ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Perceived Value Influencing the Household Waste Sorting Behaviors in Rural China.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does smartphone use encourage farmers to participate in centralized household waste disposal?Heliyon · 2024Article
- Farmers' Preference for Participating in Rural Solid Waste Management: A Case Study from Shaanxi Province, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The Perception and Attitude of Farmers toward Domestic Waste Classifications: A Case Study on Wusheng County, Sichuan Province, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Leaving the Homestead: Examining the Role of Relative Deprivation, Social Trust, and Urban Integration among Rural Farmers in China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Determinants of Satisfaction with Solid Waste Management Services: A Central-Local Comparison in China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Influencing factors of farmers' participation in domestic waste classification: An empirical analysis based on the semi-nonparametric estimation extended model.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Cultural Consumption and Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Regarding Waste Separation Management in China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Assessment of rice and wheat production efficiency based on data envelopment analysis.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Waste sorting is the cardinal measurement to solve the problem of low efficiency of rural environmental governance and to alleviate environmental pollution by reduction, recycling, and harmlessness in rural areas. However, non-excludable and non-rival features of public goods easily cause a wide free-rider problem, which results in a low frequency of participation in the waste sorting of rural people. Based on the theory of the utility maximization of the rational economic man, this paper investigates survey data of 688 farm households in three cities and three counties of Shaanxi Province to explore the effect of the perceived value on the household waste classification behavior based on cost-benefit analysis. The results show that perceived benefit and perceived cost are important perceived value factors affecting farmers' participation in waste sorting. Specifically, the spiritual benefit of the perceived benefit has a significantly positive impact on classification behavior, while the time cost, physical cost, and material cost of the perceived cost have a negative impact on waste classification behavior. Further study of the heterogeneity of income impact shows that time cost only has a significant impact on the high-income group of farmers' classification behavior, while spiritual benefit and learning cost only affect the low-income group of farmers' waste classification behavior. Material cost has different influence directions on high- and low-income groups. In view of the aforementioned findings, this study highlights corresponding policy implications from the perspective of perceived benefit and perceived cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.