from waste water or

trimmings of paper machine rolls (mill broke), or fibrous byproducts of

harvesting, extractive or woodcutting processes, or forest residue such

as bark (NERC, 1988).

While this consensus does represent progress for some legislative purposes relative to procurement standards, there yet remains a problem of the generic use of the

term “recycled” in other settings. The Coalition for Recyclable Waste is currently conducting a letter writing campaign, encouraging consumers to protest the labeling

practices of the greeting card company, Recycled Paper Products, Inc. This company

uses display cases with its name, and also prints its company name, on the back of cards

that are of glossy, non-recycled stock. Although the first cards printed by this company

when it was first founded were on recycled stock, the company maintains that consumers

do not care whether the card stock really is made of recycled paper. As a consequence

of this campaign, the company is engaged in a search to identify a source that can supply

a glossy recycled card stock. At present, this is not produced by any American paper

mill.

Standardized labels that represent the sanctions of an official or expert body

promise a safe avenue for marketers to experiment with promoting recycled content.

However, there are exceptions, where a few companies are doing this on their own. One

such company, Overseas Marketing of Tinsdale, California, is willing to share advice on

how that company uses a recycled content label on its corrugated paper cartons. The

President, Irv Wieder, explains that the carton is stamped: “Made from tested recycled

materials,” for several reasons. First, this is to explain why the color of the carton differs from that which customers are accustomed to. Second, Wieder believes that the

word “tested” is a term that customers are very familiar with, and that it conveys reliability and trustworthiness. For overseas customers, in particular, he believes that the

word “tested” carries connotations of America’s best qualities of production, as in

“Tested by Underwriters’ Laboratory” (Wieder, 1989). However, the testing should be

based on agreed-upon procedures. American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM)

regularly meets to research and develop performance standards for a wide range of

materials.

51
The key to successful marketing of recycled content could be to de-emphasize

its associations with solid waste and to build, instead, stronger associations with the

more attractive concepts of ecology, sustainability, future resources, Mother Nature,

etc. This also underscores the importance of establishing a universal seal or symbol that

could be broadly applied to all kinds of products and packaging rather than simply declaring recycled content on a label. A graphic symbol or seal could also lend itself to more

forceful and attractive presentation in a national advertising and promotion campaign

aimed at consumers.

There is good precedent for this approach. Canada has just launched a program

to award the use of an “environmentally friendly products” logo to approved products and

packaging (Stoops, 1989; and McMillan, 1988). This program is based on a similar concept

in operation in West Germany (the Blue Angel program) since 1978. The winning design

in a national competition for the Canadian logo showing three intertwining doves in the

outline of a maple leaf represents the cooperating sectors of consumer, industry and

government (see Exhibit 6).

This theme of cooperating sectors is consistent with the way in which product

evaluations need to be made, to determine which products and packaging will be eligible

to use the logo. The review and selection process involves an independent association

equivalent to a U.S. Underwriters’ Laboratory, non-profit public interest consultants, and

government representatives. Similar concepts for the use of a symbol or seal are being

proposed in the U. S., as part of an environmental organization’s environmental shopping

campaign, in educational brochures by state and city governments, and as part of

proposed legislation for RCRA reauthorization (The Waste Minimization and Control Act

of 1988).

52
VII. Conclusions

A. Major Findings

Many of the projects reviewed for this study started their consumer education

and promotion campaigns without the benefit of guidance and experience from prior

projects. This study found several consistent themes in the projects and research

reviewed which should be useful in designing similar programs and planning future

research. The findings are suggested from examining strategies that were effective in

stimulating household demand for products and packaging that promote source reduction

and recyclability. The effectiveness of consumer education programs can be enhanced if

the principles listed below are followed:

●

✎

●

●

●

Attention-getting techniques for consumer education programs

must compete with other advertising. To be successful, these

educational programs must be of high quality and as sophisticated

as other advertising in targeting appropriate messages to various

audiences.

Long-term changes in consumer behavior depend upon changing

basic consumer attitudes and motives. Consumer education

programs should not be limited to short-term, non-durable

incentives but should be combined with self-sustaining motivation

(having long-term durability).

Household consumer education programs should make consumers

feel that their participation will be a positive contribution to the

solution of an important problem.

In order to increase product choices available to consumers,

upstream decision-makers, such as manufacturers and product

and packaging designers, must be educated about the desirability

of source reduction and product/packaging recyclability as well as

the economic and image enhancement.

Definitions, labeling, and other important messages must be standardized, simple, and well publicized, so that they are readily

recognized and understood by consumers.

In addition, there are several important factors that affected the effectiveness

of the store- and community-based education programs reviewed for this study. These

include:

● Strategies designed to change purchase behaviors and attitudes

are more likely to gain consumer acceptance and achieve lasting

changes in buying habits.

53
● The quality and content of consumer education and promotional

activities affect how the message of the program is received by

the target audience(s). The promotion must grab the attention of

consumers and leave them with a sense of wanting to help solve

the MSW management crisis.

● Involvement of different interest groups helps to establish credibility and support from groups as diverse as concerned consumers,

grocery store management, the department of public works, and

industry. Involving several groups into the program pools

together resources (e.g., labor, funding, access to advertising,

endorsement) and expands support to a wider audience.

● Cooperation of retailers is critical for store-based promotional

campaigns. Efforts to change purchase decisions are most effective when community-based education is complemented by pointof-purchase information and reminders in the store. Cooperative

retailers should be recruited prior to start-up. Promoting the

program to retailers should emphasize the benefits (e.g.,

enhancing store image, avoidance of disposal costs if linked with

new recycling activities, and outside sources of financing).

● Development of programs designed for the long term is essential

if consumer-based programs are to contribute to mitigating the

MSW management crisis. Only by permanently changing purchase

behaviors can we move towards closing the recycling loop by

stimulating demand for products made from recycled material

and reduce generation of MSW destined for disposal. Long-term

funding, effective feedback of audience responses, and

adaptability are three key elements for a program’s longevity and

success.

This study’s assessment of marketplace initiatives revealed that, while little has

been done to date, consumers, government, and industry can contribute to improving the

availability of, and demand for, products and packaging promoting source reduction and

recyclability.

● As consumers become increasingly aware of the range of environmental consequences of their purchase decisions (e.g., resource

depletion, exhausting waste disposal capacity, introduction of

potential hazards into the environment during production and

disposal, endangerment of wildlife, and loss of esthetics due to

litter), they will likely select products with fewer environmental

impacts (also depending on the Four P’s). Astute marketers can

take advantage of the popularization of environmentalism by

offering acceptable alternatives that satisfy this consumer

concern. Different levels of government and interest groups can

participate in educating consumers to help them make

environmentally beneficial product and package choices.

54
●

●

✎

Cause related marketing enhances a product’s or package’s image

by linking their purchase with a social cause. Frequently,

marketers are linking their products and packaging with

environmental causes, thereby increasing consumer awareness of

environmental problems and leveraging financial support for

environmental programs. Cause related marketing could also be

used to promote source reduction and recycling activities.

Environmental shopping and letter writing campaigns may be

effective in reducing the amount and toxicity of post-consumer

materials. Environmental shopping campaigns are being used in a

few states, localities, and national organizations to educate

consumers about the environmental consequences of their

purchase decisions and guide them in selecting products and

packaging with fewer environmental impacts. Typically, environmental shopping guides contain information about product toxicity, overpackaging, recyclability, and desirable substitutes and

alternatives. Letter writing campaigns have been used to focus

consumer and media attention on selected products and packaging

which a group views as desirable or undesirable. After one such

campaign in 1987, a plastic-aluminum can was withdrawn from

the market by two soft drink manufacturers.

Standardized labeling can be used to accomplish a variety of

goals: to educate and encourage consumers to buy products and

packaging with source-reduced or recycled content, to identify

source-reduced, recycled, or recyclable materials used in

consumer products and packaging, and to create incentives for

manufacturers to introduce and gain recognition for products and

packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability.

Canada has begun a program where products may be submitted

for testing and certification as “environmentally friendly.” It is

important that all affected parties (including consumers, industry,

retailers, government, and academia) be involved in the standardsetting process to ensure feasibility and support for these types of

programs.

B. Program and Policy Needs

What is the current picture? Although there was some federal funding of consumer education projects during the 1970s, much of the recent work has been carried out

at the local level either by environmental coalitions or municipal or state authorities. At

present, states, localities, environmental groups, and industry are developing consumer

education strategies to meet their concerns as the need arises. Twenty-four states have

initiated some type of “buy recycled” program (Andress, 1989). These programs are

aimed at state procurement guidelines and, in several cases, at household consumers as

well. Several states and coalitions are developing environmental shopping guides which

will provide listings of products and packages that are considered safer for the

55
environment and will, in some cases, provide information on product availability.

Michigan is facilitating meetings between manufacturers/packagers and consumer groups

so that each can hear the other’s concerns. In addition, several manufacturers are now

taking advantage of consumer concerns about the environment by marketing products as

“safe to the environment, " “containing recycled materials,” or “recyclable. ” Each of the

major players involved could benefit from clear policies concerning source reduction,

recycled content, and recyclability, and standardized definitions of terms related to

product content and attributes.

C. Activities for Industry, Federal, State, and Municipal Governments:

1.

2.

3.

Conduct research to generate information about performance,

appearance, and marketing advantages of products and packaging

that promote source reduction and recyclability. This research

could include confidential surveys of industry and actual

performance testing of products and packages

Examine procurement specifications of products and packages

that could be made from recycled content. Modifications may be

made to specifications, based on results of research regarding

performance. The American Society of Testing Materials has

convened a committee to consider whether modification of

performance specifications is needed to permit inclusion of

products and packages with recycled content.

Disseminate information about performance, appearance, and

marketing advantages of using products and packaging that

promote source reduction and recyclability. The appropriate

federal agencies could engage in a joint effort to promote a “Buy

American, Buy Recycled Campaign.” In doing so, it would be

most effective to use existing intermediaries to communicate

with businesses and industries: trade associations, trade journals,

and trade conferences. Data can be presented regarding the

character and dimensions of the MSW management crisis,

research about model initiatives, and updates on the kinds of

regulatory and legislative initiatives being proposed at every level

of government. This should be done by publishing information and

editorials, establishing an information clearinghouse, and by

presenting information at industry conferences.

The kinds of publications to be targeted may be characterized by

type of readership and circulation. In general, there are several

major arenas suited to this effort: publications for marketers,

which would include new product and packaging designers, advertising agencies and media consultants; academic journals whose

readers consult for, or whose publications are read by, marketers;

publications aimed at specific packaging industries; and the

mainstream business press.

56
Publications for market researchers, marketers, and academics

include:

Academy of Marketing Science

American Association of Advertising

American Marketing Association

Association for Consumer Research

Journal of Advertising

Journal of Advertising Research

Journal of Marketing

Journal of Marketing Research

Journal of Consumer Research

Marketing News

Industry trade association publications include, for example:

Beverage World

Fibre Market News

Packaging Magazine

Packaging News Packaging Digest

The State Reporter (Society of the Plastics Industry)

The mainstream publications cited as most important by several

market experts include:

Advertising Age

Ad Week

Barron’s

Forbes

Fortune

Likewise, each of the industry and academic groups offer

opportunities for direct interaction through trade association

meetings, seminars and conferences. Some of these forums for

presentations include, for example:

The Industrial Design Society of America

The Package Design Council

The Ryder conference for industry packager

Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals conferences

The Stanford Design Conference sponsored by Stanford

University

4. Offer awards for innovative use of recycled content and for

innovative design of source reduced and recyclable products and

packaging. A competitive awards program could be developed for

innovative, environmentally friendly products and packages and

practices. For example, the American Institute of Graphic

Artists sponsors an annual competition among product and

packaging designers. For example, the Department of Energy

sponsored an energy efficient design competition in 1980.

57
5. Support standardized labeling (e.g., logos, symbols, wording) for

products and packaging that promote source reduction and

recyclability. Marketers stress that consumers need a simple and

reliable means to identify these products and packaging. From

the marketers’ point of view, it may be less risky, at least in the

near term, to advertise a product or package as ’’environmentally

friendly” rather than use terminology that specifically refers to

recycled content. The use of the term “recyclable’’ will not be

valuable unless its use reflects a consensus agreement among

environmental, government, industry, retail, consumer, and

academic experts.

6. Foster data collection to track use and purchase of recycled

materials. The U.S. Department of Commerce conducts an

annual census of manufacturers. If each industry were also

required to quantify its use of recycled materials for the census,

this would provide a means to evaluate and publicize the success

of various kinds of initiatives to encourage use of recycled

materials. In addition, measuring the effectiveness of consumeroriented education programs will provide a basis for revising and

improving such programs.

7. Share information about procurement practices. Publicize

accomplishments in procurement of products and packaging that

are source reduced or contain recycled material. With

participation of state agencies, a national computerized on-line

database of procurement transactions could be maintained.

Product specifications, quantities, prices and markets could be

posted continuously. Reading of information could be open to all

levels of government, industry and the public.

An American business now is marketing “The Official Recycled

Products Guide, (RPG)” (Boulanger, 1989). More than 200

companies are already expected to have listings in the catalog.

The approval criteria for products to be listed are based on

definitions of recycled content found in the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act, or those recently agreed to by

the Northeast Regional Council of Governments (NERC). Listings

are free. Subscriptions include quarterly updates.

8. Use new marketing strategies to develop an aggressive, broadbased public education program to build awareness and acceptance of recycled content. Recognize that different techniques

are needed to reach different segments of the marketplace.

Identify and target particular segments of the audience, and

develop strategies accordingly.

Prepare a comprehensive, business-like plan, comparable to product marketing strategies. William D. Novelli (1986) wrote a

chapter “Nonbusiness or Social Marketing,” for the Handbook of

Modern Marketing offering advice on how to structure such an

effort. He advises that such a plan must avoid these four “L’s”

which generally characterize marketing for social causes: low

visibility, lamentable budgets, little research, lack of continuity.

58
Give the image of recycled content a facelift. In a book of

9.

10.

advice entitled What They Don’t Teach You in Harvard Business

School, Notes from a Street Smart Executive, the importance of

imaginative advertising is explained with an apt example. Author

Mark McCormack (1985) observes that sushi restaurants would

never have become popular if they were simply called “places to

eat cold dead raw fish.”

Promote buy-recycled programs at the point of sale. Surveys that

find consumers approving of recycled and recyclable products and

packaging may be biased by the social context of the interview;

there is a tendency to give socially acceptable responses to the

interviewer. However, it is at the point of purchase that the

decision is made, and at that point many other motivations (convenience, attractiveness of the product, price, etc.) may override

the expressed preferences for recycled material. For this reason,

promotional strategies must be linked to the act of purchasing

products and packaging. The use of an easily recognizable and

understood universal symbol or slogan is recommended by

marketing experts for this reason.

Support research. Further (economic, technical, and sociobehavioral) research is needed to demonstrate the societal

benefits of recycling. Such research should include improving

understanding of the complex marketplace inter-relationships

among consumers, industry, and government, in order to better

design strategies to promote source reduction and recyclability.

In addition, community-based pilot proiects offer the opportunity

to apply and refine research findings in real world settings.

D. Activities for Consumers:

1. Purchase products and packaging promoting source reduction

recyclability.

2. Conductor participate in Environmental Shopping campaigns.

30 Write manufacturers about preferences and dissatisfactions.

marketing experts interviewed for this report, both academic

and

All

and

professional, emphasized the reactive nature of the marketplace

and the sensitivity of manufacturers to communications from

consumers. However, communication at the point of purchase

may not be effective; concerns should be conveyed directly to the

maker of the product.

4. Review and comment on industry and government proposals for

labeling schemes.

59
REFERENCES

Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa), “Land of Plenty,” National network television

advertising campaign, May-June 1989.

American Paper Institute (API), “Gray is Beautiful” Newsletter, Vol. 1, Issues 3-5, no

date.

American Paper Institute (API), series of newspaper articles describing API’s “Recycled

Packaging Awareness Week,” late 1970’s-late 1980’s.

American Paper Institute (API), series of newspaper articles describing API’s “Shopping

for the Symbol of the ‘80s” campaign, late 1970’s-late 1980’s.

American Paper Institute (API), “12 Facts About Waste Paper Recycling,” 1988.

Andress, C., “Waste Not, Want Not: State and Federal Roles in Source Reduction and

Recyclability of Solid Waste,” Northeast-Midwest Institute, Washington, DC,

February 1989.

Arthur Young & Company, Factors Which Inhibit the Demand for Secondary Materials;

Phase I Marketing Report, California State Solid Waste Management Board,

November 2, 1981, pp. 24-25.

Association of New Jersey Recyclers (ANJR), “Recycled Paper Products? Well

Sometimes...,” Recyclenet Gazette, May 1988, p. 5.

Becker, B. W., “Using Consumer Issues for Competitive Advantage,” Business Horizons,

Vol. 24, No. 3, 1981, pp. 43-47.

Becker, R. H., “Packaging and Waste Reduction: The Need for Consumer Awareness,”

paper presented at the Conference on Solid Waste Management & Materials Policy,

February 13, 1987.

Bell, C.O. and M.M. Schwartz, OSCAR’s Options: A Supplementary Environmental

Education Curriculum, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management,

1989.

Bingham, T. H.; M. S. Marquis; P. C. Cooley; A. M. Cruze; E. W. Hauser; S. A. Johnston;

and P. F. Mulligan, An Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Costs of Regulatory and

Fiscal Policy Instruments on Product Packaging, U.S. EPA, 1974.

Boulanger, R., personal communication, 1989.

Boulanger, R., “The Official Recycled Products Guide,” P.O. Box 577, Ogdensburg, NY,

(undated).

Brandt, P. and M. Swanson, “The Environmental Consumer,” St. Louis County Health

Department; Virginia, MN, 1984.

Brinkman, D. W., “Used Oil: Resource or Pollutant,” Chemtech, November 1986,

pp. 682-684.

60
Browne, E. R., ''Teaching Kids to Teach Others, '' Waste Age, April 1988, pp. 154-156.

Case, C. P., “Effective Procurement Policies: the Key to Successful Recycling,” paper

presented at The Fifth BioCycle West Coast Conference, March l-3, 1989.

Chemical & Engineering News, “P&G to Test Market Recycled Plastic Bottle,” October

31, 1988, p. 6.

Chown, C. and C. Fridgen, “Alternatives to Hazardous Household Products: You Have a

Choice,” Michigan State University, Cooperative Extension Service, Bulletin

WM 01, December 1986.

Citizens Program for the Chesapeake Bay, Inc. (CPCB), “Baybook: A Guide to Reducing

Water Pollution At Home,” Baltimore, MD, 1988.

City of Berkeley, “Precycle. Do it Right from the Start !,” Berkeley, California, 1980s.

The Coalition for Recyclable Waste, Absecon, NJ, 1989.

Conn, W. D., “Consumer Product Life Extension in the Context of Materials and Energy

Flows,” in D.W. Pearce and I. Walter (eds.), Resource Conservation: Social and

Economic Dimensions of Recycling, University Press, New York, 1977, Ch. 7, pp.

127-143.

Conn, W. D., “Product Design and Municipal Solid Waste,” Journal of Resource

Management and Technology, Vol. 16, No. 2, July 1988a, pp. 100-103.

Conn, W. D., “Reducing Municipal Solid Waste Generation Lessons from the Seventies,”

Journal of Resource Management and Technology, Vol. 16, No. 1, April 1988b,

pp. 24-27.

Conn, W. D., “Workshop on Waste Reduction, January 10, 1980: Summary of

Proceedings,” Prepared for California State Solid Waste Board.

Connecticut Fund for the Environment (CFE), Don’t Throw This Away!, 1987.

Conservation News, “Red Owl: One Store’s Attempt at Recycling,” Vol. 41, No. 2,

January 5, 1976, p. 13.

Council on Economic Priorities (CEP), “Shopping For A Better World,” New York, NY,

1988.

Crosby, L. A. and J. R. Taylor, “Consumer Satisfaction with Michigan’s Container

Deposit Law--An Ecological Perspective,” Journal of Marketing, Winter 1982, pp.

47-60.

Cutler, H., “Is Mandated Recycling Possible?” Solid Waste & Power, August 1988,

pp. 54-57.

Dadd, D., Nontoxic and Natural, Jeremey B. Tarcher, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, 1984.

David A. Meeker & Associates, Inc., “Environmental Public Relations Survey,” October

1988.

61
Davidson, G., personal communication, Social Investment Forum, Boston, MA, January

1989.

De Young, R., “Clean Michigan Fund 1986-1987 Resource Recovery Education Grants: A

Comparison of Selected Programs,” University of Michigan, School of Natural

Resources, Spring 1987.

De Young, R., “Encouraging Environmentally Appropriate Behavior: The Role of Intrinsic

Motivation,” Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 15, No. 4, 1985-86, pp. 281-

292.

De Young, R., “Motivating People to Recycle: The Use of Incentives,” Resource

Recycling, May/June 1984, pp. 14-15, 42.

De Young, R., “Satisfaction from Conservation Activities in North America,”

Environmental Conservation, Vol. 12, No. 3, Autumn 1985, pp. 259-260.

De Young, R. and S. Kaplan, “Conservation Behavior and the Structure of Satisfactions,”

Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 15, No. 3, 1985-86, pp. 233-242.

Dyer, W., meeting announcement, American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM),

November 1988.

Edwards, R., “How to Survive Mandatory Recycling and Disposability,” presentation to

conference by SPHE, Dunes International Airport, November 4, 1987.

Ehrlich, P. R. and A. H. Ehrlich, “Population, Plenty, and Poverty,” National Geographic,

Vol. 174, No. 6, December 1988, p. 917.

Elliott, C., “Canada’s Oil Re-Refining Industry,” Resource Recycling, Vol. VI, No. 2,

May/June 1987, p. 26-27,42.

Enterprise for Education, Inc. (EFE), Hazardous Wastes From Homes, 1988.

Environmental Action Foundation (EAF), Implementing Waste Reduction at the

Supermarket, 1976.

Environmental Action Foundation (EAF), “SWAP: Solid Waste Alternatives Project,”

1980s.

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), Coming Full Circle: Successful Recycling Today,

1988.

Erickson, G., “Consumers Get Tough With Packaging,” Packaging, 1988.

Esco, H., personal communication, November 1988.

FSC, personal communication, 1988.

Ferrand, T. L., “Buy American, Buy Recycled,” April 29, 1988a, Working Paper.

Ferrand, T. L., “Mandatory Recycling: Rhetoric vs. Realism,” BioCycle, Vol. 29, No. 7,

August 1988b, pp. 54-56.

62
Ferrand, T. L., Personal Communication, 1988c.

Gallager, S. M., Shelf Labeling: Packaging Regulation For Oregon, Portland State

University, 1984.

Geller, E. S., “Applied Behavior Analysis and Social Marketing: An Integration for

Environmental Preservation,” Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 45, No. 1, 1989, pp. 17-

36.

Geller, E. S., “Evaluating Energy Conservation Programs: Is Verbal Report Enough?",

Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8, December 1981, pp. 331-335.

Geller, E. S., “Prevention of Environmental Problems,” in B.A. Edelstein and L. Michelson

(eds), Handbook of Prevention, Plenum Publishing Corporation, 1986, Ch. 16, pp.

.

Geller, E. S.; J. B. Erickson; and B. A. Buttram, “Attempts to Promote Residential Water

Conservation with Educational, Behavioral and Engineering Strategies,” Population

and Environment, Vol. 6, No. 2, Summer 1983, pp. 96-112.

Geller, E. S. and G. Lehman, ‘

rMotivating Desirable Waste Management Behavior:

Applications of Behavior Analysis,” Journal of Resource Management and

Technology, Vol. 15, Nos. 2 & 3, December 1986, pp. 58-68.

Glass Packaging Institute, “The jelly jar that wouldn’t die,” National network television

advertising campaign, June 1989.

Goodman, J., personal communication, Technical Assistance Research Programs, Washington, DC, January 1989.

Gottlieb, L., personal communication, Council on Economic Priorities, New York, NY,

January 1989.

Harrowsmith, “Plastics, My Boy, Plastics,” July/August 1988, p. 118.

The Hoosier Purchaser, “The Consumer Push Is On Toward

1970s, p. 5,

Household Hazardous Waste Management, “Paint Industry

p. 7.

Recycled Paperboard,” dated -

Takes the Lead,” Spring 1989,

The Household Products Disposal Council (HPDC), “Disposal: Do It Right. Managing

Household Wastes,” Washington, DC, no date.

Hurst, K, and P. Relis, The Next Frontier: Solid Waste Source Reduction, Policy Paper,

Gildea Resource Center, Community Environmental Council, 1988.

Jacobs, K., “The Design of Garbage,” Metropolis, The Architecture and Design of New

York, December 1988, pp. 54-59, 69-71.

Katzev, R. D. and A. U. Pardini, “The Comparative Effectiveness of Reward and

Commitment Approaches in Motivating Community Recycling,” Journal of

Environmental Systems, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1987-88, pp. 93-113.

63
Keller, R., “Building Markets for Recyclable: Government Procurement Facts,” Waste

Age, July 1988, p. 39-40, 48.

Kinnear, T. C. and 3. R. Taylor, “The Effect of Ecological Concern on Brand

Perceptions,” Journal of Marketing Research, May 1973, pp. 191-197.

Kinnear, T. C.; J. R. Taylor; and S. A. Ahmed, “Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who

Are They?” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 10, No.2, April 1974, pp. 20-24.

League of Women Voters Education Fund, Recycle? In Search of New Policies for

Resource Recovery, 1972.

League of Women Voters Education Fund, Reduce? Targets, Means and Impacts of Source

Reduction, 1975.

Larson, M.A. and K.L. Massetti-Miller, “Measuring Change After a Public Education

Campaign,” Public Relations Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1984, pp. 23-32.

Lyndenberg, S.; A. T. Marlin; S.0. Strub; and the Council on Economic Priorities (CEP),

Rating America’s Corporate Conscience: A Provocative Guide to the Companies

Behind the Products You Buy Every Day, September 1986.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management (MDEM), “Household

Hazardous Wastes,” no date.

Mattheis, A., “New Jersey Lays Down the Law,” Waste Age, June 1987, pp. 59-60.

McCarthy, E. 3., Basic Marketing: A Managerial Approach, Richard D. Irwin, Inc.,

Homewood, IL, fifth edition, 1975.

McCormack, M. H., What They Don’t Teach You in Harvard Business School, Notes from

a Street Smart Executive, Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, New York,

1985.

McMillan, T., Minister of the Environment for Canada, transcript of speech at the Press

Conference to Announce Details of the Environmentally-Friendly Goods Campaign,

Press Release, Toronto, Ontario, June 27, 1988.

Michaels, M., “Perceptive Responses to an

1988, pp. 38-40.

Michigan Department of Natural Resources

Worth Our Environment,” 1988.

The Michigan Recycling Coalition (MRC),

Study,” 1986, pp. B20-B21.

Anti-Landfill Public,” World Wastes, June

(MDNR), “BUY Recycled Products: They’re

“Michigan Buy Recycled Campaign Case

The Michigan Recycling Coalition (MRC), “Recycled/Recyclable Packaging Design

Contest: 1984-1985,”1984.

Mikitka, K. F., “Promoting Recycling: Supermarkets As Environmental Classrooms,”

Illinois Teacher, March/April, 1985, pp. 160-163.

64
Mikitka, K. F., “Recycling Symbol Research,” Resource Recycling, Vol. III, No. 5,

September-October 1987, pp. 32-34,47.

Mikitka, K., F.; A. Gross; and J. Zeitler, “Recycling Symbols,” Resource Recycling,

July/August 1984, pp. 16-18.

Miller, R., “From the Publisher,” Time, January 2, 1989, p. 3.

Modern Brewery Age, “Gallup poll shows Americans buy recyclable containers,” July 4,

1988, p. 4.

Naisbitt, 3., “Trend Letter,” The Global Network, Washington, DC, February 16, 1989,

p.2.

National Solid Wastes Management Association (NSWMA), “Public Attitudes Towards

Garbage Disposal,” Washington, D. C., 1988a.

National Solid Wastes Management Association (NSWMA), “Recvcling: Treasure In Our

New

New

Trash,” Washington, DC, 1988b.

.

Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Here Today, Here

Tomorrow . . . Revisited: A Teacher’s Guide to Solid Waste, Division of Solid Waste

Management, 1989.

York State Legislative Commission on Solid Waste Management (NYSLCSWM)

“Where Will The Garbage Go?,” Update, 1988.

,,

Northeast Recycling Council (NERC) of the Eastern Regional Conference of the Council

of State Governments, A Regional Approach to Buying Recycled Paper: By

Consensus Process to Achieve Common Goals, December 31, 1988.

Northeast Recycling Council (NERC) of the Eastern Regional Conference of the Council

of State Governments, collection of materials, New York, NY, 1989.

NovelIi, W., “Nonbusiness or Social Marketing,” Handbook of Modern Marketing, McGraw

Hill Book Company, New York, 1986, pp. 7-1 to 7-12.

O’Leary, P. and P. Walsh, “How to Make a Voluntary Program Work,” Waste Age, May

1988, pp. 98-104.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ), “Packaging,” 1980.

Ottman, J., personal communication, Ahern & Heussner, New York, NY, January 1989.

Palo Alto Material Resource Recovery Program (PAMRRP), “Report on Packaging

Labeling” and other materials, dated 1970s.

Pardini, A. U. and R. D. Katzev, “The Effect of Strength of Commitment on Newspaper

Recycling,” Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 13, No. 3, 1983-84, pp. 245-254,

Pennsylvania Resource Council (PRC), “Become an Environmental Shopper: Vote for the

Environment,” 1988.

65
Perrin, G., “In behalf of the fourth R: Recycling, '' The Boston Globe, September 2l, 1988,

p. 32.

Pete, P. A., “Composting in Paper Bags,” Waste Age, May 1988, pp. 73-75.

Polaroid Consumer Resource Center, 784 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA.

Porter, J. W., “Is the Nation Entangled in a Solid Waste Crisis?,” Waste Age, April 1988,

pp. 42-44.

The Procter & Gamble Company (P&G), materials compiled by E.A. Fox of P&G

concerning P&G activities, 1988.

Public Response Associates, Inc., A Report of a Survey Conducted for The California

State Solid Waste Management Board, California State Solid Waste Management

Board, July 1981.

“P.L. 1987, c. 102, section 10,” as amended December 11, 1987, The New Jersey Source

Separation and Recycling Act, N.J.S.A. 13: lE-99.18a, Trenton, NJ, March 1987.

Recycling Today, “Canadians Host Recyclers at Wide-Ranging Con ference,” June 1988,

- .

pp. 54-56.

Red Owl Stores, “Final Report, Bring ‘Em Back, Repack and Save,” September 1973.

Research Alert, Alert Publishing, Inc., Long Island City, NY, 1988, as reported

American Demographics, May 1988.

in

Resource Recycling, “Shoppers favor recycled paperboard,” Vol. V, No.2, March/April

1986, p. 42.

Rickmers-Skislak, T., Publicity and Education For Recycling: An Informative Guide,

TGRS, 1988.

Riggle, D., “Only Pay for What You Throw Away,” BioCycle, Vol. 30, No. 2, February

1989, pp. 39-41.

Robert Marston and Associates, “Americans Agree: Troubled Environment is an Election

Issue,” Press Release, October, 1988.

Russel, C., “Guilty, As Charged,” American Demographics, Vol. 11, No. 2, February 1989,

p. 2.

Salimando, J., “A Tale of TWO Californians,” Waste Age, July 1986, pp. 39-45.

San Diego Ecology Centre (SDEC), Environmental Shopping/Solid Waste Awareness

Project, Final Project Report and Executive Summary, California State Solid Waste

Management Board, December, 1982.

Seattle Engineering Department (SED), Solid Waste Utility; Washington Energy Extension

Service, “Cutting Down on Garbage,” Seattle, WA, 1980s.

Silbergeld, D., personal communication, Consumers Union, New York, NY, January 1989.

66
Sproule, K. A. and J. M. Cosulich, “Higher recovery rates: the answer’s in the bag,"

Resource Recycling, Vol. VII, No.6, November/December 1988, pp. 20-21,43-44.

Stern, P. C., “Saving Energy: The Human Dimension,” Technology Review, January 1984,

pp. 16-25,62.

Stone, B., Fountain Fresh Beverages, Salt Lake City, Utah, personal communication,

September 21, 1988.

Stoops, B., personal communication and correspondence, Environmentally Friendly

Products Program, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, February 1989.

Taylor, E. H., “Consumer Reaction to Solid Waste Problems and Regulations,” The

Procter & Gamble Company, a report on work in progress, July 15, 1988.

Thomas, L. M., “Statement before the Subcommittee on Transportation, Tourism, and

Hazardous Materials of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, U.S. House of

Representatives,” April 13, 1988.

Tracy, A. P. and S. Oskamp, “Relationships Among Ecologically Responsible Behaviors,”

Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 13, No.2, 1983-1984, pp. 115-126.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

U.S.

U.s.

Environmental Protection Agency, Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in The

United States, 1960-2000, (update 1988) March 1988a.

Environmental Protection Agency, Let’s Recycle! Lesson Plans for Grades K-6 and

7-12, SW-801, 1980.

Environmental Protection Agency, “program of International Paper Company and

Wells Dairy,” Reducing Waste at Its Source, May 1975.

Environmental Protection Agency, “Recycle,” EPA/530-SW-88-050, October 1988b.

Environmental Protection Agency, “Source Reduction Fact Sheet: Red Owl Stores

Program,” Reducing Waste at its Source, 1970s.

Environmental Protection Agency, The Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for

Action, February 1989.

Environmental Protection Agency, “Waste Not, Want Not,” Washington, D. C., 1976.

Environmental Protection Agency, “What You Can Do to Recycle More Paper,”

1979.

VandenBerg, N., “Buying Recycled Plastic Products - Barriers to Overcome,” speech

given at RecyclingPlas II--87, June 1987.

VandenBerg, N., “Twelve Steps Toward Environmentally Sound Buying Habits,” speech

given at Office of Technology Assessment Workshop: State and Local Government

Solid Waste Management, March 17-18, 1988.

Voegele, A., personal communication, Vermont Republic Industries, St. Albans, VT,

January 1989.

67
“The Waste Minimization and Control Act of 1988,” pp. S12179-S12180, September 9,

1988.

Warkov, S., “Attitudes Toward the Future: Their Impact on Present Decisions,” in W.D.

Conn (cd.), Energy and Material Resources: Attitudes, Values, and Public Policy,

Westview Press, Boulder, CO, .1983, Ch. 7, pp. 131-143.

Watson, T., “FSC Paper builds markets with innovative approach,” Resource Recycling,

Vol. VII, No. 1, March/April 1988a, pp. 30-31, 53.

Watson, T., “Magazine Wastepaper May Have Future as Newsprint,” Resource Recycling,

Vol. VII, No. 6, November/December 1988b, pp. 18-19, 42-43.

Wieder, I., personal communication, Overseas Marketing Exchange, Huntington Beach,

CA, January 1989.

Working Assets, P.O. Box 2384, Boston, MA.

Young, R. and M. Storey, Challenging the Disposable Society: An Overview of Waste

Minimization Strategies, Philadelphia Recycling Off ice, 1988.

68
A.1

A.2

A.3

A.4

A.5

Appendix A

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

CASE STUDIES

SURVEYS

RESEARCH REPORTS AND POLICY PAPERS

CURRENT EVENTS

EDUCATIONAL AND RESOURCE MATERIALS
A.1 CASE STUDIES

Conservation News, 1976

Environmental Action Foundation, 1976

Gallager, S. M., 1984

The Hoosier Purchaser. 1970s

Palo Alto Material Resource Recovery Program, 1970s

Pete, P. A., 1988

Red Owl Stores, 1973

The San Diego Ecology Centre, 1982

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1975

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1970s.

A-1
Conservation News, “Red Owl: One Store’s Attempt at Recycling,” Vol. 41, No. 2,

January 5, 1976, p. 13.

Environmental Action Foundation, Implementingg Waste Reduction at the Supermarket,

1976.

Red Owl Stores, “Bring ‘Em Back, Repack and Save,” Final Report, September, 1973.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Source Reduction Fact Sheet: Red Owl Stores

Program,: Reducing Waste at its Source, 1970s.

Twelve Red Owl Stores in Wisconsin began the “Bring ‘Em Back, Repack and

Save” program during the summer of 1973 to promote the sale of reusable containers and

the use of bulk dispensers. Red Owl was responding to customer concerns about the

environment in the midst of the energy crisis. For each container reused, the customer

received a cash refund (a sticker identifying a container as reusable was provided at the

time of original purchase) at checkout equivalent to the store’s cost of providing a new

container.

Reusable packages included in the promotion were:

. egg cartons (3 cent refund per container);

. milk and soda containers (4 cent refund per container);

● checkout paper bags (2 cent refund per bag); and

. reusable checkout plastic shopping bags (25 cents each to

purchase and 2 cent refund for each reuse).

The conclusions drawn from the program included:

.

the program was dependent on advertising (promotion was

incorporated into the stores’ regular advertising);

. program participants needed constant reminders through

advertising;

● it was important that the store showed enthusiasm;

. in-store promotion was essential;

● the greatest consumer appeal was cost savings, though they also

approved of the environmental goal to conserve natural resources;

● even non-participants liked the idea of the program;

A-2
● it cost the stores very little since consumer refunds were

equivalent to the stores’ cost of the packaging material and the

advertising cost was incorporated into the stores’ newspaper

advertising program; and

● many consumers were confused by the number of items included

in the program.

The Environmental Action Foundation (EAF) made several recommendations

based on an examination of the program. The selection criteria for reusable packaging

should include the following factors: ease of implementation (for stores and consumers);

security (to prevent increased theft of bulk items); sanitation; and product protection.

EAF felt that programs with a limited number of products to be reused would be the

most effective. They concluded that a simple program (e.g., one which reused only egg

cartons and grocery bags) would be more understandable to the consumer and would

receive higher levels of participation than a program which reused many containers.

Suggestions concerning other aspects of the reuse program included:

. products in the preferred package need to be available;

● store personnel should have a thorough understanding and be

enthusiastic about the program;

●

there needs to be a simple and effective method by which consumers can identify reusable packaging and containers;

● programs need to make use of free media publicity and in-store

promotion of packaging reuse; and

● it is important to incorporate self-evaluation into program design.

Gallager, S. M., Shelf Labeling: Packaging Regulation For Oregon, Portland State

University, 1984.

This case study examined “the proposed introduction of shelf labeling for packages in Oregon stores as a means of controlling waste production and recycling.” Shelf

labeling legislation would require that a label be placed on the grocery store shelf below

each item, indicating whether the item is reusable, made of recycled or recyclable

materials, or is difficult or impossible to recycle. The paper discusses three voluntary

shelf labeling programs.

A-3
1) The American Paper Institute’s “Gray Is Beautiful” campaign to promote the

use of recycled (gray) paperboard was adopted by the Women’s Clubs of America in the

1970s and continues today. It had received much media attention, but no formal review

as of 1985.

2) In the 1970s, a similar campaign, called the “Packaging Labeling Program,”

was tried in Palo Alto, California, with the support and assistance of the city government

(discussed in greater detail below -- PAMRRP, 1970s). It included a large public

awareness campaign both inside the selected stores and in the local media. The program

also included a city-sponsored effort to increase recycling. The program produced no

change in shoppers’ purchasing habits, and little increase in recycling as a whole. The

program’s coordinators responded by calling for more publicity and an expansion of the

program into all the city’s supermarkets (rather than just four CO-OP supermarkets).

3) In San Diego, California (1981), the California Waste Management Board

commissioned a shelf labeling program, which was implemented by the San Diego Ecology

Centre (discussed in greater detail below -- SDEC, 1981). The program took place in

area Safeway grocery stores, and included an education campaign with a “buy recycled”

message on buttons, posters, and grocery bags, labeling of recycled paperboard content

on egg cartons, and identification of products with recycled packaging on shelf labels.

Over two thousand consumers were surveyed before and after the program to determine

if it had increased their awareness of recycled packaging. Most survey participants said

that, not only did they not recognize the recycle symbol used in the program, but they

were also unaware that the program had even occurred. But survey participants did

indicate that they would prefer to buy products in recycled packages if they were of the

same quality and price as those packaged in virgin materials.

In discussing shelf labeling, the author compared it to other legislative mechanisms, such as taxing packaging manufacturers and users based on the amount of recycled

material they use, or restricting the kinds of packaging that can be used. This latter

technique, known as design restriction, was passed into law in Minnesota in 1973, and

required that all new packaging designs, as well as changes to existing designs, be

approved by a regulatory board. However, the review process was never initiated

because it was considered too complicated. The paper also discusses government

positions on shelf labeling, and opposition to too much labeling from retail grocery

stores, container manufacturers, consumer groups, and packagers.

A-4
The Hoosier Purchaser, “The Consumer Push Is On Toward Recycled Paperboard,” 1970s,

p. 5.

This article summarizes a program of the Chatham, New York Women’s Club

promoting the purchase of products packaged in recycled paperboard by holding a contest

to see who in the community could turn in the greatest number of individual product

proofs of purchase with the characteristic gray color or with the recycled logo. The

contest was aimed at housewives. Incentives and prizes were not mentioned in the

article. This was part of the American Paper Institute’s “gray is beautiful campaign.”

Club members also wrote letters to manufacturers whose products could potentially be

packaged in recycled material to urge them to change their packaging practices.

Participation, generated primarily by peer promotion, was reported to have been very

successful. It is interesting to note that the program was designed with the help of The

Brown Company, a nearby paper manufacturer. Both the General Federation of Women’s

Clubs and the National League of Women Voters promoted the campaign nationally.

Palo Alto Material Resource Recovery Program, “Report on Packaging Labeling” and

other materials, 1970s.

This is a collection of materials (report, press release, poster, sample questionnaire, and fact sheet) associated with the efforts of Palo Alto, California to reduce the

amount of MSW generated by households in the community. These materials were

designed to encourage grocery shoppers to become more aware of product packaging

materials. The six-page report summarizes the three-month Package Labeling Program

(PLP) undertaken in the 1970s by town officials, a chain of four CO-OF’ grocery stores,

and the Community Association for the Retarded. Color-coded stickers rating the

packaging material (refillable, recyclable , and costly to recycle) were affixed to all

shelves containing wine, beer, and soft drinks. A news conference and in-store posters

were used to further increase public awareness.

While the program measurably increased shopper awareness of recycling,

significant changes in purchases had not yet occurred, though it was thought premature

to make any firm conclusions. One significant finding was that if such a program is to be

maintained without demonstration project funding (this project was partially funded with

a small EPA grant) and expanded to other supermarkets within the community, the PLP

must demonstrate that the program costs passed on to participating supermarkets are not

substantial. The Palo Alto program depended upon volunteer labor and other resources

from the city. A series of in-store surveys showed that while shoppers became more

A-5
aware of recycled content and recyclability, there was no significant change in their

product selection. Consultants to the PLP felt that shopping behavior would not change

until shoppers’ attitudes about their contribution to the MSW problem were altered.

Suggestions for future work included holding forums with packaging manufacturers and

reducing program costs by incorporating the recyclability rating on products’ unit price

stickers rather than applying separate stickers to every shelf.

Peto, P. A., “Composting in Paper Bags,” Waste Age, May 1988, pp. 73-75.

This article examines an experiment conducted in Essex County, New Jersey,

during the fall of 1985. The experiment was designed to determine whether leaves could

be successfully composted in biodegradable paper bags and to judge household acceptance

of this alternative to plastic bags. The paper bag’s composting ability was found to

depend on the biological activity of the composting pile. The study determined that the

public was pleased with the quality of the paper bags, although they wanted a better

system for closing them. Participants considered the paper bag a desirable substitute

(because of its degradability) for regular plastic bags if prices were Comparable HO Wever, the unsubsidized price of paper bags was three times greater than the price of

plastic lawn bags. Obviously, this would lower demand for such a product.

The author estimates that if the cost savings associated with composting leaves

were considered (i.e., disposal costs avoided by the community), there would be a

community savings associated with using the paper bags. The additional cost of using

plastic bags is due to the manpower required to break open the bags and dump out leaves

before composting.

The San Diego Ecology Centre, Environmental Shopping/Solid Waste Awareness Project,

Final Project Report and Executive Summary, California State Solid Waste Management

Board, December- 1982.

The Environmental Shopping/Solid Waste Awareness Project (ES/SWAP), also

called the Recycled Packaging Awareness Campaign, was funded by the California Solid

Waste Management Board and implemented by the San Diego Ecology Centre. The project was active from July 1981 through December 1982 in nine San Diego Safeway

stores. It followed the Von’s grocery stores’ Environmental Shopping Campaign of 1981.

The project had three main objectives: increase shoppers’

symbol and products packaged in recycled materials; inform

awareness of the recycle

shoppers of the important

A-6
contribution that recycled packaging makes to resource conservation; and determine if

programs such as ES/SWAP increase consumer awareness of recycled packaging. The

program sought to use the supermarket as an “environmental classroom” by placing

markers and signs in supermarkets to identify products packaged in recycled materiaIs.

The program also made use of store worker badges which explained the recycle symbol,

and bags imprinted with an environmental shopping message. In addition, the program

took advantage of news coverage of the program on television and in newspapers.

A questionnaire interview was the primary method for evaluating the program.

Two thousand three hundred pre- and post-program interviews were conducted. No statistically significant difference was found between the responses of consumers before

(pre-program) and after the program took place (post-program), nor were the responses

of consumers at the store where the program took place (program store) different from

consumers at stores that did not participate in the program (control store). Ninety

percent of the respondents (before and after the program, in program and control stores)

felt that using recycled packaging would help to reduce solid waste disposed. Ninety percent of the respondents replied that all things being equal they would prefer to buy products packaged in recycled materials. Eighty percent strongly agreed that a recycle

symbol should appear on the outside of all containers made from recycled materials.

Only 31 percent strongly agreed that consumers should pay higher prices for products

that “pollute the environment.” Forty-one percent of the pre-program and 51 percent of

the post-program interviewees responded that they had seen the recycle symbol, but only

21 percent of pre-program and 28 percent of post-program respondents were able to

identify the symbol’s meaning correctly. Most respondents identified mass media as the

method of promotion in which they had seen the recycle symbol. Only 7 percent of the

post-program respondents had seen anything about an environmental shopping campaign

in their respective supermarkets.

The San Diego program suffered organizational problems which may have led to

the minimal increase in awareness. These included: inadequate number of store signs

(2 -6 per store though 10 were produced); store managers permitted only a lower number

of recycled package markers to be applied to the shelves to reduce the clutter on the

shelves (100 -200 per store, although 800 were projected);

store employees; and late arrival of

evaluation was muddied by the fact

promotional materials.

that the control stores

inconsistent cooperation of

Furthermore, the program’s

also used shopping bags and

A-7
egg cartons with recycle symbols on them. These problems were compounded by a new

store policy of emphasizing only one theme in the window display at a time and hanging

posters in obscure places in the store.

U.S. EPA, “Program of International Paper Company and Wells Dairy, Reducing Waste at

Its Source,” May 1975.

International Paper Company redesigned the half-pint milk container in an

attempt to conserve resources. Wells Dairy of Lemars, Iowa began using the containers

in a 5-month test starting in February of 1974. The slimmer milk carton used 31 percent

less paper and 16 percent less plastic coating than the traditional half-pint container.

Manufacturing these cartons also resulted in reduced energy use and pollution; they are

also less costly to transport. The package tested very well; a number of school systems

found it economical (it costs less) and convenient.

A-8
A.2 SURVEYS

David A. Meeker & Associates, Inc., 1988

Erickson, G., 1988

Mikitka, K. F., 1987

Mikitka, K. F.; A. Gross; and 3. Zeitler, 1984

Modern Brewery Age, 1984

National Solid Wastes Management Association, 1988

Public Response Associates, Inc. 1981

Resource Recycling, 1986

Robert Marston and Associates, 1988

A-9
David A. Meeker & Associates, Inc., “Environmental Public Relations Survey,” October,

1988.

During August and September 1988, David A. Meeker & Associates conducted a

survey of Fortune 500 industrial companies (i.e., firms subject to Superfund Amendments

and Reauthorization Act Title 111 chemicals reporting requirements) located in the Great

Lakes and western Pennsylvania regions. Overall, sixty-seven companies participated.

The objective of the survey was to "[d]etermine current attitudes and practices of top

corporate communicators on environmental issues.”

Two general conclusions are drawn from among the survey responses:

 "" 1. Environmental public relations, regardless of its percentage of

overall communication activity, is extremely vital and likely to

grow in importance during the next few years.

2. There exists a wide range of opinion on how best to handle

environmental PR efforts ”(e.g., proactive versus reactive, lowprofile approaches).

One of the comments from a respondent was as follows: “There just seems to

be no avoiding the fact that environmental issues are going to be of increasing concern.

The level of public awareness is starting to take off again.”

Erickson, G., “Consumers Get Tough With Packaging,” Packaging, June 1988.

This article summarizes a 1988 nationwide survey of 756 consumers who were

asked 44 questions concerning packaging. One section of the questionnaire dealt with the

issue of recyclability of packaging.

A question in the survey for three consecutive years has been “How important is

recycling to you?.” Responses to this question have remained fairly constant over the

years with roughly 30 percent of the respondents reporting that recycling was “extremely

important” to them, 50 percent reporting that it was “somewhat important,” 15 percent

reporting that it was “not very important,” and 3 percent reporting that it was “not at all

important.” Between the 1986 and the 1988 Packaging surveys, the number of

respondents who claimed that they “often” or “sometimes” considered the recyclability of

packaging material when making a purchase rose from 36.2 percent in 1986 to 48.4

percent in 1988.

A-10
Consumers were asked how hard they thought it was to recycle different

materials. Consumers in the following percentages replied that a material was “very

easy” or “easy” to recycle: aluminum (83.9 percent), paper (75.0 percent), glass (55.4

percent), steel (40.5 percent), and plastics (37.3 percent). The survey also questioned

consumers about which industries they thought were doing a good job of recycling.

Respondents gave industries the following percentages of ’’very good’’ and ’’good’’ ratings:

aluminum (73.7 percent), paper (52.9 percent), glass (46.6 percent), steel (29.9 percent),

and plastics (25.4 percent).

Mikitka, K.F., “Recycling Symbol Research,”

September-October 1987, pp. 32-34,47.

Resource Recvclinq. Vol. VI, No. 5,

This article describes current field studies and a survey conducted by San Diego

State University which are follow-ups to the San Diego County “Environmental Shopping”

and “Shopping for the Symbol of the 80’s” promotion and education campaigns. The survey’s objective was to measure the correct identification of the “chasing arrows” recycling symbol and to obtain profiles of household consumers and those who recycle. The

survey was conducted at two shopping centers and two recycling centers in San Diego

County. While 44 percent of the respondents had seen the recycling symbol, only 31 percent of them (34 percent of recycling patrons and 28 percent of the shoppers) could

define its meaning. This significant increase over the 12 percent recycling symbol recognition rate of 1982 in San Diego County was attributed to the educational and marketing

programs aimed at creating recognition

meaning.

The survey found no significant

ferent social class categories. However,

of the recycling symbol and awareness of its

differences in the recycling rate based on difthere is a difference in terms of reasons why

people recycle. It was found

recycle for ecological reasons

recycle for monetary reasons.

Mikitka, K. F.; A. Gross; and

July/August 1984, pp. 16-18.

This article discusses

that individuals with higher incomes are more likely to

and individuals with lower incomes are more likely to

J. Zeitler, “Recycling Symbols, ”Resource Recycling,

the importance of developing a

connotes recycled content or recyclability. Symbols allow for a

packaging. In order for recycling symbols to be credible,

standard symbol which

quick understanding of

standards need to be

A-11
established as a prerequisite for using the symbols. A survey of 600 people, conducted by

a public relations firm for the California Waste Management Board in 1981, found that 90

percent of consumers believe that the recycling symbol ought to appear on packages

which are made from recycled materials, and 81 percent of those polled would prefer to

purchase items packaged in recycled containers if all things, including price, were equal.

Modern Brewery Age, “Gallup poll shows Americans buy recyclable containers,” July 4,

1988, p, 4.

The Glass Packaging Institute commissioned the Gallup organization to conduct

a survey concerning the use of recyclable packaging. Fifty percent of Americans surveyed said that they would change their purchasing habits to buy foods and beverages

sold in containers that are or can be recycled. Preference for recyclable packaging

increases with household income. Sixty percent of Americans with incomes over $40,000

said that they would switch to a product in a recyclable container. No mention was made

of price considerations. Lewis D. Andrews, President of the Glass Packaging Institute,

said that more glass containers currently have greater than 25 percent recycled content,

and they hope that this will rise to 50 percent.

National Solid Wastes Management Association, “Public Attitudes Toward Garbage

Disposal,” 1988a.

This report summarizes three surveys conducted for the National Solid Wastes

Management Association by Cambridge Reports in 1988. These surveys included a telephone poll of 1,500 adults in February, telephone interviews with 500 “opinion leaders” in

March, and face-to-face interviews with 1,500 adults in July and August.

In the February and March polls, respondents, asked to rank the importance of

issues facing local officials, placed solid waste disposal third, behind improving education

and providing affordable housing. In the July and August surveys, solid waste disposal

was ranked as the second most important problem facing local officials) second only to

improving education. In the northeastern region of the U. S., solid waste disposal was

ranked as the most important issue facing local officials. Respondents were also asked

whether they favored or opposed siting new landfills or waste-to-energy plants. Neither

of these options was favored, although landfills were more strongly opposed. The median

response to the question, “What percentage of waste can be recycled?” was 44 percent.

When asked, “How should recycling programs be paid for?,” 24 percent of the February

A-12
respondents felt that there should be taxes on packaging and nonrecyclable materials. In

the July and August surveys, 41 percent felt that recycling should be paid for by taxes on

packaging and nonrecyclables.

Public Response Associates, Inc., A Report of a Survey Conducted for: The California

State Solid Waste Management Board, California State Solid Waste Management Board,

July 1981.

California State Solid Waste Management Board, in conjunction with the American Paper Institute, Von’s Grocery Stores, and the Charter Oak Women’s Club, ran an

environmental shopping campaign in 1981. Flyers were inserted in grocery bags during

checkout and packaging containing recycled materials was marked. Public Response

Associates conducted a survey in order to test the effectiveness of the campaign.

Six hundred customer interviews were conducted after the program had been

completed in selected stores, 400 from the two stores participating in the program

(program stores) and 200 from the store that had not taken part in the campaign (control

store). Consumers received information about Von’s environmental shopping campaign

from a variety of sources: in-store signs (38 percent); newspapers (35 percent); radio and

television spots (35 percent); and grocery bag stuffers (16 percent). In-store signs,

newspaper advertising, and radio and television promotion appeared to be equally

effective in getting the program’s message to shoppers. Flyers placed in grocery bags

were a relatively ineffective tool for promoting the message. Sixty-five percent of all

respondents felt that California was facing a garbage crisis. Significantly more shoppers

in the program stores indicated this perception than in the control stores (71 percent

versus 51 percent). Forty-nine percent of the respondents shopping at program stores

recognized the recycle symbol; thirty-two percent of the control respondents recognized

it.

Of those who had seen the recycle symbol before, 87 percent of shoppers at the

program stores and 77 percent of shoppers at the control stores could correctly identify

its meaning. Of those program-store respondents who had seen the symbol, 45 percent

mentioned seeing it promoted in supermarkets and 34 percent mentioned seeing it in the

supermarket (17 percent) or on packaging. Fewer of the control store respondents

reported seeing the symbol in the supermarkets (17 percent) or on packaging (16 percent).

A-13
Summary statistics were available only from the combined responses from all

stores: (1) 90 percent of respondents felt that the recycle symbol should appear on

recycled packaging; (2) three-quarters of the respondents would think better of a

company using recycled material; (3) two-thirds of the respondents felt people should be

required to separate recyclable from garbage; (4) nearly 60 percent of the respondents

preferred to buy products in containers made with recycled materials; and (5) over 55

percent of the respondents felt that business should use recycled materials even if

consumers would have to pay slightly higher product prices.

Resource Recycling, “Shoppers favor recycled paperboard,” Vol. V, No.2, March/April

1986, p. 42.

In a survey by ShopRite supermarkets and the American Paper Institute,

thousands of ShopRite customers were interviewed and indicated their endorsement of

recycled paperboard packaging. The important findings included: 93 percent of those

surveyed thought favorably of recycled paperboard packaging; nearly 83 percent of those

surveyed believed that manufacturers should label recycled paperboard packaging with

the recycling symbol; 71 percent claimed they would shop for the recycling symbol if it

meant that it would decrease the amount of solid wastes sent to landfills; and

approximately 81 percent stated that they had taken newspapers to a recycling center

within the past year.

Robert Marston and Associates, “Americans Agree: Troubled Environment is an Election

Issue,’’ Press Release, October 1988.

This nationwide survey conducted by Penn & Schoen Associates questioned 1,000

Americans about solid waste management problems. Eighty-eight percent of those

surveyed felt that solid waste disposal was an important issue. Ninety percent felt that

recycling and biodegradability will help to alleviate the problem of solid waste, and 91

percent of the respondents would pay a few cents more for product packages which were

recyclable and biodegradable. Eighty-seven percent felt that the government should

provide incentives for manufacturers to use recyclable and biodegradable packaging.

A-14
A.3 RESEARCH REPORTS AND POLICY PAPERS

Arthur Young & Company, 1981

Becker, B.W., 1981

Bingham, T.H.; M.S. Marquis; P.C. Cooley; A.M. Cruze; E.W. Hauser; S.A.

Johnston; and P.F. Mulligan, 1974

Conn, W. D., 1977

Conn, W. D., 1988a

Conn, W. D., 1988b

Conn, W. D., 1980

Crosby, L.A. and J.R. Taylor, 1982

Cutler, A., 1988

De Young, R., 1987

De Young, R., 1985-86

De Young, R., 1984

De Young, R., 1985

De Young, R. and Kaplan, S., 1985-86

Geller, E.S., 1989

Geller, E.S., 1981

Geller, E.S., 1986

Geller, E.S.; J.B. Erickson; and B.A. Buttram, 1983

Geller, E.S. and G. Lehman, 1986

Hurst, K. and P. Relis, 1988

Katzev, R.D. and A.V. Pardini, 1987-88

Kinnear, T.C. and J.R. Taylor, 1973

Kinnear, T.C.; J.R. Taylor; and S.A. Ahmed, 1974

Larson, M.A. and K.L. Massetti-Miller, 1984

League of Women Voters Education Fund, 1972

League of Women Voters Education Fund, 1975

Mikitka, K., 1985

Pardini, A.V. and R.D. Katzev, 1983-84

Stern, P. C., 1984

Tracy, A.P. and S. Oskamp, 1983-84

Warkov, S., 1983

A-15
Arthur Young & Company, Factors Which Inhibit the Demand for Secondary Materials;

Phase I Marketing Report, California State Solid Waste Management Board, November 2,

1981, pp. 24-25.

Only two pages of this study were received from the California State Solid

Waste Management Board. The study concluded that competitors among oligopolistic

industries tend to make very similar products. Using recycled products would differentiate one company’s product from another's.. An “environmentally conscious segment of

the population” would find a recycled product appealing. However, using “recycled" in

advertisement for personal hygiene products or durable products may have negative

effects.

Becker,

Vol. 24,

Viewed

B. W., “Using Consumer Issues for Competitive Advantage,” Business Horizons,

No.3, 1981, pp. 43-47.

This article reports that “consumer concerns need not be threats to business.

imaginatively and analytically, consumer issues can become part of a firm’s

marketing strategy to obtain competitive advantage.” Becker develops a “consumerism

opportunity matrix” that incorporates a variety of consumer issues and offers four

marketing decision variables within control of management: changes in the product

(including packaging); changes in price (marketing a recycled product as a cost competitive alternative); changes in location (marketing recycled products in high-demand

areas); and promotion of the relative advantages of a recycled product. Two promotional

strategies are provided: making a positive statement about a company’s response to

consumer concerns (e.g., advertising the removal of fluorocarbons from aerosols), and

goodwill gestures that show company concern but do not directly relate to the product

(e.g., donations to charity). Several examples of the successful marketing of products

that promote source reduction or recyclability are provided: the marketing of high

quality recycled writing paper by Bergstrom Paper Company and Simpson Lee Paper

Company; elimination of fluorocarbons from aerosols by S. C. Johnson Company; reuse of

containers at Red Owl stores in Milwaukee; and Hunt-Wesson’s campaign to buy and

preserve eagle nesting land for each container label returned. The importance of

determining consumer attitudes, designing marketing plans for market segments, and the

need to measure a quantitative goal, such as packaging reuse rates in a community, are

also discussed.

A-16
Bingham, T.H.; M.S. Marquis; P.C. Cooley; A.M. Cruze; E.W. Hauser; S.A. Johnston; and

P.F. Mulligan, An Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Costs of Regulatory and Fiscal

Policy Instruments on Product Packaging, U.S. EPA, 1974.

“This study provides an evaluation of the costs and effectiveness of two types of

government policy instruments that may be used to influence the quantity and composition of consumer product packaging and the use of recycled materials in consumer product package manufacture. The policy instruments considered are a regulation requiring

the use of recycled materials in packaging and several types of taxes on packaging. The

analysis provides an initial basis for policy decisions regarding the desirability of these

policy instruments as possible means for reducing the generation of packaging wastes,

increasing the use of recycled materials in packaging manufacture, and reducing the

natural resource utilization of packaging.” (Abstract from document)

The study found that, among the policy instruments examined, taxes on packaging -- with or without exemptions for recycled containers -- induced the largest reductions in solid waste generation. However, a tax on packaging materials without the

exemption was (1) substantially less effective than one on containers with an exemption

in reducing raw materials consumption, and (2) ineffective in increasing the consumption

of secondary materials.

Conn, W. D., “Consumer Product Life Extension in the Context of Materials and Energy

Flows,” in D.W. Pearce and I. Walter (eds.), Resource Conservation: Social and Economic

Dimensions of Recycling, University Press, New York, 1977, Ch. 7, pp. 127-143.

Extending product life is considered a means to conserve natural resources,

reduce environmental impacts, and lower costs of MSW disposal. However, Conn

cautions policy makers that policies for extending the lives of consumer products should

be designed very carefully, especially if these policies are supposed to also reduce the

overall materials flow. Otherwise, results may be counterproductive. Furthermore,

other factors besides a product’s physical durability can affect its lifetime, not all of

which are under the control of the manufacturer (e.g., consumer treatment of the

product, consumer decision to repair or throw away the product, availability and pricing

of spare parts, and second-hand markets).

Adding to the complications of predicting consumer behavior and determining

the relationship between product lifetimes and materials flow, Conn points out that if

extending product life results in a cost savings) consumers may purchase more products,

A-17
possibly resulting in a net increase in materials flow. The author recommends that all

these and other related factors should be understood before policy makers move ahead.

of

Corm, W. D., “Product Design and Municipal Solid Waste,” Journal of Resource

Management and Technology, Vol. 16, No.2, July 1988a, pp. 100-103.

The author provides several examples of product design attributes which can

have a potentially significant impact on MSW disposal, e.g., durability, ease of

disassembly, and the presence or absence of materials which can have a negative impact

on product recyclability or treatment and disposal. It is also stated that product

designers and manufacturers have little or no incentive to consider whether product

design affects the following: rate of MSW generation; feasibility of recycling; and the

human and environmental safety aspects of MSW handling and disposal.

Product charges and regulations are identified as approaches to get designers

and manufacturers to recognize the relationship between their product and the MSW

stream. However, to date, these approaches have not received wide support. The author

proposes a third option: expand waste audits included in a subsidized technical assistance

program for individual firms to not only focus on their manufacturing processes, but also

on the fate of their products (i.e., after they leave the company), as well, At a

minimum, this approach could make firms aware of the impacts of their products on the

MSW stream (see above), and perhaps profitable waste-related design changes. As a

goodwill gesture, firms may make changes in their product designs if positive impacts on

MSW disposal would result.

Corm, W. D., “Reducing Municipal Solid Waste Generation: Lessons from the Seventies,”

Journal of Resource Management and Technology, Vol. 16, No. 1, April 1988b, pp. 24-27.

This study summarized the objectives (reducing costs of MSW management,

reducing litter, conserving natural resources, reducing adverse environmental impacts,

and removing market inefficiencies) and approaches (reducing quantity of material used

per unit of product, increasing the lifetime of durable and semi-durable goods, substituting reusable products for single-use “disposable” products, and directly reducing consumption of material goods) to waste reduction. It also outlines available policy options:

regulation; financial incentives; and measures to promote voluntary efforts. Voluntary

efforts included education and public

some cases, face-to-face persuasion.

awareness programs, technical assistance, and, in

A-18
From the author’s viewpoint, the lessons of the 1970s were: 1) there needs to be

a consensus of goals at federal, state, and local levels; 2) source reduction/-

reuse/recycling have been erroneously associated with a decrease in the standard of

living; 3) most source reduction and recycling activities of the 1970s were a result of

resource/cost savings measures and innovations captured by private enterprise; 4)

regulatory controls receive limited public support, are difficult to administer, and

interfere in the “free market;” 5) financial incentives offer the advantage of encouraging

consumer behavior without requiring it, but there is great difficulty in finding a

compromise between a tax or subsidy large enough to create a “visible” change in waste

generation and a tax or subsidy that is politically acceptable, especially given the

additional governmental cost of administration; 6) beverage container legislation was the

most widely adopted waste reduction measure in the 1970s for several social, economic,

and political reasons; and 7) encouraging a wide variety of voluntary efforts will continue

to be the policy of first choice for most governments but raises difficult issues related to

the level of intensity of government sponsored persuasion.

Corm, W. D., “Workshop on Waste Reduction, January 10, 1980: Summary of Proceedings,”

Prepared for California State Solid Waste Board, 1980.

Key points made at this workshop which relate most directly to this report

occurred in the session “A marketing approach to waste reduction. ” Arthur Sterngold,

President, Social Marketing Consultants, and Assistant Account Executive, Needham,

Harper, and Steers Advertising, Chicago, Illinois, described the traditional approaches to

changing consumer behavior (in his order): legal/regulatory measures (facing growing

resistance); technological measures (cannot solve everything); economic measures (are

appropriate under certain conditions but must be designed correctly); public education

(important, but not enough on its own because behavior does not depend only on

awareness); community action (encourages people to relate to problems close-to-home);

and entrepreneurial action (using the free market to “social advantage”).

To reiterate his point on education, Sterngold cited the example of energy

conservation research which showed that attitudes are not well correlated with

behavior. “Once people are made aware of the problem, they must be told what to do,

how to do it, where to go to do it, etc.” However, public education is often very

impersonal; its effect can be improved by making the message personal, e.g., through

follow-up in the local community.

A-19
Furthermore, unlike commercial advertising which sells tangible products, the

benefits of waste reduction can be intangible and not immediately obvious to

individuals. The benefits may be made to appear more immediate through the following

techniques: economic incentives/disincentives (e.g., deposits); tangible products (e.g.,

reusable shopping bags); and “down-to-earth symbols” (e.g., packaging labels).

Crosby, L.A. and J.R. Taylor, “Consumer Satisfaction with Michigan’s Container Deposit

Law--An Ecological Perspective,” Journal of Marketing, Winter 1982, pp. 47-60.

This article described a survey investigating consumer satisfaction with the

Michigan beverage container deposit law, attitudes toward the system, and consumer

reaction to retailer activities complying with the law. The survey revealed a high degree

of consumer satisfaction with the deposit law. More significant for the purposes of this

study, the survey found that consumers adapted to the new behaviors required under the

law in about six to eight months. Few of the consumers had been engaged in recyclingoriented activities prior to the law, yet many quickly developed a “convenient behavioral

repertoire.” The authors

standard skill development

that as behavior is learned

as more convenient.”

suggest that developing recycling-oriented behavior follows

processes: it requires practice. In addition, the authors state

and “becomes more efficient . . . it will tend to be perceived

Cutler, H., “Is Mandated Recycling Possible?” Solid Waste & Power, August 1988, pp.

54-37.

This article argues that mandatory source separation programs, often touted as

the answer to the MSW management crisis, will not provide large-scale solutions until

markets for recycled products are created. Successful source-separation programs can

provide a large supply of cheap raw materials, but these materials will not be utilized

unless there is demand for the products they are used to create.

The author argues that education programs which teach people about the benefits of recycling and why individuals should prefer recycled products should be the first

step in any recycling program. Moreover, the author asserts that these programs could

actually make mandatory recycling programs unnecessary: if demand for recycled products were strong enough, “the current non-mandatory recycling programs conducted by

private parties would be enlarged to meet the new demand of the manufacturing

industries, as they have historically.”

A-20
De Young, R., “Clean Michigan Fund 1986-1987 Resource Recovery Education Grants: A

Comparison of Selected Programs,” University of Michigan, School of Natural Resources,

Spring 1987.

This report compares survey data from six resource recovery education

programs funded by the state of Michigan from early 1986 to mid 1987. The surveys

were used to evaluate resident attitudes, behaviors, and motives pertaining to resource

recovery, serving as a baseline for future programs in these communities. Residents

were asked several questions, dealing with the following: importance of recycling;

experience with, and plans for, recycling; and why people do, and do not, recycle. The

report’s following conclusions were based on results from the survey, and may be helpful

to future resource recovery programs:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

since a large percentage of the respondents viewed recycling as

important, future programs do not need to focus so much

attention on changing attitudes;

since a large percentage of the respondents agrees that

recycling is an appropriate behavior, future programs should

focus more attention on converting people’s good intentions to

actual behavior (e.g., helping people overcome perceived

barriers [mostly due to not enough information of what to do,

not enough room, and too much hassle] and promote recycling of

a longer list of materials);

effectiveness of future programs in increasing recycling

behavior will be greatest if they concentrate on providing

information (i.e., increasing familiarity with recycling behavior),

rather than focusing on attitudinal, ethical or motivational

issues; and

future programs should focus on a range of non-monetary

incentives (e.g., the effect of recycling on conserving natural

resources, the benefits o f recycling for a charitabl e

organization, and the intrinsic satisfaction derived from “doing

the right thing”).

De Young, R., “Encouraging Environmentally Appropriate Behavior: The Role of Intrinsic

Motivation,” Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 15, No. 4, 1985-86, pp. 281-292.

This study was designed to explore the types of motivation which people feel

during their daily activities towards conserving natural resources. Data came from 263

responses to a mail-back questionnaire in Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1977. Three scales

were examined in detail: behavior, satisfaction, and motivation.

A-21
The study found that people derive distinct satisfaction from reuse and recycling behavior and that much of their everyday conservation behavior was intrinsically

motivated, i.e., dependent upon internal goals and rewards. Intrinsic motivation was

much more highly rated as a motivational factor for reuse and recycling than were

extrinsic rewards. The author suggests that environmentally responsible behavior might

be encouraged by helping people to discover the satisfaction they can derive from

participation. That is, a program should not invest all of its effort or funding towards

developing extrinsic rewards.

De Young, R., “Motivating People to Recycle: The Use of Incentives,” Resource Recycling, May/June 1984, pp. 14-15, 42.

This article discussed various incentives that can be used to initiate and maintain participation in recycling programs. Both extrinsic and intrinsic incentives are

examined. Extrinsically-motivated behavior is motivated by a reward, such as money,

social approval, or increased convenience, while intrinsically-motivated behavior is done

“for its own sake.” While extrinsic incentives can be every effective in promoting

recycling, the behavior established often disappears after the incentives are removed.

Over-reliance on extrinsic incentives may make an individual overlook their intrinsic

motivations. The author also raises the question of whether large monetary incentives

are cost-effective. Intrinsic incentives tend to be stronger and more permanent than

extrinsic ones, but they are far more difficult to establish. The author suggests that

basing extrinsic incentives on recycling performance (e.g., percentage of waste recycled)

may help, and possibly enhance, intrinsic motivation. The paper concludes that recycling

programs are too often designed solely around economic incentives, and that, with combinations of extrinsic and intrinsic incentives, recycling programs could achieve more

effective and enduring results.

De Young, R., “Satisfaction from Conservation Activities in North America,”

Environmental Conservation, Vol. 12, No. 3, Autumn 1985, pp. 259-260.

This article discusses findings from recent conservation behavior research. Two

main themes are revealed from this research:

(1) There is a clear and stable structure to the satisfactions which

people report deriving from daily conservation activities” (i.e.,

many conservation activities are no different than daily

behaviors).

A-22
(2) These satisfactions are independent of satisfactions gained from

material things” (i.e., non-economic satisfactions are derived

from common conservation activities).

Satisfaction is categorized by the following: frugality (e.g., avoiding wastefulness,

extending product life, and other activities tied to conservation), participation (e.g.,

participate in a community activity with a feeling of making a difference), and luxuries

(research indicates that satisfaction from material benefits does not conflict with the

other two types of satisfaction). That is, people can derive satisfaction from

conservation. “Together, these findings suggest that environmentally appropriate

activities might be made to appeal to a broad cross-section of North Americans (the

well-off and disadvantaged alike) rather than just to people of a Spartan nature.”

De Young, R. and S. Kaplan, “Conservation Behavior and the Structure of Satisfactions,”

Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 15, No. 3, 1985-86, pp. 233-242.

Based on results from some prior research, the authors state that satisfaction

(i.e., intrinsic motivation) may be more effective than extrinsic incentives in promoting

conservation behavior, based on cost-effectiveness and the durability of the behavior

once the extrinsic incentive is removed.

A survey of thirty people with interest in conservation

of the survey

(1)

(2)

(3)

The

convenience

conservation,

included the following:

People who conserve are not different from other

was conducted. Results

people.

A special outlook is not needed to foster conservation (several of

the themes ranking conservation high also support a mainstream

outlook, i.e., even though survey participants are

conservationists, they were not determined to be a fringe group).

There is a wide variety and commonplace nature of satisfactions

(e.g., conservation ethic, money, and comfort and convenience)

derived from conservation, similar to ordinary behaviors.

authors also state that although some of the themes (e.g., comfort and

and modern lifestyle) may on the surface appear to conflict with

“there is a potential for encouraging desired behavior patterns by

emphasizing qualities such as durability and the sensual qualities of environmentally

appropriate products rather than resource conservation as the bases for actions. For

example, the desire for quality might be satisfied in an environmentally appropriate

A-23
manner by purchasing only a few, high quality and long-lasting items rather than buying

large quantities of disposable or less-durable goods."

Geller, E. S., “Applied Behavior Analysis and Social Marketing: An Integration for

Environmental Preservation,” Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 45, No. 1, 1989, pp. 17-36.

This paper presents several methods for integrating applied behavior analysis

and social marketing techniques to produce effective action plans for increasing

environmentally beneficial behaviors and limiting environmentally harmful behaviors.

The author categorizes “behavior change procedures that have targeted environmental

preservation” as either antecedent interventions (e.g., education, goal-setting, modeling)

or consequence procedures (reinforcement or punishment).

In the applied behavior analysis section of the paper, the author discusses the

necessity of identifying specific behaviors to target behavior-modification programs, and

identifies the essential components of successful antecedent interventions (awareness

and education sessions, verbal and written messages, modeling and demonstrations, goalsetting and commitment procedures, and engineering and design strategies), and the

different types of consequence procedures (behavior response-contingent and behavior

outcome-contingent). Following development of behavior change strategies, the author

recommends intervening on a community-wide (and more durable) level. With larger

programs, results may not be as favorable as with smaller scale efforts.

In the social marketing section of the paper, the author discusses the key

elements of social marketing -- product, promotion, place, price, politics, and public

opinion -- and their relevance to the design of programs which seek to change people’s

behavior.

Geller, E. S., “Evaluating Energy Conservation Programs: Is Verbal Report Enough?”

Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8, December 1981, pp. 331-335.

This paper examines the stimulation of individual energy conservation behavior

through workshops and home visits. Based on his and others’ research, the author asserts

that there is a discrepancy between self-report measures and actual behavior (i.e., a

difference between attitudes and behavior regarding conservation). Workshop attendees

reported that the workshops had increased their concern about the energy crisis and that

they were more committed to conserving energy. However, after follow-up visits and

A-24
prompts to insulate hot water heaters, install

temperatures, there was not much difference

conservation techniques among forty workshop

residents (the control group).

water restrictors, and lower water

in the application of these energy

attendees and forty non-attending

The author suggests that workshops, informational pamphlets and media promotion should not be relied on exclusively to promote energy conservation. Geller feels

that additional motivation (e.g., a monetary reward and periodic or frequent feedback) is

needed to achieve high participation rates.

Geller, E. S., “Prevention of Environmental Problems,” in B. A. Edelstein and L. Michelson

(Eds.), Handbook of Prevention, Plenum Publishing Corporation, 1986, Chapter 16, pp.

●

The author summarizes a variety of behavior change intervention approaches to

environmental protection which may be applied in any of eight target areas: population;

food; land; water; energy; solid wastes; minerals; and the atmosphere. This study,

however, focuses on energy conservation. Several characteristics of the behaviorist’s

perspective and approach are discussed.

In order for a behavior change program to be effective, target behaviors and

groups must be defined. In some instances, a change can be accomplished only by a

repetitive action (setting back room thermostats each night); in other instances, a single

action will affect a change (purchasing a more efficient automobile), but usually at a

high up-front cost.

Antecedent strategies (also referred to as prompting) are designed to increase

the likelihood of desirable target behaviors or decrease the likelihood of undesirable

target responses. Such strategies include verbal and written messages, awareness and

education messages, modelling and demonstrations, goal setting and commitment

strategies, and engineering and design technologies. Response-contingent approaches

(those dependent upon performance or outcome) involve creating an incentive for the

desired behavior (or disincentive for undesired behavior), educating or increasing

audience awareness through media messages, providing the audience with a model of

successful participation, and creation of commitment and goal-setting tactics. The

effectiveness of behavior change interventions may also depend upon the consequence

strategy -- creating rewards for the desired behaviors or outcomes (e.g., a monetary

rebate for return of a reusable container or mention on an “environmental honor role”) or

A-25
creating penalties for undesired behaviors or outcomes (e.g., a speeding ticket or verbal

condemnation).

The author suggests changing attitudes through behavior modification. In so

doing, it may be more cost-effective to apply intervention strategies to the targeted

behaviors directly rather than applying these strategies to changing attitudes and values

in the hope that behavior changes will follow. However, the author states a concern of

behaviorists regarding attitude formation and acceptance of behavior change -- positive

attitudes are associated with incentives, negative attitudes are associated with

disincentives.

To that end, frequent and specific feedback should be delivered to individuals.

The author also notes that most projects have been short-term small-scale

demonstrations and have ignored the “relationships that link person, behavior, social

environment, and physical environment.” Successful behavioral change programs must do

more than modify a single behavior. The author finishes with a discussion of communitywide (community may imply national or international projects such as “Keep America

Beautiful” and “Save the Whales”) intervention, stating that the large-scale is the most

appropriate scale for creating long-term success.

Geller, E. S., J.B. Erickson, and B.A. Buttram, “Attempts to Promote Residential Water

Conservation with Educational, Behavioral and Engineering Strategies,” Population and

Environment, Vol. 6, No. 2, Summer 1983, pp. 96-112.

This article presents the results of a program to promote water conservation.

After gauging baseline water consumption in 129 residences, researchers applied different combinations of education, feedback, and engineering (e.g., use of water conservation

devices) interventions. Prior research has indicated that combinations of these

strategies are more effective than individual strategies. “Significant water savings

occurred following only the installation of low cost water conservation devices, although

the amount of water saved with these devices . . . was much less than expected.”

The major applicable finding of the study is that feedback and education

(informing people about the resource and monetary savings of conservation behavior) are

not, by themselves, sufficient to promote conservation. For real, lasting changes in

behavior, “a supportive motivational system” must also be in effect. Apparently, people

will conserve seriously only if direct, tangible rewards such as monetary savings and/or

resource cost savings are provided. The author states that conservation programs should

include an assessment of changes in attitude, behavior, and consumption.

A-26
Geller, E.S. and G.R. Lehman, “Motivating Desirable Waste Management Behavior:

Applications of Behavior Analysis,” Journal of Resource Management and Technology,

Vol. 15, Nos. 2 & 3, December 1986, pp. 58-68.

Geller and Lehman define two strategies for motivating desirable behavior and

reduce undesirable behaviors. These strategies can be antecedent- or consequenceoriented. Antecedent strategies take effect before the targeted behavior is to occur.

They can be general prompts which do not target any specific behavior. An example of

one such prompt is a packaging label such as “Dispose of Properly.” However, more

specific prompts are aimed at promoting one behavior (e.g., Place Recyclable Paper

Here). Antecedent strategies can announce disincentives (e.g., a fine for littering) or

incentives (e.g., a rebate for returning recyclable). Modeling is another antecedent

strategy, demonstrating specific behaviors. Modeling includes media presentations which

act out a behavior and the resulting consequence. An additional method of antecedent

stimuli is a commitment strategy, where individuals make a verbal or written promise to

behave in a specific manner (e.g., I will separate recyclable).

Consequence strategies take effect after a behavior has been enacted. The

strategy can be positive or negative. Positive consequence stimuli reward an individual

for participating in a behavior. The reward can be based on a specific response (response

consequence) being performed (e.g.) using a particular trash can) or it can be based on

the occurrence of a more general outcome or outcome consequence (e.g., returning an

established amount of recyclable to meet a goal). Negative consequence stimuli are

typically laws or ordinances which outlaw or punish a certain behavior. Individuals choose

to behave in a certain manner in order to avoid a negative consequence (e.g., paying a

fine for littering). For a negative consequence stimuli to be effective, there needs to be

a strong likelihood that the consequence will in fact follow a behavior. Typically, this is

expensive because of the enforcement and administrative manpower which is required to

police individual behavior. Though government and community agencies typically use

negative consequence stimuli, behavioral scientists have demonstrated several reasons

for their preference for positive consequence stimuli.

The authors’ conclusions include:

● antecedent prompts are not effective unless the target behavior

is relatively convenient and the prompt occurs at the point of

desired action;

A-27
Hurst,

Gildea

●

●

●

●

●

●

✘

general prompts may be cheap but are typically not capable of

changing behavior;

consequence strategies require antecedent strategies which

announce the consequence of specific behaviors;

antecedent strategies should not threaten individual freedom by

demanding a behavior;

response consequences are more specific and informative than

outcome consequences and are probably more likely to be effective;

consequence strategies must remain in effect over the long term;

modeling strategies are often overlooked and might be effective;

and

goal-setting strategies are easy and inexpensive

may be quite effective in changing behavior.

to implement and

K. and P. Relis, The Next Frontier: Solid Waste Source Reduction, Policy Paper,

Resource Center, Community Environmental Council, 1988.

This report highlights source reductional the most preferred MSW management

option, though it is usually the last to be considered. The information provided is

designed to educate decisionmakers, planners, public interest groups, and others on the

subject. Unlike the other MSW management options, source reduction directly addresses

a fundamental concern: the amount of MSW generated. The authors state that use of a

common definition of source reduction will reduce confusion in the policy-making arena

as well as help to chart its progress and quantify its benefits. Examples are provided of

what source reduction is, and is not, barriers to its adoption, as well as recent activities

by those groups taking a lead in this area.

The report also identifies source reduction policy alternatives (education and

recognition resulting in voluntary action; economic incentives and disincentives; and

regulation), as well as roles and/or activities of government, industry, public

organizations, designers, marketing firms, and consumers. For example, consumers need

to be informed which products and packages have source reduction qualities and

benefits. The authors point out that significant consumer concern for the impact of their

purchases on MSW disposal may serve to encourage manufacturers to respond and change

their products and packages, accordingly. Recent evidence supports this: consumer

interest in healthier diets has prompted marketers to promote products which appeal to

this growing segment of the population.

A-28
Katzev, R.D. and A.U. Pardini, “The Comparative Effectiveness of Reward and

Commitment Approaches in Motivating Community Recycling,” Journal of Environmental

Systems, Vol. 17, No. 2, 1987-88, pp. 93-113.

In support of their claim that prior research on conservation behavior has

focused too heavily on the use of incentives, the authors discuss the significant problems

related to these efforts: ( 1 ) participation rates in recycling were typically low when

incentives were used; (2) many of the incentive programs were not cost-effective; and (3)

incentive programs did not produced long-term and lasting changes in recycling

behavior. In contrast, the authors report on their research on the use of “minimal

justification techniques,” i.e., “modest” rather than “highly attractive” incentives to

stimulate internal motivations to recycle.

This study was conducted with fifty-nine households in Portland, Oregon to

determine “the relative effectiveness of commitment and incentive techniques in

promoting newspaper recycling.” The study spanned eight weeks, with a five week

intervention

established:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

period and a three week follow-up period. Four groups of households were

Control -- households were asked

project;

Commitment -- in addition to

if they would participate in the

being asked to participate,

households were also asked to sign a commitment form;

Token -- households received a token each time they recycled;

and

Commitment + Token -- households were provided information on

the token system and, if they were interested, were asked to sign

a commitment form.

Results of the study indicated that the Commitment and Commitment + Token

groups recycled substantially more (based on frequency and weight) than the Control

group; the same was true for the Token group, but not at the relative magnitude of the

other two groups. During the follow-up period, only the Commitment and Commitment +

Token groups recycled more than the Control group. On balance, none of these

techniques was always more effective than the others. In addition, the results do not

suggest that incentives are required. The Token group never out-performed the two

Commitment groups. In fact, 75 percent of households in the Token group redeemed

their tokens, while only 28 percent of households in the Commitment + Token group

redeemed theirs’.

A-29
“Encouraging individuals to begin [conserving resources] by making a small

commitment to recycle a household product can often times act as a catalyst for

initiating and sustaining further conserving acts. Unfortunately, most social policy

programs begin by making relatively large, global requests of consumers, without

recognizing the importance of first establishing the basic components of these target

behaviors, as well as creating situations where consumers can commit themselves to

undertake these acts.”

Kinnear, T.C. and J.R. Taylor, “The Effect of Ecological Concern on Brand Perceptions,”

Journal of Marketing Research, May 1973, pp. 191-197.

Kinnear and Taylor measured the association between ecological concern and

product brand perception using statistical analysis of 500 responses from a western

Ontario consumer mail survey conducted in 1972. They found that consumers who were

aware of the impacts of phosphates on the environment, and other environmental

problems, viewed laundry detergents containing phosphates as contributing to the

pollution of lakes and streams. Low or non-phosphate detergents were seen as helping to

mitigate the problem of water pollution.

Kinnear, T. C., J.R. Taylor, and S.A. Ahmed, “Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who

Are They?” Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38, April 1974, pp. 20-24.

The article examines twenty independent variables as possible predictors of

scores on ecology concern indexes. Seven of the variables were socio-economic (i.e., age

of wife, presence of children, education of each spouse) occupation of each spouse, and

family income), twelve variables were used to characterize personality traits (e.g.,

rebelliousness, depression, understanding, and indifference), and one was perceived consumer effectiveness in pollution abatement. Regression analysis measured the relative

importance of these variables on individual ecological concern index scores.

A profile of ecologically concerned consumers (derived from a mail questionnaire conducted in Canada and based on 500 respondents) suggests that they perceive a

high consumer effectiveness against pollution, are curious and open to new ideas, are

moderate in their desire to avoid personal harm (need for safety or risk aversion) and

tend to earn over $15,000 (1973 dollars) per year. The results suggest that personality

traits are a much better predictor of environmental concern than socioeconomic

variables.

A-30
The authors suggest that public education campaigns center their appeals

around a mild arousal of the need to avoid adverse personal or social outcomes (i.e.,

strong negative campaigns may alienate their audience), and a strong emphasis on the

individual consumer’s effectiveness in helping to alleviate the environmental impacts of

waste disposal.

Larson, M.A. and K.L. Massetti-Miller, “Measuring Change After a Public Education

Campaign,” Public Relations Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1984, pp. 23-32.

Based on pre- and post-campaign public opinion surveys for a nine-month statewide television and radio campaign on California’s garbage crisis, Californians showed a

greater realization of the seriousness of the crisis. However, their participation in

recycling and other “environmentally sound practices” was not on a regular basis. These

results were consistent with the findings of other public information campaigns,

illustrating “the weakness in relying solely upon mass-media channels for eliciting

behavioral change in public awareness campaigns.”

To improve the effectiveness of the public education campaign, the state

developed community-level programs to promote recycling through use of more diverse

methods (posters, brochures, articles, radio, television, slide shows, and speakers). This

paper reports on the Humboldt County Recycling and Anti-Littering Education Project,

funded with $10,000 beginning in March 1981. In comparing pre- and post-campaign data,

the authors determined that the education program was effective in influencing attitudes

on littering and illegal dumping among recyclers. However, there was little overall

change in attitudes on littering or illegal dumping or on recycling behavior. Potential

reasons offered for this less-than-desired showing included: (1) 75 percent of the

residents already recycled; (2) opportunities to recycle dwindled due to strains on the

local economy; and (3) sufficient opportunities for interpersonal communication,

participation, and social reinforcement were not provided. Recyclers were determined

to be more likely to purchase products in recyclable packaging than were non-recyclers

according to pre- and post-campaign data.

The authors also analyzed the key factors affecting recycling behavior and

determined that (1) education and community involvement were positively related to

recycling behavior; and (2) age and income were negatively related to recycling

behavior. Based on their findings, the authors recommended that helping the public

communicate among themselves would reinforce or broaden recycling behavior.

A-31
League of Women Voters Education Fund, Recycle? In Search of New Policies for

Resource Recovery, 1972.

As the solid waste burden grows, so does interest in recycling among people and

members of Congress. This report helps to educate primarily individuals and

communities as to what recycling is, as well as its benefits, barriers (economic and

institutional) to its greater use, ways (economic and institutional) to overcome these

barriers, and what lies ahead for recycling. The report stresses that markets for

recycled materials are more effective to increase recycling than simply making these

materials available (“the supply push approach is [like] pushing on a string”). However,

demand for these materials is affected by technology, their quality, procurement

specifications, and price.

League of Women Voters Education Fund, Reduce? Targets, Means and Impacts of Source

Reduction, 1975.

This report cites the U.S.’S increasing MSW generation rate, decreasing landfill

disposal capacity, potential environmental problems with landfills, rising disposal costs,

and material shortages, as key reasons why there needs to be greater attention to source

reduction. Source reduction is assessed based on its targets (durable and non-durable

goods, packaging and containers, and beverage containers), approaches (tools for control

[taxes and charges, deposits, bans, design regulations, and voluntary measures and

education] and policies for specific products), and impacts (resources and energy, solid

waste management, and the economy). Roles for industry, government, EPA, and the

public are identified, all of whom need to be involved if source reduction is to be fully

effective.

Mikitka, K., “Promoting Recycling: Supermarkets As Environmental Classrooms,” Illinois

Teacher, March/April, 1985, pp. 160-163.

The general purpose of this article is to provide subject matter and classroom

activities that build upon “environmental shopping” themes. The author states that “persuasive educational and motivational strategies are needed to induce more consumers and

industries to participate in recycling.” She points out that stimulating the demand for

recycled and recyclable materials is considered a very direct way to increase recycling.

A-32
The author states that "three key assumptions, derived from educationalmarketing program evaluations, underpin the article’s recommendations:

(1) Social marketing techniques can enhance educational programs.

(2) When consumers are made aware of the negative economic and

environmental consequences of wasteful consumption, they are

willing to support and participate in recycling programs. When

provided education and point of purchase information, they favor

products made from recycled materials.

(3) program themes incorporating bywords, slogans and symbols

reinforce awareness.”

After discussing the implementation of a consumer education project in nine

San Diego, California grocery stores (discussed in Appendix A. 1 ), the author suggests

some concepts and goals that she feels need to be included as part of in-school

environmental consumer education programs. Such programs should integrate basic

environmental and consumer economic principles, so that students understand the “systems relationships that influence the recycling process.”

The author also points out that recycling activities are strengthened when the

economic forces of supply and demand work together. She stresses the importance of

teaching students about their “dual role” as consumers, that is, as suppliers of materials

for recycling, and as a central force behind the demand for recycled materials. When

consumers buy products and packaging made from recycled materials, they motivate

manufacturers to use more of those materials. This creates a demand for recyclable,

which in turn keeps their prices high enough to encourage recycling by households,

organizations, and industries.

The author suggests general goals for environmental consumer education programs. She states that programs should teach students to recognize consumer recycling

symbols and to understand that recycling involves continuous and interdependent production, consumption, supply and demand cycles. The article concludes with some suggested

classroom activities that teach the “importance and methodology of recycling,” and

environmental shopping projects which can be undertaken cooperatively by home

economists and supermarket managers.

A-33
Pardini, A.U. and R.D. Katzev, “The Effect of Strength of Commitment on Newspaper

Recycling,” Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 13, No. 3, 1983-84, pp. 245-254.

Past research on promoting recycling behavior has focused mainly on the use of

incentives alone. In summarizing the results of some of these efforts, the authors

conclude that incentives alone are deficient: (1) when the incentive is removed, the

behavior change is unlikely to endure; (2) incentive programs generated low participation

rates; and (3) most of these programs were not cost-effective* The authors contend that

external incentives do not help to raise an individual’s internal commitment to

recycling, Rather, “minimal forms of external justification” to promote development of

internal commitments (called the “minimal justification principle”) may be more

effective than “highly attractive external incentives” in promoting and sustaining

changes in recycling behavior. For example, the “foot-in-the-door” technique can “be

quite effective in a variety of situations where a minimal amount of pressure is first used

to induce later compliance with a request that most individuals would not have otherwise

agreed to.”

This paper reports the results of an experiment conducted with thirty

households in Portland, Oregon in 1982 to investigate the impact of three commitment

techniques to promote newspaper recycling. The project included a two-week

intervention period and a two-week follow-up period. Households were asked to recycle

under the following conditions: ( 1 ) information) (2) minimal (i.e., verbal) commitment, or

(3) strong (written) commitment (i.e., a foot-in-the-door technique)” The information

condition involved households receiving leaflets explaining the details of the study. The

minimal condition included the same information received by the first group but also

asked households to participate in the project. The strong commitment included the

same information and question received by the second group but also asked households to

sign a statement committing them to the project.

The project’s findings included the following: the frequency of participation and

the amount of newspapers recycled increased as did the level of commitment by

households. However, once the two-week intervention was completed, only the strong

commitment group continued to recycle newspapers. Three important effects resulted

from the commitment techniques used:

(1) Gaining a commitment from individuals to recycle increased the

frequency of their participation, as well as the weight of the

material ‘they recycled.

(2) The greater the strength of the individual’s commitment

to recycle, the greater the magnitude of both these outcomes.

A-34
(3) Individuals who had made a strong

continued to do so, even though they

their original commitment.”

Stern, P. C., “Saving Energy: The Human Dimension,”

pp. 16-25, 62.

commitment to recycle

were no longer bound by

Technology Review,

The focus of this article is on energy conservation but its findings

January 1984,

can also apply

to consumer behavior issues. As starters, "energy is . . . psychologically invisible

whenever people cannot see the connection between the actions they take and the energy

they use as a result.” Tangible evidence of energy conservation (e.g., solar collectors)

can matter more than intangible evidence (e.g., additional layer of insulation). Making

energy use visible to people can improve the effectiveness of their conservation efforts

and help them realize their savings. For example, regular feedback on energy use can be

used to show the savings of energy conservation and enhance the credibility of such

efforts by communicating directly with individuals and through word-of-mouth contact.

The credibility of energy conservation efforts also depends on the consistency,

understandability, and source of the information provided. How the information is

delivered is also important: the author states that people will respond more favorably if

they experience an increase in control over their environment (e.g., conservation should

not be

values

equated with sacrifice).

Individual motivations to conserve energy can sometimes be influenced by

and habits rather than by economic incentives (e.g., for some people, the times

and days when appliances are used depend more on their individual commitment to

conservation than to price differences). Commitment to conserve may need to build on

small initial commitments, or “foot-in-the-door” techniques) e.g., distributing energysaving devices with information pamphlets).

Tracy, A.P. and S. Oskamp, “Relationships Among Ecologically Responsible Behaviors,"

Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 13, No.2, 1983-1984, pp. 115-126.

In October 1981, 96 randomly selected adults in a Los Angeles suburb were

asked about their adoption of ecologically responsible behaviors. Ecologically responsible

behavior refers to actions which retard the degradation of the environment. Fifteen

behaviors, including recycling, consumption of more ecologically compatible products,

driving 55 mph, and using a low-flow shower head were analyzed for the following

A-35
factors: 1) number of households participating; 2) positive relationship among behaviors

within subcategories; 3) existence of a general relationship among all of the behaviors;

and 4) relationship between attitude and behavior.

The experiment found that there was a very low rate of participation for all

ecologically responsible behavior, including recycling and purchasing of more ecologically

compatible goods. Participants recycled and/or consumed more ecologically compatible

products in direct relationship to their concern for energy conservation (i.e., someone

who is concerned about any of a wide range of ecological issues is more likely to take

action towards alleviating perceived environmental problems).

The study found a lack of awareness of what can be done at the individual or

household level. The authors state, "[i]ndividuals must be made aware of

be doing, and of which present behaviors are not ecologically responsible.”

what they can

Warkov, S., “Attitudes Toward the Future: Their Impact on Present Decisions,” in W.D.

Corm (cd.), Energy and Material Resources: Attitudes, Values, and Public Policy,

Westview Press, Boulder, CO, 1983, Ch. 7, pp. 131-143.

This article is based on a Spring 1979 telephone survey of 215 Connecticut

homeowners to determine factors affecting their interest in installing (and receiving

grants for) solar hot water systems (i.e., energy conservation methods). Survey results

indicated that homeowner installation of solar system was significantly related to their

perception of oil depletion (i.e., fear that some day there would be no more oil). Intrinsic

(e.g., fulfilling one’s obligations to society and future generations) and extrinsic (e.g.,

eventually saving money or insuring against future generations) and extrinsic (e.g.,

eventually saving money or insuring against future price increases) motivations were

found to have an insignificant impact on homeowner interest in a solar system. However,

the author points out that survey results may have been biased, e.g., the survey was not

conducted in the winter, when energy use and prices are of greater concern to

homeowners.

A-36
A.4 CURRENT EVENTS

American Paper Institute, no date

American Paper Institute, late 1970’s-late 1980’s

Association of New Jersey Recyclers, 1988

Becker, R. H., 1987

Brinkman, D. W., 1986

Chemical & Engineering News, 1988

Elliott, C., 1987

Ferrand, T. L., 1988a

Ferrand, T. L., 1988b

Harrowsmith, 1988

Jacobs, K., 1988

McMillan, T., 1988

The Michigan Recycling Coalition, 1986

The Michigan Recycling Coalition, 1984

Perrin, G., 1988

The Procter & Gamble Co., 1988

Recycling Today, 1988

Riggle, D., 1989

Sproule, K. A., and J.M. Cosulich, 1988

Stone, B., 1988

Taylor, E. H., 1988

Vandenberg, N., 1987

Vandenberg, N., 1988

Watson, 1988a

Young, R. and M. Storey, 1988

A-37
American Paper Institute, “Gray is Beautiful” Newsletter, Vol. 1, Issues 3-5, no date.

These newsletters provide information on the “Gray is Beautiful” campaign that

promoted the use of recycled (gray) paperboard packaging, and environmentally conscious

shopping. The newsletter, which provides factual responses to the “unfounded” claims

used by manufacturers for not using recycled paperboard packaging, also contains several

short articles describing the expansion of the “Gray is Beautiful” campaign to other

packagers.

American Paper Institute, series of newspaper

Symbol of the ‘80s” and “Recycled Packaging

late 1980’s.

These campaigns

manufacturers, and state

paperboard were identified

articles describing API’s “Shopping

Awareness Week” campaigns, late

for the

1970’sinvolved consumers, women’s clubs, grocery store chains,

and local governments. Products packaged in recycled

by manufacturers using recycling symbols on their packages

and stores having stickers placed (typically by volunteers) near the products’ shelf price

in participating stores. These campaigns were accompanied by media announcements.

The success of these programs in changing consumer purchase decisions was not

reported. These articles promoted programs which took place in Charlotte, South

Carolina; Los Angeles, California; Palo Alto, California; and throughout Arkansas and

New Jersey.

Association of New Jersey Recyclers, “Recycled Paper

Recyclenet Gazette, May 1988, p. 5.

Recycled Paper Products, Inc. has become

Products? Well Sometimes . . . ,“

the United States’ third largest

greeting card company, due in part to the popularity of its use of recycled paper. With

its growth, the company has developed new product lines, many of which do not contain

recycled fibers. These products are still marketed under the Recycled Paper Products

trade name. Other manufacturers using recycled materials are concerned that consumers

will interpret the trade name to mean that all of their products have recycled content.

This case demonstrates the need for standard definitions of symbols meaning “recycled

product.”

A-38
Becker, R. H., “Packaging and Waste Reduction: The Need for Consumer Awareness,”

paper presented at the Conference on Solid Waste Management & Materials Policy,

February 13, 1987.

The author describes the Pennsylvania Resources Council’s Environmental

Shopping Campaign, a short-lived pilot program which sought to educate consumers on

ways they could lessen their generation of solid wastes. The program encouraged consumers to, among other things, buy products made from recycled materials, or products

that were reusable or recyclable. The program had limited funds, but the consumers it

reached responded enthusiastically. Based on this experience, as well as on survey

results which indicated that the public favored recycling to reduce solid waste, but rarely

went beyond verbal support, the author argues that a well-funded, well-organized

consumer education program that deals with one type of packaging at a time could

change consumers’ purchasing habits.

Brinkman, D. W., “Used Oil: Resource or Pollutant,” Chemtech, November 1986, pp.

682-684.

This article discusses the history of the reused oil industry and processes

involved with the recycling of used oil. The oil re-refining industry was prosperous

during the 1940s- 1950s. Due to the increased use of additives in oil and economic factors

(low oil prices), the industry has since declined. During the mid-1960s, the military

stopped using recycled oil. At the same time, Congress enacted a bill forcing all lubricants containing any recycled material to be labeled as “made from previously used oil.”

The combination of these events caused consumers to assume that re-refined oil was of

inferior quality.

The Used Oil Recycling Act of 1976 removed the requirement that re-refined

oil had to be labeled as such. The Act publicized the fact that re-refined oils can be of

very high quality. Brinkman argues that the promotion of re-refined oil needs funding.

Chemical & Engineering News, “P&G to Test Market Recycled Plastic Bottle,” October

31, 1988, p. 6.

Procter & Gamble (P&G) plans to test market the first plastic bottle made from

100 percent recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET) in 1989. The material for

manufacturing

containers are

these bottles is mostly

ground and melted, and

from used two-liter soft-drink containers. The

the resin is then filtered to remove impurities.

A-39
The chemical and mechanical properties of the recycled resins are said to be identical to

bottles made with virgin PET. P&G is not sure whether the use of recycled resins will

reduce the production costs of its bottles.

Elliott, C., “Canada’s Oil Re-Refining Industry,” Resource Recycling, Vol. VI, No. 2,

May/June 1987, p. 26-27,42.

This article discusses the major sales barriers facing the Canadian oil re-refining industry, which also exports to the United States. Because of difficulties in selling

re-refined oil in Canada, the industry sells to foreign markets (including the U.S.). Not

the least of these barriers is the public perception in Canada that re-refined oils are

inferior to virgin oils, despite extensive testing by the national Research Council of

Canada which shows that “all properties of re-refined base oils are equivalent to, and in

some applications better than, virgin base oils.”

Ferrand, T. L., “Buy American, Buy Recycled,” April 29, 1988a, Working Paper.

This paper is based on a presentation made during a conference on “Recycling

Markets: California and the Pacific Rim,” sponsored by the California Waste Management Board and the Gildea Resource Center. The author begins by discussing the “consumer sector” in recycling, meaning individual and household purchase decisions. Ferrand

asserts that in addition to encouraging consumers to participate in recycling, recyclers

must also work to encourage consumers to buy the finished goods made from these

reclaimed materials.

The author’s central point is that in order to increase demand for recycled products, the image of these products must be greatly improved. The public perception of

recycled products as oftentimes inferior to those made from virgin materials must be

changed. In addition, consumer education programs must be decidedly upbeat and

positive; somber reminders about the growing MSW management crisis and the threat of

resource depletion will not work. The author states, “We are hard to motivate with

negativity, and are mostly worn out on being afraid.” As an example of negatively

oriented consumer education, she quotes the widely used slogan, “Use it up, wear it out,

make it do or do without,” and argues that this kind of approach simply does not work.

Consumer education programs should focus on the benefits that come from

recycling, rather than the problems created by not recycling.

A-40
Ferrand, T. L., “Mandatory

August 1988b, pp. 54-56.

Ferrand attacks

Recycling: Rhetoric Vs. Realism," BioCycle, Vol. 29, No. 7,

the rhetoric surrounding recycling. She also claims that

existing promotional campaigns for recycling are not appealing to society. The

campaigns need to provide positive associations with recycling for people rather than use

negative messages. Conservation must be promoted by how it can make us “richer, more

self-reliant, and secure in our economy.”

Harrowsmith, “Plastics, My Boy, Plastics,” July/August 1988, p. 118.

This article is Harrowsmith magazine’s response to readers’ criticism of a plastic magazine wrapper. They cite a 1986 West German study which found that the production of plastic grocery bags uses one-third the energy and produces less sulfur dioxide,

carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbon emissions than does the production of brown paper

bags. However, it takes plastics much longer than paper to degrade once they are disposed of. Harrowsmith changed their packaging in response to this criticism. They have

begun to wrap their magazines in Ecostar-blended polyethylene. The starch content of

this bag allows it to degrade through a combination of oxidation and biological action.

Jacobs, K., “The Design of Garbage,” Metropolis, The Architecture and Design Magazine

of New York, December, 1988, pp 54-59, 69-71.

This article is prominently featured as the cover page story in a magazine targeted to design engineers. The writer is the Associate Editor of Metropolis, and the presentation style is that of an entertaining and dramatic editorial. Data are presented on

the magnitude of solid waste problems, and packaging and product designers are

criticized for their lack of attention to the solid waste impacts of design. A few industry

leaders are quoted as saying that designers must begin to be sensitive to these issues

when designing products. The controversy over the term “recyclable” is explained, and

new industry initiatives are described, such as the Council on Plastic Packaging and the

Environment and the Packaging Coalition for Solid Waste Management.

A-41
McMillan, T., Minister of the Environment for Canada, transcript of speech at the Press

Conference to Announce Details of the Environmentally-Friendly Goods Campaign, Press

Release, Toronto, Ontario, June 27, 1988.

In response to public opinion surveys and consumer demands for ‘information on

how individuals can help protect the natural environment,” the Canadian government

plans to initiate a labeling program to identify “environmentally-friendly’’ products and

processes. The labeling program is slated to begin operation in January 1989, and is

already receiving enthusiastic support from many business leaders and environmentalists.

Surveys show that 94 percent of Canadians believe every person must take individual actions to protect the environment. Furthermore, Canadians stated a willingness

to pay up to ten percent more for “environmentally friendly” products.

The labeling program will include advisors from government, trade unions, the

private sector, academia, and consumer and environmental groups, who together will

review products and processes in the marketplace to determine which ones merit

“environmentally-friendly” labels. In addition, a competition will be held to select a logo

by which consumers can readily recognize “environmentally-friendly” goods and services. The government will provide initial financial and administrative support, but the

program will ultimately be self-sustaining. Applicants for the logo will pay fees to have

their products evaluated and, should they receive approval, to have them labeled with the

“environmentally friendly” logo.

The Michigan Recycling Coalition, “Michigan Buy Recycled Campaign Case Study,” 1986,

pp. B20-B21.

This short write-up summarizes Michigan’s “Buy Recycled” campaign. The campaign focuses on six products made from recycled materials:

● plastic lumber used in marinas, parks and as highway markers;

● shredded newspaper in animal bedding, and building insulation,

and for erosion control;

● writing paper and greeting cards;

● retreaded tires;

. re-refined oil for industrial use; and

. paper packaging.

The first step in the Michigan program is the development of a directory of

products made with recycled material. The State will not produce the directory itself,

A-42
but will instead conduct training workshops for local environmental, recycling, and civic

activists, along with anyone else who wants to participate. Once trained, these volunteers will meet with interested businesses and trade groups to discuss the materials most

relevant to particular consumer groups. The program also includes training materials,

bumper stickers, speeches, clip art, posters, and brochures to help educate and motivate

consumers to recycle and purchase products and packaging that promote source reduction

and recyclability.

The Michigan Recycling Coalition,

1984-1985,”1984.

This contest, co-sponsored

“Recycled/Recyclable Packaging Design Contest:

by four major firms (Granger Waste Management,

James River Corp., Kellogg’s, and Mead Paper), was designed to “encourage innovative

packaging ideas that will not only meet the needs and criteria of the packaging industry,

but will also maximize the use of recycled and recyclable materials, and minimize dependency on non-renewable natural resources.” A cash prize was to be awarded for top

packaging entries which satisfied marketing concerns (i.e., product protection, containment, information, convenience, marketability, and consumer appeal) and environmental

concerns (i.e., reusability, use of recycled materials, recyclability, dependency on nonrenewable natural resources, and biodegradability).

Entry forms were distributed to schools and teacher associations but no entries

were returned and the prize money was returned to the co-sponsors. Project staff felt

that concern for the MSW management crisis and environmental impacts of waste

disposal was low in 1985. There are no current plans to rerun the contest.

Perrin, G., “In behalf of the fourth R: Recycling,” The Boston Globe, September 21, 1988,

p. 32.

Jeanne Bakelar, a New Jersey woman, began a campaign in 1985 which protested the use of plastic bags in grocery stores. The campaign has been expanded to

include promoting the use of recyclable and biodegradable rather than plastic

packaging. It is now backed by the General Federation of Women’s Clubs. Bakelar

stated, “The whole thing boils down to education. It’s the fourth ‘R’ - recycling.” She

feels that it is up to the consumer to demand that manufacturers use recyclable and biodegradable packaging rather than plastics. (This short editorial article does not provide

details of the campaign.)

A-43
The Procter & Gamble Company, materials compiled by E. A. Fox concerning P&G

activities, 1988.

Procter & Gamble is marketing both a liquid detergent and a fabric softener in

several European countries using a packaging refill scheme which reduces packaging by

selling a reusable container of liquid detergent which may be refilled from smaller bags

of concentrate and adding water. The reduction of packaging material was estimated to

be approximately 85 percent of the conventionally packaged liquid detergents. Procter &

Gamble expects to use the same packaging

within the same market because of positive

scheme, in improved

consumer response.

form, for other products

Recycling Today, “Canadians Host Recyclers at Wide-Ranging Conference,” June 1988,

pp. 54-56.

This staff article provided a brief synopsis of The North American Recycling ’88

Conference. One significant theme presented at the conference was the necessity of

developing a steady demand for recycled products. One speaker said that market development is “the single most important issue facing recyclers today. (It is) the last

remaining barrier to a mature recycling infrastructure.”

Another speaker stressed the importance of educating consumers, calling it a

key to improving the success of recycling programs. Consumer education, the speaker

suggested, should include labeling recyclable products as such, and teaching consumers

about the true costs of “consumption without disposal planning.”

Riggle, D., “Only

1989, pp. 39-41.

Pay for What You Throw Away,” BioCycle, Vol. 30, No. 2, February

This article summarizes the pay-per-bag trash collection programs for three

communities. The author discusses the programs’ collection experiences, public

acceptance, effects on diversion rates (primarily from recycling), cost savings (i.e.,

recycling versus landfilling), and state support.

According to a representative of one of the communities’ programs: “What goes

on in the mind of consumers when they must repeatedly go into a store and buy the

actual bags they use for their garbage and pay a price that actually reflects the cost of

the service is very important. It sends a powerful message on a regular basis that waste

A-44
disposal is an expensive service, and that if I reduce the amount 1 throw away by

recycling, 1 will also reduce my garbage bill. it’s a different kind of education than

reading a flyer or going to a meeting and really seems to bring about an awareness in

people of what’s really going on.”

Sproule, K.A. and J.M. Cosulich,

Resource Recycling, Vol. VII, No. 6,

“Higher recovery rates: the answer’s in the bag,”

November/December 1988, pp. 20-21, 43-44.

This article describes the per-container system of charging households and

businesses for their solid waste collection and disposal costs based directly on the number

of containers set out for collection. Twelve such programs are summarized, providing

information on their collection and implementation methods, containers used, fees

charged, and other program features.

Stone, B., Fountain Fresh Beverages, Salt Lake City, Utah, Personal Communication,

September 21, 1988.

Since 1982, the Fountain Fresh Beverage Company has been operating an innovative program which encourages consumers to reuse plastic (PET) bottles. The program

works as follows. The consumer fills a two-liter plastic bottle with any of a variety of

soft-drink flavors from an automatic dispenser in the store. At the register, the cashier

first rings up the price for the full bottle using a Universal Product Code (UPC) label

scanner, and then places a new UPC label over the original.

When the consumer returns to the store, he or she brings back the empty bottle.

Attached to the soft drink dispensers are patented, automatic bottle washing units. The

consumer simply places the bottle in the unit, which thoroughly washes and rinses it. The

consumer then refills the bottle with soft drink and takes it to the register. The new

UPC label registers a lower price than the original. No additional labels are applied

after the initial purchase.

There are approximately 180 dispensing-and-washing units in operation, 60 to 70

of which are in Canada. In the U. S., the units are located primarily in the Pacific

Northwest states, Florida, and some Western states. The Fountain Fresh company

reports that consumers have responded positively to the program. Canadian consumers

have accepted the program much more enthusiastically than have their counterparts in

A-45
the United States. A representative said the Canadian response has been “unbelievable,”

and attributed it in large part to the high levels of environmental awareness and concern

in Canada.

Taylor, E. H., “Consumer Reaction to Solid Waste Problems and Regulations,” The

Procter & Gamble Company, a report on work in progress, July 15, 1988.

In 1987, Procter & Gamble anticipated that there would be increasing state

regulation designed to reduce MS W. The company expected that state activities ranging

from taxing or banning certain packaging material to mandating trash separation and

recycling would become more prevalent. Group interviews were conducted in California,

Georgia, Michigan, New Jersey, and Tennessee to ascertain consumer awareness of solid

waste problems and attitudes towards corrective actions. In order to gain a better

understanding of household awareness, over one hundred follow-up home visits were conducted in communities in Connecticut, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Washington. The

findings include:

. Consumer awareness of national and local solid waste problems

was directly proportional to the level of publicity.

● Even where awareness existed, the typical response was to blame

“the system.” There was a great resistance to changing waste

disposal practices.

● The desire for biodegradable packaging is not based on an understanding of the relative merits of degradable packaging, but

rather the consumer’s desire for a “panacea” to the waste disposal

problem .

. The greatest weaknesses of municipal programs are communication, consistency, and dependability. The municipality’s inability

to get the message across to households results in confusion and

lack of cooperation by households.

● Industry support may be required and industry could gain strategic

market advantage from knowledge of consumer interests.

. Both industry and solid waste officials (at all levels of

government) should pay more attention to what consumers are

willing and able to do to solve the MSW management crisis.

A-46
Vandenberg, N., “Buying Recycled Plastic Products - Barriers to Overcome,” speech

given at RecyclingPlas II --87, June 1987.

Nancy Vandenberg’s speech stresses the need to overcome barriers to buying

plastic products with recycled content. She states that there is no problem meeting

feedstock requirements, and that increasing demand for end products will benefit everyone. The principal impediment to increasing demand for products with recycled content

is lack of availability. Most “buy recycled” programs have great difficulty finding

recycled plastic products. Most manufacturers and dealers will not admit that their

products contain recycled content. Randy Duncan, in Austin’s (Texas) purchasing

department stated,

“Finding opportunities to buy, that’s the hardest part. Paper, glass, and

aluminum are easy, it’s going a step beyond that’s hard. The recycled

content is all I ask [for].”

Manufacturers fear losing customers because labeling a product as containing “recycled

material” might connote lower quality. Six barriers to increasing consumer demand and

some solutions were mentioned:

●

✎

✎

●

●

What is the definition of recycled plastic content?

The definition must be supported by all constituencies and must

be adopted quickly. Standard definitions will help to simplify the

bidding for institution and government purchasing.

How can recycled content be proven?

Government approved certification will help overcome the doubts

of skeptical consumers and prevent the creation of an over-used

label such as “all natural” on food products.

Overcome manufacturers’ fear of losing customers.

Information on recycled content should be made available to

those interested in buying recycled products, including household

consumers, government buyers, and the business community.

Information on recycled content will also be helpful to education

programs and retailers promoting purchase of recycled products.

Publicize recycled content in products that work.

“The prejudice against recycled content is still very real.” Publicity of products with high recycled content that are already successful will increase consumer acceptance.

Recognize existing products as well as innovations.

Unfortunately, new products and innovations are the focus of

industry and trade association publicity. The growing trend of

recognizing existing products with recycled content should be

supported. Eventually, trade associations may be formed by manufacturers of products with recycled content.

A-47
● Make it easy to find recycled products.

An up-to-date computerized directory of recycled plastic products for individual and industrial consumers is needed. A product

directory would be a valuable public relations tool.

VandenBerg, N., “Twelve Steps Toward Environmentally Sound Buying Habits,” speech

given at Office of Technology Assessment Workshop: State and Local Government Solid

Waste Management, March 17-18, 1988.

The author states that getting consumers to accept and buy goods with recycled

content will require some fundamental changes in American thinking. Furthermore, the

message should be fashionable and the educational campaign should be well crafted to

achieve the goal of long-term changes in purchasing behavior. However, educating

consumers to buy these goods will not be effective if they are not available in the

marketplace. As a result, policy makers and industry decision-makers must first address

the following twelve problems:

. Shifting to Recycled Materials Use. A broad-scale commitment

to using recyclable is needed.

● Learn from Countries using U.S. Scrap Materials about recycling

industries that could be sited in the U.S. and capitalize on U.S.

feedstocks. Department of Commerce should begin tracking

those materials that can be recycled.

. Develop Data for Strategic Planning which currently is very

difficult to gather.

. Define Source Reduction, Reuse, Recycling, Incineration, Landfill. The waste management hierarchy adopted by EPA needs to

be well defined and well publicized to avoid confusion and inaccurate use of terms.

● Establish Common Definitions for Recycled Content so that

recycled content labels always refer to a consistent, nationwide,

minimum qualifying percentage for any given product.

● Set Purchasing Strategies to Match Waste Management Strategies. This could provide major reductions in waste generation.

For example, a double-sided copier capable of reading single- or

two-sided originals could cut paper use in half.

. Develop and Publicize Fundamental Formulas which not only

include the purchase price but also consider avoided disposal costs

available to the region.

A-48
● Re-evaluate and Improve Upon the Language in RCRA 6002.

Streamlining the certification requirements for government procurements will, on a cost basis, - increase the attractiveness of

recycled purchases.

● Release and Publicize Federal Agency Reports and Publish Useful

Bibliographies. This would be most useful if conducted according

to subject area and would prevent duplication of research by different agencies.

c Redesign Shipping Strategies to Backhaul Recycled Feedstock.

Transport costs could be cut if the delivery vehicles picked up

recyclable materials.

● Target Materials Collections to Industries Which Limit Recycled

Product Production Because of Lack of Supply. Lack of supply is

often the easiest barrier to overcome but requires research to

determine which industries need better feedstock supplies and

what can be done to facilitate the return of post-consumer and

secondary materials.

. Market Development Must Be Concurrent with Collection of

Recyclable Materials or else supply and demand will always be

out of balance.

Watson, T., “FSC Paper builds markets with innovative approach,” Resource Recycling,

Vol. VII, No. 1, March/April 1988a, pp. 30-31, 53.

This article describes FSC Paper Co.'s (Alsip, Illinois) Total Recycling program:

they will purchase all the waste newspaper collected by a community if the community’s

newspaper publisher agrees to buy a certain amount of FSC's 100 percent recycled

newsprint. FSC's recycling program represents a self-contained recycling program and is

offered to communities within one to two hours of driving time from their mill.

Currently, nine Midwest communities participate in the program.

Young, R. and M. Storey, Challenging the Disposable Society: An Overview of Waste

Minimization Strategies, Philadelphia Recycling Office, 1988.

This paper summarizes current state waste minimization programs along the

East Coast. The focus is on activities states can undertake, such as refundable deposits,

packaging taxes, or prohibitive regulations, to discourage or prevent the purchase of certain packaging materials. Because of the authors’ attention to legislative solutions,

efforts to affect consumer behavior through education were mentioned only in passing.

Education was seen to be most effective in raising citizen awareness of the need to miniA-49
mize waste generation. Two publications oriented towards creating consumer demand

for recyclable products were cited: the West Michigan Environmental Action Council

Education Foundation’s “Waste Reduction Handbook” and the Pennsylvania Resource

Council’s (PRC) “Environmental Shopping List.” Because the PRC expects that these

activities would be most effective at the local level, it is sponsoring a competition

among garden and women’s clubs awarding $100 to the club that is most active in

changing their consumer habits. Rhode Island has already developed legislation which

would require labeling to inform consumers about a product’s durability and reusability.

Similarly, a twelve state consortium is considering labeling requirements informing the

consumer of the recyclability of plastic products. There is no discussion of the expected

effectiveness of any of these programs. One section highlights industry responses such as

the Coca-Cola Corporation’s joint venture to produce and market the world’s first

refillable plastic soft drink container.

A-50
1

A.5 EDUCATIONAL AND RESOURCE MATERIALS

American Paper Institute, 1988

Bell, C. O. and M. M. Schwartz, 1989

Brandt, P. and M. Swanson, 1984

Browne, E.R., 1988

Chown, C. and C. Fridgen, 1986

Citizens’ Program for the Chesapeake Bay, Inc., 1986

City of Berkeley, 1980s

Connecticut Fund for the Environment, 1987

Council on Economic Priorities, 1988

Dadd, D., 1984

Enterprise for Education, 1988

Environmental Action Foundation, 1980s

The Household Products Disposal Council, no date

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, no date

Michigan Department of Natural Resources, 1988

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 1989

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 1980

Pennsylvania Resources Council, 1988

Seattle Engineering Department, Solid Waste Utility,

Washington Extension Service, 1980s

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988b

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1979

A-51
American Paper Institute, “12 Facts About Waste Paper Recycling,” 1988.

This pamphlet presents twelve facts which support the recycling of waste paper.

These include a reduction in landfill disposal costs and the positive effect of demand for

recycled paper on encouraging markets for waste paper.

Bell, C.O. and M.M. Schwartz, OSCAR’s Options: A Supplementary Environmental

Education Curriculum, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, 1989.

The lessons included in this manual are for grades 4-8 and designed for Rhode

Island schools. To address the state’s problems of MSW disposal, the following topics are

covered: natural resources, litter, household hazardous waste, source reduction,

recycling, composting, incineration, and landfills. Each topic has a list of lessons,

arranged sequentially, along with suggested time allotments. Students are encouraged to

become concerned consumers, to learn of the environmental consequences of their

purchase decisions, and to buy products which promote source reduction and

recyclability, and thereby reduce their environmental impacts.

Brandt, P. and M. Swanson, “The Environmental Consumer,” 1984.

“The Environmental Consumer” is a twenty-minute automatic slide and tape

series. The program begins with a discussion of the “throw away” ethic in American society. This ethic has made some raw materials scarce and has created a solid waste

disposal crisis in America. The slide show suggests that the solution to the solid waste

crisis is to change the existing “throw away” ethic to a conservation ethic. The

presentation suggests how individual consumers can avoid products which are not

recycled, recyclable, or are over-packaged. It also discusses how individuals can recycle

materials and describes which materials are recyclable. Government agencies and

community groups can help by developing recycling centers and separated curbside

collection systems. Government agencies can also create incentives for manufacturers

to produce goods that promote source reduction and recyclability.

A-52
Browne, E. R., “Teaching Kids to Teach Others,’’ Waste Age. April 1988, pp. 154-156.

Brown claims that, "[i]t makes good business sense to teach your community

about the environmentally sound aspects of modern solid waste management.” The

author cited programs targeted at elementary and high school students in Florida,

Missouri, Ohio, and New York City that promote awareness of recycling and other

aspects of solid waste management through participation in recycling drives, field trips

to a disposal or recycling facility, and school science projects. Project staff in Columbus, Ohio measured success according to the level of student participation in school

science projects focusing on solid waste topics. Although the current programs do not

stress changing buying habits to promote the same goals, project staff felt that teaching

students is always a good conduit for reaching and informing families.

Chown, C. and C. Fridgen, “Alternatives to Hazardous Household Products: You Have a

Choice,” Michigan State University, Cooperative Extension Service, Bulletin WM 01,

December 1986.

This pamphlet discusses the dangers of hazardous household products and

provides a list of alternative safe substitute products and proper disposal methods for the

following products: household cleaners, aerosol sprays; automotive and paint products;

and pesticides, herbicides, and rodenticides. Referral information such as additional

reference materials and phone numbers and addresses of environmental agencies and

groups is also provided.

Citizens’ Program for the Chesapeake Bay, Inc., “Baybook: A Guide To Reducing Water

Pollution At Home,” Baltimore, MD, 1986.

Although targeted at people living in communities near the Chesapeake Bay and

its tributary waterbodies, this guide is a reference source for anyone concerned with

water pollution. The guide discusses potential sources of pollution from the home, and

provides information on how to reduce or prevent it. The guide is divided into chapters

on topics such as erosion control, septic systems, gardening! household chemicals

(includes discussion of less toxic alternative products and appropriate disposal methods),

and community action.

A-53
City of Berkeley, “Precycle. Do it Right from the Start!,” Berkeley, California, 1980s.

“Precycle” is described as "[a] new, perhaps revolutionary, way of thinking about

waste." It draws a direct link between what we buy and what we throw away, and

stresses source reduction through purchase decisions made at the store. Examples of

precycling include choosing products carefully, being selective on packages, avoiding

disposable, buying in bulk, and reusing and repairing items. Locations of collection

points for recyclable are also listed.

Connecticut Fund for the Environment, Don’t Throw This Away!, 1987.

The coalition prepared a booklet which summarizes statistics about solid waste

and recycling, provides advice on how to reduce waste volume and toxicity by changing

purchase decisions, and tells where and how to recycle household wastes.

Council on Economic Priorities, “Shopping For A Better World,” New York, NY, 1988.

A pocket reference guide designed for consumers to carry with them while

shopping. Includes a section called “Shopping For A Cleaner World,” which rates companies in terms of the environmental safety of their products and/or manufacturing practices. Companies using modern pollution controls, practicing resource recovery, eliminating hazardous ingredients, or using more recyclable and/or biodegradable packaging

materials (or combinations of these activities) are rated and named.

Dadd, D., Nontoxic and Natural, Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, 1984.

A book rating over 1,200 brand-name items for nontoxicity, and suggesting over

400 safe, inexpensive alternatives to commercial products. Covers cosmetics, food,

cleaners, pesticides, office supplies, and building materials. Includes a bibliography, a

directory of manufacturers, importers, distributors, and mail-order sources.

A-54
Enterprise for Education, Inc., Hazardous Wastes from Homes, 1988.

This color booklet provides a brief history of the creation, introduction, and

widespread use of household chemicals. The booklet outlines the dangers of many common chemicals, and gives instructions on the safest ways to dispose of virtually all household chemicals. It advises consumers to change their buying habits to avoid purchasing

dangerous products, and to recycle their hazardous wastes. It also supplies general

guidance and suggestions for implementing a community household hazardous waste

collection and disposal program.

Environmental Action Foundation, “SWAP: Solid Waste Alternatives Project,” 1980s.

“The goal of the Solid Waste Alternatives Project is to encourage states and

communities to implement successful waste reduction programs that maximize source

reduction, reuse, remanufacture, recycling and composting.” This brochure discusses

strategies to encourage greater levels of these waste reduction measures as well as

actions individuals can take in their purchase and use of products, as well as in their

everyday lives.

The Household Products Disposal Council, “Disposal: Do It Right. Managing Household

Wastes,” Washington, DC, no date.

This booklet discusses the potential hazards of, and proper disposal methods for,

common household products. It includes a section on how communities handle different

kinds of household wastes, a checklist of “do’s and don’t’s” for household hazardous waste

disposal (e.g., don’t pour any wastes into storm drains), recommended disposal

instructions for household products, and information on setting up a community household

hazardous waste collection day.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management> “Household Hazardous

Wastes,” no date.

This pamphlet describes the environmental hazards of careless storage and

disposal of many common household products. It includes a list of benign and inexpensive

alternatives to such products as oven cleaners, roach poisons, and silver polish. The

pamphlet also encourages consumers to change their buying habits so as to avoid

purchasing environmentally hazardous items.

A-55
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, “Buy Recycled Products: They’re Worth Our

Environment,” 1988.

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources, with funding from the Clean

Michigan Fund Program, has produced a series of pamphlets under the title, “Buy

Recycled Products. They’re Worth Our Environment.” The pamphlets begin by presenting information about the solid waste management crisis in Michigan. This information

includes how much solid waste is generated in Michigan, where and how the waste is

disposed of, and the potential problems associated with disposing of waste in these ways

(e.g., ground water contamination from landfills and air pollution from incineration).

The pamphlets suggest that recycling is one way individuals can help solve

Michigan’s solid waste crisis. In order to increase the demand for recycled products, the

Michigan Buy Recycled Program concentrates on encouraging the purchase of recycled

paper and paper packaging, recycled plastic, retreaded tires and re-refined automotive

oil. The pamphlets describe the types of products which are available in each of these

categories

and price.

and dispute some of the common myths concerning recycled products’ quality

There is also a smart shopper’s guide to source reduction.

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Here Today, Here

Tomorrow . . . Revisited: A Teacher’s Guide to Solid Waste, Division of Solid Waste

Management, 1989.

This is a manual developed and designed for New Jersey students and teachers

in grades 4 through 8, and written by New Jersey teachers and solid waste management

professionals. Activities in the manual are designed around New Jersey solid waste

management issues, intending to increase student (and teacher) awareness and knowledge

of the subject. Students and teachers are also asked to participate actively (e.g., through

their roles as consumers) in solving the state’s solid waste dilemma. Student activities

are described by individual objectives, subject areas, skill identification, materials

needed, study procedure, study extension possibilities, and the solid waste component(s)

(source reduction, recycling, resource recovery, and Iandfilling) to which the activities

are related.

A-56
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, “Packaging,” 1980.

This flyer discusses the uses of packaging as well as what makes some packaging

excessive. It lists alternatives for consumers and provides a self test to determine how

socially conscious a consumer is.

Pennsylvania Resources Council, “Become an Environmental Shopper: Vote for the

Environment,” 1988.

These materials ask consumers to think about the environmental impacts of

their purchasing decisions, and to become “environmental shoppers” by learning the four

R’s: reduce the amount of waste produced; reuse as much as possible; recycle the

recyclable; and reject (i.e., don’t purchase) over-packaging and products hazardous to

the environment. The brochure offers an environmental shopping guide which lists

products that are packaged in recycled/recyclable packaging. Information on how the

brochure was distributed and its effectiveness is contained in the Ruth Becker speech

(1987) contained in Appendix A.4.

Seattle Engineering Department, Solid Waste Utility; Washington Energy Extension Service, “Cutting Down On Garbage,” Seattle, WA, 1980s.

This booklet provides information on environmental shopping, reuse, recycling,

composting, other ways to reduce MSW disposal, and information on the hazards of

common household products.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Let’s Recycle! Lesson Plans for Grades K-6 and

7-12, SW-801, 1980.

In 1975, EPA provided financial and technical assistance to Somerville,

, Massachusetts to determine the feasibility of residential source separation of

recyclable. A key component to the program’s success was the education campaign used

for residents and students. The lesson plans included in the manual are based on those

used in Somerville; they are designed to inform students of the environmental impacts

from MSW, the benefits of recycling (and reuse), and how to participate in recycling (and

reuse) activities.

A-57
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, ''Recycle, '' EPA/53O-SW-88-050, October 1988b.

This brochure describes the MSW problem and the role of recycling in reducing

the reliance on landfills and incinerators, saving on disposal costs, protecting health and

the environment, and conserving natural resources. Information is also provided on what

recycling is, and how to participate in it, as well as how to be a smart shopper.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Waste Not, Want Not,” Washington, D. C., 1976.

This one-page flyer discusses how households can help reduce the amount of

packaging used. It describes in simple terms how households can minimize, shop for,

reuse, discard properly, compress, and recycle their packaging wastes.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “What You Can Do to Recycle More Paper,”

1979.

This pamphlet discusses the benefits of recycling in conserving resources and

protecting the environment. It is pointed out that demand by individual consumers and

bulk users for recycled paper is necessary if wastepaper is to be used to make new

paper. There is lengthy discussion of the various roles for consumers and households

(e.g., ask for it, buy it), citizens (e.g., write about it, participate in it), students (e.g., ask

for it, study it), teachers (e.g., write for it, teach about it), and employees (e.g., ask

about it and for it), to increase the demand for products made of recycled paper.

A-58
Appendix B

ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS CONTACTED

Telephone Interviews

Informal telephone interviews were conducted with members of industry associations, individual companies, government organizations dealing with recycling

programs, environmental coalitions, and numerous consultants and other experts.

Industry associations were asked about the types of products and packaging

their members produce, how consumers have responded to the promotion of products and

packaging that promote source reduction or contain recycled materials, whether the

industry makes any efforts to create a positive image for recycled products and

packaging or downplays that they are recycled, and their opinions on the appropriate

roles for the public and private sectors in promoting recycled products and packaging.

Members of government organizations were asked for information on projects

currently underway or planned for the future, and for their opinions of the proper roles

for government and industry in stimulating demand for products and packaging that

promote source reduction or recyclability.

Individual companies were asked essentially the same questions as were industry

associations, except that special attention was paid to the specific details of each company’s situation and products and packaging.

The consultants, experts and coalition members were asked for any information

they had, as well as for their assessment of the current level of consumer awareness

about products and packaging that promote source reduction or recyclability and their

opinions about the essential elements of a successful education program.

The following is a list of the primary contacts made during telephone interviews,

Industry Associations:

Aluminum Association

American Retreaders Association

American Paper Institute

Food Marketing Institute

Glass Packaging Institute

Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries

New Jersey Food Council

Society of the Plastics Industry

Tire Retread Information Bureau

B-1
Government:

California Waste Management Board

Environmentally Friendly Products Campaign of Canada

Illinois Dept. of Energy and Natural Resources

Maryland Energy Office

Michigan Department of Natural Resources

Ministry of the Environment, Canada

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Minnesota Waste Management Board

Pennsylvania Resources Council

Recycling Council of Ontario (Canada)

Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management

Rhode Island Solid Waste Management Corp.

U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Companies:

Ahern and Heussner

American Demographics Magazine

FSC Paper

Metropolis Magazine

Packaging Magazine

The Procter & Gamble Company

The Recycled Paper Company

Recycled Products Guide

Rubbermaid

Turtle Plastics

World Waste Magazine

Experts and Coalitions:

American Recycling Markets

Bentley College

Columbus Clean Community

Consumers Union

Council on Economic Priorities

EcoNet/PeaceNet

Environmental Defense Fund

Ferrand Associates

Markets for Recycled Products, New York City

New Alternatives

New York City Environmental Action Coalition

Overseas Marketing Exchange

People Technologies

Public Management Consultants

Reed College

Resource Conservation Consultants

San Diego Ecology Centre

San Diego State University

Social Investment Forum

Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals

B-2
Technical Assistance Research Programs Institute

University of Michigan

University of Pennsylvania

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Worldwatch Institute

B-3
Appendix C

MATERIALS IN THE MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE STREAM

AND SELECTED PRODUCTS AND PACKAGING WHICH MAY HELP TO

MITIGATE THE MSW MANAGEMENT CRISIS

This appendix provides a summary of products and packaging and practices that

can help reduce the MSW problem. MSW is defined by U.S. EPA (1989) as referring

“primarily to residential solid waste, with some contribution from commercial,

institutional and industrial sources. ” The first section discusses products and packaging

that promote source reduction and recyclability. The second section reviews several

environmental shopping guides that can help consumers modify their purchasing habits

and become more conscious of the environmental impacts posed by common household

products and packaging.

Summary of Products and Packaging

The study generated a list of the types of household consumer products and

packaging that promote source reduction and recyclability. The list is not exhaustive,

and no brand names are provided.

Products and packaging that promote source reduction include redesigned half -

pint milk cartons (use less paper), durable products, reusable products and packaging

containers, and non-toxic alternatives to household products and chemicals. Products

that are repairable also contribute to source reduction in that worn components, rather

than the entire product, are replaced.

Products and packaging that promote recyclability include: paper, glass, ferrous

metals, aluminum, plastics, rubber, waste oil, textiles, yard wastes, and municipal

sewage sludge. The most common reusable items found in households are containers

such as returnable bottles, durable packaging, and boxes. In addition, numerous non-toxic

or low-toxicity pesticides are available to consumers. The following materials, discussed

in order of their contribution to the MSW stream (see Exhibit C-1), are considered

recyclable. It is important to note that until both the technology to reclaim and

reprocess those materials and the market for reclaimed materials exist, a material

cannot be considered recyclable.

c-1
Exhibit C-1

Recyclable Constituents of the MSW Stream

r--l

L

I I 7.9% Glass

i

8.0% Rubber, Leather, Textiles & Wood

8.2% Food Wastes

/

I

(U.S. EPA, 1988a)

c-2
Paper makes up 41 percent of gross discards of the MSW stream. On average,

about 22 percent of used paper is recovered (USEPA, 1988a).

● Recyclable paper products include newsprint, office paper,

computer paper, magazines, and cardboard. The specific paper

products accepted for recycling often vary with recycling

centers. The paper recycling process can be hampered by certain

items, including envelopes with cellophane “windows”, and peeloff note paper (“stick-on notes”) backed with polyvinyl acetate

adhesive.

● Recycled paper products include gray cardboard, high-grade

office paper, xerographic and laser printing paper, mixed paper,

newsprint, photographic paper, corrugated cardboard, gypsum,

wallboard liner, cellulose insulation, tissue products, and

“agropaper”, a soil mulch.

Yard wastes are 17.9 percent of gross discards of the MSW stream (USEPA,

1988a). Yard wastes can be composted and sold as a soil enhancement or mulch. Because

yard wastes constitute such a large share of the total MSW stream, and because

composting them is relatively simple and

increasingly turning to composting yard

destined for disposal.

Glass makes up 8.2 percent of

avoids the cost of disposal, communities are

wastes to help reduce the amount of MSW

gross discards of the MSW stream. Of this

amount, approximately 8.5 percent is recovered (USEPA, 1988a).

● Recyclable glass products include all glass containers such as

bottles and jars. Most non-container glass products, such as

dishes and plate glass, are not accepted at recycling centers

because they are made of different materials than are bottles and

jars. In addition, certain specialty glass products are not

recyclable. These include safety glass, which is laminated with a

plastic film, and heat-resistant (Pyrex) glass, which is extremely

difficult to melt for re-molding. Glass is an extremely efficient

material to recycle, because it can be melted and re-molded into

new containers with no loss: one pound of discarded glass can be

recycled into one pound of new glass (Glass Packaging Institute,

pamphlet, no date).

● Recycled glass products include new glass containers, fiberglass

insulation, aggregate substitutes (fill), foam insulation, and

“glassphalt,” a paving material.

Ferrous Metals compose 7 percent of gross discards of the MSW stream. Less

than 4 percent of ferrous metal discards are recovered (USEPA, 1988a).

● Recyclable ferrous metal products include a wide variety of scrap

metal items. Household ferrous recyclable include steel cans,

automobiles (bodies, engine blocks), and major appliances.

C-3
● Recycled ferrous metal products encompass the same wide range

as do the recyclable products. For example, the steel from used

appliances can be recycled into sheet steel, and engine blocks can

be recast into any number of items, including new engines.

Aluminum makes up 1.5 percent of gross discards of the MSW stream, of which

25 percent is recovered (USEPA, 1988a).

● Recyclable aluminum products include cans, and a wide variety of

other products, ranging from aluminum engine blocks to miscellaneous scrap. Like glass, aluminum is an efficient material to

recycle. It requires much less energy to recover and recycle

aluminum than to mine and refine the bauxite ore for virgin metal

(Aluminum Association, personal communication, 1988).

● Recycled aluminum products include much more than just

beverage cans. Virtually every product made from aluminum has

at least some recycled aluminum in it. The Institute of Scrap

Recycling Industries (personal contact, 1988) has stated that

recycled aluminum performs better than virgin metal in die

casting.

Plastics make up 6.5 percent of gross discards of the MSW stream.

Approximately one percent of discarded plastics is recovered (USEPA, 1988a).

. Recyclable plastics include discarded polyethylene terephthalate

(PET) bottles, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) milk and juice

jugs, and polyvinyl chloride (PVC).

. Recycled plastic products vary depending on the type of plastic

that is recycled. PET bottles are recycled as: fiberfill for coats

and sleeping bags, rigid plastic foam - insulation, woven or spun

geotextiles/geofabrics (used in erosion control), continuous

filament yarns, carpeting, garbage bags, and garbage cans. Highdensity polyethylene is made into: drain pipes, pallets, playground

equipment, plastic lumber, plant pots, hoses, urethane foam

insulation, and molded plastics (e.g., shower stalls). Polyvinylchloride is recycled to make: urinal screens, floor mats; automobile battery casings, and tire traction mats.

Before they can be recycled into new products, discarded plastic items may

need to be sorted by resin types (i.e., PET separated from PVC, etc.). In an effort to

facilitate such container sorting, and thus to increase plastic recycling, the Society of

the Plastics Industry has recently designed a Voluntary Plastic Container Coding

System. Under the system, which began in July 1988, participating container

manufacturers will imprint symbols that identify resin types on the bottom of all plastic

bottles with a capacity of 16 ounces or more, and on other plastic containers with a

capacity of 8 ounces or more. It is expected that most plastic bottles will be coded by

mid-1991.

c-4
Rubber and Leather make up 2.5 percent of gross discards of the MSW stream

(USEPA, 1988a). A small amount of discarded rubber (less than 3 percent of the rubber

and leather) is recycled into products such as irrigation hoses and automobile retreads.

Textiles comprise 1.8 percent of the MSW stream. An extremely small portion

of the textile discards is recycled (USEPA, 1988a). Waste wool and cotton are used in

recycled cloths (industrial wiping cloths), and discarded polyester is recycled as mattress

pads and carpeting.

Municipal wastewater treatment sludge comprises 1 percent of gross discards of

the MSW stream. Currently, approximately 41 percent of all sludge generated is sent to

municipal landfills, while 25 percent is applied to land as a soil amendment, either

directly or after composting.

Waste Oil can be re-refined for use as a lubricant. Waste oil can also be burned

as a fuel, but this practice produces emissions of heavy metals and other contaminants

unless adequate pollution controls are used. Despite negative public perceptions about

its quality, re-refined oil has been shown to be as good as virgin oil (see Elliot,

Appendix A.4).

Shopping Guides

State and local governments as well as some private companies and non-profit

organizations now offer environmental-shopping guides. These guides range from lists of

products and packaging made from recycled materials, to brand-name evaluations of the

toxicity of common household products and suggestions for non-toxic alternatives. The

guides also include lists of companies that practice source reduction, utilize state-ofthe-art pollution controls, eliminate toxic materials in their production processes, and

use more recyclable materials in their packaging. Some examples of these kinds of

guides are: Shopping For A Better World, by the Council on Economic Priorities,

Nontoxic & Natural, written by Debra Lynn Dadd, and Recycled Products Guide, by

Recoup Publishing (available March 1989).

Consumer shopping guides are useful for several reasons. First, and most

obviously, these guides help consumers make environmentally-conscious purchase

decisions by providing them with basic information about the products on the market.

Second, because they make environmental shopping less confusing, the guides encourage

consumers to modify their purchase habits. Third, by showing consumers the social-cost

c-5
differences between products with similar or identical functions, these guides may help

consumers recognize that by choosing carefully what to buy, they can influence which

products are manufactured and sold.

There are also numerous guides available that provide information on reducing

the amounts and toxicity of wastes leaving the home. Some guides, such as the those

available from the Environmental Action Foundation (1980s, 1976) as part of its Solid

Waste Alternatives Plan (SWAP), the Seattle Engineering Department (1980s), the

Michigan Department of Natural Resources (1988), the Pennsylvania Resources Council

(1988), or from the U.S. EPA (1988b, 1986) focus on ways to reduce MSW. Others guides,

such as those from the Citizens Program for the Chesapeake Bay, Inc. (1988), and

Enterprise for Education (1988), emphasize the pollution hazards posed by many common

household products such as cleaners, polishes, disinfectants, motor oil and antifreeze.

These guides also discuss safe ways to dispose of household hazardous wastes and

encourage the use of non-toxic alternatives.

*U.S. Government Printing Office : 1990-721-255

C-6