Quality appraisal of household recycling influences research found evidence was mostly insufficient for drawing conclusions

Research on recycling behaviour and its influences is critical to supporting public policy efforts to mitigate the negative effects of waste. However, recent reviews have raised concerns about the quality of recycling research. Despite this, no previous reviews have conducted quality appraisals. This is partly because validated appraisal tools have typically been developed for intervention reviews in the health/medicine fields, creating difficulties applying to behaviour influence reviews in environmental fields. This update of a previous systematic review aims to fill this gap. We developed and piloted a novel quality appraisal framework tailored to interdisciplinary reviews of influences on recycling behaviours. Application of the novel framework to 118 recycling papers highlighted a lack of strongly-rated evidence, particularly for causal claims and operationalisation of behaviour. Specifically, over 80% of papers contained insufficient causal evidence, while 90% contained insufficient or cautious evidence of influence on actual behaviour. Only four papers (1%) produced strong evidence across both measures, allowing compelling confidence in their conclusions. Lack of quality evidence undermines the ability of remaining papers (and the body of literature as a whole) to draw strong conclusions about what factors have causal influence on actual recycling behaviour. This has implications for how well the field can guide interventions to improve recycling outcomes. To strengthen future research, this review identifies feasible instances of better practice to increase quality of evidence. Implementing such recommendations could increase the field’s confidence in what influences household recycling. The quality appraisal framework may also be of interest for other pro-environmental behaviours.HighlightsA novel, interdisciplinary quality appraisal framework for behavioural influences.118 research papers appraised, exploring 159 influences on recycling behaviour.Over 90% of studies and 70% of factors have insufficient evidence.Common methodological choices are reaching the limits of marginal utility.There are practical ways to improve the quality of recycling research.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26180/28267226.v1
Primary Topic
Advanced SAR Imaging Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quality appraisal of household recycling influences research found evidence was mostly insufficient for drawing conclusions

Figshare
Advanced SAR Imaging Techniques
article

Quality appraisal of household recycling influences research found evidence was mostly insufficient for drawing conclusions

article en

Abstract

Research on recycling behaviour and its influences is critical to supporting public policy efforts to mitigate the negative effects of waste. However, recent reviews have raised concerns about the quality of recycling research. Despite this, no previous reviews have conducted quality appraisals. This is partly because validated appraisal tools have typically been developed for intervention reviews in the health/medicine fields, creating difficulties applying to behaviour influence reviews in environmental fields. This update of a previous systematic review aims to fill this gap. We developed and piloted a novel quality appraisal framework tailored to interdisciplinary reviews of influences on recycling behaviours. Application of the novel framework to 118 recycling papers highlighted a lack of strongly-rated evidence, particularly for causal claims and operationalisation of behaviour. Specifically, over 80% of papers contained insufficient causal evidence, while 90% contained insufficient or cautious evidence of influence on actual behaviour. Only four papers (1%) produced strong evidence across both measures, allowing compelling confidence in their conclusions. Lack of quality evidence undermines the ability of remaining papers (and the body of literature as a whole) to draw strong conclusions about what factors have causal influence on actual recycling behaviour. This has implications for how well the field can guide interventions to improve recycling outcomes. To strengthen future research, this review identifies feasible instances of better practice to increase quality of evidence. Implementing such recommendations could increase the field’s confidence in what influences household recycling. The quality appraisal framework may also be of interest for other pro-environmental behaviours.HighlightsA novel, interdisciplinary quality appraisal framework for behavioural influences.118 research papers appraised, exploring 159 influences on recycling behaviour.Over 90% of studies and 70% of factors have insufficient evidence.Common methodological choices are reaching the limits of marginal utility.There are practical ways to improve the quality of recycling research.

Figshare
The University of Melbourne (AU), Australian Regenerative Medicine Institute (AU), Monash University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 40%
Advanced SAR Imaging Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.