Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 1257–1272 | Cite as

Assessment of citizens’ environmental behavior toward municipal solid waste management for a better and appropriate system in Indonesia: a case study of Padang City

  • Nova Ulhasanah
  • Naohiro Goto


Waste separation system which has been relatively successful in developed countries is expected to be the solution for municipal solid waste’s problems in Padang city, Indonesia. However, the existing solid waste (SW) bank (a system for waste separation implementation in Padang city) is claimed to be ineffective proved by the low percentage of waste that can be treated by it. This study aims to understand the social condition toward citizens’ environmental behavior which brings to the conclusion of readiness of Padang citizen for plan of waste separation-based system application in the future and propose a new system that is appropriate for Padang city’s social condition. The study conducted structural equation modeling (SEM) [including exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)] and a scoring system of social evaluation by surveying 609 residents. This study showed that Padang citizens are not completely ready for the plan of modification of the solid waste management system and that the city needs to improve citizens’ pro-environmental behavior. This study proposes the waste FUN system as a solution to improve the level of readiness of the citizens that has a high potential for application in Indonesia and other developing countries with similar social condition.


Structural equation modeling Exploratory factor analysis Confirmatory factor analysis Municipal solid waste Separation-based system 



We gratefully acknowledge the lecturers and students of Andalas University and citizens of Padang, Indonesia for filling the questionnaires and providing data and other valuable information to make this study a reality.

Supplementary material

10163_2017_691_MOESM1_ESM.ppt (1.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PPT 1256 KB)


  1. 1.
    Zhu DJ (2004) Towards a closed-loop materials economy. Chin J Popul Resour Environ 2(1):9–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sheate WR, Partidário MR (2010) Strategic approaches and assessment techniques—potential for knowledge brokerage towards sustainability. Environ Impact Assess Rev 30:278–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Steg L, Vlek C (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and research agent. J Environ Psychol 29:309–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Padang (2017) Kependudukan.|accordion-daftar-subjek1. Accessed 2 Sep 2017, (in Indonesian Language)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ministry of Environment (2008) UU No. 18/2008. Accessed 24 Jan 2017, (in Indonesian Language)
  6. 6.
    Dinas Perhubungan Komunikasi dan Informatika Kota Padang (2014) Peluang investasi dibidang Pengelolaan Sampah. 6 Nov 2014, (in Indonesian Language)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aprilia A, Tezuka T, Spaargaren G (2012) Household solid waste management in Jakarta Indonesia: a socio-economic evaluation. Intech 4:71–100. Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zurbrugg C, Gfrerer M, Ashadi H, Brenner W, Kuper D (2012) Determinants of sustainability in solid waste management—the gianyar waste recovery project in Indonesia. Waste Manag 32:2126–2133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sasaki S, Araki T, Tambunan AH, Prasadja H (2014) Household income, living and working conditions of dumpsite wastepickers in Bantar Gebang: toward integrated waste management in Indonesia. Resour Conserv Recycl 89:11–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Darwin D, Syafrinaldi, Lesta A, Munir T, Putra FN (2006) Pilot project peningkatan kesadaran masyarakat dalam pengelolaan sampah rumah tangga dengan cara pemilahan di kota Padang. Accessed 22 Apr 2016 (in Indonesian Language)
  11. 11.
    Prianto RA (2011) Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pengelolaan sampah di kelurahan Jombang kota Semarang (analisis sosio yuridis pasal 28 Undang-Undang No. 18 tahun 2018 tentang pengelolaan sampah). Semarang University, Semarang (Indonesian Language)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mulyadi A, Sofyan H, Saam Z (2010) Perilaku masyarakat dan peran serta pemerintah daerah dalam pengelolaan sampah di kota Tembilahan. Riau University, Journal of Environmental Science (Ilmu Lingkungan) (in Indonesia Language)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Soma S (2005) Peran serta swasta dan masyarakat dalam pengelolaan sampah kota. Seminar Nasional ASPI III-2005, Bogor (in Indonesian Language)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Irman (2005) Evaluasi peran serta masyarakat dalam pelaksanaan system teknik operasional pengelolaan sampah di kota padang. Diponegoro University, Semarang, Indonesia (Thesis in Indonesian Language)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Syahruddin H (undated). BAB V hasil penelitian dan pembahasan. Accessed 22 April 2016 (in Indonesian Language)
  16. 16.
    Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood-CliffsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Domina T, Koch K (2002) Convenience and frequency of recycling: implication for including textiles in curbside. Environ Behav 34(2)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tucker P (1999) Normative influences in household waste recycling. J Environ Plann Manage 42:63–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Blake J (1999) Overcoming the ‘value–action gap’ in environmental policy: tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environ 4(3):257–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shaw PJ (2008) Nearest neighbor effects in kerbside household waste recycling. Resour Conserv Recycl 52(5):775–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lyas JK, Shaw PJ, Van VM (2005) Kerbside recycling in the London Borough of Havering: progress and priorities. Resour Conserv Recycl 45(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Martin M, Williams ID, Clark M (2006) Social, cultural and structural influences on household waste recycling: a case study. Resour Conserv Recycl 48(4):357–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zang D, Huang G, Yin X, Gong Q (2015) Residents’ waste separation behaviors at the source: using SEM with the theory of planned behavior in Guangzhou, China. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 12:9475–9491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Oztekin C, Teksoz G, Pamuk S, Sahin E, Kilic DA (2017) Gender perspective on the factors predicting recycling behavior: implication from the theory of planned behavior. Waste Manag 62:290–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stoeva K, Alriksson S (2017) Influence of recycling programmes on waste separation behavior. Waste Manag 68:732–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Plepiene JM, Hage O, Plepys A, Reipas A (2016) What motivates households recycling behavior in recycling schemes of different maturity? lesson from Lithuania and Sweden. Resour Conserv Recycl 113: 40–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bao R (2011) Waste and recycling attitudes and behavior of students in Turku. University of Turku, Finland (Master’s Thesis)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jatau AA (2013) Knowledge, attitudes and practices associated with waste management in Jos South Metropolis, Plateau State. Mediterr J Soc Sci. Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Burns N, Grove SK (2005) The practice of nursing research: conduct, critique & utilization, 5th edn. WB Saunders Company, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Polit DF, Beck CT (2004) Nursing research: principles and methods, 7th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nieswiadomy RM (2002) Foundations of nursing research, 4th edn. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Koufteros XA, Vonderembse MA, Doll WJ (2001) Concurrent engineering and its consequences. J Oper Manag 19:97–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jekria N, Daud S (2016) Environmental concern and recycling behavior. Procedia Econ Finance 35:667–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ertz M, Karakas F, Sarigollu E (2016) Exploring pro-environmental behaviors of consumers: an analysis of contextual factors, attitude, and behaviors. J Bus Res 69:3971–3980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mudalige UKJ, Udugama JMM, Ikram SMM (2012) Use of structural equation modeling techniques to overcome the empirical issues associated with quantification of attitudes and perceptions. Sri Lankan J Appl Stat 13:15–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ari E, Yilmaz V (2016) A proposed structural model for housewives’ recycling behavior: a case study from Turkey. Ecol Econ 129:132–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kil N, Holland SM, Stein TV (2014) Structural relationships between environmental attitudes, recreation motivations, and environmentally responsible behaviors. J Outdoor Recreat Tour 7–8:16–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wu Z, Yu ATW, Shen L (2017) Investigating the determinants of contractor’s construction and demolition waste management behavior in Mainland China. Waste Manag 60:290–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Segar A (1997) Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: A paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. Omega 25(1):107–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kline RB (1998) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fornell CG, Bookstein FL (1982) Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. J Mark Res 19(4):440–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Raharjo S, Matsumoto T, Ihsan T, Rachman I, Gustin L (2015) Community-based solid waste bank program for municipal solid waste management improvement in Indonesia: a case study of Padang city. J Mater Cycles Waste Manage 19:201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Singhirunnusorn W, Donlakorn K, Kaewhanin W (2012) Contextual factors influencing household recycling behaviours: a case of waste bank project in Mahasarakham municipality. Procedia-Soc Behav Sci 36:688–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Indrianti N (2016) Community-based solid waste bank model for sustainable education. Procedia-Soc Behav Sci 224:158–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wijayanti DR, Suryani S (2015) Waste bank as community-based environmental governance: a lesson learned from Surabaya. Procedia-Soc Behav Sci 184:171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Krejcie RV, Morgan DW (1970) Determining sample size for research activities. Educ Psychol Measur 30:607–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Padang (2016) Kependudukan. Accessed 26 January 2016
  49. 49.
    Litwin MS (1995) How to measure survey reliability and validity. Sage Publication, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ardasheva Y (2016) A structural equation modeling investigation of relationships among School-aged ELs’ individual difference characteristics and academic and second language outcomes. Learn Individ Differ 47:194–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lally P, Van-Jaarsveld CHM, Potts HWW, Wardle J (2010) How are habits formed: modelling habit formation in the real world. Eur J Soc Psychol 40:998–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental and Life SciencesToyohashi University of TechnologyToyohashiJapan
  2. 2.Faculty of Information Networking for Innovation and DesignToyo University (INIAD)TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations