Waste attitudes in Aotearoa New Zealand

We often assume that people don’t reduce waste because they don’t care, or because they don’t understand the environmental impact. New research suggests something very different. In 2023, the Ministry for the Environment launched a three-year research project to better understand how people’s attitudes, awareness and behaviours around waste minimisation are changing. And they have. The findings confirmed that the biggest barrier to reducing waste isn’t awareness, it’s perceived inconvenience.

We also see from this research that concerns regarding waste and environmental impacts have declined across all audience segments. People still understand the issue, but there is less interest in doing the right thing. And this matters, because behaviour doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Individual attitudes are reflected in business decisions—and increasingly, in government policy.

“Too inconvenient” And getting worse

Source: Waste and Resource Efficiency – Behavioural Trend and Monitoring Survey 2025, Ministry for the Environment (see p. 67).

For those who don’t actively try to reduce waste, the main reason is that the action is “too inconvenient” (22%). Up from 10% in 2024. That same logic translates to commercial settings.

When people respond that waste reduction is “not important or relevant to me”, that they “don’t create enough waste”, or that it’s “too inconvenient”, this reflects a growing individualism where people assess environmental action purely through a personal lens, rather than as a collective responsibility.

This shift matters since waste minimisation, like climate action, only works when people view themselves as part of a shared system. When responsibility is fragmented and when individuals feel their actions are too small to matter, then we see participation decline, even in the context of increasing environmental pressures.

Policy signals matter

In 2023, the Government announced plans to get businesses ready to separate food scraps from general waste by 2030. The proposal was one of three the Ministry consulted on as part of the Transforming Recycling consultation. 

1. Container Return Scheme 

2. Improvements to household kerbside recycling 

3. Separation of business food waste

View the separation of food waste consultation document

View the full 147 page transforming recycling consultation document

Alongside paused household kerbside reforms, earlier signals around preparing businesses, including hospitality to separate food scraps quietly disappeared. An update confirming that businesses would no longer be required to separate food scraps was published December 18, 2024. No delay. This was alongside removing the 2025 deadline for the third tranche of plastic phase-outs and extending the deadline for completing the transition to home compostable produce labels to 2028.

Four of the five proposed waste-minimisation policies in relation to improvements to household kerbside recycling were abandoned without a ministerial media release or public explanation. The only policy work that went ahead was the standardisation of recycling materials. The following policies did not.

• Mandatory kerbside composting for all urban areas

• Mandatory kerbside recycling for all urban areas

• Requiring schemes to report on materials diverted from landfill

• A performance standard for council recycling and composting schemes

This policy decision occurred against the backdrop of a cost-of-living crisis, where margins in hospitality were already under pressure. Separating food scraps would have introduced new operational costs for businesses, with no indication that councils would fund collection or infrastructure. And for residents, increasing council costs translated to increased rates in the media. In that context, waste minimisation became politically vulnerable, signalling waste minimisation as too costly and inconvenient.

Policy timeline:

• March–May 2022: Consultation on business food-waste separation as part of ‘Transforming Recycling’

• November 2022: Five kerbside policies agreed

• 2024/25: Four policies confirmed not to proceed; standardisation only implemented. View policy update.

Whether intentional or not, the signal is clear: waste minimisation has been deprioritised because it is perceived as too costly and of negligible importance, the same barriers identified in this research. Without regulatory frameworks, consistent systems and national education, attitudes don’t shift and behaviour doesn’t change.

That is exactly what businesses say about composting:

“Too hard. Too unclear. Too costly”

Even where businesses technically have access to compost collections, uptake is low. The perceived effort—changing bins, training staff, managing contamination, dealing with inconsistent rules outweighs the perceived benefit. The behavioural barrier hasn’t changed. What has changed is the policy environment around it. And when policy mirrors the same behavioural barriers identified in public research, behaviour doesn’t shift, it deepens.

Why this matters

Food and organic waste isn’t a marginal issue. 9% of New Zealand's biogenic methane emissions and 4% of our total greenhouse gas emissions are from food and organic waste. Without clear regulation, consistent systems, and national education, waste minimisation remains optional. 

If waste minimisation is seen as ‘too inconvenient’, what do you think it would take for people and businesses to act?

Waste attitudes report linked for anyone who wants to read.