Socio-behavioral assessment of household solid waste management: The case of Barangay Calicanto, Philippines

The cycle of waste generation, segregation, disposal, and recovery is highly dependent on varying human activities and their awareness towards solid waste management (SWM). This study presents the first reported socio-behavioral assessment focusing on the households in a city in the Philippines to bridge the intention-action gap of SWM stakeholders by imploring socio-behavioral change communication activities through the trials of improved practices (TIPs). Findings reveal the significant contribution of women in household waste management responsibilities, highlighting their active participation in SWM initiatives. Analysis of short-term and long-term committed and accomplished actions demonstrated the willingness of the households to adopt sustainable waste management practices. Collective action of policymakers, waste management authorities, and stakeholders should consider the dynamics within households including their financial capacities, provide education and support, develop waste management infrastructures and systems, and create conducive conditions for behavioral change.


Introduction
Rapid urbanization and population growth in developing countries have resulted in an increase in solid waste generation, posing significant challenges for waste management systems.The Philippines, with its rapidly growing urban cities, is no exception to this trend as aggravated by inadequate infrastructure for waste management, which further leads to improper waste handling practices and widespread waste leakage to the environment [1].Low levels of public awareness about proper solid waste management (SWM) compound the challenges faced in managing solid waste in urban areas [2].These factors made the Philippines to be known as one of the world's leading plastic polluters on the environment [3].1257 (2023) 012008 IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1257/1/012008 2 Implementations to address waste management challenges include both physical and non-physical approaches [4].Physical interventions include enforcement of laws [5], construction of waste infrastructures [6], and provision of technological advancements [7].Non-physical interventions, meanwhile, revolve on social and behavioral aspects such as environmental education [8] and trainings [9]; capacity building in terms of attitudes, knowledge, and actions [10]; and participation within families and communities [11].
The Philippine Republic Act 9003, also known as the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, serves as the framework for the systematic waste management activities in the country, with local government units (LGUs) being primarily responsible for ensuring effective SWM within their area of authority [12].Inefficient waste management practices may present adverse impacts on public health and the environment [13].Hence, the implementation of the law and other relevant policies is crucial in addressing the challenges associated with SWM and improving the overall environmental and health outcomes for the community.Despite the existence of these legislations, their effectiveness is often hindered by challenges such as limited resources to fund programs and construct infrastructures; lack of political will and technical competency in the government; and minimal community and stakeholder participation [14].These challenges often result in the inadequate execution of waste management policies, leading to suboptimal outcomes.
Aside from the importance of technical and political factors in promoting effective SWM, various local studies emphasized the significance of community engagement in waste management initiatives [15,16,17,18].These studies, however, have been limited to focusing on the public awareness of SWM programs and the implementation of such programs at community-level or educational institution-level.There is a lack of local studies that explore the relation of social and behavioral aspects in implementing SWM practices and identifying their associated barriers, which play a vital role in shaping the household behaviors and influencing the success of waste management interventions.
Assessment of household SWM is important in developing effective measures as household waste constitutes a significant portion of municipal solid waste [19].Household waste management involves various social and behavioral factors that influence waste generation, collection, segregation, disposal, and recovery practices.Gender [20], household size [21], income level [22], educational attainment [23], and household location [24] are key factors that influence the effectiveness of SWM which may vary across municipalities.It is, therefore, crucial to understand the characteristics of different households when formulating interventions tailored to the specific needs and behaviors in an area.This research conducts a socio-behavioral assessment of household SWM in Barangay Calicanto, Batangas City, Province of Batangas, Philippines to understand the social and behavioral factors that influence waste practices and perceptions of the community.This is the first reported local study which aims to address the intention-action gap in waste management by employing socio-behavioral change communication (SBCC) activities through trials of improved practices (TIPs).Additionally, the study explores the relationship among demographic characteristics, socio-behavioral factors, and current SWM practices at the household level.The study further intends to identify applicable interventions and monitor the implementation to provide evidence-based strategies for improving waste management practices in the study area through a socio-behavioral approach.

Study Area
The study was conducted in Barangay Calicanto, an urban barangay (or the smallest administrative unit) in the coastal city of Batangas City, Province of Batangas, Philippines (Figure 1).Calicanto has a 1257 (2023) 012008 IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1257/1/0120083 total land area of about 142 hectares and is home to an estimated population of 11,343 people as of 2022 [25,26].The barangay generates about 1,739 metric tons of waste per year, in which about 52% are generated at the residential level [26].

Study Design and Participants
The socio-behavioral assessment followed a community-based longitudinal study to capture household SWM practices and perceptions over time.The study also employed the use of TIPs [27,28,29], a three-phase formative assessment to engage the participants in potential interventions and behaviors regarding their SWM practices at the household level.
The number of participants in the socio-behavioral assessment varied across the three phases, as participation was voluntary in nature.The participants are limited to the 61 households who took part in the 7-day baseline waste analysis and characterization study (WACS), which was conducted in parallel with this study.During the household WACS activity, the selected households voluntarily provided their daily waste generation for sorting and characterization over a period of seven days [30].These households were provided with segregation bags for biodegradable, non-biodegradable, and special waste, and a guide for waste categories.Among the 61 households which was calculated based on the Philippine statistical standards [30], a total of 37 participants (61%) were involved in the first phase (three days before WACS), 35 participants (57%) in the second phase (two days after the WACS), and 18 participants (30%) in the third phase (two weeks after the WACS) of this study.

Data Collection
The data collection was conducted from July to August 2022, amidst the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.To ensure comprehension and language consistency, the three-phase study utilized forms that were written in Filipino, the local language in the study area, and then the results are translated to the English language.The forms consisted of a combination of close-ended questions for specific and structured responses, and open-ended questions to encourage participants to provide additional information on specific topics.
In the first phase of TIPs, demographic information, and current household SWM practices, including segregation, collection, recycling, and disposal, of the participants were gathered in a faceto-face discussion prior to the 7-day WACS activity.Participants voluntarily attended the session and completed the phase through answering a questionnaire with supervision to ensure that they understand the questions correctly and provide accurate answers.
After conducting the WACS activity, the second phase involved exploring the participants' segregation experiences during WACS and identifying potential short-term and long-term changes and actions they could undertake to improve their household SWM based on the findings of the conducted WACS.Short-term changes and actions refer to immediate measures and modifications implemented to address specific waste management issues.These actions typically have a relatively short duration and are aimed at achieving immediate improvements in waste management practices, such as avoiding having leftover food and using eco-bag when shopping.While the long-term actions and changes focus on sustainable and strategic efforts and long-lasting solutions to establish more comprehensive SWM such as single-use plastic waste avoidance, purchasing waste segregation bins, and teaching household the proper segregation.They were provided with a list of actions, including individual and collective actions, that household members could apply regarding waste avoidance, reduction, segregation, collection, recovery, and disposal.The committed actions and changes chosen by participants are based on their potential actions and commitments.However, it is important to note that the actual implementation and practice of these actions were monitored in the third phase.Participation in the facilitated face-to-face session for the second phase remained optional.
For the third phase, participants were given journal forms to self-monitor their committed changes and actions over a two-week period.These monitoring journals allowed them to track and document their engagement with the activities and behavioral changes they implemented at the household level.
In addition to conducting surveys and interviews with the participants, data validation was performed to enhance validity and reliability of the study.This validation included field observation on waste management practices and interviews with external stakeholders such as local government units, formal and informal waste collectors, and recycling facility operator.These methods were initially carried out during the baseline study [26] and have been incorporated into this research.

Data Analysis
The data analysis was conducted with the aid of Microsoft Excel and its built-in Analysis ToolPak functions following a manual check for data completeness.Descriptive statistics were used to examine the frequency of socio-demographic patterns, household SWM practices, and household perceptions on waste management.Inferential statistical techniques were also applied such as chi-square goodness of fit tests to explore relationships among categorical variables, and chi-square bivariate correlation tests to assess associations between variables [19].The null hypothesis for the goodness of fit assumed no difference between observed proportions and hypothesized equal proportions, while the null hypothesis for the bivariate correlation test considered no association between considered variables.A p-value less than 0.05 was adopted to determine statistical significance and dependence.
The study variables included gender, household size, income group, segregation practices, waste collection frequency, household waste management responsibility, and actions and behavioral changes related to household SWM.The income classification is based on the definition of Waste Wise Cities Tool (WaCT) which anchors the income group on the housing type of the households [31].

Ethical Considerations
The respondents were carefully informed about the purpose of this study and their rights to confidentiality and data protection for all information collected.Accomplished consent forms were obtained from the participants during an orientation session prior to the conduct of the study.It was made clear to the respondents that their participation is completely voluntary and that they have the right to refuse or withdraw their participation at any point of the research process, without any consequences.

Limitations
The limitations of this study stem from a limited sample size comprising WACS participants, which may introduce a potential selection bias and limit the generalizability of the findings to a broader population.The voluntary nature of participation further adds to the challenge of maintaining a consistent number of participants across study phases and may affect the representation of the collected data.Reliance on self-reported data is also susceptible to response bias.Furthermore, constraints in resources and absence of longer period of monitoring may limit the comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness and sustainability of implemented changes in household SWM.
Despite these limitations, the study still offers a general overview of participants' behaviors in relation to SWM.It can serve as a reference for future interventions and initiatives to be implemented in the community.However, it is important to consider these limitations when interpreting and applying the findings of the study.Further research with larger sample sizes, diverse populations, and longer monitoring periods would contribute to a more comprehensive socio-behavioral assessment.

Demographic Profile of the Participants
Across all study phases, female participants exhibited higher levels of engagement than males with 86% (32/37) composition in Phase 1, 89% (31/35) in Phase 2, and 78% (14/18) in Phase 3. The chisquare tests show that there are statistically significant differences between gender variables for each study phase (Table 1).The gender distribution, meanwhile, indicated no statistically significant difference across study phases (χ 2 = 1.16, p = 0.559), implying that the gender composition remained relatively consistent throughout the study.The consistent higher participation of females across study phases highlights their increased engagement and interest in waste management initiatives.The findings suggest the need to consider gender dynamics in household SWM initiatives and explore strategies to encourage greater male participation in future interventions.(11/18) in Phase 3. The chi-square tests reveal a statistically significant differences among income variables for each study phase, indicating variations in participation based on income group (Table 2).The income group distribution indicated no statistically significant difference across study phases (χ 2 = 0.74, p = 0.946), reflecting a consistent pattern of participation and indicating the active engagement of households from low-income households in household SWM initiatives.These findings underscore the need to address socio-economic disparities in waste management and ensure inclusive engagement of participants from diverse income backgrounds.The retention rate from Phase 1 to Phase 2 was 95%, indicating a high level of participant engagement and commitment to the initial phase of the study.The retention rate from Phase 2 to Phase 3, however, decreased to 51%, which may suggest a decline in sustained involvement over time.The participation in the study across study phase shows a statistically significant difference based on retention rate (χ 2 = 17.25, p<0.001).The observed decline in participation throughout the phases of the study may be attributed to various factors, including the ongoing pandemic and time constraints, which has significantly impacted individuals' interest and commitment levels in improving household SWM.It is crucial to conduct further investigation to understand the specific factors that influence participant retention and explore effective strategies to enhance long-term engagement in waste management initiatives.

Phase 1: Current Household SWM Practices
In the first phase of the study, 37 participants provided insights into their current household SWM practices.Among the participants, 35% (13/37) reported having less than 5 members in their households, 59% (22/37) have 5-10 household members, and 5% (2/37) have more than 10 members (Table 3).The chi-square test shows a significant difference among categorical variables for the number of household members (χ 2 = 16.27,p<0.001), indicating variations in household size among the participants.
The results also showed that 35% (13/37) of the participants practiced waste segregation between biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste.Additionally, 38% (14/37) made efforts to segregate but faced challenges in fully implementing the practice, while 27% (10/37) did not segregate their waste (Table 3).The primary reason cited for non-segregation was the belief that waste collectors ultimately combine all waste in the collection truck, as indicated by 59% of the responses.Furthermore, 25% specified that the absence of separate collection systems for biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste added to the challenge of segregation.The remaining 16% of the participants mentioned a lack of space and being unaware of the benefits of segregation.These cited issues were validated based on field observations wherein mixed wastes in bags were collected from households during waste collection [26].Lack of space at home and lack of information on waste segregation were also the findings in the study of Malik et al. (2015) as the major factors that prevent the households to practice segregation [32].There is no significant difference found for those who are segregating household waste, those who are trying, and those who are not (χ 2 = 0.70, p = 0.704).Percentages may not add up due to rounding off.
Waste collection frequency for the households varied, with 38% (14/37) of the responses reported daily collection, while the majority experienced irregular schedules (Table 3).The irregularities in collection schedule were verified during the conducted baseline assessment [26], where collection may occur from every other day to once a week.This is likely due to the change of the collection service provider contracted by the City during the conduct of the study [26] along with the impacts of the lockdown of COVID-19 pandemic such as workforce shortages and restrictions on movement.Irregularities in the schedule of the collection during the COVID-19 pandemic were also documented by Owusu-Ansah et al. (2022) in Ghana [33] and Dzawanda and Moyo (2022) in Zimbabwe [34].The significant difference in collection frequencies for the household waste (χ 2 = 26.38,p<0.001) highlights the need to address the variability in waste collection schedule to ensure consistent and timely waste removal.There is no significant difference, meanwhile, found between income group and daily and non-daily collection (χ 2 = 0.95, p = 0.622), indicating that the collection problem encompasses all households in the barangay, regardless of economic status.
Household gender roles in waste disposal reported 23 males and 17 females responsible for bringing out their waste out of 40 responses, where multiple answers were allowed.No significant difference between gender variables for the household task was identified (χ 2 = 0.90, p = 0.343), which suggests a relatively equal distribution of responsibility between males and females in this aspect.In terms of the household members responsible for disposal, 28% (11/40) are fathers and 35% (14/40) are mothers.It is consistent with the previous study of Bernardo (2008) where mothers are usually responsible for the management of solid waste at home [35].However, no significant difference was found on which parent is responsible for bringing out their household waste (χ 2 = 0.36, p = 0.549).
High number of respondents, at 81%, expressed their awareness on income potential from selling recyclables (Figure 2); however, majority of the participants disposed their recyclables, such as plastic, paper, glass, and metal, at the sanitary landfill through the collection services offered by the city government (Figure 2).Meanwhile, it can be noted that among the recyclables, polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles and glass (35%) have the highest potential being sold to junkshops by the participants.The lack of local recovery facilities and initiatives in the study area was identified as a key challenge.There is only one recycling center or junkshop within the barangay that offers monetary compensation for recyclable items [26].However, this facility is situated far from the residential areas, making them inconvenient for the households.Chi-square tests conducted to examine the relationship of segregation practices with gender (χ 2 = 0.14, p = 0.704), income group (χ 2 = 0.68, p = 0.712), and waste collection frequency (χ 2 = 3.09, p = 0.686) did not yield any statistically significant associations.These findings suggest that waste segregation is not strongly influenced by these variables within Barangay Calicanto and highlight the need for massive educational campaigns to provide clear information on proper household SWM, regardless of gender, income level, or waste collection frequency.

Phase 2: Segregation Experiences and Committed Changes
After the conduct of the 7-day household WACS activity, 35 participants shared their experiences on segregating their waste as biodegradable, non-biodegradable, and special waste, as part of the second phase of the study.While most of the participants have previous experience on waste segregation between biodegradable and non-biodegradable, majority of them were first-timers on waste segregation of three categories.
The chi-square analysis shows that there is no statistically significant difference among the type of waste being segregated by each household member (Table 4), implying that all household members have no apparent preference for specific waste type to be segregated.
Using the same analysis, it was also revealed a statistically significant difference among the proportion of household member responsible for the segregation, which is true for all type of waste (Table 4).A significant difference was found in the gender distribution of participants engaged in segregation activities during WACS for biodegradable (χ 2 = 7.38, p = 0.007), non-biodegradable (χ 2 = 8.12, p = 0.004), and special waste (χ 2 = 6.37, p = 0.012).Females take prominent role in segregation which constituted about two-thirds of the cited individuals involved in segregation, which is consistent across different waste types (χ 2 = 0.05, p = 0.974).The results also indicated that about 41% of the responses identified mothers as the household member primarily responsible for waste segregation during the WACS activity.Recent study led by the World Wide Fund for Nature et al. (2023) shows that women, especially the mothers, are mostly active in waste management [36].Women are observed to take the initiative in waste segregation, reduction, reuse, and recycling at the household level [36].When examining the main challenges faced during the segregation, 53% of the received responses cited that the uncertainty about certain types of waste as a significant challenge.Limited space for segregation and lack of assistance from other household members were also mentioned as challenges.Among those who reported no difficulty in segregation during WACS activity, 10 participants were already segregating their waste prior to the study as reported in the first phase, while 5 had not been segregating previously, and 5 were trying to segregate.Meanwhile, participants who encountered difficulties with segregation were those who had not been segregating or had attempted segregation as documented in the first phase.The segregation experiences of the participants prior to the study, however, did not significantly influence the level of difficulty they encountered during the WACS activity (χ 2 = 4.35, p = 0.113).
In terms of the committed short-term actions and changes, participants were allowed to select multiple actions from a list of 14 options (Figure 3), where significant differences were found among the proportions of committed actions (χ 2 = 53.78,p<0.001).The actions committed by most of the participants include bringing out their waste for collection (77%), using eco-bags to buy in markets (71%), segregating their waste according to classification (71%), and selling collected recyclables to nearby junkshops (66%).The selection of these actions indicates a positive inclination towards proper household SWM, covering generation, segregation, disposal, and recovery.Actions related to consumption, meanwhile, showed lower levels of commitment, with fewer participants committing to actions such as reducing excessive use of disposable face masks (14%), refraining from consuming products more than what they need (17%), refraining from buying products packaged in sachets (17%), and using reusable products such as utensils (17%).Actions requiring changes in consumption patterns, especially those that require purchasing alternatives, may have been influenced by the participants from low-income households due to financial constraints such as low purchasing power, with significant associations found between income groups and committed actions such as refraining from consuming more products (χ 2 = 7.00, p = 0.030) and using reusable products (χ 2 = 7.00, p = 0.030).Sachet culture [37], however, is still evident across all income groups (χ 2 = 4.00, p = 0.135).Other factors influencing consumption may also include convenience and limited alternatives in the market.
The association of the overall selection of short-term actions between gender (χ 2 = 11.28,p = 0.587) and income group (χ 2 = 16.22,p = 0.931) were both found to have no statistical significance.For committed long-term actions, participants could select multiple actions from a list of 11 options (Figure 4), showing significant differences among the proportions of committed actions (χ 2 = 44.57,p<0.001).The top selected actions for long-term commitment include teaching proper waste segregation to household members (86%), selling or donating items they no longer needed (83%), purchasing only what is needed (69%), and collecting recyclables that can be sold to junkshops (60%).The selection of these actions reflects their commitment to promote recycling and foster a sense of social responsibility.Long-term actions with low frequency of committed participants include buying products in bulk rather than in small retail (6%) and refraining from using plastic utensils (23%).Similar to short-term actions, the choices made in long-term commitments are related to consumption and may reflect the influence of participants from low-income backgrounds, as evidenced by significant association found between income groups and committed actions such as purchasing only what is needed (χ 2 = 22.75, p<0.001).Not committing to buy products in bulk than in small retail may further intensify the consumption of plastic sachets as the selection of this action has no significant difference across all income groups (χ 2 = 1.00, p = 0.607).
No significant association were found for the relation of the commitment to long-term actions with gender (χ 2 = 5.50, p = 0.855) and income (χ 2 = 8.14, p = 0.991).The results of the second phase emphasize the need to promote awareness and support for sustainable actions among all segments of society, irrespective of gender or income level, to ensure a comprehensive and equitable approach to waste management.

Phase 3: Self-Monitoring of Behavioral Changes
The third phase of the study involved monitoring of the actions and behavioral changes related to household SWM of the participants over a two-week period, where 18 household cooperators participated.This phase focuses on short-term and long-term actions, which were tracked to assess their adoption and commitment to proper waste management.
Participants had the option to report multiple actions and behavioral changes they accomplished daily, regardless of their initial commitments in the second phase (Figure 5 and Figure 6).Waste segregation emerged as the most consistently accomplished action, with an average of 12.57 (70%) participants per day engaging in this practice throughout the monitoring period.This action is also among the top committed short-term actions from the second phase, indicating that waste segregation has been successfully integrated into the daily routines of a significant number of participants after the conduct of the 7-day WACS activity.It is worth noting, however, that the number of participants maintaining this action daily decreased slightly by the end of the monitoring from 16 to 12.This trend underscores the significance of ongoing support, such as the provision of segregation bins, as well as the establishment of recycling facilities and adherence to a regular collection schedule.These measures are crucial in ensuring the sustained commitment of participants, particularly those who may be concerned about their segregated waste being mixed during the collection process.Actions and behavioral changes such as avoiding waste burning, collecting recyclables for sale, and bringing out waste during collection time were initially accomplished by 16 participants, but were maintained by a lower number of individuals of about 10 to 11 participants by the end of the monitoring period (Figure 6).The average daily participation rates for these actions were 11.50 (64%), 11.71 (65%), and 11.86 (66%), respectively (Figure 5).These behavioral changes are crucial as they address significant issues identified in the barangay.Open burning, which is illegal and prohibited in the country [12], and the accumulation of waste at collection points, particularly during times when the collection truck fails to arrive, are major concerns.However, it is important to recognize that the root cause of these practices stems from the inefficiency and irregularities of the collection system [26].Compared with the reported frequency in the second phase, bringing out of household waste only during collection time (77%) was also one of the top committed actions, while refraining to burn waste (26%) had a low frequency of commitment.
Refraining from the use of plastic sachets proved to be the most challenging action for participants to accomplish, limited to an average of 6.14 (34%) participants per day.The low levels of frequency for commitment and accomplishment of this action in both Phase 2 (17%) and Phase 3 highlight the difficulty in changing habits related to plastic sachet usage.The practicality of using plastic sachets, particularly among low-income households, is evident based on the participants' preferences.The affordability, convenience, and accessibility of sachets in convenience stores make them a preferred choice over other less affordable alternatives.This observation is in line with the report of Liamson et al. (2020) in the Philippines, which emphasized that sachets attract low-income households due to their affordability, allowing for the purchase of essential items in smaller quantities at affordable price [38].The study also highlighted the convenience of sachets that the target market expanded from the lower-income group to the higher ones [38].
The accomplishment of long-term actions and behavior changes are recorded if participants successfully conducted the action at least once during the entire monitoring period (Figure 7).Participants were also given the opportunity to report multiple accomplishments, irrespective of their initial commitments in the second phase.The actions predominantly accomplished by most participants focused on waste avoidance and reduction, such as encouraging household members to consume less (94%), purchasing only necessary items (94%), and selling or donating unused items (89%).Notably, in the second phase, purchasing only necessary items (69%) and selling or donating items (89%) remained among the top committed actions, reflecting a strong dedication to sustainable practices.The least accomplished long-term changes were buying in bulk rather than in small retail (44%) and buying trash bins for segregation (44%).Buying in bulk was also the least committed action during the second phase (6%).The low frequency in accomplishment for buying in bulk instead of in small retail may perpetuate the need for higher purchasing power and more space at home.In addition, the prevailing preference for sachets, regardless of income group, indicates the persistence of the sachet culture.This observation is supported by the lack of a significant association between the accomplishment of buying in bulk and income group (χ 2 = 3.25, p = 0.197).

Comparative Analysis of Behavioral Change: Commitment vs. Accomplishment
The analysis in the comparison between the commitment made in the second phase and the accomplishment in the third phase may provide the extent of behavior change achieved related to household SWM.Understanding behavior change dynamics can provide insights to further enhance sustainable waste management practices within households.
The comparison between Phase 2 and Phase 3 results for short-term actions reveals that the accomplishment rates for most actions in Phase 3 are greater than the initial commitment rates in Phase 2 (Figure 8).Reducing excessive use of disposable face masks (+336%) and refraining from consuming products more than what they need (+266%) are the actions with high positive shift in behavior of the participants during the monitoring, despite having the lowest frequency of participants committing to these actions in the second phase.Lower accomplishment rates than commitment rates, meanwhile, were observed for some actions such as selling recyclables to junkshops (-33%) and bringing out waste for collection (-15%).The decreasing trend observed suggests that participants may have faced challenges in translating their commitments into actual behavior.These challenges could include difficulties in locating nearby junkshops for selling recyclables or inconsistencies in the waste collection schedule, as identified during the first phase.Examining the changes between commitment and accomplishment for long-term actions reveals higher accomplishment rates than commitment rates for most actions (Figure 9).Buying products in bulk instead of in small retail (+678%) shows the highest positive shift from a commitment rate of 6% in Phase 2 to an accomplishment rate of 44% in Phase 3.While the majority of participants still rely on products packaged in sachets, the results indicate that this behavior change is feasible for a select few participants, particularly those in middle-income and high-income groups.Buying bins for waste segregation also shows the slowest adoption (+4%) from a commitment rate of 43% to an accomplishment rate of 44%.While 86% of the participants in the second phase committed to teach proper segregation to the members of their household, the accomplishment rate in the third phase decreased to 83%, which is the only long-term action that have a lower accomplishment rate than the commitment rate (-3%).Possible barriers, such as lack of receptiveness to change and generation gaps, may have hindered the ability of the participant to effectively promote proper waste segregation practices with other household members.These findings highlight the importance of addressing interpersonal dynamics and communication strategies within households.The comparative analysis between Phase 2 and Phase 3 provides valuable insights into the complexity of behavior change in household SWM.The higher accomplishment rates for many actions compared to the commitment rates demonstrates the willingness of the participants to adopt sustainable practices once they have had the opportunity to try them along with the improvement of the current SWM in the barangay.While there is overall improvement, actions such as refraining from buying products in sachets, selling recyclables to junkshops, and bringing out waste only during collection time require continued attention.These interventions will create an enabling environment that sustains engagement in these actions and overcomes obstacles hindering their implementation.

Conclusion and Recommendations
This study offers valuable insights into the socio-behavioral factors of household SWM influencing the waste practices and perceptions of the community in a coastal barangay in the Philippines.By employing socio-behavioral change communication activities through TIPs, key patterns and challenges were identified, highlighting the need for comprehensive and targeted approaches to address waste management issues through behavioral changes at the household level.
In terms of household responsibilities on waste management, there is a significant difference in the proportion of household members responsible for waste segregation, with females taking a prominent role and mothers being identified as the primary household member leading the waste segregation.These findings underscore the importance of engaging and empowering women as key drivers of sustainable waste management practices.Challenges related to segregation, however, were identified such as uncertainty about waste types, limited space for segregation, and lack of support from other household members, which emphasize the need for education and awareness programs to enhance understanding and to overcome these practical challenges.
The study demonstrates the potential for behavioral change in household SWM practices as revealed by the results of short-term and long-term commitments and accomplishments among participants throughout the study phases.The positive shift observed on various actions indicates the willingness of participants to adopt sustainable waste management practices once provided with the opportunity and support.Actions such as bringing out waste only during collection, segregating waste according to classification, collecting recyclables to sell, purchasing only what is needed, and selling or donating items that are no longer being used were among the most committed and accomplished actions.Meanwhile, actions related to consumption patterns showed lower levels of commitment and accomplishment such as refraining from the use of products packaged in plastic sachets and buying products in bulk instead of in small retail, as possibly influenced by financial constraints and limited alternatives in the market.The persistence of sachet culture was observed across all income groups.Although the adoption of these behavioral changes is low, shifting to these practices is still found to be possible, suggesting the importance of developing strategies to address deeply ingrained habits and preferences related to plastic sachet usage.
The comparison between commitment and accomplishment rates across the phases of the study highlighted the dynamic nature of behavior change.While most actions showed higher accomplishment rates than commitment rates indicating the household willingness to adopt sustainable practices, challenges were identified in translating commitments into actual behavior.Actions such as bringing out waste only during collection and selling recyclables showed lower frequencies of accomplishment than of that of commitment due to lack of nearby recycling facilities in the area and the irregularities in waste collection.The findings require interventions to create an enabling environment to sustain engagement of the households to proper waste management practice.
Overall, the study emphasizes the importance of addressing the socio-behavioral aspects of household SWM.The collective action of policymakers, waste management authorities, and stakeholders should consider the dynamics within households including their financial capacities, provide education and support, develop waste management infrastructures and systems, and create conducive conditions for behavioral change.Comprehensive and effective information, education, and communication (IEC) campaigns can facilitate the adoption of sustainable waste management practices.Ensuring the strict implementation of segregation at source and introducing incentive programs can further encourage the community to conduct proper waste management and improve the recycling efforts of the locality.Public engagement, including both men and women, in SWM programs and activities can empower the locals to take on active roles in shaping their environment by driving policy change and action planning.Improvement on evidence-based strategies and continuous collaboration among various stakeholders are key to effectively addressing waste management issues through an equitable and sustainable approach.
To enhance the conduct of future research in this field of solid waste management, future studies should build upon these insights incorporating larger sample size to improve generalizability; employing observational methods in monitoring the actual activity of the participants to enhance data accuracy; conducting prolonged monitoring to assess the sustainability and effectiveness of interventions; and collaborating with local authorities and waste management agencies to bridge gaps in relevant infrastructure and policies.By adopting these recommendations, future studies can strengthen the understanding of socio-behavioral factors in household waste management and contribute to the development of effective strategies that have the potential to catalyze a ripple effect within the community and foster sustainable waste practices at a larger scale.

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Location of the study area in Barangay Calicanto, Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines.

Figure 3 .
Figure 3. Commitment to short-term actions and behavioral changes.

Figure 4 .
Figure 4. Commitment to long-term actions and behavioral changes.

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. Accomplishment of short-term actions and behavioral changes.

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Daily accomplishment of short-term actions and behavioral changes.

Figure 7 .
Figure 7. Accomplishment of long-term actions and behavioral changes.

Figure 8 .
Figure 8.Comparison of commitment and accomplishment of short-term actions.

Figure 9 .
Figure 9.Comparison of commitment and accomplishment of long-term actions.

O:
Encourage household to be frugal P: Only purchase what is needed Q: Refrain from use of plastic utensils R: Collect recyclables that can be sold S: Buy products in bulk T: Teach household the correct way of waste segregation U: Educate self on different waste categories V: Buy bins for every waste category W: Share within the household the waste management responsibilities X: Use reusable products Y: Sell/donate items no longer used

Table 1 .
Gender distribution of participants for each phase of the study.Participants from low-income group demonstrated the highest level of participation across all study phases, comprising 70% (26/37) in Phase 1, 71% (25/35) in Phase 2, and 61%

Table 2 .
Income group distribution of participants for each phase of the study.

Table 3 .
Household and current SWM information.

Table 4 .
Household member performing segregation for each waste type during WACS.
a Examines the difference in proportion of waste type segregated by each household member b Examines the difference in proportion of household member doing segregation for each waste type