THE IMPORTANCE OF SEPARATE COLLECTION OF MUNICIPAL HOUSEHOLD WASTE IN SHAPING ECOLOGICAL CULTURE IN TASHKENT CITY

ABSTRACT

This article explores the concept of ecological culture and its importance for societal development. It focuses on the separate collection of municipal solid waste in Tashkent City as a means of raising environmental awareness. Using survey and observational methods, the study examines public environmental knowledge and behaviour, infrastructural constraints, and the need for awareness-raising activities. Observations covering 1,239 households, 26 multi-storey buildings and three educational institutions show that practical waste separation is limited and that ecological culture is insufficiently developed. The study also reveals the environmental consequences of the existing waste management system, including soil contamination and the risk of the chemical degradation of urban land resulting from the uncontrolled mixing of waste streams.

АННОТАЦИЯ

В данной статье рассматривается концепция экологической культуры и ее значение для развития общества с акцентом на раздельный сбор твердых бытовых отходов (ТБО) в Ташкенте как на инструмент повышения экологической осведомленности населения. С использованием методов опроса и наблюдения в исследовании анализируются уровень экологических знаний граждан, их поведение, инфраструктурные ограничения, а также необходимость проведения информационно-просветительских мероприятий. Результаты наблюдений, охвативших 1239 домохозяйств, 26 многоэтажных жилых домов и 3 образовательных учреждения, свидетельствуют о том, что практическое разделение отходов развито слабо, а уровень экологической культуры остается недостаточно сформированным. В статье также рассматриваются негативные последствия для окружающей среды, вызванные текущей системой обращения с отходами, такие как загрязнение почв и угроза химического истощения городских земель из-за хаотичного смешивания различных видов отходов

Keywords: ecological culture, waste separation, environmental awareness, waste management, behavioral change, infrastructure.

Ключевые слова: экологическая культура, раздельный сбор отходов, экологическая осведомленность, управление отходами, изменение поведения, инфраструктура.

Introduction. On a global scale, ecological problems arising from anthropogenic activities, particularly the rapid increase in the volume of solid household waste, have become one of the most serious economic, social, and environmental challenges for modern cities. According to the World Bank's What a Waste 2.0 report, annual global waste volumes are projected to reach 3.4 billion tons by 2050, with nearly 70% expected to accumulate in developing countries [11]. This trend poses serious threats to urban infrastructure, public health systems, and climate stability. Particularly in the Central Asian region, waste management systems remain based on a linear model (take → use → dispose), leading to inefficient resource utilization and environmental degradation [8]. In Uzbekistan, especially in Tashkent City, the majority of daily household waste is disposed of in landfills without sorting, in mixed form. This situation not only causes contamination of soil and groundwater but also leads to the release of methane and other greenhouse gases as a result of anaerobic decomposition of waste [9]. Under such circumstances, shaping ecological culture and directing public behavior toward sustainable practices is becoming one of the strategic directions of state policy, as reflected in the National Strategy on Waste Management (2023–2030) [3]. Ecological culture encompasses not only theoretical concepts about nature conservation but also decisions made in daily life, responsible consumption, and skills for managing waste at the source [6]. However, international experience shows that a high level of environmental knowledge among the population does not always directly translate into practical behavior. According to the "Knowledge–Attitude–Practice" (KAP) model, behavioral change requires not only information but also convenient infrastructure, social norms, incentive mechanisms, and institutional trust. Although initial steps are being taken in Tashkent City regarding waste sorting [9], there is insufficient comprehensive empirical data on the population's level of practical readiness, lack of container systems, continuity of explanatory work, and transparency of the recycling chain.

Mixed disposal of waste, especially at unengineered landfills, represents not only a socio‑economic but also a serious chemical‑ecological problem. Within the landfill body, complex biogeochemical processes lead to the formation of toxic leachate saturated with heavy metals and biogas containing greenhouse gases. The infiltration of leachate into the soil causes its chemical pollution, disrupts natural biogeochemical cycles, and results in soil cover degradation. The release of methane and other gases contributes to air pollution and climate change. Therefore, a separate waste collection system serves as a critical instrument for preventing these negative consequences and maintaining the ecological balance of urbanized territories

The main objective of this research is to empirically study the opportunities, barriers, and effectiveness factors in shaping the ecological culture of the population through the implementation of a separate collection system for municipal household waste in Tashkent City. The research aims to address the following tasks: To identify the relationship between the population's environmental knowledge, attitudes, and practical behavior, To assess the current state of source-separation infrastructure for waste, To analyze the physical-chemical and quantitative composition of waste, To develop practical and policy recommendations for developing ecological culture. The research was conducted in the area of 1,239 households, 26 multi-apartment residential buildings, and 3 educational institutions, with the participation of a total of 5,242 residents. Observations and measurements were carried out at 3 central waste collection points.

Literature Review. The concept of ecological culture has been examined in scientific literature from various perspectives, analyzing in an integrated manner the relationship between humans and nature, values, knowledge, and daily practices. Q. Nazarov defines ecological culture as an individual's environmental worldview, sense of responsibility, and conscious attitude toward the environment [6]. According to this approach, ecological culture is shaped not only through education but also under the influence of the social environment, family upbringing, mass media, and state policy. A. Abdullaev and D. Karimova emphasize that systematic environmental education and upbringing are foundational elements in cultivating a responsible attitude toward nature and resource conservation [1]. International documents in the field of waste management, particularly the UN Environment Programme and the European Union's Waste Framework Directive, recognize source separation of waste as a primary stage of sustainable resource management and circular economy [4, 10]. In European countries (Germany, Sweden, Estonia), waste sorting has reached 70–90%, achievements attained not only through strict legislation but also through long-term environmental education, transparent reporting systems, and economic incentives (deposit systems, tax benefits, "polluter pays" principle) [5]. In Central Asia and post-Soviet regions, however, waste management systems remain based on centralized, reactive, and technically outdated models. S. Abdurashidova indicates that the underdevelopment of waste recycling infrastructure in Uzbek cities, resource constraints of local governance bodies, and public distrust are the main barriers [2]. In [7] is advanced the concept of "competent waste management" in shaping ecological culture, emphasizing that citizens need not only knowledge but also skills, motivation, and trust in the system. In the Uzbek context, M. Xodjayeva examined the theoretical and practical aspects of pro‑environmental behavior, highlighting the influence of social norms and perceived behavioral control on waste management practices [12]. Behavioral change theories (such as the Theory of Planned Behavior and Schwartz's Value-Belief-Norm model) show that personal responsibility, social norms, convenience, and belief in outcomes play decisive roles in transitioning to environmental action. In the Uzbek context, empirical study of these factors is still at an initial stage. Although pilot projects are being implemented in Tashkent [9], there is virtually no consistent research on residents' daily practices, infrastructure shortcomings, and the effectiveness of awareness-raising activities. Therefore, this study emphasizes examining ecological culture not only theoretically but also in a practical-infrastructural context. The research integrates international experience, behavioral theories, and local conditions to empirically substantiate the mechanisms for shaping ecological culture through separate waste collection.

Research Methodology

This study was designed to comprehensively assess the state of ecological culture and waste sorting practices using a mixed-methods approach. The research integrated quantitative approaches, such as statistical measurements and structured surveys, and qualitative approaches, such as direct observation, waste audits and behavioural protocol analysis.

1. Study object and sampling.

The research was conducted in the Bostanobod district, specifically in the area served by the Bostanobod neighbourhood Citizens' Assembly of Tashkent City. This site is representative of a densely populated urban area comprising multi-apartment residential buildings and public educational institutions. The sample encompassed:

- 1,239 households;

- 26 multi-apartment residential buildings;

- three educational institutions (two secondary schools and one preschool institution).

A total of 5,242 residents were covered by the study. A stratified random sampling technique was employed to ensure proportionality across key demographic variables, such as age, gender, level of education, and type of housing.

2. Data collection instruments and procedures.

Sociological survey: a structured questionnaire consisting of four thematic blocks was developed: (1) demographic data; (2) level of environmental knowledge; (3) attitudes and self-reported practices regarding waste separation; and (4) perceived needs related to infrastructure and awareness-raising activities. Items were designed using a 5-point Likert scale combined with closed- and open-ended questions. The instrument was pilot-tested with a group of 30 respondents. The reliability of the scale was confirmed by a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.82, indicating high internal consistency.

Observation and waste audit: Data were collected at three central waste collection points over a continuous three-day period (covering both weekdays and a weekend day). All incoming waste was sorted into 22 distinct categories at the source: food waste; paper/cardboard; milk/juice cartons; PET bottles; polypropylene containers; polyethylene bags; glass; ferrous metals; non-ferrous metals; textile waste; wood; medical waste; batteries/accumulators; bones; leather; rubber; plant residues; office equipment; bulky household waste; sweepings/soil; nappies; and construction debris. The mass of each category was recorded using calibrated digital scales.

3. Qualitative observation

Residents' behaviour in the vicinity of waste containers, including any difficulties encountered during sorting, attention to visual instructions and interaction with collection staff, was documented in written protocol form.

3) Data analysis

Quantitative survey data were processed using SPSS software. Descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages and mean values) and correlation analysis were employed. The observational data and waste audit results were evaluated through qualitative interpretation and comparative analysis. The findings were benchmarked against international standards, specifically the European Waste Hierarchy and the UNEP waste management indicators.

4) Ethical considerations and limitations

The confidentiality of participants' personal data was strictly maintained, and surveys were only administered with informed consent. All field observations were coordinated with local authorities and housing management bodies.

The study acknowledges the following limitations: the three-day duration of the waste audit may not fully capture weekly or seasonal variations; self-reporting bias is inherent to the survey component; and geographic coverage is restricted to a single neighbourhood. These limitations could be overcome in future research through longitudinal designs and multi-area sampling strategies.

Results and Discussion

1) Survey Results: The Gap Between Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice

According to survey results (Figure 1), 78% of respondents theoretically understand the necessity of separating waste, and 64% acknowledged that environmental problems affect personal health and the well-being of future generations. However, this knowledge has not fully translated into practical behavior: only 23% of respondents reported having regular experience sorting waste at home, while 31% indicated they sort waste occasionally. The main barriers identified were:

- lack of colored containers and clear instructions (67%);

- distance or uncertainty regarding waste recycling points (41%);

- insufficient explanatory and awareness-raising activities (58%);

- social distrust expressed as "my contribution won't change anything" (34%).

Figure 1. Behavioral indicators and willingness of respondents to participate in separate waste collection (n=5242): 1 - understands the necessity of waste separation; 2 - insufficient ecological culture; 3 - not yet ready for sorting; 4 - ready if convenient containers are available; 5 - insufficient awareness-raising activities

These findings align with international research: although the population is environmentally aware, practical change occurs slowly if the system lacks transparency, convenience, and reliability [2, 7].

2) Waste Audit Results and Composition Analysis. Over the 3-day observation period, a total of 711.0 kg of waste was sorted and weighed. Results are presented in the table below.

Analysis revealed the following. Food waste accounts for the largest share (341.6 kg, 48.0%). This indicator is close to European standards, indicating high potential for composting organic waste or producing biogas. Recyclable materials (paper, cardboard, PET, glass, metals) totaled 125.4 kg, representing 17.6% of the total volume. However, because they are disposed of in mixed form, their potential to enter the recycling chain is low. Polymer waste (polyethylene, polypropylene, PET) totaled 83.6 kg, indicating that plastic pollution is a serious concern.

Table 1.

Results of 3-Day Waste Sorting (kg)

Note: These results reflect waste collected from 1,239 households at 3 waste collection points in the Bostanobod neighborhood Citizens' Assembly area of Tashkent City.

The high proportion of disposable containers and bags particularly confirms the need for changes in consumption culture. Special waste (batteries, medical waste, office equipment), while quantitatively small, poses high environmental risks. A system for their separate collection and safe disposal currently does not exist. Day-to-day variation: Waste volume increased significantly on Day 2 (295.7 kg), which may be related to increased shopping and food consumption during weekends and pre-holiday periods. Beyond the quantitative distribution, the morphological analysis reveals significant chemical and biological hazards associated with the identified waste fractions. The presence of accumulators and batteries (0.2 kg), though minimal in mass, indicates a potential source of heavy metal contamination (lead, cadmium, mercury) within the mixed waste stream. Under anaerobic landfill conditions, these metals can leach into soil and groundwater, entering trophic chains and posing long-term risks to soil microbiota and public health. Furthermore, the medical waste fraction (1.0 kg) and diapers/pampers (61.6 kg) represent a reservoir of pathogenic microflora and organic pollutants. The co-disposal of these fractions with food waste creates conditions for microbiological contamination and the spread of antibiotic-resistant strains. The high proportion of plastic polymers (PET, polypropylene, polyethylene — totaling 83.6 kg) is particularly concerning from a biogeochemical perspective: these materials undergo slow photodegradation, fragmenting into microplastics that alter soil structure, water retention capacity, and serve as vectors for toxic organic compounds. Thus, the lack of source separation not only reduces resource recovery but actively contributes to the chemical degradation of urban ecosystems and disrupts natural biogeochemical cycles in the soil-plant system.

3) Theoretical and Practical Interpretation of Results. The  results obtained clearly demonstrate a disconnect in the "knowledge–attitude–practice" chain. Although residents understand the environmental necessity, the lack of infrastructure, unclear instructions, and low trust in the system are slowing behavioral change. This situation is fully explained by the Theory of Planned Behavior and UNEP's "Infrastructure + Education + Policy" triangular model. The lack of colored containers, non-standardized sorting rules, and unguaranteed delivery of waste to recycling enterprises raise the question among residents: "Why sort?" At the same time, survey results showed that if convenient conditions are created (colored containers, visual instructions, local coordinators), more than 60% of residents are ready to regularly separate waste. This confirms that implementing the "opportunity–motivation–skill" model would be effective in shaping ecological culture.

Conclusions and Recommendations. The results of this study indicate that the process of shaping ecological culture in Tashkent City is not yet sufficiently developed, and a significant gap exists between the population's theoretical knowledge and practical behavior. The low level of readiness for separate waste collection, infrastructure shortcomings, discontinuity of awareness-raising activities, and lack of transparency in the recycling chain were identified as main barriers. Observation results showed a significant proportion of food waste in the waste composition and that recyclable materials are being disposed of in mixed form. This situation reduces resource efficiency, increases landfill burden, and leads to environmental degradation. However, the fact that a large portion of residents is ready to sort waste if convenient conditions are created indicates significant potential for developing ecological culture. To effectively implement a separate waste collection system in Tashkent City, the following comprehensive measures are recommended in line with the National Strategy on Waste Management [3]:

- modernize infrastructure (implementing a colored container system in each residential area; installing pictograms and brief instructions clearly indicating waste types; developing a responsibility mechanism for the cleanliness and hygiene of container sites);

- systematize environmental education (introducing environmental literacy programs from preschool through higher education; shaping sustainable consumption culture among children and youth through practical classes, excursions, and exhibitions);

- conduct regular awareness and advocacy campaigns (organizing national campaigns such as "Sort, Sort, Recycle" with the participation of neighborhood activists, NGOs, bloggers, and media; distributing visual content and interactive guides on social media);

- implement economic incentives and policy mechanisms (providing discounts on utility payments for households actively participating in waste sorting; expanding the deposit-container system; grant tax incentives to recycling enterprises; implementing the "polluter pays" principle);

- ensure monitoring and transparency (monitoring waste collection, transportation, and recycling processes through a digital platform; providing monthly reports to residents to build trust).

 Only through systematic and continuous implementation of these measures can sustainable results be achieved in shaping ecological culture, using resources wisely, and protecting the environment.

Research limitations and future directions. This study has several limitations. First, the waste audit was conducted over only three days, which may not fully reflect seasonal and weekly variations. Second, survey data may be subject to self-reporting biases. Third, since the research covered only one neighbourhood, caution is required when generalising the results to the entire city of Tashkent. For future research, the following areas should be explored:

- assess the impact of environmental education programmes on behaviour through long-term (longitudinal) observations;

- conduct a comparative analysis of waste sorting dynamics across different districts and socio-economic groups;

- experimentally study the effectiveness of infographics, reminders and social comparisons based on 'nudge' theory;

- model the economic efficiency of the waste recycling chain and its potential for creating green jobs.

References:

1. Abdullaev A., Karimova D. (2022). Ecological Education and Upbringing Theory. Tashkent: National University of Uzbekistan Publishing House.
2. Abdurashidova S. (2023). Waste Recycling and Environmental Safety. Scientific Article. Tashkent: National University.
3. Committee for Ecology, Environmental Protection and Climate Change of the Republic of Uzbekistan (2023). National Strategy on Waste Management (2023–2030). Tashkent.
4. European Commission (2008). Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC). Brussels. https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/waste-framework-directive_en
5. Karimova L., Yusupov A. (2022). International Experience in Waste Management and Recommendations for Uzbekistan. Tashkent: Economics and Finance.
6. Nazarov Q. (2020). Fundamentals of Ecological Culture. Tashkent: Fan.
7. Primak, E. A., & Ivanova, E. A. (2024). Fostering an environmental culture of competent waste management. RUDN Journal of Ecology and Life Safety, 32(1), 89–104. https://journals.rudn.ru/ecology/article/view/41278
8. Rahimov B. (2021). Urban Ecology and Sustainable Development. Tashkent: University.
9. "Three-year project on waste sorting being implemented in Tashkent." Kun.uz, 2021. https://kun.uz/14158768
10. UNEP (2015). Global Waste Management Outlook. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-waste-management-outlook
11. World Bank (2018). What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Washington, DC. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30317
12. Xodjayeva M. (2023). Population's Environmental Behavior: Theory and Practice. Ecology and Life Safety, 12(2), 45–58.