Does your opinions about 'nature', 'human nature', and 'procreation' influence your recycling behavior?

I am a psychology student with The Open University, and I am interested in whether there is any connection between certain belief systems and recycling behaviors.

There is existing research that shows a strong correlation between 'self-perceived connection to nature’ and recycling behavior but there is currently no psychological literature on whether opinions about humanity (pro-human or misanthropic) and opinions about having children (pro-natal or anti-natalism) are good predictors of pro-environmental behavior.

For this reason, I have designed a short survey that measures peoples opinions about these topics. The idea is to see whether levels of these beliefs correlate with recycling intentions, attitudes and behaviors.

If you are 18 years or older then you are welcome to take part in the survey by clicking on the link below;

https://openss.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9GEysYaMzXrKygK

This link will take you to the Qualtrics website where the survey is hosted. It takes roughly 5 minutes to complete and is completely anonymous.

Thank you to anyone who replies to this post or does takes part in the survey! This research project will contribute to my final degree and will help advance our psychological understanding of recycling motivations.

https://www.facebook.com/100000374212336/posts/pfbid0zQAqgM1FRQDw8B4FP8…

Disposal of sanitary pads and its collection is a major environmental degradation concern inline with chemicals affecting female human health concerning the production of pads. Had suggested a remedial measure taking up with the Authorities in my country.?

For International Women Day... Join the ISLANDS Call to Action on Gender Equality & Technology!

How do you think technology - especially in the waste & chemicals sector - can support gender equality? And also, how do you think women empowerment and participation can bring innovation?

Join the Call to Action and read the article to find out more.

An in-depth journal on the e-waste generation in the Caribbean SIDS, their place against the global trend in e-waste generation, SIDS-specific obstacles in setting up waste management systems, and more interesting figures & indicators.

The paper uses a dynamic material flow analysis (MFA) approach to estimate the flows and stocks of the 10 main e-waste categories across 5 Caribbean SIDS which are Aruba, Barbados, Grenada, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago. While merely representing 11% of the Caribbean population and 7% of the Caribbean land area, they produced the double the e-waste per capita per year compared to the global average, and has been estimated to record a rising number of e-waste generated per year; from 27,500 tonnes in 2010 to around 59,000 tonnes in 2025.

With systemic challenges lying in setting up waste management in SIDS, such as lack of available land and financing measures, vulnerability extreme weathers, higher operational expenditures, small market sizes and more, there are also challenges in terms of data retrieval because the Caribbean lacks baseline data to the annual quantity of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) consumption and the corresponding amount e-waste generated. Trinidad and Tobago was also estimated to face higher pressure to deal with the e-waste generation among the 5 countries monitored.

With the amount of 10 main e-waste types (e.g., household appliances, IT equipment, lighting equipment, etc.) growing and eventually taking up majority of the EEE put-on-market (consumed) which also has been saturated from 2017, the article calls for a transition from the current linear take- make- waste economy to a Circular Economy, closing the loops through recycling, reuse, refurbishment, and remanufacturing.

Are you an expert in knowledge management systems? Then this is the perfect project for you!

The Green Growth Knowledge Partnership is renowned for its global efforts on ensuring that everyone has access to the knowledge we need to make a just and sustainable transition. And we want to now become even better at this important work with your help!

When France first introduced its “anti-waste” law, the world was excited. By 2040, one way or another, the government will have phased out all single-use plastic packaging. Finally, a bold step by a country to really tackle the waste problem and incorporate it into binding law. And in December when our turtleneck loving Macron tweeted about McDonald’s reusable red chip holders, a few of us definitely smiled.

However, as great as it is to see tangible change in the fast food chain and elsewhere, a few months down the line cracks are appearing: consumers bringing the reusable packaging home as a souvenir; the size of the investment needed by fast-food companies to accommodate such a big change in operational processes, which will probably trickle down to consumer prices; food waste piling up, as it is impossible to donate food without packaging; higher energy and water usage to clean packs; and overlooking non-reusable alternatives which may be more recyclable or have a lower environmental footprint.

This is a tough one, as it’s to be expected that big changes will come with teething problems, as companies and the other stakeholders adapt to change, and find the long-term solutions that do make sense environmentally, economically and practically. So it’s important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. But it does also shine a light on the imperative of taking time to test potential solutions properly, and on learning from unintended consequences, so that others don’t repeat them. That was progressive and far-reaching legislation can be used in conjunction with evidence-based, practical solutions which make things better, rather than worse.

Sign up to our newsletter for our weekly digest of the hottest sustainability news here:
https://business.us12.list-manage.com/subscribe/post?u=0300b5532c917bd6…

Participants from various Pacific countries have benefitted from a virtual Disaster Waste Management workshop designed to allow them to share experiences and lessons learned in disaster waste management. The workshop, which was held on 8 December 2022, was organized by the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) through the ‘Committing to Sustainable Waste Actions in the Pacific’ (SWAP) project in collaboration with the J-PRISM II Project and the PacWaste Plus Programme.

The workshop brought together speakers from Samoa, Tonga, and Vanuatu, and 18 participants were able to learn about preparedness for minimizing disaster waste generation and were informed on the safe handling and storage of disaster waste. They also learned the importance of collaboration and coordination in managing disaster waste and the need for effective planning and preparedness.

SPREP’s Director of Waste Management and Pollution, Mr. Anthony Talouli, highlighted the importance of the workshop, stating that "the impact of disasters to our GDP is very significant as it can set us back billions of dollars every year in terms of development, so the significance of the workshop is very high."

The workshop was structured into three sessions, with the first session introducing documents with a regional scope such as the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific and the Disaster Waste Management Guideline. The second session focused on national activities in Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu, and the third session focused on sharing knowledge on how to strengthen good practices.

You can find more information on the workshop on the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) SWAP Project website, and a video recording of the workshop can be found on their YouTube page.

An incredibly sharp and frank analysis into the plastics crediting and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes, and the misleading binary narrative created by global polluters, like Coca Cola and Unilever.

As the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) convened for the first time in Uruguay in November 2022 to develop an 'international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution', among its key measures to address the plastics pollution were implementing EPR and creating international standards for plastic credits.

Both EPR and plastic credits are in essence similar mechanisms that deploy the principle of 'polluters pay', explains the author. The key difference would lie in their legal effect; EPR schemes usually involve national and regional governments as enforcers, whereas plastic credits - much like carbon credits - operate on a voluntary basis.

Despite the 'legally binding' principle of EPR, it turns out Coca-cola and Unilver, seemed to rail against the plastic credits and instead lend strong support for the EPR schemes. The author identifies the reason to this 'misleading' commitment in their intention to exploit the procedural challenges in creating government-led legislations, and how they can attempt to impose "maximum participation in the design and development of these programs". As a result, companies like the two have contributed to creating a false narrative that EPR and plastic credits are essentially competing, mutually exclusive measures; when in reality they need co-existing to complement each other.

Recommend a read if you have been craving a more deep-dive in the technical measures which are to be deployed as UNEP and its INC moves their legally binding plastics pollutions framework forward.

This nativity instalment has been created entirely using plastic and waste found in the ocean during ocean clean-ups led by the Pacific Ocean Litter Youth Project and the Pacific Conference of Chruches. This project is part of our collective efforts to raise awareness for plastic pollution in our ocean and to platform youth movements like POLYP who are working to study and combat this issue within our island home.