bs_bs_banner

International Journal of Consumer Studies ISSN 1470-6423

Towards a sustainable consumer model: the case study of

Bulgarian recyclers
Elka Vasileva and Daniela Ivanova
Department of Natural Resources Economics, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria

Keywords
Bulgaria, packaging waste, recycling,
segmentation, separate collection.
Correspondence
Elka Vasileva, Department of Natural
Resources Economics, University of National
and World Economy, Studentski Grad Hristo
Botev, 1700 Sofia, Bulgaria.
E-mail: elkav@unwe.bg
doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12123

Abstract
For several years, Bulgaria has been implementing systems for separate collection of
packaging waste as elements of environment policy, which aims to decrease the quantity of
the municipal-generated waste deposited in land. The effectiveness of these systems is
largely determined by consumers recycling behaviour in post-socialist countries with
emerging sustainable behaviour patterns. The aim of this article is to identify different
segments among Bulgarians based on their attitudes towards recycling in order to highlight
the characteristics of recyclers and non-recycler groups and, subsequently, to elaborate on
possible tailored marketing and communication plans to promote recycling among Bulgarians. A national survey was conducted with 968 people over 18 years of age from
the municipalities covered by the system for separate collection of packaging waste. The
cluster analysis of the results of the survey made possible the segmentation according to the
attitudes towards recycling. The following four clusters were identified: the Environmentally sensitive (18.46%); the Inert who do not appreciate the benefits of recycling for the
environment (26.14%); the Indifferent to the separate collection of waste (29.57%); and
the Recycling (25.83%). The composition of each of the clusters is analysed both
according to recycling practices and according to other types of sustainable behaviour
(buying of organic foods, non-food ecological products, energy-efficient household appliances, etc.). The contextual factors that have demotivating effects on consumer behaviour
for separate collection of waste in the country are also discussed. The correlations between
cluster belonging and socio-demographic characteristics of the participants in the study are
examined. The implications of the study may be associated with the development and
implementation of public policy strategies for the separate collection of waste and the
promotion of sustainable consumer behaviour patterns.

Introduction
Economic development in recent decades has led to more intensive
use of packaging materials and disposable goods. As a result,
municipal solid waste, including packaging waste, has significantly increased. According to the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD), this problem is projected
to continue to grow, despite current efforts to reduce the material
content of products, and to stimulate the reuse of products and
packaging and the recycling of materials and substances (OECD,
2008).
Forecasts of the European Environment Agency (EEA) for the
period 20052020 predict that the annual amount of municipal
waste will increase by 25% (EEA, 2008). A key role in tackling
the environmental impacts of increasing waste volumes plays
increased recycling of waste and diverting them from disposing.
Recycling of waste is an appropriate way of saving or avoiding
greenhouse emissions, i.e. offsetting direct emissions.

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

According to data from EUROSTAT, the generated municipal

solid waste in Bulgaria for 2011 is 375 kg per capita and 93% of
it (349 kg per capita) is deposited onto or into land (EUROSTAT,
2011). These facts put Bulgaria among Member States of the
European Union (EU) with the highest share of landfill municipal waste compared with the total waste collected. Reduction
of waste disposed in the country can be achieved through
recycling of packaging waste, which is associated with separate
collection.
Over the past 10 years, a system for separate collection of
packaging waste has been developed in Bulgaria. The system is
based on the regional activity of municipalities and the packaging
recovery organizations licensed by the Ministry of Environment
and Waters (MEW, 2013).
A successful recycling programme requires the population to
participate by sorting and disposing recyclable packaging waste in
the appropriate locations for subsequent selective collection.
The effectiveness of these systems is largely determined by
475

Towards a sustainable consumer model

consumers recycling behaviour in post-socialist countries with

emerging sustainable behaviour patterns.
There are some visible efforts at national and regional levels to
promote recycling among the Bulgarians. According to the Bulgarian Executive Environment Agency (BEEA), there are positive
indications for the development of the system for separate collection of waste, such as the growing number of disposal locations
and the constructed new industrial facility to upgrade the trial
system (BEEA, 2011). At the same time, some of the packaging
recovery organizations did not manage well the collection and
transportation of the waste bins. This led to the revocation of the
licenses of some of them in 2010 and set a discouraging example
of recycling behaviour for Bulgarians (MEW, 2013).
When the system was implemented in 2004, a mass communication campaigns was launched on television, radio and billboards
to foster recycling behaviour. However, the few studies underline
the limited practice of separate collection of waste in households
in the country (Vitosha Research, 2006; Ivanova et al., 2010). A
sociological survey conducted in November 2006 showed that
Bulgarian citizens approve the implementation of a system of
separate collection of waste (Vitosha Research, 2006). At the same
time, the results highlighted the lack of experience and the need
for specific guidelines for this activity. Another survey conducted
among citizens from major Bulgarian cities encompasses the perceptions, expectations and the attitudes to eco-labelling related to
separate collection of packaging waste (Ivanova et al., 2010). Irrespective of the fact that consumers find a direct link between the
separate collection of packaging waste and environmental protection, they expressed doubts about the effectiveness of ecolabelling. According to the Eurobarometer reports, Bulgarian
citizens do not consider the separation of waste for recycling as the
most popular environmental activity in their daily life. In the
Eurobarometer study in 2011, only 19% of Bulgarians reported
that they separated most of their wastes for recycling, which represented scores much lower than the average for the EU of 66%.
Bulgaria made exception to the trend for most EU Member States
of significant increase in respondents engaged in this activity. The
number of Bulgarian respondents participating in recycling programmes decreased from 24 to 19% during the period of the
survey 20082011 (Eurobarometer, 2008; Eurobarometer, 2011).
All this shows that the activities undertaken are insufficient and
largely inefficient. It outlines the need to create strategies and
policies, aimed at stimulating participation of Bulgarian citizens in
recycling activities.
The present research is directed to the segmentations of Bulgarians based on their attitudes towards recycling and the description
of the different groups in relation to their recycling-related knowledge and demographic profile, recycling practices and other types
of sustainable behaviour, and perceived contextual factors affecting the separate collection of waste. Segmentation allows to
develop marketing and communication plans to promote recycling
among Bulgarians. The different attitudes to the separation of
waste for recycling necessitate the use of a specific approach,
targeting specific groups.

Profiling the recyclers

It may be noted that in general there are no segmentation studies
applying a cluster analytic approach in identifying different pro476

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

environmental consumer groups. There are no published studies

regarding profiling of recyclers in Bulgaria.
In a cluster analytic approach, the selection of the segmentation
variables is crucial for the subsequently emerging consumer clusters. Mainly two approaches are used in the published studies for
the purpose of profiling: description by socio-demographic criteria
and by using psychographic and behavioural criteria.
General values, lifestyle and psychologically different patterns
of consumer behaviour are used as the segmentation base in some
of the energy consumer segmentation studies (Gatersleben et al.,
2002; Sutterlin et al., 2011). In other studies, the differentiation
between consumers who buy green products is based on environmental and demographic variables (do Paco and Raposo, 2009;
Jansson et al., 2009). According to the environmental segmentation model developed by UK Department for Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), the public is divided into seven clusters through distinct set of attitudes and beliefs towards the environment, environmental issues and behaviours (DEFRA, 2008). In
attempting to define the characteristics of recyclers and nonrecyclers, a number of studies have used attitudinal surveys to
produce segmentation models (Vicente and Reis, 2007; DEFRA,
2008). Other researchers explored the current barriers to recycling
household waste, and along with attitudinal and behavioural criteria they introduced competencies framework in the development
of a segmentation model (Jesson, 2009). This consumer-centred
social marketing approach was developed for the local level
authorities in charge of waste collection and disposal.
As the purpose of the present study is to serve as a basis for the
development of marketing and communication plans to promote
recycling among Bulgarians, attitudes towards recycling were
chosen as the segmentation base.

Understanding recycling behaviour

Scientific literature explores the ways in which to get citizens
more involved in recycling and the promotion of their proenvironmental behaviours. There are numerous studies that
examine recyclers and non-recyclers analysing them according to
their economic status, environmental attitudes, beliefs and values,
the influence of family and friends and social norms, their access
to facilities and services that enable them to participate in recycling, and their knowledge or lack of it.
Some authors often focus on profiling recyclers and understanding why people do not recycle and the barriers they face (Vining
and Ebreo, 1990; Schultz et al., 1995). Other studies evaluate the
influence on peoples willingness to recycle in terms of the situational or structural factors that they face, such as access to facilities and services that enable them to participate, and the
convenience of doing so (Valle et al., 2004; Maio et al., 2007).
They also point to the understanding of the influence of sociodemographic factors, and peoples knowledge and experience of
recycling (Gamba and Oskamp, 1994; Tucker, 2001; Thomas and
Sharp, 2013).
In other research studies, a wide range of psychological factors
and their relationship to recycling behaviour have been reviewed
including attitudes, beliefs and values, social influences and social
and personal norms, identity, perceived control and self-efficacy.
The role played by these potential behavioural determinants has
been examined in a wide range of papers (Bandura, 1977; Granzin

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

and Olsen, 1991; Thgersen, 1994, 2009; Taylor and Todd, 1995;
Schultz, 1998; Barr, 2007; Biel and Thgersen, 2007; Vicente and
Reis, 2008; Thomas and Sharp, 2013).
Many conceptual models have been developed in order to
provide frameworks to help understand the social and psychological influences on peoples behaviours: Ajzens theory of planned
behaviour, Sterns value-belief-norm theory and attitudebehaviour-context model (Jackson, 2005). These models have
been reviewed by many authors in relation to recycling and other
pro-environmental behaviours (Tucker, 2001; Jackson, 2005;
Stern, 2005; Darnton, 2008; Steg and Vlek, 2009; Timlett and
Williams, 2011).
This paper explores recycle and non-recycle segments by
describing them through: recycling-related knowledge and demographic profile, self-declared recycling practices and other types of
sustainable behaviour, and perceived contextual factors affecting
the separate collection of waste.
The aim of this study is to identify different segments among
Bulgarians based on their attitudes towards recycling in order to
highlight the characteristics of recycler and non-recycler groups
and, subsequently, to elaborate on possible tailored marketing and
communication plans to promote recycling among Bulgarians.

Methods
Sample and data collection
Selection of respondents
The survey is representative of the municipalities in whose territories the separate collection of packaging waste is done. According to the latest information from the BEEA (2011) in 2009, the
separate collection system covered 162 municipalities in the
country including the municipalities of Karlovo and Troyan which
have developed systems since 2004, built with municipalities own
funds. The people in these 164 municipalities, covered by the
system for separate collection, are a total of 6 018 765 according
to the Unified System for Vital Statistics and Administrative Services to the Population (ESGRAON, 2009). This represents 80%
of the population.
The study involved 968 adult (1000 planned) inhabitants of the
municipalities in whose territory the separate collection of packaging waste was done. The sample was formed from the official
population database (electoral rolls) on the basis of two-stage
random cluster sample (100 clusters). Socio-demographic structure (gender, age, education and place of residence) of the surveyed cluster reproduces that of the population in the country
(Table 1). The survey was conducted in SeptemberOctober 2011.
Information was collected through direct personal face-to-face
interviews with the persons included in the surveyed group. The
socio-demographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table 1.
Questionnaire
Structurally, the questionnaires used to research the knowledge
and attitudes towards recycling consist of six parts. A short overview of the purposes of the survey and examples of how to fill in
the questionnaires are presented in the introductory part.

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Towards a sustainable consumer model

Table 1 The demographic and social characteristics of the participants

and population in the country

Gender
Male
Female
Total
Age
1829
3039
4049
5059
6069
70+
Total
Education
University
Secondary
Primary or lower
Total
Social group
Employed
Students
Unemployed
Pensioners
Other
Total
Place of residenceb
Sofia
District town
Smaller town
Village
Total

Surveyed
group (%)

For population in
the countrya (%)

50.2
49.8
100.0

48.4
51.6
100.0

17.1
19.7
18.5
19.0
16.7
8.9
100.0

17.0
18.4
17.0
17.1
15.2
15.3
100.0

16.8
53.0
30.2
100.0

14.0
46.0
40.0
100.0

52.5
3.1
14.7
25.1
4.6
100.0
19.3
43.7
23.8
13.2
100.0

20.0
47.1
22.6
10.3
100.0

NSI (2011).
The data about the country refer only to the municipalities included in
the system of separate collection of packaging waste.

The second part includes a set a nine items intended to measure

the respondents attitudes towards recycling. Each item is scored
on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally
agree). The original scale of specific attitudes towards recycling
comes from Schwartzs normative model and has already been
used by Vicente and Reis (2007).
The third part explores the level of information of the people
about the rules of separate collection and disposal of household
waste. This part includes a set of four statements which the
respondents should define as correct or incorrect. There is also the
answer I am not aware I do not know.
The fourth part includes basic questions organized in logical
sequence in order to gather information about the practice of
collection and disposal of waste and other types of sustainable
behaviour (buying of organic foods, non-food ecological products,
energy-efficient household appliances, etc.).
The fifth part explores how the respondents evaluate the external conditions created for collection of waste. Four questions are
used there connected with: the availability of waste bins for separate collection of waste near the home; the locality of the waste
477

Towards a sustainable consumer model

bins conveniently spaced from home; the shape and dimensions of

the waste bins; and the waste tax that should be reduced for places
of residence where the separate collection of waste is organized
and carried out.
The last identification part includes questions of general information describing the demographic and social attributes of the
respondents such as gender, age, educational level, place of residence, employment status, personal monthly income, marital
status and existence of children in the household.

Statistical data analysis

Principal component analysis (PCA) was carried out on the nine
items intended to measure the respondents attitudes towards recycling. To assess the adequacy of PCA to the series of attitudinal
variables, the KaiserMeyerOlkin statistic was applied and the
Bartletts test was performed. The reliability of the new dimensions was measured by means of Cronbachs alpha coefficient.
Cluster analysis
Cluster analysis is applied to segment Bulgarian customers
according to their attitudes to separate collection of waste. Considering the importance of attitudes for understanding participation in recycling, cluster analysis aims to classify respondents in
groups by looking at the similarities (or dissimilarities) between
them in relation to attitudinal variables.
Two methods of hierarchical cluster analysis are applied to the
answers of 964 respondents furthest neighbour and the Ward
method. The collected data are also analysed by non-hierarchical
clustering through K-means method. The contingency table and
the values of the contingency coefficient are calculated for a
pairwise comparison among the used methods of cluster analysis.
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) test and Dunnetts C post hoc
test for valuation of significant differences between clusters are
applied. The resulting clusters are described by a set of attributes
associated with: the knowledge of the rules of separate collection
and disposal; recycling behaviours; and other types of sustainable
behaviour (buying of organic foods, non-food ecological products,
energy-efficient household appliances, etc.) and contextual

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

factors. The correlations between cluster belonging and sociodemographic attributes of the participants in the study are
examined.

Results
Clustering based on recycling-related attitudes
The results of the application of the PCA to the nine items intended
to measure the respondents attitudes towards recycling are presented in Table 2. They show the presence of three latent components that together account for 65.5% of the initial variance
(KMO = 0.756; Bartlett test P-value = 0.000; Cronbachs alpha
coefficient varies from 0.68 to 0.75). The disclosed factors can be
indicated as follows: component 1: pressure of social and personal
norms; component 2: indifference; and component 3: environmental protection.
Two methods for hierarchical clustering are applied to the
answers of 964 respondents furthest neighbour and the Ward
method. The presence of four clusters is established from the
dendrograms. The solutions obtained are analysed by nonhierarchical clustering via the K-means method. The contingency
table and the values of the contingency coefficient are calculated
for a pairwise comparison among the used methods of cluster
analysis. The results (coefficients of contingency = 0.835,
P-value = 0.000) show strong association between the method of
Ward and non-hierarchical clustering. Four clusters are obtained
as a result of the application of a non-hierarchical clustering presented in Table 3.
The application of ANOVA test confirms the significant differences between clusters (P-value < 0.05) in attitudinal variables
towards recycling. Dunnetts C post hoc test is computed to assess
the differences between each pair of clusters. All four clusters have
a different pressure of social and personal norms (P-value < 0.05).
With respect to component 2: indifference towards recycling,
there are no significant differences between the second and the
fourth clusters established with Dunnetts C post hoc test
(P-value > 0.05). The applied Dunnetts C post hoc test shows that
there are no significant differences between the second and the
third clusters (P-value > 0.05) with respect to component 3: environment protection.

Table 2 Disclosed latent components after the application of principal component analysis of attitudes towards recycling

Components

Loadings

Component 1: pressure of social and personal norms

I recycle because I see this action as meaningful
I recycle because most people do it
I recycle because the waste in bins are separate according to type
I recycle because the wastes of different types of waste bins are not mixed together when transported
Component 2: indifference
Recycling is not my concern and is the care of the municipality
Recycling of packaging is not my concern and is the care of producers and retailers
Paying waste fees fulfils my personal commitment to waste collection
Component 3: environment protection
I recycle because everyone does it to protect the environment
I recycle because this facilitates environment protection

478

% variance
explained

Cronbachs
alpha

23.2

0.75

17.9

0.75

24.4

0.68

0.691
0.763
0.805
0.614
0.817
0.811
0.748
0.839
0.849

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

Towards a sustainable consumer model

Table 3 Description of clusters in terms of mean value of attitudinal components

Attitudinal components

Cluster 1
Environmentally sensitive

Cluster 2
Inert

Cluster 3
Indifferent

Cluster 4
Recycling

Component 1: pressure of social and personal normsa,b

Component 2: indifferencea,c
Component 3: environment protectiona,d
No. of respondents

0.410
0.207
1.423
178

0.892
0.744
0.493
252

0.025
1.146
0.451
285

1.168
0.707
0.002
249

Significant differences between clusters with ANOVA (P-value < 0.05).

Significant differences between clusters two by two with Dunnetts C post hoc test (P-value < 0.05).
c
No significant differences between the second and fourth clusters have been identified with Dunnetts C post hoc test (P-value > 0.05).
d
No significant differences between the second and the third clusters have been identified with Dunnetts C post hoc test (P-value > 0.05).
a

As a result of cluster analysis, four clusters were identified on

the basis of the described three segmentation variables. The first
cluster is characterized by extremely high values for component
3: environment protection. Respondents in this cluster Environmentally sensitive express an inner conviction that they protect
the environment through separate collection, they are not influenced strongly by social and personal norms, while at the same
time they are slightly indifferent towards recycling. The second
cluster Inert is described by the average values of all three components. It covers people who barely appreciate the benefits of
recycling to environment protection. They are not indifferent
towards recycling but are relatively poorly influenced by social
and personal norms. The third cluster has extremely low values
with regard to component 2: indifference towards recycling.
Respondents exhibiting strong indifference to the separate collection of wastes with relatively low environmental attitudes are
grouped in the third cluster Indifferent. The cluster is characterized by an average impact of social and personal norms. The
fourth cluster Recycling shows extremely high values of component 1: pressure of social and personal norms. The cluster is
strongly influenced by the pressure of social and personal norms
and the respondents are not indifferent towards recycling and
show average environmental attitudes.

Recycling-related knowledge and

demographic profile
There are significant differences between the clusters in the social
and demographic attributes of the study participants (Table 4).
Exceptions are the attributes gender, marital status and existence
of children in the household.
Third age respondents with low levels of education dominate
in cluster 2. The respondents from cluster 3 have the lowest levels
of education, where only 7.4% have post-secondary education.
Highly educated respondents are distributed between cluster 4 and
cluster 1. In these two clusters, more than two-thirds of the
respondents live in the capital and major cities. Among them are
the participants in the survey who report the highest monthly
personal income. At the same time, in cluster 2 and cluster 3 over
40% live in small towns or villages. In cluster 2, about one quarter
of the respondents live in villages and 30.2% are retired. The
highest percentage of unemployed participants is concentrated in
cluster 3 (19.6% of the respondents in the cluster) who declare the
lowest incomes in the study.

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Analysis of the composition of each cluster with respect to the

knowledge of people about the rules of separate collection of
waste is made in order to highlight more clearly the differences
between the clusters. Table 4 presents the composition of each
cluster for these attributes.
To determine the level of knowledge of the rules of separate
collection and disposal of household waste, the respondents were
asked to indicate whether the four statements in Table 4 were
correct or incorrect. The results obtained from this mini-test show
that a good level of information was achieved and the majority of
the respondents know the rules that should be followed for the
collection and disposal of household waste. However, differences
can be observed in the individual clusters. Cluster Recycling is
characterized by the highest level of information as the positive
answers to the first and the fourth statements are more than 90%.
Good knowledge is shown also by the respondents in cluster
Inert. In group of Indifferent, the percentage of correct answers
to the four statements is from 41.9 to 70.5%, similar to those in
cluster Environmentally sensitive. Fairly problematic appears to
be the case with the requirement for the packaging to have information about the material of which they are made in all clusters
the correct answers are with the lowest values compared with the
rest.
This is confirmed by the analysis of data on the behaviours of
respondents in recycling in Table 5. Segment Recycling is associated with the greatest attention to the labelling of the packaging
material in disposal of household waste. Although they demonstrate good knowledge of this, the people of cluster Inert and
cluster Indifferent do not take into account the labelling in reallife situation. Only 12.4% of the Inert comply with this labelling
when disposing of household waste.

Recycling practices and other types of

sustainable behaviour
Table 5 contains the results of analysis of the clusters in terms of
the self-declared practice of collection and disposal of waste and
other types of sustainable behaviour (buying of organic foods,
non-food ecological products, energy-efficient household appliances, etc.). The respondents in Recycling manifest the highest
activity in the separate collection of packaging waste, where more
than half of them (54.7%) do so permanently or with a few exceptions. About one-third of the Environmentally sensitive report
that their household collects accumulated packaging waste
479

Towards a sustainable consumer model

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

Table 4 Description of the clusters with respect to the knowledge of the rules of separate collection and disposal of household waste and their
demographic attributes

Attributes
Knowledge of the rules of separate collection and disposal of household waste
When paper, glass, metal, plastic waste is collected separately, each type is
placed in a different waste bin (% correct responses)a
Each packaging must have a special label indicating what kind of material it
is made of (% correct responses)a
In separate collection of waste, paper is not collected separately (% correct
responses)a
In separate collection of waste from various materials, it is disposed in
waste bins with different colours (% correct responses)a
Social and demographic attributes
Age (%)a
1839
4059
60+
Education (%)a
University
Secondary
Primary or lower
Place of residence (%)a
Sofia and district town
Smaller town and village
Social group (%)a
Employed
Pensioners
Unemployed
Other
Income (%)a
099.99 euro
100199.99 euro
200299.99 euro
300+
a

Cluster 1
Environmentally sensitive

Cluster 2
Inert

Cluster 3
Indifferent

Cluster 4
Recycling

74.7

85.7

70.5

92.8

79.2

60.6

41.9

59.3

55.1

76.9

60.4

73.8

71.9

82.3

68.6

93.5

44.4
30.4
25.2

24.6
43.3
32.1

39.6
36.5
23.9

40.2
38.6
21.2

24.1
57.9
18.0

14.3
45.4
40.3

7.4
49.1
43.5

31.5
55.2
13.3

67.9
32.1

59.1
40.9

50.9
49.1

77.5
22.5

55.6
21.9
16.9
5.6

49.2
30.2
14.3
6.3

54.4
22.8
19.6
3.2

51.6
25.0
7.7
15.7

23.9
39.8
27.3
9.0

24.3
45.8
23.5
6.4

31.5
36.4
27.9
4.2

23.0
39.2
29.8
8.0

Chi-square test (P-value 0.05).

Table 5 Description of the clusters with respect to the practice of the collection and disposal of waste and other types of sustainable behaviour

Attributes
Separate collection of household waste (% positive responses)a
Attention for marking the packaging material for disposal of household waste
(% positive responses)a
Place of disposal of used batteries (%)a
Special containers or look for companies for special waste
In the waste bins for household waste
Place of disposal of old electrical appliances in the household (%)a
Look for companies for special waste or return them to the shop when
buying new appliances
In/near the waste bins for household waste
Repair them
When buying an electric appliance you are interested in its energy efficiency
(positive responses, %)a
When purchasing food you look for organic food (% positive responses)a
When purchasing non-food you look for green goods (% positive responses)a
a

Cluster 1
Environmentally sensitive

Cluster 2
Inert

Cluster 3
Indifferent

Cluster 4
Recycling

33.7
12.4

6.3
2.8

2.1
4.6

54.7
23.3

18.0
82.0

7.5
92.5

10.5
89.5

40.6
59.4

17.5

16.3

16.1

24.5

62.3
20.2
79.2

60.3
23.4
61.9

57.2
26.7
55.0

61.8
13.7
82.8

45.0
42.7

21.1
13.1

14.3
6.6

38.6
30.1

Chi-square test (P-value 0.05).

480

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

separately. According to the responses of the majority of Inert

(93.7%) and Indifferent (97.9%), waste is collected and disposed
in their homes without being sorted by type. Separate collection
practices in these clusters are an exception.
Questions relating to their consumption of organic foods, nonfood ecological products, energy-efficient household appliances,
separate collection of hazardous household waste, etc. were asked
in order to establish the extent to which survey respondents tend to
have sustainable behaviours in their daily lives. The results are
summarized in Table 5.
As a whole, the observed picture is very diverse and heterogeneous in each of the groups, related with psychologically different
patterns of consumer behaviour. In some cases, this type of behaviour is demonstrated by the majority of participants, while in
others it is almost completely absent.
Separate disposal of other types of hazardous household waste
is a practice which does not enjoy great popularity. However,
40.6% of the respondents from Recycling dispose exhausted
batteries only in specially designated areas in stores or seek the
services of companies for special waste. These companies are
sought by 24.5% of the respondents in this group to dispose old
appliances, or they return them to the store when purchasing new
ones. When buying an electric appliance, 82.8% of the respondents from this cluster are always interested in its energy efficiency.
They show interest in ecological products and 38.6% seek to
purchase organic food products. When purchasing non-food items,
30.1% of the respondents in the cluster frequently or regularly
look for ecological products.
Environmentally sensitive self-declare also a similar sustainable behaviour. Here 15.2% of the respondents dispose the used
batteries to designated areas in stores and 2.8% give them to
special companies that collect hazardous waste. A smaller part of
the respondents, compared with Recycling (17.5%), hand over
obsolete electric appliances for recycling. Labelling for energy
efficiency is sought always or almost always by 79.2%. The analysis of the results shows that in this cluster, compared with Recycling, the interest in environmental products is bigger and those
who look for organic foods constantly are 45.0%. Similarly, the
interest in non-food green products is also higher (42.7%).
Inert and Indifferent tend to show examples of unsustainable
practices. The explanation for this can be found in the lower
income and education levels in these groups. The participants in
these clusters 92.5 and 89.5%, respectively dispose exhausted
batteries in waste bins for general use without taking account the

Towards a sustainable consumer model

hazards. About two-thirds of the respondents in each cluster leave

old appliances near the waste bins (to be used in some way by the
poor who earn their living by filtering the contents of the waste
bins). Compared with Environmentally sensitive and Inert, a
smaller proportion of the respondents in these clusters look for
labelling for energy efficiency (from 55 to 61.9%). Only 21.1% of
segment Inert and 14.3% of Indifferent seek organic products
when buying foods.

Perceptions of contextual factors affecting the

separate collection of waste
The effectiveness of the system for separate waste collection is
determined to a large extent by good organization. The vast majority of respondents report numerous loopholes in the system for
separate collection of packaging waste. Each cluster is analysed in
terms of respondents perceptions of contextual factors influencing the practice of collection and disposal of waste. The results are
presented in Table 6.
In cluster Recycling are the most numerous supporters of the
current distribution of waste bins for separate collection. More
than half of the group (57.4%) declare that they have waste bins
near their homes, and 48.2% say that the shape and the dimensions
are appropriate. According to 39.4% of them, the waste bins are
located at a suitable distance from their homes. In cluster Environmentally sensitive, the positive opinion about the organization
of separate collection diminishes. About one-third see waste bins
around their homes and for a quarter they are at an appropriate
distance. In clusters Inert and Indifferent, there was an increase
of disapproval of the established separate waste collection system.
More than half of the respondents in these groups (66.3 and
69.5%, respectively) believe that there are no waste bins for separate waste collection near their homes. Only 23.0% of Inert and
14.4% of Indifferent have waste bins at an appropriate distance
from homes, where they can dispose separately their household
wastes.
Assessing the external factors affecting the separate waste collection, we should pay attention to another contextual attribute
reduction in the amount of waste tax for residents of municipalities
and regions where well-organized and efficient separate waste
collection functions. More than half of the respondents from each
cluster (from 54.7% of the participants in cluster Indifferent to
76.4% of the participants in cluster Environmentally sensitive)
support such a proposition.

Table 6 Description of the clusters with respect to contextual factors affecting the separate collection of waste

Attributes
Bins for separate collection of waste are conveniently spaced from home
(% positive responses)a
Availability of bins for separate collection of waste near the home
(% positive responses)a
Bins for separate collection of waste are of suitable shapes and sizes
(% positive responses)a
Waste tax that should be reduced for places of residence where the separate
collection of waste is organized and carried out (% positive responses)a
a

Cluster 1
Environmentally sensitive

Cluster 2
Inert

Cluster 3
Indifferent

Cluster 4
Recycling

34.8

27.8

17.9

57.4

25.8

23.0

14.4

39.4

52.8

36.1

28.8

48.2

76.4

69.7

54.7

76.2

Chi-square test (P-value 0.05).

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

481

Towards a sustainable consumer model

Discussion
The cluster analysis of the results of the survey made possible the
segmentation according to the attitudes towards recycling. The
following four clusters were identified: the Environmentally sensitive (18.46%); the Inert who do not appreciate the benefits of
recycling for the environment (26.14%); the Indifferent to the
separate collection of waste (29.57%); and the Recycling
(25.83%). Possible solutions relating to the implementation of
recycling in Bulgaria based on the segmentation and the identified
specific barriers were offered.
Despite the different basis for segmentation or criteria used in
other studies, some of the identified segments are similar to those
already established in previous research (Vicente and Reis, 2007;
DEFRA, 2008; Jesson, 2009).
The analysis showed that the participants in cluster Recycling realize in the highest degree the necessity of separate collection of packaging waste and approve the created organization.
They tend to use other sustainable practices such as consumption
of organic foods and non-food ecological products. They understand the meaning of the labelling for energy efficiency and look
for it when purchasing electrical appliances. The respondents in
this cluster are strongly influenced by the pressure of social and
personal norms. Taylor and Todd found that the programmes for
social pressures are particularly effective in the early stages of
setting up systems for waste management, as is the case in Bulgaria (Taylor and Todd, 1995). In this context, communication
messages addressed to them must activate these norms in order
to influence their pro-environmental behaviours (Biel and
Thgersen, 2007; Thomas and Sharp, 2013). Regardless of the
self-declared highest activity in recycling compared with others,
over 40% of the respondents in the group do not separate their
wastes. Therefore, messages with examples of best practices of
neighbours and friends and the influence of members of the
household can lead to positive results (Granzin and Olsen, 1991;
Gamba and Oskamp, 1994). Providing evidence that their efforts
were not in vain, as well as examples of sustainable behaviour,
could motivate them further. Feedback leads to a growing
sense of individual and collective efficacy. Supply of information
from the local media about the achievements of the region, compared with other regions of the country, can affect social and
personal norms and lead to a change by increasing the sense of
pride in participating in similar projects (Bandura, 1977; Schultz,
1998).
The cluster of Environmentally sensitive is characterized by
strongly manifested attitudes to environmental protection through
separate collection. The average age of this group is the lowest.
The majority of the respondents in it grew up in a time when the
issues related to the problems of the environment were much
discussed in the school and in the media. This is one of the reasons
they appreciate the need for specific actions to protect the environment. This awareness can provide a valuable basis on which to
build plans for encouragement of their participation in recycling
which, according to the study results, is not high. At the same time,
they declare the greatest interest in organic food and green products. This cluster has the highest percentage of actively working
whose incomes are comparatively high. They tend to invest in
energy-efficient appliances that reduce maintenance costs without
affecting the quality of life. The communication campaigns should
482

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

provide information on the costs and benefits of recycling when

targeting this segment.
The Environmentally sensitive evaluate most the opportunities
to reduce waste tax in municipalities with separate waste collection. Several studies show that cost reduction can be a driver for
environmental behaviour (Tucker, 2001; Sutterlin et al., 2011).
Therefore, the development of new rules for the formation of the
waste tax would attract more players in this segment of separate
collection.
Unlike Recycling here, the disapproval of the context of recycling is clearly shown. The lack of sufficient and conveniently
located waste bins, which the survey registered, does not especially encourage citizens to separate their household wastes.
Surely, this fact affects negatively the attitudes of people who are
generally ready and willing to do so. According to Triandis, the
presence or absence of facilitating conditions constrains behavioural choice (Darnton, 2008). Other studies even show that the
intervention related to improvement of external conditions is more
profitable in terms of behaviour change (Maio et al., 2007). In this
regard, we can assume that the improvement of the organization
will increase the activity in the separate collection of waste in this
cluster.
Similar intervention may be efficient among the Inert and
Indifferent where there is also disapproval of contextual characteristics. Separate collection practices in these clusters are
rather the exception. The belief that the separate collection of
waste leads to environmental protection lacks in these clusters.
Therefore, the communication programme should be aimed at
transforming negative attitudes into positive ones. The benefits of
recycling should be presented with specific examples, easy for
adoption. For example, the number of trees saved by a certain
amount of recycled papers and the amount of recycled wastes in
comparison with the period when there was no system for separate collection.
At the same time, representatives of the Inert are not indifferent and realize their commitments related to recycling. This group
has the highest average age and thus the largest percentage of
pensioners. Considering that the incomes of this population are in
the low range, economic factors that influence their behaviours can
also be used. Such a tool could reduce the amount of waste fee for
residents of municipalities and regions where a well-organized and
efficient separate waste collection functions. The survey results
show a very high support for this proposal by the respondents of
this cluster.
Less educated inhabitants and lower income people of small
towns and villages predominate in the cluster Indifferent. They
think that recycling is not my concern. With their indifference,
they become perhaps the most difficult segment to influence. The
attitude of indifference can be diminished in two ways (Vicente
and Reis, 2007). First is with the message that anyone who creates
problems should be involved in their solution. In this case, the
generation of waste can be reduced through recycling. The other
way is to show that recycling is not an isolated act done by a
minority of citizens but an activity enjoying a growing interest in
the community.
Participants of the clusters with low activity towards recycling
(Inert and Indifferent) need additional training, including
instructions that explain how to separate household waste and
where to discard it. Information should be easily accessible so as

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

to provide a constant reminder of this possibility. Jesson focused

on even more intensive methods of communication, such as
door knocking and local events, combined with outdoor advertising at municipal level to raise awareness of recycling (Jesson,
2009). Linking these methods with a national media campaign can
provide the basis for behavioural changes. The messages that are
used need to improve the understanding that recycling is a good
thing, and disposal of waste in landfills is detrimental to the
environment.

Conclusions
The method of cluster analysis for segmentation of Bulgarian
consumers according to their attitudes towards waste collection
was applied in this study. Four segments were identified based on
recycling-related attitudinal variables and only one of them is
characterized by a positive attitude towards recycling. The discovery of the Environmentally sensitive among the other three segments is interesting for future marketing and communication
interventions. Participants are less motivated to engage in separate
waste collection, but they are aware of and appreciate the need for
recycling to protect the environment. Communication campaigns
related to the provision of information about the benefits of recycling would increase interest and improve the results of the separate collection of waste.
The other two clusters are Inert and Indifferent. The representatives of these groups should be trained further to collect
separately household waste. They should be subject to targeted
marketing and communication strategy by which to weaken the
negative attitudes and reinforce positive behaviour towards
recycling.
The survey results show the strong disincentive effects of the
undeveloped infrastructure and service of recycling, especially on
clusters whose members are less motivated to separate household
waste. Removing these barriers would facilitate and promote sustainable pro-environmental patterns of behaviour.
Segmentation of consumers creates a good basis for facilitating
the recycling marketing and communications campaigns and to be
better targeted and personalized around specific barriers and
household circumstances. The implications of the study may be
associated with the development and implementation of public
policy strategies for the separate collection of waste and the promotion of consumer behaviour patterns.
Although the obtained results from segmentation study on recycling participation in Bulgaria, the effort to pursue strategies with
positive results on Bulgarians participation in recycling must
continue and be sustained by future empirical knowledge. Future
research may be extended to other approach of using behavioural
variables and variables directly related to behaviour, such as
beliefs and motives, as a segmentation base.

Acknowledgements
The financial support provided by the National Science Fund and
the Ministry of Education and Science for the Project Sustainable
Consumption in Bulgaria changing patterns is gratefully
acknowledged.

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Towards a sustainable consumer model

References
Bandura, A. (1977) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral
change. Psychological Review, 84, 191215.
Barr, S. (2007) Factors influencing environmental attitudes and
behaviors: a U. K. case study of household waste management. Environment and Behavior, 39, 435473.
BEEA (2011) Bulgarian executive environment agency. In Report to the
Objectives of the Republic of Bulgaria for Recycling and Recovery of
Packaging Waste. BEEA, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Biel, A. & Thgersen, J. (2007) Activation of social norms in social
dilemmas: a review of the evidence and reflections on the implications for environmental behaviour. Journal of Economic Psychology,
28, 93112.
do Paco, A. & Raposo, M. (2009) Green segmentation: an application
to the Portuguese consumer market. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 27, 364379.
Darnton, A. (2008) GSR behaviour change knowledge review reference
report: an overview of behaviour change models and their uses. UK
Government Social Research Unit. London. [WWW document].
URL http://www.defra.gov.uk/ (accessed on 10 February 2014).
DEFRA (2008) A framework for pro-environmental behaviours. Report.
London: UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
2008. [WWW document]. URL http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/
files/pb13574-behaviours-report-080110.pdf (accessed on 10 February
2014).
EEA (2008) European Environment Agency. Municipal Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases. ETC/RWM, Brussels, Belgium.
ESGRAON (2009) Unified System for Vital Statistics and Administrative Services to the Population in Bulgaria. Database. [WWW document]. URL http://www.grao.bg/tables.html (accessed on 30
November 2013).
Eurobarometer (2008) Attitudes of European citizens towards the
environment (Special Eurobarometer). [WWW document].
URL http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_295_en.pdf
(accessed on 10 February 2014).
Eurobarometer (2011) Attitudes of European citizens towards the
environment (Special Eurobarometer). [WWW document].
URL http://ec.europa.eu/environment/pdf/ebs_365_en.pdf
(accessed on 10 February 2014).
EUROSTAT (2011) The Sustainable Development Indicators (SDIs).
[WWW document]. URL http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/ (accessed
on 30 November 2013).
Gamba, R. & Oskamp, S. (1994) Factors influencing community residents participation in comingled curbside recycling programs. Environment and Behavior, 26, 587612.
Gatersleben, B., Steg, L. & Vlek, C. (2002) Measurement and determinants of environmentally significant consumer behavior. Environment
and Behavior, 34, 335362.
Granzin, K. & Olsen, J. (1991) Characterising participants in activities
protecting the environment: a focus on donating, recycling and conservation behaviours. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 10,
127.
Ivanova, D., Vasileva, E., Stefanov, S. & Tipova, N. (2010) Sustainable
consumption and recycling of household waste in Bulgaria. Romanian
Journal of Quality, 11, 10831088.
Jackson, T. (2005) Motivating sustainable consumption: a review of evidence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change. In Report to
the Sustainable Development Research Network Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey, Surrey, UK.
Jansson, J., Marell, A. & Nordlund, A. (2009) Elucidating green consumers: a cluster analytic approach on proenvironmental purchase
and curtailment behaviors. Journal of Euromarketing, 18,
245267.

483

Towards a sustainable consumer model

Jesson, J. (2009) Household waste recycling behavior: a market

segmentation model. Social Marketing Quarterly, 15,
2538.
Maio, G., Verplanken, B., Manstead, A., Stroebe, W., Abraham, C.,
Sheeran, P. & Conner, M. (2007) Social Psychological factors in lifestyle change and their relevance to policy. Social Issues and Policy
Review, 1, 99137.
MEW (2013) Ministry of Environment and Water of Republic Bulgaria.
Register of packaging recovery organizations. [WWW document].
URL http://www.moew.government.bg/ (accessed on 10 February
2014).
NSI (2011) National Statistical Institute. Statistical Reference Book
2010. Education and Science inc. Co., Sofia, Bulgaria.
OECD (2008) Household Behaviour and the Environment Reviewing the
Evidence, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Paris, France.
Schultz, P., Oskamp, S. & Mainieri, T. (1995) Who recycles and when?
A review of personal and situational factors. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 15, 105121.
Schultz, P.W. (1998) Changing behavior with normative feedback interventions: a field experiment on curbside recycling. Basic and Applied
Social Psychology, 21, 2536.
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour:
an integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 29, 309317.
Stern, P. (2005) Understanding individuals environmentally significant
behavior. Environmental Law Report, 35, 785790.
Sutterlin, B., Brunner, T. & Siegrist, M. (2011) Who puts the most
energy into energy conservation? A segmentation of energy consumers based on energy-related behavioral characteristics. Energy Policy,
39, 81378152.

484

E. Vasileva and D. Ivanova

Taylor, S. & Todd, P. (1995) An integrated model of waste management

behavior: a test of household recycling and composting intentions.
Environment and Behavior, 27, 603630.
Thomas, C. & Sharp, V. (2013) Understanding the normalisation of
recycling behaviour and its implications for other pro-environmental
behaviours: a review of social norms and recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 79, 1120.
Thgersen, J. (1994) A model of recycling behaviour with evidence
from Danish source separation programmes. International Journal of
Research in Marketing, 11, 145163.
Thgersen, J. (2009) The motivational roots of norms for environmentally responsible behaviour. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31,
348362.
Timlett, R. & Williams, I.D. (2011) The ISB model (infrastructure,
service, behavior): a tool for waste practitioners. Waste Management,
31, 13811392.
Tucker, P. (2001) Understanding Recycling Behaviour. University of
Paisley, Paisley, Scotland.
Valle, P., Reis, E., Mendes, J. & Rebelo, E. (2004) Behaviour determinants of household recycling participation: the Portuguese case. Environment and Behavior, 36, 505540.
Vicente, P. & Reis, E. (2007) Segmentation householders according to
recycling attitudes in a Portuguese urban area. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52, 112.
Vicente, P. & Reis, E. (2008) Factors influencing households participation in recycling. Waste Management & Research, 26, 140146.
Vining, J. & Ebreo, A. (1990) What makes a recycler? A comparison of
recyclers and nonrecyclers. Environment and Behavior, 22, 5573.
Vitosha Research (2006) Rapport: citizens and separate waste collection.
Sofia. [WWW document]. URL http://www.vitosha-research.com
(accessed on 10 February 2014).

International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (2014) 475484

2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd