Unveiling the Age Factor: The Influence of Cabinet Members’ Age on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Recycling Rates in European Nations

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work has good methodological consistency. The hypotheses have good theoretical foundations and the stochastic model presents no problems.

The authors could discuss the research gap better. It is not entirely clear how relevant it is to study the age of cabinet members in the specific context of WEEE recycling. Similar studies should be discussed to support the originality and relevance of the topic.

In the conclusions, it is important to explicitly mention future research proposals.

Below are my detailed considerations regarding the decision by minor review.   1. What is the main question addressed by the research? The authors seek to investigate the relationship between the age of cabinet members in European nations and recycling rates. The research question is valid, as characteristics of politicians and governments affect the development of policies and legislation aimed at treating WEEE waste, and potentially recycling rates
2. What parts do you consider original or relevant for the field? What
specific gap in the field does the paper address?   The authors only state that to their knowledge there is no work on the age of cabinet members and recycling rates. It would be important to show some search carried out in the database to corroborate this. Other work on the age of government officials could also be discussed, in other contexts, predicting the impact on the issue of WEEE recycling, even if indirectly.   A weakness of the work is the simplicity of the contribution. A single model, to test the interference of an independent variable (age) in a dependent variable (recycling rate). The authors could have used the text to test other personal characteristics of cabinet members and other environmental indicators.
3. What does it add to the subject area compared with other published
material? I believe that the work has a contribution to the study of behavioral aspects and the personal and professional profile of legislators, who develop public policies aimed at sustainability. Sections 2 and 3 help in this regard, but lacked a more explicit discussion of the contribution
4. What specific improvements should the authors consider regarding the
methodology? What further controls should be considered? If only a hypothesis, it would be better to call section 3 a research hypothesis. I don't understand why there is text before and after the presentation of the hypothesis, but OK. The choice of the STIRPAT model is suitable for investigating demographic relationships and is well justified. A time-in-position control variable is important. Bear in mind that a young member with experience in the position could influence recycling results.
5. Please describe how the conclusions are or are not consistent with the
evidence and arguments presented. Please also indicate if all main questions
posed were addressed and by which specific experiments. The analysis carried out using the regression model appears valid, indicating an inverted U-shaped relationship between the age of cabinet members and recycling rates, answering the main research question. Analysis of control variables is also interesting and is supported by the data collected and analyzed.
6. Are the references appropriate? Yes, they are aligned with the thematic and cited properly.
7. Please include any additional comments on the tables and figures and
quality of the data. A minor issue: Lacking period in "as proposed by the Environmental 294 Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis This hypothesis proposes that there could be an inverted"

Author Response

As per the suggestion of the esteemed referee

1) Future research proposals are mentioned in the conclusions section. Descriptions on page 13 are highlighted in blue.

2) A more explicit discussion of the contribution is provided. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in blue.

3) The introduction and literature review sections are merged and shortened to better discuss the research gap. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

4) Similar studies are discussed to support the originality and relevance of the topic. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

5) A full stop has been added between sentences on page 7.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic and context is very interesting, but not the research and the subsequent analysis/discussion. 

While age may be a secondary reason, there may be a few more other primary factors that can play a significant role in this trend such as the exposure and or the educational level of both the minister who is in charge of portfolio and who he/she is reporting to (i.e., the president/prime-minister). 

I know the authors have shown that there is statistical significance to what they say. But there are example for plenty of ridiculous things people have proven statistically, that are not meaningful to the rest of the world (e.g. https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations). Statistics s just a tool. 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Can be improved.

Author Response

1) A figure (Figure 1) has been added to display the e-waste recycling rates of 28 European countries (page 2, Figure 1).

2) The introduction and literature review sections have been merged and shortened, focusing on the objectives. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

3) The introduction and literature review sections are merged and shortened to better discuss the research gap. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

4) The introduction section has been updated to include the latest work and relevant literature. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

5) Similar studies are discussed to support the originality and relevance of the topic. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

6) A more explicit discussion of the contribution is provided. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in blue.

7) The precise source of data in Table 1 is provided in the supplementary materials.

8) More details about the STIRPAT model, including its reliability and applicability based on references, are provided. Descriptions on pages 6 and 16 are highlighted in green.

9) A figure (Figure 2) has been added to illustrate the non-linear relationship between the age of cabinet members and the e-waste recycling rate (page 11, Figure 2).

10) Conclusions have been refined. Descriptions on pages 12-13 are highlighted in green.

11) Future research proposals are mentioned in the conclusions section. Descriptions on page 13 are highlighted in blue.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this paper, the authors examine how Cabinet Members' age affects the recycling of waste electrical and electronic Equipment in European nations. Generally, this is a very interesting paper and it aligns well with the research direction of Sustainability. There are only several minor problems with the content in the authors’ manuscript. The following comments would be helpful to improve the quality of this manuscript.

(1)  Please check the format of Tables 1 and 2. There seems to be some extra vertical lines.

(2)  In Table, if possible, please give the precise source of Eurostat data or list them in the supplementary materials.

(3)  If possible, more details should be described in Method section. For example, why were the STIRPAT model selected? The reliability and applicability should be clarified based on references.

(4)  The conclusions need to be more refined.

Author Response

As per the suggestion of the esteemed referee,

1) More details about the STIRPAT model, including its reliability and applicability based on references, are provided. Descriptions on pages 6 and 16 are highlighted in green.

2) Conclusions have been refined. Descriptions on pages 12-13 are highlighted in green.

3) The precise source of data in Table 1 is provided in the supplementary materials.

4) The format of Tables 1 and 2 has been checked.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The introduction part needs some latest relevant literature.

 the introduction part can be improved and linked with the latest work

the introduction part and literature review can be merged and shorted with the circle of objectives 

Estimation results indicate the existence of a nonlinear relationship (i.e., an inverted U-shaped Environmental Kuznets Curve) between the age of cabinet members and the e-waste recycling rate, which you can present in the figure to show in the figure or pictorial form.

the hypothesis description is long can be shortened and to the point

There is repetition in the result and can make a figure  with the increasing age of the cabinet members  

Make a separate table and place it at the start of the introduction 

You mention 28 European countries, it is better to present in the graph   

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language is difficult to understand

Author Response

As per the suggestion of the esteemed referee,

1) The introduction and literature review sections have been merged and shortened, focusing on the objectives. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

2) The introduction section has been updated to include the latest work and relevant literature. Descriptions on pages 3-4 are highlighted in yellow.

3) A figure (Figure 2) has been added to illustrate the non-linear relationship between the age of cabinet members and the e-waste recycling rate (page 11, Figure 2).

4) The conclusions have been refined. Descriptions on pages 12-13 are highlighted in green.

5) A figure (Figure 1) has been added to display the e-waste recycling rates of 28 European countries (page 2, Figure 1).

Reviewer 5 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscripts that I have reviewed seeks to establish  and investigate how the age of cabinet members influences e-waste recycling rates in European countries, alongside other relevant factors.

I find this research problem very relevant and worthy of a scientific investigation, and hopefully yielding very important  insights that can reveal critical factors whose implementation can  help propel e-waste recycling rates in the particular world region.   

The research has revealed  a nonlinear relationship  between the age of cabinet members and the e-waste recycling rate,  rather than a linear relationship. Ages during which increases in environmental improvements are seen have been clearly  delineated along with ages at which such effects are decreasing.

Thus the research is revealing  that the age of cabinet members and generational perspectives can influence their awareness, understanding, and commitment to addressing contemporary challenges such as e-waste recycling.

Similarly, the conclusions are well integrated in this manuscript with the research aim and they summarise major findings for the study as well as their implications for the effective implementation of environmental policy and related initiatives.

 While I find the scientific approach to have been carefully contrived, planned, and executed, I have a minor  question in some of the statistical analyses that took place. The most important variables are cabinet ministers ages and e-waste recycling rates. In the statistical correlation tests that were done, the research clearly established a non-linear relationship between these variables.  However, my questions is how do we know the time periods in which the e-waste recycling rates were increasing or decreasing thus  occuring at the same time when the politicians were serving in goverment.  In other words, can you further support the view that during the youthful years of cabinet politicians, specific increases in waste recycling took place and upto a certin point such increases were no longer discernible.  In answering this question, I believe  your statistical analyses or assumptions you make will be reinforced, thus enhancing the validity and significance of your findings.  Lastly, a minor comment is summarised below in the area of your manuscript where the problem was located.  

Line 70, Page 2 of 18

The overall the rate of WEEE recycling for the EU stood at 38.9 percent in 2018.

Comment: This sentence needs to be grammatically corrected

Hoping to receive a revised and grammatically flawless manuscript for further re-examination and best wishes in your research. 

Last Comment: In the section where the 'Conclusions' are being summarised, the content provided is more than the conclusions. Therefore it is important to re-write the caption of this section as 'Conclusions and Recommendations'. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Already provided

Author Response

As per the suggestion of the esteemed referee,

1) To support the view that e-waste recycling rates increased during the youthful years of cabinet politicians and eventually plateaued, we divided our main sample into two subsamples, including only the common observations of e-waste recycling rates and cabinet member age data. Using an average age threshold of 49, the first subsample includes data for cabinet members under 49, while the second subsample includes data for those aged 49 and above. The first subsample (younger cabinet members) contains 77 observations, while the second subsample (older cabinet members) contains 194 observations. We conducted separate covariance and correlation analyses for each subsample. The results show positive covariance and correlation coefficients between e-waste recycling rates and cabinet member age for the younger group, while negative covariance and correlation coefficients were observed for the older group. These findings support our argument and empirical evidence that e-waste recycling rates tend to increase during the youthful years of cabinet politicians but decline during their later years.

A paragraph has been added on page 12, highlighted in yellow. The covariance and correlation analyses are provided below; they are not included in the manuscript but are available as supplementary material.

Subsample1 (sample of young cabinet members):

Covariance Analysis: Ordinary
Date: 09/12/24   Time: 13:24
Sample: 1 77
Included observations: 77
Balanced sample (listwise missing value deletion)
Covariance
Correlation	EWASTEYOUNG	AGEYOUNG
EWASTEYOUNG	306.9218
	1.000000
AGEYOUNG	0.018419	1.879340
	0.000767	1.000000

Subsample2 (sample of old cabinet members):

Covariance Analysis: Ordinary
Date: 09/12/24   Time: 13:25
Sample: 1 194
Included observations: 194
Covariance
Correlation	EWASTEOLD		AGEOLD
EWASTEOLD	152.0714
	1.000000
AGEOLD	-12.39689		8.316272
	-0.348598		1.000000

 

2) The sentence “The overall the rate of WEEE recycling for the EU stood at 38.9 percent in 2018.” in page 2 is grammatically corrected. Descriptions on page 2 are highlighted in yellow.

3) The title of the "Conclusions" section has been revised to “Conclusions and Recommendations.” Descriptions on page 13 are highlighted in yellow.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

My main concern from review round 1, has not been addressed or rebutted.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Can be improved.

Author Response

1) Following the esteemed referee's suggestion, we would like to examine the role of "the educational level of both the minister in charge of the portfolio and the individual they report to (i.e., the president or prime minister)." However, there is no available data source providing panel data on the educational levels of parliament and cabinet members. Therefore, we have added the following paragraph to the conclusion section, where future research proposals are discussed:

“Upon data availability, the individual ages of cabinet members can be used instead of the average age of cabinet members. The ages of parliament members can also be utilized, and the age-gender distribution of parliament and cabinet members can be studied. Additionally, the impact of the educational level and professional background of parliament and cabinet members on environmental factors can be examined. Nevertheless, single-country studies can be conducted by researchers who collect the aforementioned data themselves.” Descriptions on page 14 are highlighted in green.

2) Regarding the issue of spurious correlations, we have provided the theoretical framework and research hypotheses that explore how the age of cabinet members influences e-waste recycling rates in European countries, along with other relevant factors. Descriptions on page 4-5 are highlighted in green.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Over all the repones of the comments is acceptable but, in the introduction, section still needs to a minor revision to use some more relevant literature like https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352186421005824

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is almost done 

Author Response

As per the suggestion of the esteemed referee,

Relevant literature has been incorporated into the introduction section. Descriptions on pages 2 and 14 are highlighted in yellow.