Littering remains a serious problem. However, encouraging progress has been made in the war against this issue. This progress can be attributed, at least in part, to the efforts of the scholarly community. Researchers continue to conduct studies aimed at shedding light on the factors that encourage littering and the steps that can be taken to eliminate this problem. As part of this research project, an extensive and thorough review of literature was conducted. Among the themes that emerged from the review is that societal norms play a critical role in defining littering behavior. In this section, an outline of the main themes that the literature review revealed is offered.
Littering as a Problem
For data collection, the research project employs the survey method. One of the questions posed to respondents concerns their views on the reality of littering and its problematic nature in Staten Island. It is hoped that the responses issued will unearth the extent of littering in this area. The scholarly community has dedicated effort to shedding light on the damaging effects that littering can cause. Hartley et al. (2018) is among the scholars who have explored this issue. The focus of their research was to determine the views that the public holds regarding marine litter. Their observations revealed that a majority of the public feels that marine litter is a serious problem and that the government, retailers and industries are mostly to blame. In presenting marine litter as a problem, Hartley and his colleagues make reference to the damaging effects that it has on the aesthetic appeal of coasts and its adverse effects on marine life. It is expected that those who participate in the survey will share the view that littering is a problem because it damages the environment and poses a threat to animal life. Schultz et al. (2011) are another group of scholars who set out to determine the damaging effects of littering. When conducting the study, these researchers were driven by the need to identify the factors that underlie littering behavior. They noted that younger individuals tend to litter as opposed to those who are older who demonstrate greater respect for the environment and avoid littering. The key implication of this observation is that since it involves young people who are expected to lead environmental conservation efforts are to blame for much of the littering. If success is to be found in the fight against littering, the youth need to be in the forefront of this campaign.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Social Norms and Acceptability of Littering
One of the key purposes of the research project is to establish the association between social norms and littering behavior. Essentially, the research aims to determine if whether norms that prohibit littering have any effect in promoting responsible waste disposal behavior. Among the researchers whose studies focus on the impact of social norms are Bateson et al. (2013). These scholars were driven by a desire to understand whether the watching eyes theory explains littering behavior. Essentially, this theory posits that if individuals understand that their actions are being monitored, they are likely to engage in behaviors that are considered socially acceptable. They observed that the theory does indeed account for littering behavior. The fear that one will suffer harsh judgment or lose their membership to social groups discourages littering. By confirming that the watching eye theory explains littering, Bateson and his colleagues essentially provide insights that can be integrated into littering eradication initiatives. Bator et al. (2010) joined Bateson and his team in exploring the effect that social norms have on littering. For their study, they sought to determine whether social norms which establish littering as an unacceptable behavior deter littering. As is the case in the study by Bateson et al., Bator and his team confirmed that individuals are more likely to refrain from littering if their societies disapprove of this behavior. The relevance and importance of this finding cannot be overstated. If littering is to be eliminated, societies and social groups need to make it clear to their members that all forms of littering are unacceptable.
Cialdini, Reno and Kallgren (1990) also performed a study whose aim was to establish the association between social norms and social behavior. Their observations are in line with the conclusions reached by other scholars. In their text, they mention that injunctive norms which disapprove littering are an effective approach to combating this behavior. Keenan (1996) is yet another researcher whose text addresses the deterrent effect of social norms on littering. As opposed to the other researchers who were rather direct in their approaches, Keenan adopts a different framework. He presents social norms as the consequences that accompany actions. When an individual understands that their littering behavior will trigger adverse consequences, this individual is inspired to avoid this behavior. Geller, Fowler and Raymond (1992) concur that consequences inform the decisions that individuals make regarding littering. In particular, they note that if an individual understands that a certain behavior yielded positive outcomes before, they are likely to embrace this behavior. As regards littering, this observation can be motivate individuals with the promise that by collecting ill-disposed litter and dumping their trash in designated facilities, they create conditions that enable them to reap such benefits as clean air. Overall, it appears that there is consensus within the research community that society can play a critical role in the effort to eliminate littering. It can do this by prohibiting and punishing littering.
Littering Eradication Strategies
As noted earlier, among the aims of the research project is to identify the strategies that the authorities and the public in Staten Island can implement to reduce littering. Fortunately, these stakeholders do not need to innovate solutions. This is because the research community has conducted studies that have led it to identify interventions that are most effective in discouraging littering. Almosa, Parkinson and Rundle-Thiele (2017) are some of these scholars. They identify such technologies as social media as among the tools that can be leveraged in littering eradication campaigns. For example, social media can be used to sensitize the public against the harm that littering causes to the environment. Given that it is used by a majority of the public, social media can indeed be an effective tool. Public policy, infrastructure development and community initiatives are other strategies that Almosa, Parkinson and Rundle-Thiele propose. Community initiatives are particularly effective because they allow communities to take part in efforts aimed at insulating the environment and the public against the ill effects of littering. Restoring order is another approach that has been presented as holding the key to tackling littering. Keizer, Lindenberg and Steg (2013) urge authorities to enact policies which make it unlawful for the members of the public to litter. The threat of legal action should encourage responsible behaviors. Nearly all the solutions outlined above are fairly simple to implement and are based on basic understanding of human behavior. It is worth noting that there are other solutions that are novel and rather odd. Using scents is among these interventions. In their text, Lange et al. (2012) describe a study that involved the use of scents with the goal of encouraging participants to avoid littering. These scents proved effective. It is clear that there is a wide range of strategies that can be adopted. Communities and leaders should join forces in adopting the interventions that the research community has established to be highly effective.
References
Almosa, Y., Parkinson, J., & Rundle-Thiele, S. (2017). Littering Reduction. Social Marketing Quarterly, 23 (3), 203-222. doi:10.1177/1524500417697654
Bateson, M., Callow, L., Holmes, J. R., Roche, M. L., & Nettle, D. (2013). Do Images of ‘Watching Eyes’ Induce Behaviour That Is More Pro-Social or More Normative? A Field Experiment on Littering. PLoS ONE, 8(12). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082055
Bator, R. J., Bryan, A. D., & Schultz, P. W. (2010, October 19). Who Gives a Hoot?: Intercept Surveys of Litterers and Disposers. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013916509356884
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R.R., & Kallgren, C.A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 6, 1015-1026.
Geller, E., & Fowler, Raymond D. (1992). It Takes More Than Information to Save Energy, 47(6), 814-815.
Hartley, B. L., Pahl, S., Veiga, J., Vlachogianni, T., Vasconcelos, L., Maes, T., . . . Thompson, R. C. (2018). Exploring public views on marine litter in Europe: Perceived causes, consequences and pathways to change. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 133 , 945-955. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.05.061
Keenan, M. (1996). The A, B, C of litter control. University of Ulster at Coleraine. The Irish Journal of Psychology , 17, 4, 327-339
Keizer K, Lindenberg S, Steg L (2013) The Importance of Demonstratively Restoring Order. PLoS ONE 8(6): e65137. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0065137
Lange, M. A., Debets, L. W., Ruitenburg, K., & Holland, R. W. (2012). Making less of a mess: Scent exposure as a tool for behavioral change. Social Influence, 7(2), 90-97. doi:10.1080/15534510.2012.659509
