Recycling is thought to be a good way to convert old things into new things, and therefore save the environment from the accumulation of excessive solid waste. Recycling is also supposed to reduce pollution, reduce the amount of solid waste in landfills, and conserve 
valuable raw materials (i.e. paper, plastic, etc.). By recycling, there should be less demand for new products to be produced, which could save energy and money. The negative consequences of not recycling could certainly be perceived as a problem worthy of social intervention.
According to Aronson, Wilson and Akert (2010), social norms “are implicit (and sometimes explicit) rules for acceptable behaviors, values, and beliefs. Groups have certain expectations about how the group members should behave, and members in good standing conform to these rules. Members who do not are perceived as different, difficulty and eventually deviant.”
People have a tendency to go along with the group, and to follow the group’s norms. If you believe recycling is good because you’ve heard that recycling is a good thing, and you therefore believe recycling is what you “ought” to do, then you are following what is called an “injunctive norm” (Cialdini, Kallgren & Reno, 1991). If you recycle because you see other people recycle, and therefore you think it must be the sensible thing to do, then you are following what Cialdini et al. (1991) term a “descriptive norm.” Cialdini et. al (1991) assert that injunctive and descriptive norms “are conceptually and motivationally distinct, and it is important for a proper understanding of normative influence to keep them separate, especially in situations where both are acting simultaneously.” Essentially, the social psychologist must be aware that in order to effectively utilize social norms to achieve an effect, he/she must understand that both types of norms must be emphasized in compatible, non-contradictory ways. People believe what they hear, and people also believe what they see. The two messages should be consistent, and mutually reinforcing.
Once we understand how norms operate, we need to further understand how to operationalize them. According to Latane’s social impact theory,
“..conformity to a norm will increase as strength and immediacy increase” (Aronson, et al, 2010, p232).
If the group is important, and we are around that group often, then the normative influence of the group will be strongest. Understanding the power of norms, and taking into consideration Latane’s social impact theory, perhaps it is possible to develop an applied social psychology intervention to increase people’s willingness to recycle by using social messaging to impress on the family group the importance of recycling.
Using Latane’s theory, it would be probably more effective to appeal to the family and community groups first and foremost in our intervention. A message to enforce the injunctive norm could be that recycling is a good thing that protects our community, and also provides value to the family and community by saving us money and energy. Advertisements showing reduced family 
power bills as a result of recycling could be placed around the community. To reinforce the descriptive norms, the advertisement could show a family, or other small group participating in recycling activities. This imagery will hopefully be modeled by the viewers, and therefore promote recycling amongst the group. Children could receive this type of education in school, which might further promulgate the message in the family unit, which should mean according to Latane’s theory, that the pro-recycling norm will be more powerfully received.
Recycling rates could be measure pre- and post-intervention to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. Additionally, pre- and post-intervention self-report measures could be used to ascertain the willingness of participants to participate in recycling initiative, and to ascertain pro-recycling attitudes.
It is clear that recycling is a good way to help the environment and to save valuable natural resources. Hopefully, applied social psychology interventions like the one proposed above could make a positive difference towards increasing recycling behaviors nationwide.
=======================================
References:
Aronson, E., Wilson, T.D., & Akert, A.M. (2010). Normative Social Influence: The Need to Be Accepted. Social Psychology (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: a theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 24; 201–234.
Latane, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist. 36: 343-356.
This is such a great topic and post! I took a class a few semesters ago about the environment…honestly the only thing that made it interesting was the super awesome teacher. I wish I could find my notes because I know there was a study done with this theory and it was excellent. This really is a great way to encourage recycling and behavioral change for any area really. It’s so interesting the power of groups and group norms…and leads me to think about other aspects of our communities….the good parts and the negative parts. I wonder if we look at a community program and see an issue…in some way it’s not productive, this theory and your example leads me to think we need to examine if this theory is responsible for the problem. Hmmmm! Maybe the group norm …and ‘the way we’ve always done things’ is why we can’t move forward in so many social issues.