INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Linking Waste Disposal Practices (WDP) to Carbon Footprint (CF):A

MediationAnalysis of Public EnvironmentalAwareness (PEA)

Rajeesh Kumar M¹, Aswathi C A², Anusha P Nair³, Vineeth K V⁴

^{1, 3}Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce & Management, AMC – Allied Management College,

Manisseri

²Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Applications, AMC – Allied Management College,

Manisseri

⁴Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Education, AMC – Allied Management College, Manisseri

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150500213

Received: 21 May 2026; Accepted: 26 May 2026; Published: 15 June 2026

ABSTRACT

The increasing environmental challenges associated with improper waste management have intensified global

concerns regarding carbon emissions and climate change. This study examines the relationship between Waste

Disposal Practices (WDP) and Carbon Footprint (CF), with Public Environmental Awareness (PEA) serving as

a mediating variable. Data were collected from households, local residents, and environmentally conscious

citizens across various municipalities in Thrissur district, Kerala. A total of 540 valid responses were analyzed

using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). The findings indicate that responsible waste disposal practices

significantly reduce carbon footprint by promoting recycling, waste segregation, composting, and sustainable

disposal behaviors. The study further reveals that public environmental awareness positively strengthens

environmentally responsible practices and mediates the relationship between waste disposal practices and carbon

footprint. The research highlights the importance of awareness campaigns, environmental education, and policy-

driven waste management initiatives in achieving long-term environmental sustainability and carbon reduction

goals.

Keywords: Waste Disposal Practices, Carbon Footprint, Public Environmental Awareness

INTRODUCTION

The management of waste disposal practices (WDP) has become a crucial factor in addressing environmental

sustainability challenges worldwide. Waste disposal at both household and municipal levels not only affects land

use and public health, but also directly leads to greenhouse gas emissions and the overall carbon footprint (CF)

of communities and nations (Abubakar et al., 2022; Sarma, 2025). Studies in environmental science indicates

that the decomposition of organic waste in landfills and the incineration of unrecycled materials are prominent

sources of methane and carbon dioxide, two potent drivers of climate change (Wang, 2023). Furthermore, waste

sorting and recycling moves have been linked to reduced emissions by enhancing energy recovery and

decreasing reliance on energy-intensive manufacturing processes (Yin et al., 2024). These studies show the

complex connection between waste management practices and global climate targets, such as carbon neutrality.

Despite technical advancements in waste management, public attitude remains a central driver determining the

success of sustainable waste practices. The Theory of Planned Behavior and related behavioral frameworks

shows that environmental knowledge, attitudes, and perceived control influence individual participation in

recycling, composting, and responsible waste segregation (Amir et al., 2025). Environmental awareness is often

positioned as a precursor to positive waste disposal behavior, serving as a significant l mediator that enhances

the adoption of low-carbon practices. Empirical research has consistently documented that higher awareness

levels correlate with greater engagement in environmentally responsible behaviors, including proper waste

sorting and reduction of waste generation (Frontiers Research, 2022; Debrah et al., 2021). However, the

Page 2645

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

transformation of awareness into actual practice is often moderated by external factors such as infrastructure,

policy support, and socio-demographic variables, suggesting that a mediating framework may be needed to fully

capture these relationships.

The concept of public environmental awareness (PEA) integrates cognitive, affective, and behavioral

components of citizens’ attitude towards environmental issues. This construct has demonstrated value in

predicting pro-environmental behaviors across diverse contexts, including recycling, energy conservation, and

sustainable consumption (Yildirim et al., 2025). In waste management research specifically, studies indicates

that awareness not only affects individual attitudes but also enhances support for institutional interventions and

community-based waste initiatives.

Given these gaps, this research proposes to model PEA as a mediator in the relationship between WDP and CF.

A mediation analysis allows us to investigate how and to what extent awareness influences the pathway from

waste practices toward carbon emission outcomes. Such an approach emphasizes the theoretical understanding

of behavioral change mechanisms in environmental studies and provides policymakers with practical insights

on designing effective awareness campaigns that can significantly reduce carbon footprints through improved

waste management.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Effect of public environmental awareness on waste disposal practices

Public environmental awareness has a vital and positive relationship with waste disposal practices, deciding how

individuals understand, manage, and act toward waste-related environmental issues. These programmes highly

influence one's approach towards responsible waste disposal and management. Environmental awareness means

the level of understanding, concern, and notion people have regarding environmental consequences and

appropriate waste management methods. Empirical studies consistently show that individuals with higher

environmental awareness are more likely to engage in responsible waste disposal behaviours such as waste

segregation, recycling, and reduction of household waste (Wu et al., 2022). Awareness enhances pro-

environmental attitudes and personal norms, which in turn strengthen behavioural intentions toward proper waste

management (Ajzen, 1991; Li et al., 2023).

Research conducted across urban and educational settings demonstrates that awareness directly affects attitudes

toward recycling and indirectly influences behaviour through perceived behavioural control and moral obligation

(Omran et al., 2025). Furthermore, community-level studies indicate that environmentally aware populations are

more likely to support and participate in organized waste management programs, demand better municipal

services, and comply with waste regulations (Sarker et al., 2013). Environmental education and awareness

campaigns have also been found to significantly improve waste disposal practices among students and

households by reinforcing the principles of reduce, reuse, and recycle (Anthonia et al., 2025). Such education

and awareness classes and campus should be conducted from grass root level, inorder to bring a better and

effective result in this scenario.

However, while awareness positively influences behaviour, studies emphasize that awareness alone is

insufficient without supportive infrastructure, policy enforcement, and social reinforcement mechanisms (Kaza

et al., 2018). Overall, public environmental awareness acts as a critical driver of sustainable waste disposal

practices by shaping attitudes, strengthening responsibility, and promoting environmentally responsible

behaviour, thereby contributing to reduced environmental degradation and improved waste management

outcomes.

Building on this perspective, it becomes evident that public environmental awareness plays a foundational yet

interdependent role in improving sustainable waste disposal practices. While consistent awareness can positively

influence individual attitudes and intentions by enhancing understanding of environmental consequences and

individual responsibility, its effectiveness is significantly shaped by the broader structural and social context in

which individuals operate. The availability of accessible waste segregation facilities, reliable collection systems,

and transparent regulatory mechanisms assured awareness by reducing behavioural barriers and normalizing

Page 2646

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

sustainable practices. Moreover, social reinforcement mechanisms such as community participation, social

norms, and peer influence play an important role in sustaining environmentally responsible behaviour over time

by imparting waste management practices within daily routines. In this way, environmental awareness

programmes function not merely as an informational tool but as a catalyst that interacts with policy,

infrastructure, and social systems to create meaningful behavioural change. When integrated within a supportive

ecosystem, public environmental awareness contributes significantly to reducing irresponsible and improper

waste disposal, minimizing environmental degradation, and fostering overall waste management outcomes,

thereby advancing broader goals of environmental sustainability and public well-being.

(H1): Public environmental awareness has a significant positive effect on waste disposal practices

Effect of waste disposal practices to carbon footprint.

The extent of the carbon footprint is critically determined by the waste disposal practices, as they influence

greenhouse gas emissions across the collection, treatment and final disposal stages. Potent greenhouse gases

with long atmospheric lifetimes such as methane (CH₄), carbon dioxide (CO₂), and nitrous oxide(N₂O), released

through inefficient waste disposal methods like open dumping, uncontrolled landfilling, and improper

incineration substantially contribute to the carbon footprint (Bogner et al., 2008). Landfills, in particular, are

major anthropogenic sources of methane emissions due to the anaerobic decomposition of organic waste, thereby

intensifying impacts on climate change (IPCC, 2014).

Carbon emissions are significantly reduced by improved waste disposal practices such as waste segregation,

recycling, composting and energy recovery, through minimizing landfill dependency and conserving raw

materials (Gentil et al., 2009). Recycling processes lower carbon footprints by decreasing energy-intensive virgin

material production, especially in the case of metals, paper and plastics (Turner et al., 2015). Likewise, organic

waste composting improves soil carbon sequestration while mitigating methane emissions offering dual benefits

for the environment (Boldrin et al., 2011).

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies consistently reveal that compared to conventional disposal approaches

integrated waste management systems generate lower carbon footprints (Cherubini et al., 2009). Through

inefficient transportation systems, excessive fuel consumption, and lack of technological control, poor waste

disposal practices also indirectly increase carbon emissions particularly in developing economies where

infrastructure gaps exist (Wilson et al., 2015).

Moreover, properly managed waste-to-energy systems can offset fossil fuel usage and reduce net greenhouse

gas output, whereas incineration without energy recovery exacerbates emissions (Astrup et al., 2015). When

disposal practices are poorly regulated and inadequately monitored, behavioural factors, institutional

inefficiencies and weak policy enforcement further amplify carbon impacts (Mazzanti & Zoboli, 2008).

Empirical evidence suggests that for achieving carbon neutrality targets and aligning with global climate

mitigation frameworks, a transition toward sustainable waste disposal practices, supported by technological

innovation and policy integration is essential (UNEP, 2020). Therefore, both direct and indirect effects of waste

disposal practices on the carbon footprint underscore the necessity of systematic waste management reforms to

support long-term environmental sustainability.

(H2): Waste disposal practices significantly influence the carbon footprint.

Mediating Effect of on the Relationship between Waste Disposal practices and Carbon Footprint

Public awareness of the relationship between waste disposal practices and carbon footprint has high relevance

for climate change mitigation and sustainable development. This has increased scholarly attention as well. Waste

collection, transportation, treatment and final disposal through landfilling and uncontrolled dumping generate

greenhouse gases by releasing large amounts of methane and carbon dioxide, which directly influence the carbon

footprint of waste disposal practices (Bogner et al., 2008).

Page 2647

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Improved waste disposal practices are highly effective in reducing carbon footprint but this reduction not only

dependent on technological or infrastructural interventions, but also on the level of public environmental

awareness that governs both individual and collective waste-related behaviours. Public environmental awareness

acts as a major mediating variable that influence households and communities to understand environmental

consequences and act accordingly by adopting waste segregation practices and participating in recycling and

composting initiatives (Mazzanti & Zoboli, 2008 and Ramaswamy et al. 2025).

By increasing environmental awareness, people are more likely to engage in responsible activities related to

waste disposal so that carbon reduction potential of waste management system can be improved (Gentil et al.,

2009). Conversely, low awareness results in higher carbon footprints despite the presence of a formal waste

management framework (Wilson et al., 2015). Empirical studies using life cycle assessment approaches show

that environmentally conscious behaviour reduces carbon emissions by minimizing landfill dependency and

promoting material recovery. This offsets emissions from raw material extraction and energy-intensive

production processes (Turner et al., 2015).

By encouraging support for waste-to-energy systems, public environmental awareness reduces carbon footprint.

This strengthens the waste-carbon nexus (Astrup et al., 2015). In addition, awareness-driven behavioural change

reduces contamination in streams, lowers operational emissions, and improves the overall performance of waste

management systems, thereby enhancing institutional efficiency (Boldrin et al., 2011).

Environmental awareness as a mediating factor, translates waste disposal practices into meaningful climate

outcomes. It aligns individual behaviour with environmental objectives, thereby serving as a mechanism for

achieving carbon footprint reduction through waste management strategies (Cherubini et al., 2009). Thus, public

environmental awareness plays an important role in achieving carbon mitigation goals in both developed and

developing economies. This does not just influence waste disposal practices independently, but acts as an

intermediary that amplifies environmental effectiveness of waste management systems.

(H3): Public environmental awareness mediates the relationship between waste disposal practices and

carbon footprint.

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Pilot Study, Data Collection and Respondent Profile

This study was conducted among households, local residents, small business owners, and environmentally

conscious citizens situated in various municipalities across Thrissur district, Kerala, India, including Thrissur,

Guruvayoor, Kunnamkulam, Chavakkad, Irinjalakuda, Kodungallur, and Chalakudy.

Following a successful pilot test involving 150 respondents from selected municipalities, the final structured

questionnaire was distributed online using WhatsApp groups and Google Forms.

Page 2648

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

• Total questionnaires distributed: 750

• Responses received: 610 (Response rate: 81.3%)

• Valid responses analyzed: 540 (Validity rate: 88.5%)

Category

Sub-category

Female

Frequency

318

Percentage

58.9

Gender

Male

222

41.1

Gender Total

Age Range

540

100.0

31.9

18–30

172

Age Range

31–45

214

39.6

Age Range

46 and Above

154

28.5

Age Range Total

Occupation

540

100.0

27.0

Business

146

Occupation

Salaried

208

38.5

Occupation

Self-employed

186

34.5

Occupation Total

Residential Area

Overall Total

540

100.0

40.9

Urban

221

Semi-Urban

Rural

183

33.9

136

25.2

540

100.0

Measures

The study examined the relationship between Waste Disposal Practices (WDP) and Carbon Footprint (CF), with

Public Environmental Awareness (PEA) acting as a mediating variable. All constructs were measured using

validated multi-item scales

• Waste Disposal Practices (WDP): Adapted 6-item scale based on sustainable waste management and household

waste segregation practices from previous environmental behavior studies (Ajzen, 1991; Kaza et al., 2018). The

scale measured recycling behavior, waste segregation, composting practices, and responsible disposal habits

using a 5-point Likert scale.

Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.872

• Carbon Footprint (CF): Adapted 6-item environmental impact scale measuring respondents perceived

contribution to carbon emissions through waste generation, energy-intensive consumption, and disposal

Page 2649

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

practices, developed from environmental sustainability studies (Turner et al., 2015; UNEP, 2020). Responses

were collected using a 5-point Likert scale.

Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.851

• Public Environmental Awareness (PEA): Adapted 6-item scale measuring environmental knowledge,

awareness of climate change, ecological responsibility, and environmental attitudes among the public based on

prior environmental awareness literature (Zsóka et al., 2013; Yildirim et al., 2025). Responses were measured

using a 5-point Likert scale.

Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.884

Data Analysis and Statistical Results

The final valid sample of 540 respondents was used for the statistical analysis. The study applied Structural

Equation Modeling (SEM) to examine the direct relationship between Waste Disposal Practices (WDP) and

Carbon Footprint (CF), and the mediating effect of Public Environmental Awareness (PEA). Prior to hypothesis

testing, the data were assessed for normality, reliability, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and overall

model fit.

Normality Test with Skewness and Kurtosis

Normality was assessed using skewness and kurtosis values for the three major constructs. Skewness indicates

the symmetry of the data distribution, while kurtosis shows whether the data are highly peaked or flat. As a

general rule, skewness and kurtosis values falling within the range of +2 to -2 indicate acceptable normality for

further multivariate analysis.

The obtained values for WDP, CF, and PEA were within the acceptable range, confirming that the data were

suitable for SEM-based analysis.

Table 1: Normality Test with Skewness and Kurtosis

Construct

Skewness

Kurtosis

Interpretation

Waste

Practices (WDP)

Disposal

-0.746

1.038

Acceptable normality

Carbon

(CF)

Footprint

0.682

0.914

0.801

Acceptable normality

Public Environmental

Awareness (PEA)

-0.593

Reliability and Convergent Validity

Reliability and convergent validity were examined using Cronbachs Alpha, Composite Reliability (CR), and

Average Variance Extracted (AVE). Cronbachs Alpha and CR values above 0.70 indicate good internal

consistency among the items measuring each construct.

AVE values above 0.50 indicate that the construct explains more than half of the variance in its observed

indicators. The results show that all three constructs satisfied the recommended thresholds, confirming adequate

reliability and convergent validity.

Page 2650

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Table 2: Reliability and Convergent Validity

Cronbachs

Alpha

Composite

Reliability (CR)

Construct

AVE

0.598

0.562

Result

Waste Disposal

Practices (WDP)

0.872

0.851

0.899

0.884

Accepted

Carbon Footprint

(CF)

Public

Environmental

Awareness

(PEA)

0.884

0.912

0.635

Accepted

Discriminant Validity (Fornell-Larcker Criterion)

Discriminant validity was tested using the Fornell-Larcker criterion. According to this criterion, the square root

of AVE for each construct should be greater than its correlation with other constructs. The diagonal values in

the table represent the square root of AVE. Since each diagonal value is higher than the corresponding inter-

construct correlations, discriminant validity is established. This confirms that WDP, CF, and PEA are statistically

distinct constructs.

Table 3: Discriminant Validity - Fornell-Larcker Criterion

Construct

WDP

CF

PEA

Waste

Practices (WDP)

Disposal

0.773

Carbon

(CF)

Footprint

-0.536

0.648

0.750

Public Environmental

Awareness (PEA)

-0.492

0.797

Model Fit Indices

Model fit indices were assessed to determine whether the proposed structural model adequately represented the

observed data. The SRMR value was below 0.08, indicating a good approximate model fit. The NFI, CFI, and

TLI values were above the recommended 0.90 level, confirming acceptable incremental fit. The RMSEA value

was below 0.08 and the Chi-square/df ratio was below 3.00, further supporting the adequacy of the model.

Overall, the model fit indices indicate that the proposed mediation model is statistically acceptable.

Table 4: Model Fit Indices

Recommended

Fit Index

Obtained Value

Interpretation

Value

< 0.08

> 0.90

SRMR

NFI

0.058

0.921

Good fit

Acceptable fit

Page 2651

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

CFI

0.953

0.941

0.046

2.214

> 0.90

< 0.08

< 3.00

Good fit

TLI

Good fit

RMSEA

Chi-square/df

Good fit

Acceptable fit

Hypothesis Test Results

The hypothesis testing results were examined using path coefficients, t-values, and p-values. The direct effect of

Waste Disposal Practices on Carbon Footprint was negative and statistically significant, indicating that better

waste disposal practices reduce the perceived carbon footprint. Waste Disposal Practices also had a significant

positive effect on Public Environmental Awareness, while Public Environmental Awareness had a significant

negative effect on Carbon Footprint. The indirect effect was also significant, confirming that Public

Environmental Awareness mediates the relationship between Waste Disposal Practices and Carbon Footprint.

Table 5: Hypothesis Test Results

Hypothesis

Relationship

Beta

t-value

8.972

p-value

< 0.001

Result

H1

H2

H3

WDP -> CF

-0.438

Supported

WDP -> PEA 0.512

11.436

6.214

PEA -> CF

-0.286

-0.146

WDP -> PEA

-> CF

Mediation

supported

H4

4.326

< 0.001

Summary of Statistical Findings

The statistical results confirm that the data were normally distributed, reliable, and valid for further analysis. The

constructs demonstrated acceptable convergent and discriminant validity, and the model fit indices supported

the adequacy of the proposed research model. The hypothesis results indicate that responsible waste disposal

practices significantly reduce carbon footprint. In addition, public environmental awareness serves as an

important mediating mechanism by strengthening responsible environmental behavior and supporting lower

carbon-emission outcomes.

FINDINGS

The findings of the study reveal that waste disposal practices have a significant influence on the carbon footprint

among the respondents. The statistical results indicate that environmentally responsible waste disposal behaviors

such as waste segregation, recycling, composting, and controlled disposal significantly reduce perceived carbon

emissions and environmental degradation. The negative beta coefficient observed between Waste Disposal

Practices and Carbon Footprint confirms that improved waste management practices contribute to lower

environmental impact.

The study further identified that Waste Disposal Practices significantly influence Public Environmental

Awareness. Individuals who actively engage in proper waste management practices demonstrate greater

awareness regarding climate change, ecological sustainability, and environmental responsibility. Public

Page 2652

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

Environmental Awareness was also found to significantly reduce Carbon Footprint by encouraging sustainable

environmental behaviors and promoting responsible consumption practices.

Most importantly, the mediation analysis confirmed that Public Environmental Awareness partially mediates the

relationship between Waste Disposal Practices and Carbon Footprint. This suggests that awareness functions as

an important psychological and behavioral mechanism through which responsible waste management practices

translate into lower carbon-emission outcomes. The findings emphasize that environmental education and

awareness-building programs can substantially strengthen the effectiveness of waste management initiatives in

reducing carbon footprint.

The overall statistical assessment confirmed acceptable normality, reliability, convergent validity, discriminant

validity, and model fit indices, indicating that the proposed research model is statistically sound and appropriate

for explaining the relationship between the study variables.

CONCLUSION

The present study examined the relationship between Waste Disposal Practices and Carbon Footprint, with

Public Environmental Awareness serving as a mediating variable. The findings clearly indicate that sustainable

waste disposal practices significantly reduce carbon footprint and contribute positively toward environmental

sustainability. Responsible environmental behaviors such as recycling, composting, waste segregation, and

reduced waste generation were found to play an important role in minimizing greenhouse gas emissions and

environmental pollution.

The study also highlights the importance of Public Environmental Awareness in promoting sustainable waste

management behavior among citizens. Environmentally aware individuals are more likely to participate in

responsible disposal practices and support environmental protection initiatives. The mediation effect further

confirms that awareness acts as an important bridge connecting waste disposal practices with environmental

outcomes.

The research provides important practical implications for policymakers, local self-government institutions,

environmental agencies, and educational institutions. Awareness campaigns, environmental education programs,

community participation initiatives, and effective waste management policies should be strengthened to improve

public environmental responsibility and reduce carbon emissions. The study contributes to the growing body of

environmental sustainability literature by emphasizing the combined role of behavioral practices and

environmental awareness in addressing climate-related challenges.

Future research may extend this study by examining additional environmental, technological, policy-related, and

socio-cultural factors influencing waste management behavior and carbon footprint across different regions and

demographic groups.

REFERENCES

1. Abubakar, I. R., et al. (2022). Environmental sustainability impacts of solid waste management

practices in the Global South. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,

19(19), 12717. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912717

2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision

Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

3. Amir, F., Miru, A. S., & Sabara, E. (2025). Urban household behavior in Indonesia: Drivers of zero

waste participation.

4. Anthonia, U. C., Onah, B. I., Tapamo, H. M., & Endurance, A. (2025). Effect of environmental

awareness programs on waste disposal practices. International Journal of Research and Innovation in

Social Science. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000546

5. Astrup, T., et al. (2015). Incineration and climate change implications. Waste Management, 37, 13–

25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.10.011

Page 2653

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

6. Astrup, T., et al. (2015). Incineration and climate change. Waste Management, 37, 13–25.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.10.011

7. Bogner, J., et al. (2008). Mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions from waste. Waste

Management, 28(11), 1993–2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2008.02.028

8. Bogner, J., et al. (2008). Mitigation of global greenhouse gas emissions from waste. Waste

Management, 28(11), 1993–2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2008.02.028

9. Boldrin, A., Andersen, J. K., Møller, J., Favoino, E., & Christensen, T. H. (2011). Composting and

greenhouse

gas

emissions.

Waste

Management,

31(4),

800–812.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.12.025

10. Cherubini, F., Bargigli, S., & Ulgiati, S. (2009). Life cycle assessment of waste management systems.

Energy, 34(12), 2116–2123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2008.08.023

11. Cherubini, F., Bargigli, S., & Ulgiati, S. (2009). Life cycle assessment of waste management systems.

Energy, 34(12), 2116–2123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2008.08.023

12. Debrah, J. K. (2021). Raising awareness on solid waste management. MDPI Journal of Waste, 6(1),

6. https://doi.org/10.3390/waste6010006

13. Dr.Meena Ramaswamy., Kadambari K., & Simran Vijay Kumar. (2025). Inefficient Waste Disposal

Systems (IWDS) and their Impact on the Environmental Carbon Footprint (ECF): Analyzing the

Moderating Influence of 'Haritha Karma Sena' (HKS) in Kerala. Ijfans international journal of food

and

nutritional

sciences

issn

print

2319

1775

online

2320

7876.

https://www.ijfans.org/uploads/paper/5b1be80cf5495d56fb8e692b1337a9ef.pdf

14. Frontiers Research (2022). Waste management within the scope of environmental public awareness.

Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.1030525

15. Gentil, E. C., Christensen, T. H., & Aoustin, E. (2009). Greenhouse gas accounting in waste

management.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X09346702

16. Gentil, E. C., Christensen, T. H., & Aoustin, E. (2009). Greenhouse gas accounting and waste

management. Waste Management Research, 27(8), 696–706.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X09346702

Waste

Management

&

Research,

27(8),

696–706.

&

17. IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014: Mitigation of climate change. Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415416

18. Kaza, S., Yao, L., Bhada-Tata, P., & Van Woerden, F. (2018). What a waste 2.0: A global snapshot of

solid waste management. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0

19. Li, Y., Bhutto, M. Y., Sun, C., & Mehdi, S. M. (2023). Do information publicity and moral norms

trigger

waste-sorting

intention?

Frontiers

in

Psychology,

14,

1193411.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1193411

20. Mazzanti, M., & Zoboli, R. (2008). Waste generation and economic drivers. Ecological Economics,

65(3), 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.009

21. Mazzanti, M., & Zoboli, R. (2008). Waste generation, waste disposal, and environmental awareness.

Ecological Economics, 65(3), 509–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.009

22. Omran, A., Bah, M., & Baharuddin, A. H. (2017). Investigating the level of environmental awareness

and practices on recycling. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, 8(3), 497–506.

https://doi.org/10.14505/jemt.v8.3(19).06

23. Sarker, B., Sarker, S., Islam, M. S., & Sharmin, S. (2013). Public awareness about solid waste disposal

and its impact. Journal of Environmental Science and Natural Resources, 5(2), 239–244.

https://doi.org/10.3329/jesnr.v5i2.14821

24. Sarma, A. (2025). Climate change and waste reduction: A critical connection. Journal of

Environmental

Waste

Management

and

Recycling,

8(1),

241.

https://doi.org/10.35841/10.35841/aaewmr-8.1.241

25. Turner, D. A., Williams, I. D., & Kemp, S. (2015). Greenhouse gas emission factors for recycling.

Waste Management, 42, 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.04.006

26. Turner, D. A., Williams, I. D., & Kemp, S. (2015). Greenhouse gas emission factors for recycling.

Waste Management, 42, 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.04.006

27. UNEP. (2020). Waste management and climate change. United Nations Environment Programme.

https://doi.org/10.18356/9789210042391

Page 2654

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue V, May 2026

28. Wang, Q. (2023). Reducing our carbon footprint: Eco-friendly approaches to waste management.

Journal

of

Environmental

Waste

Management

&

Recycling,

6(6),

177.

https://doi.org/10.35841/aaewmr-6.6.177

29. Wilson, D. C., Rodic, L., Modak, P., et al. (2015). Global waste management outlook. Waste

Management & Research, 33(12), 1045–1056. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X15616055

30. Wilson, D. C., Rodic, L., Modak, P., Soos, R., Rogero, A. C., Velis, C., Iyer, M., & Simonett, O.

(2015). Global waste management outlook. Waste Management & Research, 33(12), 1045–1056.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X15616055

31. Wu, L., Zhu, Y., & Zhai, J. (2022). Understanding waste management behavior among university

students: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 771723.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.771723

32. Yildirim, M. S., Elkoca, A., & Gökçay, G. (2025). The relationship between environmental literacy,

ecological footprint awareness, and environmental behavior. BMC Public Health, 25, 551.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-21340-3

33. Yin, J. (2024). Carbon footprint impact of waste sorting on municipal systems. Journal of Cleaner

Production.

Page 2655

www.rsisinternational.org