Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis.  Permission is given for 
a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and 
private study only.  The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without 
the permission of the Author. 
 
 Community Recycling Awareness and Participation 
at Massey University’s Turitea Campus 
 
 
 
 
A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of  
Master of Environmental Management  
at 
Massey University 
New Zealand  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rony Joel Barreto Da Costa 
2011 
 i 
ABSTRACT  
 
In 1999 Massey University’s Turitea campus established a zero waste programme in 
response to concerns about the practical environmental management of the campus. A 
key part of this programme was the implementation of a recycling system to ensure 
valuable resources are not wasted. In order to monitor the effectiveness of this system 
and identify potential areas of improvement, a recycling and waste audit was conducted 
across the campus. Of the four trials undertaken three focused on the wider campus 
community, while the fourth focused on the student hostels. Trial I was conducted as a 
pilot study during summer school of 2009/10, Trial II during semester two of 2010, 
Trial III during summer school of 2010/11 and Trial IV during semester one of 2011. 
 
The audit quantified recycling and waste disposal choices made by the campus 
community. It was found that key issues that impact upon recycling practices include 
poor signage and inadequate recycling drop-off facilities.  Recommendations from the 
study included an upgrade of recyling infrastructure, a review of the recycling 
programme, a branding ‘make-over’ and an information-awareness campaign to raise 
the campus community’s understanding of the role thay can play in a zero waste 
programme. It is also recommeded that Massey’s Wellington and Auckland campuses 
be included in an institution-wide strategy for zero waste management.  
 
The findings of this research were submitted to Massey University’s Sustainablity 
Steering Group in order that the ideas and information relating to recycling and waste 
management could be considered along with other institutional sustaianblity issues.  
 
 
 
 
Keywords: zero waste, waste management, recycling management, recycling behaviour, 
campus sustainability, sustainable university practices.  
 
 ii 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  
 
Firstly I would like to thank my supervisor, Mr. Jonathan Hannon, for expertly 
supervising this thesis. He has assisted me from the first sketches of the project, right 
through to designing the final project. I am very grateful for his patience, guidance, 
continuous support and constructive comments. I would like also to express my sincere 
gratitude to Ass. Prof. John Holland for assisting me since I first started studying at 
Massey University, right through to the accomplishment of my masters degree. I am 
very thankful to him for the support, encouragement, and guidance during my studies in 
Palmerston North. This thesis would not have been possible without the generous 
assistance of many individuals who shared their knowledge and time with me. 
 
I appreciate and thank for all of their support my friends and fellow postgraduate 
students in the Environmental Management programme, Pitter Lee, Konchai Pimakong, 
Poula, Fleur Hirst, Naomi McBride, Jerry Teng, Camilla Reyes, Emi, Susi, and Chou 
who helped me in many ways. It was really a great pleasure being your friend.  
 
A special thank you and deepest indebtedness to my parents, especially to my beloved 
mom ‘Aurelia Da Costa’ who died in December 2010, for all the encouragement, 
support and prayer she had given to me during my study in New Zealand. She was such 
a wonderful mom and always be a great mom for my entire life. I am also grateful to my 
beloved dad and younger bother, who came all the way from East Timor to stay with me 
in New Zealand for a few weeks and to attend the graduation ceremony for my 
postgraduate diploma. I am also grateful to my big brother and sister Lino and Mimi, 
and the whole family in East Timor for the support and prayers during my time studying 
in New Zealand.  
 
I also express my sincere gratitude to my fellow Timorese who are studying in 
Palmerston North, New Zealand, Cornelia Ase and his family, Sandra Gusmao Martins, 
Celestina Fonseca and her family, Deonisio Do Santos, and Cipriana Soares for the 
support and encouragement, and being really good friends during my studies.  A special 
thank to my best friend Joao Paulo Rangel (JP) for being supportive and such a great 
friend during my first and second year in New Zealand. 
 
 iii 
I am indebted to the following individuals for their assistance in conducting this 
research: 
Ken McEwen (RFM) 
Andre (RFM) 
Yvonne (GBT) 
Sandra (GBT 
Ricky (GBT) 
Kerry Lee (RFM) 
Helen Mays (Enviropreneur) 
 
Finally, I would like to express my sincere indebtedness to NZAID for giving me this 
golden opportunity in the form of a ‘grant award’ to study at Massey University, 
Palmerston North, New Zealand. I am also indebted to the international student support 
office (ISSO), Sylvia Hooker, Olive Pimentel, Sue Flynn, Natalia Benquet, and Dianne 
Reilly for their support, encouragement and guidance during my study at Massey 
University. 
 
 iv 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS  
    
Abstract  i 
Acknowledgements  ii 
Table of Contents iv  
List of Tables ix 
List of Figures xi 
  
Chapter 1 Introduction  1 
 1.1. Introduction 1 
 1.2. Background 4 
 1.3. Aim  6 
 1.4. Research Questions and Objectives of the Study  6 
 1.5. Thesis Structure 7 
 
Chapter 2 Literature Review  
 
8 
 2.1. Literature Review Outline 8 
 2.2. An Overview of Solid Waste and Waste Management 8 
 2.3. Reduce, Re-use and Recycle 16 
 2.4. Zero waste 20 
 2.4.1. Zero Waste at the International Scale 21 
 2.4.2. Zero Waste in New Zealand 22 
 2.4.3. Zero Waste in Palmerston North 31 
 2.4.4. Zero Waste at Massey 34 
 2.5. Recycling Behaviour 36 
 2.6. Waste Auditing 40 
 2.6.1. The Method of Conducting a Waste Audit 41 
 2.6.1.1. Scoping 42 
 2.6.1.2. Health and Safety 42 
 2.6.1.3. Setting up a Waste Audit 43 
 2.6.1.4. Sorting out – Quantification of Waste Materials 44 
 2.6.1.5. Managing Data 45 
 2.6.1.6 Analysing the Data 45 
 
Chapter 3 Methodology  47 
 3.1. Introduction 47 
 3.2. Location of Study 48 
 3.2. Survey Period  49 
 3.4. Research Method 50 
 3.4.1. Waste Auditing 50 
 3.4.1.1. The Locations, Types and Sizes of the Bin Codes  50 
 3.4.1.2. Description of Bin Types 54 
 v 
 
3.4.1.3. 
Consultation with Key Staff Regarding the Waste and Recycling 
Audit at Massey 
67 
 3.4.1.4. Equipment 67 
 3.4.1.5 Site Requirements for Sorting  68 
 3.4.1.6. The Process of Auditing 68 
 3.4.1.7. Data Analysis 69 
 
Chapter 4 Results  70 
 4.1. Trial I 71 
 4.1.1. Auditing the Recycling Wheelie Bins (Code B) 71 
 4.1.2. Auditing the Small Waste Bins (Code C) 75 
 4.1.3. Auditing the Massey Dining Hall Recycling Bins (Code D) 76 
 4.2. Trial II 79 
 4.2.1. Auditing the Large Waste Bins and Recycling Cage Bins (Code A) 79 
 4.2.2. Auditing the Recycling Wheelie Bins (Code B) 86 
 4.2.3. Auditing the Small Waste Bins (Code C) 90 
 4.2.4. Auditing the Massey Dining Hall Recycle Bins (Code D) 92 
 
4.2.5. 
Auditing the Staff Common Room Organic and Recycling Bins 
(Code E) 
95 
 4.3. Trial III 96 
 4.3.1. Auditing the Large Waste Bins and Recycling Cage Bins (Code A) 96 
 4.3.2. Auditing the Recycling Wheelie Bins (Code B) 103 
 4.3.3. Auditing the Small Waste Bins (Code C) 107 
 
4.3.4 Discontinued Audit of the Massey Dining Hall Recycling Bins (Code 
D) 
109 
 
4.3.5. 
Auditing the Staff Common Room Waste, Organic and Recycling 
Bins (Code E) 
109 
 4.4. Trial IV 111 
 4.4.1. Auditing the Recycling Wheelie Bins (Code F1) 112 
 4.4.1.1. Moginie Hall 112 
 4.4.1.2. Tararua and Ruahine Halls 114 
 4.4.1.3. Bindaloe Hall 115 
 4.4.1.4. Colombo Hall 117 
 4.4.1.5. Tawa Hall 119 
 4.4.1.6. Matai Hall 120 
 4.4.1.7. City Court 122 
 4.4.1.8. Kairanga Court 124 
 4.4.1.9. Atawhai 125 
 4.4.1.10 Summary of Recycling Audit for Student Hostels - Code F1 Trial IV 127 
 4.4.2. Auditing the Large Waste Bins (Code F2) 131 
 4.4.2.1. Moginie Hall 133 
 4.4.2.2. Colombo Hall 134 
 vi 
 
 4.4.2.3. Tawa Hall 134 
 4.4.2.4. City and Egmont Courts 135 
 4.4.2.5 Contamination of Large Waste Bins Code F2 135 
 
Chapter 5 Discussion 139 
 
5.1. 
Large Waste Bins and Recycling Cage Bins (Code A and Sub-Code 
F2) 
140 
 5.1.1. Large Waste Bins (Sub-code A1 and F2) 140 
 5.1.2. Paper/Cardboard Recycling Cage Bins (Sub-code A2) 149 
 5.1.3. Recycling Wheelie Bins (Code B and Sub-code F1) 150 
 5.1.4. Small Waste Bins (Code C) 163 
 5.1.5. Massey Dining Hall Bins (Code D)  167 
 
5.1.6. Staff Common Room Waste, Organic and Recycling Bins (Code E)  172 
 5.2. Summary of Discussion 176 
 5.3. Implication and Recommendations 179 
 
Chapter 6 Conclusion 181 
 6.1 Introduction 181 
 6.2 Summary of Findings 181 
 6.3 Future Research 183 
    
References 184 
 
Appendix I 196 
 
 vii 
 
List of Tables 
   
Table 1 Bin code and location 53 
Table 2 The location and size of the large waste bins, Turitea campus 55 
Table 3 Recycling cage bins   56 
Table 4 
The locations of waste, organic and recycling bins in the staff 
common rooms, Turitea campus 
59 
Table 5 Student hostels at Massey University, Turitea campus 63 
Table 6 Massey’s conversion factor  66 
Table 7 The Auditing result, Code B Trial I 72 
Table 8 The Auditing result, Code C Trial I 75 
Table 9 The Auditing result, Code D Trial I 76 
Table 10 The Auditing result, Code A Trial II 81 
Table 11 
The Auditing result of the large waste bins based on three key waste 
streams, Sub-code A1 Trial II 
85 
Table 12 The Auditing result, Code B Trial II   87 
Table 13 The  Auditing result, Code C Trial II 90 
Table 14 The Auditing result, Code D Trial II 92 
Table 15 The Auditing result, Code E Trial II 95 
Table 16 The Auditing result, Code A Trial III 98 
Table 17 
The Auditing result of the large waste bins based on three key waste 
streams, Sub-code A1 Trial III  
102 
Table 18 The Auditing result, Code B Trial III   104 
Table 19 The Auditing result, Code C Trial III 107 
Table 20 The Auditing result, Code E Trial III 110 
Table 21 The  Auditing result for Moginie Hall, Code F1 Trial IV 112 
Table 22 The  Auditing result for Tararua and Ruahine Halls, Code F1 Trial IV  114 
Table 23 The  Auditing result for Bindaloe Hall, Code F1 Trial IV 116 
Table 24 The  Auditing result for Colombo Hall, Code F1 Trial IV 117 
Table 25 The  Auditing result for Tawa Hall, Code F1 Trial IV 119 
Table 26 The  Auditing result for Matai Hall, Code F1 Trial IV 120 
Table 27 The  Auditing result for City Court, Code F1 Trial IV 122 
Table 28 The  Auditing result for Kairanga Court, Code F1 Trial  124 
Table 29 The  Auditing result for Atawhai, Code F1 Trial IV 125 
Table 30 The Auditing result for Code F2, Trial IV 132 
Table 31 Categorisation into 3 waste streams for  Code F2 Trial IV 136 
Table 32 Categorisation of Sub-code A1 and F2 into recyclables, compostable 
and waste, Trial II, III and IV 
141 
Table 33 The Auditing result for Sub-code A2 Trial II and III 149 
Table 34 The Auditing results of correct vs. incorrect for the recycling wheelie 
bins (Code B & F1), Trial I, II, III and IV 
152 
 viii 
Table 35 
The comparison of average percentage, Code B and F1 Trial I, II, III 
and IV, without waste included 
155 
Table 36 
The comparison of average percentage, Code B and F1 Trial I, II, III 
and IV, with waste included 
155 
Table 37 
Total (kg) correct vs. incorrect and correct vs. incorrect percentage 
calculations for the student hostels, Code F1 Trial IV 
161 
Table 38 The Auditing result, Code C Trial I, II and III 164 
Table 39 The Auditing result for Code D, Trial I and II 169 
Table 40 The Auditing result for Code E Trial II and III 172 
 
 ix 
 
List of Figures 
   
Figure 1 R5 waste hierarchy 18 
Figure 2 R6 waste hierarchy 19 
Figure 3 Map of zero waste councils in New Zealand 23 
Figure 4  SWAP analysis  30 
Figure 5 The new collection of recycling bins in Palmerston North 33 
Figure 6 Site location of study 49 
Figure 7 Samples of bins audited in this study 51 
Figure 8 The locations of bins  52 
Figure 9 The picture of the organic waste bins in the Dining Hall area 58 
Figure 10 The four groups of student hostels 62 
Figure 11 Method one of the Massey conversion factor  64 
Figure 12 Method two of the Massey conversion factor 66 
Figure 13 Waste auditing facility 68 
Figure 14 The process of sorting out the waste 69 
Figure 15 The percentage of recycling and waste generated by Code B in Trial I 
by weight (kg) 
72 
Figure 16 The percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code B Trial I 73 
Figure 17 The average percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code B Trial I 74 
Figure 18 The percentage of waste-landfill to recyclables for Code C Trial I 76 
Figure 19 The percentage of recycling and waste for Code D in Trial I 77 
Figure 20 The percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code D Trial I 78 
Figure 21 The average percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code D Trial I 79 
Figure 22 The percentage of SWAP categories for Code A1 Trial II 83 
Figure 23 
The percentage composition of SWAP categories for Code A1 – 
Science Tower D Trial II 
84 
Figure 24 
The percentage composition of SWAP categories for Code A1 – 
Social Science Trial II 
84 
Figure 25 
The composition of waste, recyclables, and compostable by 
percentage of Science Tower D and the Social Science Building, Sub-
code A1 Trial II 
86 
Figure 26 The percentage of recycling and waste generated by Code B in Trial 
II by weight (kg) 
88 
Figure 27 The percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code B Trial II 88 
Figure 28 The average percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code B Trial II 89 
Figure 29 The percentage of waste-landfill, recyclables, and compostable for 
Code C Trial II 
91 
Figure 30 The percentage of waste-landfill to recyclables  for Code C Trial II 91 
Figure 31 The percentage of recycling and waste for Code D Trial II 93 
Figure 32 The percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code D Trial II 93 
Figure 33 The average percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code D Trial II 94 
 x 
Figure 34 The percentage of compostable and recyclables for Code E Trial II 96 
Figure 35 
The large waste bins and recycling cages at their locations; the Main 
building, adjacent to the old Registry building, and Riddet 2, off 
University Avenue, between Colombo & Riddet Roads 
97 
Figure 36 The percentages of SWAP categories for Code A1 Trial III 99 
Figure 37 
The percentage comparison of  recycling paper and cardboard for 
Main Building and Riddet,  Code A1 Trial III 
100 
Figure 38 
The percentage composition of SWAP categories for Code A1 – 
Main Building Trial III 
101 
Figure 39 
The percentage composition of SWAP categories for Code A1 – 
Riddet Trial III 
102 
Figure 40 
The composition of waste, recyclables, and compostable by 
percentage for Main Building and Riddet, Sub-code A1 Trial III 
103 
Figure 41 The percentage of recycling and waste generated by Code B in Trial 
III by weight (kg) 
105 
Figure 42 The percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code B Trial III 105 
Figure 43 The average percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code B Trial III 106 
Figure 44 The percentage of waste-landfill, recyclables, and compostable for 
Code C Trial III 
108 
Figure 45 The percentage of waste-landfill to recyclables  for Code C Trial III  109 
Figure 46 
The percentage of compostable and recyclables, and waste  for Code 
E Trial III 
110 
Figure 47 The percentage of correct vs. incorrect for Code E Trial III 111 
Figure 48 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV 
(Moginie) 
113 
Figure 49 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Moginie Hall)  
113 
Figure 50 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV 
(Tararua & Ruahine Hall) 
114 
Figure 51 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Tararua & Ruahine Hall) 
115 
Figure 52 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV 
(Bindaloe Hall) 
116 
Figure 53 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Bindaloe Hall)  
117 
Figure 54 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV 
(Colombo Hall) 
118 
Figure 55 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Colombo Hall) 
118 
Figure 56 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV (Tawa 
Hall) 
119 
Figure 57 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Tawa Hall) 
120 
 xi 
Figure 58 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV (Matai 
Hall) 
121 
Figure 59 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Matai Hall) 
122 
Figure 60 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV (City 
Court) 
123 
Figure 61 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (City Court) 
123 
Figure 62 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV 
(Kairanga Court) 
124 
Figure 63 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Kairanga Court) 
125 
Figure 64 
The percentage of recyclable categories for Code F1 Trial IV 
(Atawhai) 
126 
Figure 65 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect recyclables disposal for Code 
F1 Trial IV (Atawhai) 
127 
Figure 66 The total in kg for the four recyclable types at all nine hostels 128 
Figure 67 
The percentage of correct vs. incorrect in the recycling wheelie bins 
for the 9 hostels, Trial IV 
130 
Figure 68 The percentage composition of Moginie Hall into twelve categories 
Code F2 Trial IV 
133 
Figure 69 
The percentage composition of Colombo Hall into twelve categories 
Code F2 Trial IV 
134 
Figure 70 
The percentage composition of Tawa Hall into twelve categories 
Code F2 Trial IV 
134 
Figure 71 
The percentage composition of City & Egmont Courts Hall into 
twelve categories Code F2 Trial IV 
135 
Figure 72 The composition by percentage of 3 key waste streams for Moginie 
Hall, Code F2 Trial IV 
136 
Figure 73 The composition by percentage of 3 key waste streams for Colombo 
Hall, Code F2 Trial IV 
137 
Figure 74 The composition by percentage of 3 key waste streams for Tawa Hall, 
Code F2 Trial IV 
137 
Figure 75 
The composition by percentage of 3 key waste streams for City and 
Egmont Courts, Code F2 Trial IV 
138 
Figure 76 Examples of contamination of waste as found in the large waste bins 142 
Figure 77 
Examples of potentially hazardous substances as found in the large 
waste bins 
143 
Figure 78 The average total (kg) of material audited during Trial II, III and IV, 
Code A1 and F2 
144 
Figure 79 The comparison of totals (kg) for Code A1 and F2 Trial II, III and IV 145 
 xii 
Figure 80 
The comparison of the percentage of waste, recyclables and 
compostable waste for Code A1 and F2 across T II, III and IV 
146 
Figure 81 
The average percentage of recyclables, compostable and waste, Code 
A1 and F2 Trial II, III and IV  
147 
Figure 82 The overall percentage of recyclables, compostable and waste for 
Code A1 and F2, Trial III, III and IV 
149 
Figure 83 Contents of the mixed paper recycling cage bins 150 
Figure 84 Examples of contamination of the mixed paper (B3) wheelie bins 153 
Figure 85 
Examples of contamination of the waste (B5) wheelie bins (no 
signage)   
154 
Figure 86 The comparison of average contamination for Code B and F1 across 
Trial I, II, III and IV, both including and excluding waste category 
156 
Figure 87 
The average % of correct vs. incorrect for Code B, Trial I, II, III and 
Code F1, Trial IV 
157 
Figure 88 The comparison of totals per recyclable category for all 9 hostels by 
weight (kg), Code F1  Trial IV  
159 
Figure 89 The contribution of each hostel to the recyclables stream, Code F 
Trial IV 
159 
Figure 90 
The average percentage of correct vs. incorrect disposal per category 
across 9 hostels Code F1 Trial IV 
162 
Figure 91 The totals in kg for Code C, Trial I, II and III 165 
Figure 92 Examples of compostable and recyclable contamination found in the 
small waste bins 
166 
Figure 93 
The comparison of correct vs. incorrect percentages for Code C Trial 
II and III 
166 
Figure 94 The average correct vs. incorrect for Code C across Trial II and III 167 
Figure 95 
The comparison of the totals produced for each category for Code D 
Trial I and II 
170 
Figure 96 
Examples of contamination found in the Massey recycling bin 
(Landfill D1 and Plastic D2) 
170 
Figure 97 The comparison of correct vs. incorrect for Code D Trial I and II 171 
Figure 98 The comparison of compostable waste and recyclables for Code E 
Trial II and III 
173 
 
 
 xiii 
ABBREVIATION  
 
ASDC    Awapuni Sustainable Development Centre  
DEFRA   Department For Environment, Food and Rural Affairs of England  
GBT    Green Bike Trust  
ISWM    Integrated Solid Waste Management 
MfE    Ministry for the Environment, NZ  
MSW    Municipal Solid Waste 
MUSA    Massey University Student Association 
NZWS    New Zealand Waste Strategy  
OECD    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development  
PNCC    Palmerston North City Council 
RFM    Regional Facilities Management  
RMA    Resource Management Act  
SWAP    Solid Waste Analysis Protocol  
USEPA   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
ZERI    Zero Emissions Research Initiative 
ZWA    Zero Waste Academy  
ZWIA    Zero Waste International Alliance  
ZWNZ Trust   Zero Waste New Zealand Trust