CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 55

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Why is China struggling with waste classification? A stakeholder theory perspective

Guo, Shihong, Chen, Liangliang·2022·Resources, Conservation and Recycling
DOI 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106312
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106312

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Alhassan, 2020, Households' source separation behaviour and solid waste disposal options in Ghana's Millennium City, J. Environ. Manag., 259, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.110055 · DOI
  2. Breukelman, 2019, Failing services on urban waste management in developing countries: a review on symptoms, diagnoses, and interventions, Sustainability, 11, 6977, 10.3390/su11246977 · DOI
  3. Cahill, 2010, Extended producer responsibility for packaging wastes and WEEE - a comparison of implementation and the role of local authorities across Europe, Waste Manag. Res., 29, 455, 10.1177/0734242X10379455 · DOI
  4. Cesar, 2019, Earning a social license to operate in mining: a case study from Peru, Resour. Policy, 64, 10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101482 · DOI
  5. Charuvichaipong, 2006, Promoting waste separation for recycling and local governance in Thailand, Habitat Int., 30, 579, 10.1016/j.habitatint.2005.02.002 · DOI
  6. Chen, 2020, A new learning interaction rule for municipal household waste classification behavior based on multi-agent-based simulation, J. Clean. Prod., 271, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122654 · DOI
  7. Cheng, 2020, Analysis of the factors that affect the production of municipal solid waste in China, J. Clean. Prod., 259, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120808 · DOI
  8. Clarkson, 1995, A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance, Acad. Manag. Rev., 20, 92, 10.2307/258888 · DOI
  9. Derakhshan, 2019, Project governance and stakeholders: a literature review, Int. J. Proj. Manag., 37, 98, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2018.10.007 · DOI
  10. Du, 2020, Evolutionary game analysis of stakeholders' decision-making behaviours in construction and demolition waste management, Environ. Impact Asses., 84, 10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106408 · DOI
  11. Fornara, 2011, Distinguishing the sources of normative influence on proenvironmental behaviors: the role of local norms in household waste recycling, Group Process. Intergroup, 14, 623, 10.1177/1368430211408149 · DOI
  12. Gegg, 2019, The development of seaweed-derived fuels in the UK: an analysis of stakeholder issues and public perceptions, Energy Policy, 133, 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110924 · DOI
  13. Goode, 2017, Defining disaster resilience: comparisons from key stakeholders involved in emergency management in Victoria, Australia, Disasters, 41, 171, 10.1111/disa.12189 · DOI
  14. Guo, 2021, Innovation or implementation? Local response to low-carbon policy experimentation in China, Rev. Policy Res., 38, 555, 10.1111/ropr.12436 · DOI
  15. Hacking, 2017, Networks, power and knowledge in the planning system: a case study of energy from waste, Prog. Plann., 113, 1, 10.1016/j.progress.2015.12.001 · DOI
  16. Hacking, 2018, Protesting against neoliberal and illiberal governmentalities: a comparative analysis of waste governance in the UK and China, Political Geogr., 63, 31, 10.1016/j.polgeo.2017.12.004 · DOI
  17. Harring, 2019, Recycling as a large-scale collective action dilemma: a cross-country study on trust and reported recycling behavior, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 140, 85, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.09.008 · DOI
  18. Hickle, 2013, Comparative analysis of extended producer responsibility policy in the United States and Canada, J. Ind. Ecol., 17, 249, 10.1111/jiec.12020 · DOI
  19. Li, 2020, The impact of mandatory policies on residents’ willingness to separate household waste: a moderated mediation model, J. Environ. Manag., 275, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111226 · DOI
  20. Lienert, 2013, Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine-grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes, J. Environ. Manag., 125, 134, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.052 · DOI
  21. Ling, 2021, Incentivizing household recycling crowds out public support for other waste management policies: a long-term quasi-experimental study, J. Environ. Manag., 299, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113675 · DOI
  22. Liu, 2020, Study on the paths of urban domestic waste treatment in China: based on the perspective of technology and policy innovation, Environ. Prot., 48, 44
  23. Long, 2015, Who are the stakeholders and how do they respond to a local government payments for ecosystem services program in a developed area: a case study from Suzhou, China, Habitat Int., 49, 1, 10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.05.007 · DOI
  24. Meng, 2018, Multi-agent based simulation for household solid waste recycling behavior, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 128, 535, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.09.033 · DOI
  25. Miafodzyeva, 2013, Recycling behaviour of householders living in multicultural urban area: a case study of Järva, Stockholm, Sweden, Waste Manag. Res., 31, 447, 10.1177/0734242X13476746 · DOI
  26. Mitchell, 1997, Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts, Acad. Manag. Rev., 22, 853, 10.2307/259247 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Nguyen, 2015, Factors influencing waste separation intention of residential households in a developing country: evidence from Hanoi, Vietnam, Habitat Int., 48, 169, 10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.03.013 · DOI
  28. Passafaro, 2019, Local norms and the theory of planned behavior: understanding the effects of spatial proximity on recycling intentions and self-reported behavior, Front. Psychol., 10, 744, 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00744 · DOI
  29. Pedersen, 2020, The hidden dynamics of household waste separation: an anthropological analysis of user commitment, barriers, and the gaps between a waste system and its users, J. Clean. Prod., 242, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.281 · DOI
  30. Pires, 2019, Waste hierarchy index for circular economy in waste management, Waste Manag., 95, 298, 10.1016/j.wasman.2019.06.014 · DOI
  31. Ran, 2013, Perverse incentive structure and policy implementation gap in China's local environmental politics, J. Environ. Policy Plan., 15, 17, 10.1080/1523908X.2012.752186 · DOI
  32. Rose, 2018, Stakeholder theory for the E -government context: framing a value-oriented normative core, Gov. Inf. Q., 35, 362, 10.1016/j.giq.2018.06.005 · DOI
  33. Rubio, 2019, Effectiveness of extended producer responsibility policies implementation: the case of Portuguese and Spanish packaging waste systems, J. Clean. Prod., 210, 217, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.299 · DOI
  34. Schubert, 2021, In the name of the stakeholder: an assessment of representation surpluses and deficits by nonprofit leaders, Nonprofit Manag. Leadersh., 31, 639, 10.1002/nml.21445 · DOI
  35. Šiška, 2021, What matters while assessing quality of social services? Stakeholders' perspective in Czechia, Eur. J. Soc. Work, 24, 864, 10.1080/13691457.2021.1934411 · DOI
  36. Sorkun, 2018, How do social norms influence recycling behavior in a collectivistic society? A case study from Turkey, Waste Manag., 80, 359, 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.09.026 · DOI
  37. Suskevics, 2013, Assessing the relevance of stakeholder analysis for national ecological network governance: the case of the Green Network in Estonia, J. Nat. Conserv., 21, 206, 10.1016/j.jnc.2012.12.007 · DOI
  38. Timlett, 2008, Public participation and recycling performance in England: a comparison of tools for behaviour change, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 52, 622, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2007.08.003 · DOI
  39. Wang, 2018, Antecedents of urban residents' separate collection intentions for household solid waste and their willingness to pay: evidence from China, J. Clean. Prod., 173, 256, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.223 · DOI
  40. Wong, 2016, Environmental protests and NIMBY activism: local politics and waste management in Beijing and Guangzhou, China Inf., 30, 143
  41. Ye, 2020, China's green future and household solid waste: challenges and prospects, Waste Manag., 105, 328, 10.1016/j.wasman.2020.02.025 · DOI
  42. Zhan, 2013, Political opportunities, resources constraints and policy's advocacy of environmental NGOs in China, Public Adm., 91, 381, 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.02011.x · DOI
  43. Zhang, 2019, From intention to action: how do personal attitudes, facilities accessibility, and government stimulus matter for household waste sorting?, J. Environ. Manag., 233, 447, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.12.059 · DOI
  44. Zhang, 2016, What keeps Chinese from recycling: accessibility of recycling facilities and the behavior, Resour. Conserv. Recycl., 109, 176, 10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.02.008 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 55

Metadata

Authors
Guo, S., & Chen, L.
ORCID
Guo, Shihong
Venue
Resources, Conservation and Recycling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-08
Volume
183
Pages
106312
ISSN
0921-3449
DOI
10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106312
Cited by
55
References
1
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why is China struggling with waste classification? A stakeholder theory perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106312
The paper
Guo, S., & Chen, L. (2022). Why is China struggling with waste classification? A stakeholder theory perspective. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106312