The objective of this research is not only to provide a new theoretical framework to overcome doctrinal inconsistencies related to the reward recycling technique but also to empirically contrast the proposed explanations.
This research follows a quasi‐experimental design. This type of treatment comprises the application of a draw‐based prize technique. A questionnaire was issued to gather the information from a sample with 123 individuals. The approach is quantitative.
It was found that recycling behaviour has become a routine or habit with recognized awareness of ecology and recycling, but without a high level of involvement, since today's adoption process does not require such effort. This implies that the efficacy of the reward technique has been transformed and consequently its effects must be understood differently. To be specific, responders and non‐responders are similar, in terms of their levels of beliefs about recycling, ecological concern and involvement with recycling, and both show the same model of adoption with a low hierarchy of effect and with a few minor differences. Nevertheless there is only one difference between sustainers and non‐sustainers, namely, the sustainers’ greater ecological concern before the promotion application.
The non‐existence of a control group is a limitation with the result that the validity of the experiment is not being totally checked.
This research provides some empirical evidence challenging some old presumptions concerning the understanding of recycling.
Díaz Meneses, G. and Beerli Palacio, A. (2006), "Different kinds of consumer response to the reward recycling technique: similarities at the desired routine level", Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 43-60. https://doi.org/10.1108/13555850610641082
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2006, Emerald Group Publishing Limited