1 School of Environmental Science, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia

2 Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, West Java, Indonesia


This study aims to understand influential factors for Jakarta’s residents to participate in a formal electronic waste recycling programme. It questions the efficacy of providing facilities to collect electronic waste despite the lack of legislated regulations or policies. Using the goal-framing theory as a foundation, a survey conducted on 208 respondents in 2018 revealed that selling obsolete electronic devices to peddlers or retaining them at home were standard practices in society, and only 2% of respondents recycled their electronic waste at formal facilities. The results show that electronic waste recycling intention correlates highest with information and convenience, 0.521 and 0.411, respectively. While knowledge has the least correlative value with attitude and intention, that is 0.204 and 0.240.  It clarifies that the normative goal is weaker than hedonic and gain goals. Respondents had enough awareness about the hazards of electronic waste. However, their behaviour did not exhibit it. It is imperative to lessen the gap between normative and hedonic goals by campaigning continuously and place the facilities at easily accessible locations to increase recycling participation. Furthermore, collecting electronic waste requires a collaboration between the government and electronics businesses, and must be supported by a legal framework.

Graphical Abstract

Underlying factors behind the low participation rate in electronic waste recycling


  • Participation in e-waste recycling relates better with the programme information and access to facilities than knowledge of e-waste;
  • Recycling was mainly motivated by gain and hedonic goals rather than normative goal;
  • A regulation and collaboration with electronic business are imperative for effective e-waste collection system.


Main Subjects

Letters to Editor

GJESM Journal welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in GJESM should be sent to the editorial office of GJESM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.
[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.
[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.
[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.
[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.
[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.
[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.