KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDE, AND PRACTICES OF RECYCLING AND ITS ASSOCIATED FACTORS AMONG UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS IN UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA, SERDANG IJPHCS

(1)

International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences e-ISSN : 2289-7577. Vol. 3:No. 6 November/December 2016

F.N. Nordin, S.M. Saliludin 154

IJPHCS

Open Access: e-Journal

KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDE, AND PRACTICES OF RECYCLING AND ITS ASSOCIATED FACTORS AMONG

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS IN UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA, SERDANG

F.N. Nordin

¹

, S.M.Saliludin

^2*

1MPH candidate, Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia

2Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang

*Corresponding author: Dr. Suhainizam Muhamad Saliluddin

Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia 40300 UPM Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, MALAYSIA Email: suhainizam@upm.edu.my

ABSTRACT

Background: Urbanisation, industrialisation processes, and human activities are one of the causes of the increasing amount of solid waste production which leads to a myriad of problems to the environment as well as cause diseases due to improper solid waste disposal and increasing amount of solid wastes in landfills. Being a ‘green’ university, Universiti Putra Malaysia Serdang (UPM) has had held various activities and provided facilities to promote recycling behaviour among their students.

Conservation behaviour of a group of young adults is pertinent as they will grow and mature to become future leaders responsible for environmental stewardship and sustainability. Hence this study will focus on undergraduate students in UPM Serdang, as university students embody various expression of characteristics in comparison to the general population.

Materials and Methods: This is an analytical cross-sectional study, conducted on 310 undergraduate students in UPM, Serdang from three randomly selected faculties. Proportionate stratified random sampling was used to determine the sample size from each faculty. Self-administered questionnaires were used. Data analyses were conducted using SPSS version 22, and p-value <0.05 is considered significant.

Results: This study reported to have high levels of knowledge, negative attitude and poor practice on recycling among the respondents. Significant associations present between faculty of study, previous recycling practices and previous recycling campaign involvement to the level of recycling knowledge as well as with level of recycling practices. Previous recycling practices and the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences are the predictors for high level of knowledge. While previous recycling practices, Faculty of Human Ecology, and having high level of knowledge are the predictors for good practices.

Conclusion: Recycling attitude is lacking, which exhibits lack of environmental awareness among respondents. There is a need for behavioural and attitudinal change in respect for environmental sustainability by improving the level of recycling practice.

Keywords: recycling, knowledge, attitude, practice, faculty, past recycling history, university

(2)

IJPHCS

1.0 Introduction

Environmentally friendly management of solid waste and resource residuals is a crucial factor in moving towards the target of a sustainable society. Over the years, the actions of reduce, re-use and recycle have gained increasing attention as a mean of protecting the environment which offers the solution to manage solid waste both ecologically as well as economically (Omran, Mahmood, Hamidi, & Robinson, 2009). The increasing amount of solid waste production was due to the accelerated urbanisation and industrialisation processes as well as human activities. Human activities create waste, and the way these wastes were handled, stored, collected and disposed determines the health of the environment and of the population itself. Errant human activities in regards to solid waste disposal are alarmingly causing more destruction and irreversible harm on the environment, and pose risks to public health (Zubrugg, 2002; Budhiarta, Siwar, & Basri, 2012). Therefore, recycling helps to promote environmental and energy conservation by reducing energy and material usage by utilising recovered material from discarded or waste materials to manufacture new products (Gilpin, 2000; Hopewell, Dvorak, & Kosior, 2009).

In Malaysia, the launching of the national recycling campaign had only begun in 1993 by the Malaysian government through the Ministry of Housing and Local Government (MHLG, 2003). However, the reception and feedback by the people were not noteworthy as waste output continues to rise considerably with minimal efforts to recycle while municipal solid waste landfills continue to expand (Omran, Mahmood, Hamidi, & Robinson, 2009).

Recycling programs were re-introduced again in 2000 by the Ministry of Housing and Local Government with the objectives to reduce total generated waste at a minimum rate of 22% by the year 2020 (MHLG). Since then, conservation programmes and recycling campaigns were set up by the government, private sectors and non-governmental agencies alike with mixed and varying results. Studies conducted in Malaysia to determine the level of knowledge, attitude, practice of recycling and/or related to environmental sustainability among diverse groups in the past decade (Tan Awang, Md Salleh, Jusang, & Ramdzani, 2013; Jamilah, Shuhaida, & Nurzali, 2015; Osman, Md Isa, Othman, & Jaganathan, 2015; Tiew, Watanabe, Noor Ezlin, Shahrom, & Hassan, 2013; Nur Atiqah & Haliza, 2015; Omran, Mahmood, Hamidi, & Robinson, 2009; Shahariah, Jamaliah, & Zahariah, 2012) however, the results were shown to be unsatisfactory. These factors may undermine the recycling culture further, leading to deteriorating ecological and environmental health, and setting back the country’s initiative to reduce total generated waste by 2020.

It is projected that in 2020, solid waste generation will amount to reach 31,000 tonnes/day with an estimation of 11 million tonnes annually. While in 2005, Malaysia has generated about 19,100 tonnes/day or about 7 million tonnes annually and rising to to 21,000 tonnes/day or about 8 million tonnes annually in 2009 (Omran, et. al., 2009; Manaf, 2009; Ahmad, Ab Kadir, & Shafie, 2011). The national daily average of MSW generation in Malaysia varies from 0.5-1.7 kg/person/day (Manaf, 2009; Hussain, 2006; Kathirvale, 2003) and also have shown an upward trend concurrently with rapid urbanisation and industrialisation of the country.

Discards from Malaysian universities were reported to range from five to eight tonnes a day, while waste from academic institutions in Malaysia alone can amount to about 1,500 tonnes a day (Yusoff, 2015). It is said that University communities are comprised of diverse and defining characters, engaging in activities with considerable consumption of energy and

(3)

IJPHCS

materials, which are similar to those of the general public (Kelly, Mason, Leiss, & Ganesh, 2006; Kaplowitz, 2009). Moreover, university students are highly educated and influential, the leaders of tomorrow, and therefore, universities are arguably considered as a subset of the whole population that can significantly have an effect to the wider society (Wan, Cheung, &

Shen, 2012). Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) was ranked at 17th place in the UI- GreenMetric World University Ranking, topping other local universities in East and West Malaysia (UI Green Metric; TribunPutra, 2016). One of the indicators set by the UI- GreenMetric World University Ranking is recycling programmes and policy to reduce the use of paper and plastic in campus.

Studies have been conducted to ascertain the level of knowledge, attitude, and practice of recycling. Adeolu A., Eneesi, & Adeolu M., (2014) investigated secondary school students’

knowledge, attitude, and practice towards waste management in Nigeria revelead that in majority, 63.4% of respondents were classified as having average knowledge, 52.4% had moderate attitude, and 67.9% of students were classified with having moderate level of practice. Ehrampoush and Modhadam (2005) investigated the knowledge, attitude, and practice of Medical Sciences Students about solid waste disposal and recycling found that in majority, 40.2% of students possessed moderate level of knowledge and 44.5% of students had low level of knowledge, 59.0% had good levels of attitude and 66.0% of students had bad recycling practices.

Comparing to several studies conducted on university students in Malaysia revealed also varying results regarding the level of knowledge, attitude, and practices of recycling and/or environmental sustainability. Norizan (2010) studied environmental knowledge, attitude and practices of student teachers, found that the 54.8% of students scored higher than the mean for the level of knowledge, 53.9% of students scored higher than the mean for the level of attitude and 56.5% of students scored higher than the mean for the level of practice. Whereas Nur Atiqah and Haliza (2015) investigated secondary school students’ level of knowledge, attitude, and practice on recycling and found that in majority, 77.2% students possessed moderate level of knowledge and 77.6% had moderate level of attitude, however 73.2% had bad recycling practices.

Therefore, the objectives of this study is to determine the knowledge, attitude and practices of recycling and its associated factors among undergraduate students in UPM, Serdang. The specific objectives are as follows:

i. To describe the sociodemographic factors, the distribution of students in different faculties, and past recycling history of undergraduate students in UPM.

ii. To determine the level of knowledge, attitude, and practices of recycling among undergraduate students in UPM.

iii. To determine the associations of the sociodemographic factors, faculty of study and past recycling history with the level of knowledge, attitude, and practices of recycling among undergraduate students in UPM.

iv. To determine the associations between:

• undergraduate students’ recycling knowledge level and recycling attitude level;

• recycling attitude level and recycling practice level; and

• recycling knowledge level and recycling practice level.

v. To determine the predictors of levels of high knowledge, positive attitude, and good practices in regards to recycling among undergraduate students in UPM.

(4)

IJPHCS

Based on the aims, the null hypotheses were as follows:

i. There are no significant associations between sociodemographic factors, faculty of study and past recycling history to the level of knowledge, attitude and practices of recycling.

ii. There are no significant associations between recycling knowledge level and recycling attitude level; recycling attitude level and recycling practice level; and recycling knowledge level and recycling practice level.

Conservation behaviour of a group of young adults is pertinent as they will grow and mature to become future leaders responsible for environmental stewardship and sustainability (Wray- Lake, Flanagan, & Osgood, 2010). This study was conducted on undergraduate students in UPM Serdang to ascertain the level of knowledge, attitude and practices of recycling and its associating factors, which shed the light on the factors that encourages the recycling practices and the determining factors of pro-environmental behaviour among university undergraduate students, as they are the future beacons of tomorrow.

2.0 Materials and Methods

This study was conducted in Universiti Putra Malaysia Serdang, in central West Peninsular Malaysia, close to Kuala Lumpur and next to Putrajaya, Malaysia’s administrative capital city. The main campus stands on 1108.103 hectares, having 16 faculties with 26,222 students as of December 2014. All the faculties are located at the main campus. This analytical cross- sectional study began from September 2015 until July 2016, while data collection and analyses were done from May 2016. The target population of this study was undergraduate students in Universiti Putra Malaysia. The study population are three faculties that are randomly selected by the fishbowl draw method which were the Faculty of Engineering, Faculty of Human Ecology, and the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.

The study is calculated with the estimated sample size using the formula that compares proportion between two groups by Lemeshow et. al., (1990). A sample size of 310 were obtained through this calculation. In order do a random sampling of the study population, a proportionate stratified random sampling was used. A final sample size of 78 were isolated from the Faculty of Human Ecology, 122 from the Faculty of Engineering, and 110 from the Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences. Then, the students from each faculty were chosen by random number generator until the desired sample size was achieved for each faculty.

The three independent variables of this study identified are: 1) Sociodemographic factors (Age, gender, ethnicity, types of current accommodation (on/off campus), hometown status (urban/rural)); 2) Faculty of study; and 3) Past recycling history (History of recycling practices and history of recycling campaign involvements). While the dependent variables of this study are the level of knowledge of recycling, the level of attitude of recycling and the level of practice of recycling.

A self-administered questionnaire was used in this study. A pre-test was done prior to the study to determine the questionnaire’s reliability through Cronbach’s Alpha. The value obtained was 0.73 and is sufficient to predict the reliability of the items as supported by Cooper and Schindler (2005).

(5)

IJPHCS

Data was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 22 software (IBM, SPSS Statistics, 2016). For the entire outcome, a p-value < 0.05 is considered to be significant.

3.0 Results

This study managed to garner all 310 respondents, which amounts to a 100.0% response rate.

3.1 General characteristics of respondents

Table 3.1 shows the distribution of the respondents based on their socio-demographic distribution, their faculty of study and past recycling history.

Table 3.1: Descriptive analysis of the independent variables in the study (N=310)

Independent variables Median (IQR)

Frequency, n

Percentage,

% Sociodemographic factors

Age 23.0 (3.0)

18 – 25 year olds 264 85.2

≥ 26 year olds 46 14.8

Gender

Male 116 37.4

Female 194 62.6

Ethnicity

Malay 219 70.6

Non-Malay 91 29.4

Types of current accommodation

In-campus 176 56.8

Off-campus 134 43.2

Hometown status

Urban 207 66.8

Rural 103 33.2

Faculty of study

Engineering 122 39.4

Human Ecology 78 25.2

Medicine and Health Sciences 110 35.5

Past history of recycling Previous recycling practices

Yes 228 73.5

No 82 26.2

Previous recycling campaign involvement

Yes 149 48.1

No 161 51.9

(6)

IJPHCS

A total of 194 females participated in the study whereas there were 116 males. The minimum age of respondents that participated in this study is 20 year olds and the maximum age is 27 year olds, while the median age of respondents is 23 years old. The majority of the respondents aged 25 and below are at 85.2%, n= 264). Malays hold the majority among the respondents (70.6%, n=219) for ethnicity. Respondents living in-campus holds 56.8% of the demography (n=176) compared to those living off-campus (n=134, 43.2%). For hometown status, the majority of respondents originated from an urban setting (n=207, 66.8%) compared to those who originated from a rural setting (n=103, 33.2%). Among the 310 respondents, 39.4% are in the Faculty of Engineering, 35.5% are in the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, and the rest 25.2% are from the Faculty of Human Ecology.

When asked about their past history of recycling prior to entering UPM, 228 students (73.5%) reported that they have previously recycled or have done any activities pertaining to recycling. The second question asked if the respondents have ever participated or was involved in any recycling campaigns, 161 students (51.9%) reported to have never participated or be involved in recycling campaigns.

3.2 Level of knowledge, attitude, and practice on recycling

The levels of recycling for this study population based on their knowledge, attitude, and practices obtained from the questionnaire, are explained in table 3.2.

Table 3.2: Levels of knowledge, attitude, and practice of recycling among undergraduate students in UPM (N=310)

Variables Frequency (n) Percentage

(%)

Level of knowledge High 264 85.2

Low 46 14.8

Level of attitude Positive 133 42.9

Negative 177 57.1

Level of practice Good 152 49.0

Poor 158 51.0

It is found that in this study population, 85.2% of respondents possess high levels of knowledge on recycling. However, only 42.9% respondents exhibit positive levels of attitude and 49.0% respondents have good recycling practices.

3.3 Association between independent variables to the level of knowledge among undergraduate students in UPM

The study revealed that none of the sociodemographic factors have statistically significant association to levels of knowledge. Table 3.3 describes the associations between faculty of study to the respondents to the levels of knowledge.

(7)

IJPHCS

Table 3.3: Association between faculty of study to the level of knowledge among undergraduate students in UPM (N=310)

Level of knowledge

n (%) χ² p-value

High Low

Engineering 87 (71.3) 35 (28.7) 31.565 <0.001*

Human Ecology 71 (91.0) 7 (9.0)

Medicine and Health

Sciences 106 (96.4) 4 (3.6)

* Significant at p-value <0.05

Table 3.3 describes the associations between the faculty of study to the level of knowledge of recycling. It is demonstrated that there is a significant association between faculty of study to the level of knowledge of recycling (χ²= 31.6, p<0.001). 96.4% of students from the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences have the higher level of knowledge compared to the Faculty of Human Ecology (91.0%) and the Faculty of Engineering (71.3%).

Table 3.4: Association between past recycling history to the level of knowledge among undergraduate students in UPM (N=310)

Past recycling history

Level of knowledge

n (%) χ² p-value

High Low

Previous recycling practices

Yes 219

(96.1)

9 (3.9) 80.911 <0.001*

No 45

(54.9)

37 (45.1) Previous recycling

campaign involvement

Yes 142

(95.3)

7 (4.7) 23.346 <0.001*

No 122

(75.8)

39 (24.2)

Table 3.4 describes the association between past recycling history to the level of knowledge of recycling. It is demonstrated that both previous history of recycling and campaign participation have a significant association to the level of knowledge of recycling.

Respondents who have previously recycled prior to entering UPM have a higher knowledge (96.1%) compared those who have not (54.9%) with χ² = 80.9, p<0.001. Similarly, respondents who have previously participated in recycling campaigns prior to entering UPM have higher knowledge of recycling (95.3%) compared to those who have not participated (75.8%) with χ²= 23.3, p<0.001.

3.4 Association between independent variables to the level of attitude among undergraduate students in UPM

This study revealed that none of the sociodemographic factors have statistically significant association to levels of attitude, as with faculty of study and past recycling history. Table 3.5 describes the sociodemographic factors to the level of attitude. Table 3.5 describes the sociodemographic factors to the level of attitude.

(8)

IJPHCS

Table 3.5: Associations between sociodemographic factors to the level of attitude among undergraduate students in UPM (N=310)

Sociodemographic factors

Level of attitude

n (%) χ² p-value

Positive Negative Age

18 – 25 year olds 112 (42.4) 152 (57.6) 0.167 0.683

≥ 26 year olds 21 (45.7) 25 (54.3) Gender

Male 47 (40.5) 69 (59.5) 0.431 0.512

Female 86 (44.3) 108 (55.7)

Ethnicity

Malay 90 (41.1) 129 (58.9) 0.995 0.319

Non-Malay 43 (47.3) 48 (52.7)

Types of current accommodation

In-campus 75 (42.6) 101 (57.4) 0.014 0.906

Off-campus 58 (43.3) 76 (56.7)

Hometown status

Urban 85 (41.1) 122 (58.9) 0.861 0.353

Rural 48 (46.6) 55 (53.4)

3.5 Association between independent variables to the level of practice among undergraduate students in UPM

None of the sociodemographic factors have statistically significant association to levels of practice. Table 3.6 describes the association between the faculty of study to the level of practice of recycling.

Table 3.6: Associations between faculty of study to the level of practice among undergraduate students in UPM (N=310)

Level of practice

n (%) χ² p-value

Good Poor

Engineering 55 (45.1) 67 (54.9) 23.021 <0.001*

Human Ecology 56 (71.8) 22 (28.2) Medicine and Health

Sciences 41 (37.3) 69 (62.7)

It is demonstrated that there is a significant association between faculty of study to the level of practice (χ²= 23.02, p<0.001). In this study, 71.8% of students from the Faculty of Human Ecology have good level of practices, followed by the Faculty of Engineering (45.1%) and the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences (37.3%).

Table 3.7 describes the association between past recycling history to the level of practice of recycling.

(9)

IJPHCS

Table 3.7: Association between past recycling history to the level of practice among undergraduate students in UPM (N=310)

n (%) χ² p-value

Good Poor Previous recycling

practices

Yes 132

(57.9)

96 (42.1) 27.090 <0.001*

No 20 (24.4) 62 (75.6) Previous recycling

campaign involvement

Yes 86 (57.7) 63 (42.3) 8.661 0.003*

No 66 (41.0) 95 (59.0)

It is demonstrated that both previous history of recycling and campaign participation have a significant association to the level of practice of recycling. Respondents who have previously recycled prior to entering UPM have a good practice (57.9%) compared those who have not (24.4%) with χ²= 27.09, p<0.001. Similarly, respondents who have previously participated in recycling campaigns prior to entering UPM have good practice of recycling (57.7%) compared to those who have not participated (41.0%) with χ²= 8.66, p=0.003.

3.6 Associations among the dependent variables among undergraduate students in UPM This section explains the association between the level of knowledge to the level of attitude, the level of attitude to the level of practice, and the level of knowledge to the level of practice of recycling.

Table 3.8: Associations between the level of knowledge to the level of attitude of recycling among undergraduate students of UPM (N=310)

Variables

Level of attitude

n (%) χ² p-value

Positive Negative

Level of knowledge High 116 (43.9) 148 (56.1) 0.780 0.377 Low 17 (37.0) 29 (63.0)

Table 3.8 describes the association between the level of knowledge to the level of attitude of recycling. It is revealed too, that the association is not statistically significant (χ²=0.78, p=0.377).

Table 3.9: Associations between the level of knowledge and level of attitude to the level of practice of recycling among undergraduate students of UPM (N=310)

Variables

n (%) χ² p-value

Good Poor

Level of knowledge High 145 (54.9) 119 (45.1) 24.715 <0.001*

Low 7 (15.2) 39 (84.8)

Level of attitude Positive 72 (54.1) 61 (45.9) 2.427 0.119 Negative 80 (45.2) 97 (54.8)

(10)

IJPHCS

Table 3.9 indicated that the level of knowledge is significantly associated to the level of practice (χ²=24,72, p<0.001), on the other hand, there is no significant association between the level of attitude to the level of practice.

3.7 Predictors of high knowledge and good practice of recycling

Since there are significant associations between faculty of study and past recycling history to both the level of knowledge and level of practice, and a significant association between the level of knowledge to the level of practice, predictors for high knowledge and good practice were ascertained.

3.7.1 Predictors of high knowledge of recycling

A logistic regression was performed to ascertain the faculty of study and past history of recycling on the likelihood that the respondents have high level of knowledge, when other independent variables are kept constant by using it as a reference group. Table 3.10 described the predictors of high knowledge towards recycling.

Table 3.10: Predictors of having high knowledge towards recycling (N=310)

Variables AOR 95% CI p-value

Faculty of study [Engineering]

Human Ecology 3.547 1.250,

10.067

0.017*

Medicine and Health Sciences 14.889 4.557, 48.648

<0.001*

Previous recycling practices Yes 17.944 6.835, 47.110

<0.001*

[No]

Yes 1.983 0.695, 5.658 0.201 [No]

[ ] Reference group for Odds Ratio (OR) R² = 0.503 * Significant at p-value <0.05

The respondents from the Faculty of Human Ecology has 3.6 times more likely to have higher knowledge as compared to those from the Faculty of Engineering, and is statistically significant [AOR 3.55, 95% CI (1.25, 10.07), p=0.017]. Moreover, the odds of possessing high level of knowledge by the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences are 15 times more likely as compared to those from the Faculty of Engineering, and is statistically significant [AOR 14.89, 95% CI (4.56, 48.65), p<0.001].

For past recycling history, respondents who previously recycled prior to entering UPM are 18 times more likely to have higher knowledge as compared to those who have not, and is statistically significant [AOR 17.94, 95% CI (6.86, 47.11), p<0.001].

(11)

IJPHCS

3.7.2 Predictors of good practice of recycling

Table 3.11 explains the predictors of having good recycling practices. A logistic regression was performed to ascertain the faculty of study, past history of recycling, and level of knowledge on the likelihood that the respondents have good recycling practices, when other independent variables are kept constant by using it as a reference group.

Table 3.11: Predictors of having good practice towards recycling

Variables AOR 95% CI p-value

Faculty of study [Engineering]

Human Ecology 2.410 1.242, 4.675 0.009*

Medicine and Health Sciences 0.476 0.266, 0.851 0.012*

Past recycling history

Previous recycling practices Yes 2.681 1.345, 5.345 0.005*

[No]

Yes 0.923 0.539, 1.579 0.769 [No]

Level of knowledge of recycling

High

[Low] 4.939 1.885, 12.939 0.001*

[ ] Reference group for Odds Ratio (OR) R² = 0.242 * Significant at p-value <0.05

The odds of respondents from the Faculty of Human Ecology are 2.4 times more likely to have good recycling practices as compared to those from the Faculty of Engineering and it is statistically significant [AOR 2.41, 95% CI (1.24, 4.68), p=0.009]. However, the odds of having good recycling practices by the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences are 48% less likely as compared to those from the Faculty of Engineering, and is statistically significant [AOR 0.48, 95% CI (0.27, 0.85), p=0.012].

Respondents who previously recycled prior to entering UPM are 2.7 times more likely to have good recycling practices as compared to those who have not and is statistically significant [AOR 2.681, 95% CI (1.345, 5.345), p=0.005].

On the other hand, respondents who possess high level of knowledge are 5 times more likely to also have good recycling practices, compared to those who have a low level of knowledge, and is statistically significant [AOR 4.94, 95%CI (1.89, 12.94), p=0.001].

4.0 Discussion

4.1 Levels of knowledge, attitude, and practices of recycling

Based on the results and findings from the study population of undergraduate students from the Faculty of Engineering, Faculty of Human Ecology, and Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, this study revealed that 85.2% of respondents possess high knowledge of recycling.

(12)

IJPHCS

57.1% of respondents reported to have negative attitudes towards recycling, and 51.0% of respondents with poor recycling practice. Granted, the percentage ratio between the positive and negative attitude, and good and poor practice are relatively close. High level of knowledge for this study population corresponds to studies by Norizan (2010), Jamilah, et. al., (2015) and Nur Atiqah and Haliza (2015), but not with negative attitude and poor practice.

4.2 Associations between sociodemographic factors to the level of knowledge, attitude, and practices of recycling

For sociodemographic factors, none were associated to either the level of knowledge, attitude or practice of recycling. Among literature reviews, studies by Hussein and Hasoon (2013), Coertjens, et, al., (2010) reported no significant associations for sociodemographic factors, particularly gender, and the level of knowledge. The association between sociodemographic factors to the level of attitude corresponds to a number of studies (Kelly, et. al., 2006; Tiew, et. al., 2013; Shahariah, et. al., 2012; Omran et. al., 2009; (Wright Y. , 2011; Nur Atiqah &

Haliza, 2015; Byrne & O'Regan, 2014; Mrema, 2008; Robertson & Walkington, 2009;

Tatlonghari & Jamias, 2010; Ferrer, 2015), so as to ethnicity to the level of practice which corresponds to Nur Atiqah and Haliza (2015), however, hometown status did have a significant association with the level of practice in their study. Moreover, their study was also reaffirmed by a study by Shahariah, et. al., (2012) which indicated that aside from the significant association, respondents coming from the rural setting tend to have better practice of recycling compared to their urban counterparts.

4.3 Faculty of study and the association between them to the level of knowledge, attitude and practices of recycling

Faculty of study indicated significant associations to the level of knowledge and level of practice of recycling. Associations between faculty of study with level of knowledge are supported by Tikka et. al., (2000) and Ifegbesan (2010) in terms of level of knowledge. In my study findings, the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences have the highest level among the respondents, followed by the Faculty of Engineering and the Faculty of Ecology. Tikka, et.

al., (2000) reported in their study that the Faculty of Engineering and Faculty of Health Care had the lowest level of knowledge compared to the rest (Faculty of Forestry and Biology), which are in contrast to my study findings. The significant association between faculty of study and the level of practice is supported by Ferrer (2015), Shahriah, et. al. (2012), and Ifegbesan (2010). However, Ferrer (2015) reported students in Health related course has a higher level of practice compared to the rest, which differed from my findings, where the Faculty of Ecology has the best level of practice, followed by the Faculty of Engineering and lastly, the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. It is also noteworthy to mention that the Faculty of Ecology has the lowest knowledge of recycling, but has the best recycling practice among the faculty of study.

This study revealed that there was a significant association between faculty of study to the level of knowledge of recycling (χ²= 31.6, p<0.001), with 96.4% of students from the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences have the higher level of knowledge compared to the Faculty of Human Ecology (91.0%) and the Faculty of Engineering (71.3%). The results are likely to indicate that respondents from the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences are more knowledgeable in terms of health implications, as well as environmental impact.

Unexpectedly, the Faculty of Human Ecology falls behind in the level of knowledge, as

(13)

IJPHCS

students studying in Human Ecology focuses on the relationship between humans and their natural, and built environments (SpringerLink, 2016).

4.4 Past recycling history and the associations between them to the level of knowledge, attitude and practices of recycling

From table 4.1, the majority of respondents reported to have previously have done recycling in the past, but less for involving in previous recycling campaigns. These findings are more or less similar to a study done by Ifegbesan (2010), who stated that the majority of his respondents have participated in waste and waste management activities, and lesser students have had contributed to an organisation that works to protect the environment and have attended training, seminar or workshop on environmental education or management, which are almost similar to recycling campaign involvement. Recycling education and activities starting from an early education are pertinent in order to increase the students’ awareness of the importance of practice, so they will become more responsible and hence, cultivate a recycling culture in the future (Nur Atiqah & Haliza, 2015). According to studies done on primary and secondary school children, the issues we face are when they treat environmental education just as one of the academic topics to study without relating the knowledge to their lives and the world beyond the classroom (Thang & Kumarasamy, 2006; Yasmin & Marjan, 2013).

Past recycling history has an association to the level of knowledge and level of practice. Past experiences of recycling do influence the level of practice of recycling, as supported by a study by Tonglet, et. al., (2004). According to them, respondents who have recycled their household wastes in the past tend to regularly carry out recycling practice.

Previous recycling practices have more chances to get good practice of recycling in the future compared to previous recycling campaign involvement. However, Tonglet, et. al., (2004) reported that past experience with recycling predicts strong attitude and strong behaviour, with no mention of knowledge. Finally, respondents who possess high level of knowledge are more likely to have good recycling practices. This finding is indirectly supported by TPB in a sense that having high knowledge on recycling may lead to good recycling practices, albeit not having the right attitude. According to Nur Atiqah and Haliza (2015), attitude towards recycling is an important determinant of practicing recycling. Without sufficient knowledge, ideas, and skills, attitude alone cannot bring good behaviour and practice towards recycling.

4.5 Associations among the level of knowledge, attitude, and practices of recycling

There was only a significant association between the level of knowledge of recycling to the level of recycling practice, but not between the level of knowledge and attitude, nor the level of attitude to the level of practice which corresponded to studies by Norizan (2010), Ratnapradipa, et. al. (2011), Jamilah, et. al., (2015) and Nur Atiqah and Haliza (2015). In contrast to the TPB by Ajzen (1991) and Tan Awang et. al., (2013), having high knowledge on a subject cultivates a positive attitude, and in turn translates into good practice. Perhaps, having the knowledge of recycling is enough to make people recycle, because of external factors such as curriculum, extracurricular activities for a module. In a rigid sense, attitude does not come into the equation.

(14)

IJPHCS

5.0 Conclusion and recommendation

The high level of knowledge among the study population was evident in this study, however with the negative recycling attitude and low level of practice, recycling initiatives within an individual and in the university will not flourish. It also indicates the lack of environmental awareness among students.

There were significant associations between faculty of study and past recycling history to the level of knowledge of recycling, and there were significant associations between faculty of study and past recycling history to the level of recycling practice, as well as a significant association between the level of knowledge and the level of practice of recycling. Based on these findings, the aforementioned null hypotheses according to them were rejected.

In view of the significant association between the level of knowledge and the level practice of recycling, the negative attitude has to be tackled by addressing and improving the recycling knowledge and greatly improving the practice level by creating student involvement in recycling programs and campaigns in repeated measures to sustain recycling behaviours in the long term. These steps will in turn improve the level of attitude of recycling.

Their past and current behaviour and practices of recycling greatly influence the future recycling outcomes, therefore it is imperative that recycling knowledge, attitude, and practices should be addressed and strengthened at the university level. Since none of the sociodemographic factors obtained consistent association to either level of knowledge, attitude, and practice of recycling, it is recommended all layers of the student community, regardless of profile, should be given equal attention in the care of the environment.

From this study, it is apparent that the level of attitude of recycling is lacking in this study population, followed by poor level of practice. This exhibits lack of environmental awareness among students. The university has to continue its green initiatives, if not to improve it even further. Recycling bins ought to be adequate and visible throughout university grounds, as well as on dormitory grounds. Management of recyclable wastes should be regularly maintained. More recycling campaigns and programmes need to be organised by the university in order to facilitate student involvement. With that, level of practice among students will improve. Therefore, with improved level of knowledge and level of practice, in turn the level of attitude of recycling among the students will also improve over time.

Acknowledgement

This article was prepared as a part of requirement of graduation in Master in Public Health degree in Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia.

This study has obtained approval from Univeristy Research Ethical Committee (JKEUPM), Universiti Putra Malaysia. (Reference number: FPSK(EXP16)P079) and approval from the Deans from the Faculty of Engineering, the Faculty of Human Ecology and the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.

(15)

IJPHCS

The authors also would like to thank the Director General of Health Malaysia for the permission to publish this article.

Authors contribution

Author 1: Information gathering and preparation of the draft of the manuscript Author 2: Editing final manuscript

References

Adeolu, A., Eneesi, D., & Adeolu, M. (2014). Assessment of secondary school students' knowledge, attitude and practices towards waste managenent in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. Journal of Research in Environmental Science and Toxicology .

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational behaviour and human decision processes, 179-211.

Byrne, S., & O'Regan, B. (2014). Attitudes and actions towards recycling behaviours in the Limerick, Ireland region. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 89-96.

Cooper, R. C., & Schindler, P. S. (2005). Business Research Methods. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

Ehrampoush, M. H., & Modhadam, M. B. (2005). Survey of knowledge, attitude and practice of Yazd University of Medical Sciences students about solid waste disposal and recycling. Iranian J Env Health Science Eng, 2(2), 26-30.

Ferrer, F. P. (2015). Students' waste management practices: Association to demographic profile. International Journal of Science, Environment, 4(1), 125-134.

Gilpin. (2000). Dictionary of Environmental Law. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Hopewell, J., Dvorak, R., & Kosior, E. (2009). Plastics recycling: challenges and opportunities. Retrieved from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2873020/

Hussain. (2006). Combustion modelling of an industrial municipal waste combustor in Malaysia. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 63:313-29.

Ifegbesan, A. (2010). Exploring secondary school students' understanding and practices of waste management in Ogun State, Nigeria. International Journal of Environmental &

Science Education, 5(2), 201-215.

(16)

IJPHCS

Jamilah, A., Shuhaida, M., & Nurzali, I. (2015). Investigating students' environmental knowledge, attitude, practice and communication. Asian Social Science.

doi:10.5539/ass.v11n16p284

Kaplowitz, M. (2009). Garnering input for recycling communication strategies at a Big Ten University. Resources, conservation and recycling, 612-23.

Kathirvale, M. Y. (2003). Energy potential from municipal solid waste in Malaysia.

Renewable Energy, 29:559-67.

Kelly, T., Mason, I., Leiss, M., & Ganesh, S. (2006). University community responses to on- campus resource recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53.

Lemeshow, S., Hosmer, D. W., Klar, J., & Lwanga, S. K. (1990). Adequacy of sample size in health studies. World Health Organisation.

Manaf, L. (2009). Municipal solid waste management in Malaysia: Practices and challenges.

Waste Management, 2902–2906.

MHLG. (2003). Annual report, section 4- local government, Kuala Lumpur. Technical Section of the Local Government Division.

Mrema, K. (2008). An Assessment of students' environmental attitudes and behaviors and the effectiveness of their school recycling programs. Halifax, NS: School of Resource and Environmental Studies.

Norizan, E. (2010). Environmental knowledge, attitude and practices of student teachers.

International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 19(1), 39-50.

Nur Atiqah, Y., & Haliza, A. (2015). Knowledge, attitude and practice towards recycling activity among secondary school students at Hulu Langat, Selangor, Malaysia. 1st International Conference on Interdisciplinary Development Research (IDR 2015).

Chiangmai, Thailand.

Omran, A., Mahmood, A., Hamidi, A., & Robinson, G. (2009). Investigating households attitude toward recycling of solid waste in Malaysia: A case study. International Journal of Environmental Research, 275-88.

Osman, A., Md Isa, F., Othman, S., & Jaganathan, M. (2015). Attitude towards recycling among Business Undergraduate Students in Malaysia. American-Eurasian Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 6-12.

Ratnapradipa, D., Brown, S., Middleton, W., & Wodika, A. (2011). Measuring Environmental Health Perception Among College Students. The Health Educator.

Robertson, S., & Walkington, H. (2009). Recycling and waste minimisation behaviours of the transient student population in Oxford: results of an on-line survey. Local Environment, 14(4), 285-296.

(17)

IJPHCS

Shahariah, A., Jamaliah, M., & Zahariah, M. (2012). Sustainable consumption practices of university sutdents in Selangor, Malaysia. Journal of ASIAN behavioral srudies.

SpringerLink. (2016). Human Ecology. Retrieved 1 August, 2016, from Springer Link:

http://link.springer.com/journal/10745

Tan Awang, B., Md Salleh, H., Jusang, B., & Ramdzani, A. (2013). Exploring the levels of knowledge, attitude and environment-friendly practices among young civil servants in Malaysia. Social sciences & Humanities, 21-38.

Tatlonghari, R. V., & Jamias, S. B. (2010). Village-level knowledge, attitudes and practices on solid waste management in Sta. Rosa City, Laguna, Philippines. Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 36.

Thang, S., & Kumarasamy, P. (2006). Malaysian Students’ Perceptions of the Environment Contents in Their English Language Classes. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teachin, 3(2), 190-208.

Tiew, K., Watanabe, K., Noor Ezlin, A., Shahrom, M., & Hassan, B. (2013). Level of recycling awareness and responses to on-campus recycling facilities: case study - Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia students. UNIMAS e-Journal of Civil Engineering.

Tikka, P. M., Kuitunen, M. T., & Tynys, S. M. (2000). Effects of educational background of students' attitudes, activity levels, and knowledge concerning the environment.

Journal of Environmental Education, 31, 12-19.

Tonglet, M., Phillips, P., & Read, A. (2004). Using the Thoery of Planned Behaviour to investigate the determinants of recycling behaviour: a case study from Brixworth, UK.

Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 41, 191-214.

TribunPutra. (2016). UPM is World's Top 17th in UI-Greenmetric World University Ranking.

TribunPutra(83), 1-2.

UI Green Metric. (n.d.). UI Green Metric Universities Overall Ranking 2014. Retrieved from http://greenmetric.ui.ac.id/

Wan, C., Cheung, R., & Shen, G. Q. (2012). Recycling attitude and behaviour in university campus: a case study in Hong Kong. Emerald insight, 630-646.

Wright, Y. (2011). Relating recycling: Demographics, attitudes, knowledge and recycling behaviour among UC Berkeley students.

Yasmin, H., & Marjan, N. (2013). Understanding Consumer Decision Making Towards Green Electronic Products. South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business, Economics and Law, 2(1).

Yusoff, S. (2 March, 2015). Universiti Malaya aims for zero waste. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.my/lifestyle/features/2015/03/02/um-aims-for-zero-waste/

Zubrugg, C. (2002). Urban solid waste management in low-income countries of Asia - how to cope with the garbage crisis.