Case Study Report

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community- based waste prevention and recycling

Case Study Report

January 2007

CONTENTS

Summary of findings...... 1 1. Types of engagement/behaviour change targeted ...... 1 2. Funding sources...... 4 3. Partnership working ...... 4 4. Staffing ...... 4 5. What is special about it being community based?...... 5 6. Monitoring and evaluation ...... 6 Case studies...... 8 Aberdeen Eco-Challenge, Aberdeen Forward…………………………………………………… 8 Small Steps to Change the World, Action for Sustainable Living …………………… 18 Rethink Rubbish, Bath and North East Somerset Council………………………………… 24 MAGIC, Bradford Environmental Action Trust…………………………………………………… 31 Blooming Bottoms………………………………………………………………………………….…………… 36 Cae Post Recycling Ltd, Powys Council……………………………………………………………… 40 Recycling Champions Project, The Centre for Environmental Initiatives………… 46 The Pilands Wood Recycling and Waste Minimisation Project, Eastleigh Borough Council……………………………………………………………………………………………… 51 Rethink Rubbish – Small Actions, Big Changes, East Sussex County Council… 57 Finstock Recycling, Charlbury Area Waste Action Group (CAWAG), West Oxfordshire District Council……………………………………………………………………………… 63 Eco Teams, Global Action Plan…………………………………………………………………………… 67 Go Zero, Go Zero Ltd………………………………………………………………………………………… 74 Community Waste Action Groups, London Borough of Hounslow…………………… 80 ‘Be the change’ Sustainable Schools programme (England), Peace Child International…………………….……………………………………………………………………………… 86 Seeding sustainable communities, Peterborough Environmental City Trust (PECT)……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 92 Somerset Waste Action Programme (SWAP), Somerset Waste Action Programme………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 98 The Surrey Real Nappy Network, Surrey County Council……………………..………… 105 The Surrey Scholar Research Project in Waste Recycling, University of Surrey………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 110 What not to waste, Waste Watch - Recycle Western Riverside Team…………….. 115 Climate Friendly Communities (CFC), Wiltshire Wildlife Trust (WWT)……… 122

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Summary of findings

1. Types of engagement/behaviour change targeted

The following case studies represent a cross-section of responses received to an electronic survey, undertaken in June 2006, of over 100 organisations involved in community-based recycling and waste minimisation. Twenty of these were selected as case studies and interviewed face-to-face. A further 57 projects were interviewed via telephone. The results of both the electronic and the telephone survey are available as spreadsheets.

The selection of case studies was driven by the desire to reflect the diversity of delivery agents and community-based engagement approaches, whilst representing either best practice or innovative approaches. Particular emphasis was therefore given to the monitoring and evaluation regimes projects reported to have in place as well as the data collected to measure the impact of the project.

Other criteria considered included:

• target audiences (including school children, new parents, low recyclers and ‘hard-to-reach’ groups) • use of community champions and other intermediaries • geographical representativeness (including examples from England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland)

The table below gives an overview of the projects featured as case studies.

1 Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Table 1 – Case study projects

Organisation Project name Project Budget Funding sources duration Aberdeen Forward Aberdeen Eco- 2003-2004 approx. £126,000 Fresh Futures, LTCS, Aberdeen City Council, Challenge the Home Energy Conservation Association, SITA and BAA. Action for Sustainable Living Small steps to April 2005 - £50,000 per year Defra Environmental Action Fund (EAF) change the world March 2008 Bath & North East Somerset Rethink Rubbish ongoing since LTCS (until 2004), WRAP, BaNES Council, Council (BaNES Council) 2001 Big Lottery Community Recycling & Economic Development (CRED) scheme, Defra Recycling Incentivisation scheme

Blooming Bottoms Blooming Bottoms ongoing since £83,000 LTCS reuseable nappy 2002 service Bradford Environmental Action Manningham & April 2004 - £13,000 per year Bradford Metropolitan District Council Trust Girlington Inspired March 2007 Communities (MAGIC) Cae Post Recycling Ltd Cae Post Recycling ongoing since £1 million over five Big Lottery CRED scheme, European Union 1986 years Economic & Social Fund, Wales Development Agency, The Welsh Assembly

Centre for Environmental Recycling Champions April 2005 - £115,000 for 2.75 Big Lottery CRED scheme Initiatives Project December years 2007 Eastleigh Borough Council Pilands Wood May 2006 - £65,000 per year Hampshire County Council, Recycling & Waste May 2007 Eastleigh Borough Council Minimisation Project East Sussex County Council Rethink Rubbish - ongoing since n/a Defra Waste Minimisation & Recycling Fund, Small actions, big 2003 LTCS, WRAP, European Union changes Global Action Plan EcoTeams ongoing since £5,000 - £50,000 Defra Climate Change Communication Fund 1999 and EAF, Big Lottery, European Union Go Zero Ltd Go Zero ongoing since £2,000 Royal Society of Arts cash prize January 2004 Finstock Recycling Finstock Recycling 2002 - 2006 approx. £100 Oxfordshire District Council

2 Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Organisation Project name Project Budget Funding sources duration

London Borough of Hounslow Community Waste ongoing since £600 per year LB Hounslow Action Groups 1999

Peace Child International ‘Be the change’ April 2005 - £40,000 per year Defra EAF Sustainable Schools March 2008 Programme

Peterborough Environmental City Seeding sustainable April 2005 - £40,000 per year Defra EAF Trust (PECT) communities March 2008

Somerset Waste Action Somerset Waste ongoing since £150,000 per year LTCS (until 2004), Somerset County Council, Programme (SWAP) Action Programme 2002 from SCC; £5,000 Somerset borough and district councils per year from districts and boroughs

Surrey County Council The Surrey Real ongoing since £10,000 per year Surrey County Council Nappy Network 1998 plus funding for 1 full-time staff member University of Surrey The Surrey Scholar 2003 - 2004 n/a The Surrey Scholar Fund project

Waste Watch - Recycle Western What not to waste April - June £18,000 Interreg III, Defra Waste & Resources R&D Riverside 2006 programme Wiltshire Wildlife Trust Climate-friendly April 2005 - £30,000 per year Defra EAF communities March 2008

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

2. Funding sources

The majority of projects interviewed were or are being funded through grants, notably Defra’s Environmental Action Fund and the Big Lottery’s Community Recycling and Economic Development (CRED) scheme.

The majority of funding usually paid for staff time spent on project delivery, with smaller amounts going towards capital investment. Only a small minority of projects relied almost entirely on the contributions of community volunteers, receiving only small amounts of funding for the production of promotional materials or displays.

Problems related to funding reported by the case study projects echoed those of the telephone interviewees, most notably the short-term nature of most funding streams, limiting qualifying requirements and a bias towards new initiatives and the lack of consistency in application and reporting requirements across different funding streams.

Some projects conceded that they had been relatively successful at gaining grant funding. This is likely to be the result of a high degree of professionalism and experience on the part of project staff.

3. Partnership working

Many projects worked with a range of other organisations, either as official partners or as intermediaries to engage specific target audiences. Often partnerships included community organisations and local authorities.

A key reason for collaboration with these partners was to gain credibility.. For example, community organisations felt that collaborating with the council gave them greater credibility with residents in service delivery, whereas local authorities reported that working with independent delivery agents such as community organisations eased the establishment of trust with residents.

Working with partners also provides in-routes into specific communities, which may otherwise be hard to reach, such as ethnic minority groups.

4. Staffing

Only a very small number of projects interviewed, both as case studies and as part of the telephone survey, were staffed and run entirely by volunteers.

In most cases, a small number of paid staff were responsible for project delivery, typically one project officer responsible for the overall coordination and other members of staff providing support for specific aspects, such as events, or drawing on their personal expertise such as communications.

Most projects worked with volunteers in some capacity. Volunteers were either specifically recruited from the general public as ‘community champions’ or drawn from existing community organisations.

Where they were recruited as community champions, their role usually consisted of direct communication with the target group, usually through face-to-face contact via doorstepping or engagement at events. It is not always clear, however, what guidance champions received on how to interact with the public and how their impact was monitored.

4 Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The desire to recruit professional and experienced personnel to manage projects has meant that the most suitable staff did not always hail from the immediate community the project is targeting. In a number of cases, project officers moved to the area as a result of being recruited to the project and hence did not have any prior knowledge of the communities they worked with. This challenges the traditional view of community organisations as being firmly rooted within their locality and being in touch with local people’s needs and interests.

In some cases, local communities were also characterised by a high degree of cultural and ethnic diversity. Environmental organisations still tend to be dominated by white middle-class staff and community organisations are no exception. Staff may therefore also be recruited specifically to represent the target community and speak one or more minority languages.

This is where the recruitment of local volunteers is particularly crucial, as these are more likely to be true community representatives.

5. What is special about it being community based?

Similar to projects interviewed for our telephone survey, case study projects attached great importance to the commitment and enthusiasm of their staff, both employed and voluntary.

A high level of commitment was indeed cited as a major success factor by the vast majority of interviewees. Enthusiasm is considered particularly essential when interfacing with the public at community events or through doorstepping campaigns, because it is seen to elicit a more positive response from the community.

The capacity to respond to the needs and interests of local residents was also cited as a major advantage of being based in the community. However, this ability may also be due to the usually small size of organisations unburdened by bureaucracy, which makes them able to respond more flexibly and creatively. The ability to act on feedback from the community, be it via champions or individual householders, was also highlighted as an important success factor.

As reported by many local authorities in the telephone survey, councils suffer from an ingrained sense of resentment among many residents and perceive that the public are likely to be less receptive to their messages.

Delivering messages through community groups is therefore seen as a way of bestowing credibility and increasing effectiveness of communications and engagement campaigns and programmes.

Community groups themselves also reported that being seen as ‘of the community’ enhanced their standing with local residents and enabled them to engage with householders in a more effective way. Conversely, community groups did not appear to feel that working with local authorities affected their image negatively. In some cases, partnering with the local authority was in fact considered to improve the credibility of community organisation, particularly where they provide a professional service such as recycling collections or waste education programmes.

The ability to deliver wider socio-economic benefits was also cited as a unique success factor of community-based approaches. Such benefits include empowering communities to make improvements to their local environment and offering employment opportunities for disadvantaged groups.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

6. Monitoring and evaluation

As may be expected in view of the diversity of projects reviewed, monitoring and evaluation regimes varied considerably.

The vast majority of case study interviewees stated that monitoring formed an integral part of their projects and methodologies were developed at the outset of the project. However, in some cases, monitoring methods evolved as projects progressed, barriers to using the envisaged techniques became apparent or delivery activities changed. This appears to be particularly the case with projects funded through the current round of Defra’s Environmental Action Fund, which places increased emphasis on evaluation.

Most projects did not allocate any specific amount of their budget to monitoring and evaluation, but considered it as part of the overall responsibilities of the project officer. It is therefore difficult to establish the cost of evaluation, either in terms of officer time or as a monetary value. Some projects, which were in the process of undertaking evaluation or did this on an ongoing basis, reported, however, that they were recording the amount of time spent on evaluation-related tasks. This data is intended to inform the development of future project proposals.

In the majority of case study projects, evaluations exceeded the requirements of funders as projects did not limit them to project outputs but also sought to capture whether engagement techniques were successful or not.

Approaches to and the extent of monitoring and evaluation varied greatly. Similar to the telephone survey findings, a small number of case study projects reported that tight or small budgets curtailed the extent of their evaluations as project resources had to be focused on delivery. As a result, some projects were not able to carry out an end-of- project evaluation.

Reporting requirements were usually deemed reasonable and not too onerous. In some instances, reporting procedures were found to be complex and somewhat confusing, but such issues were usually resolved with the assistance of grants administrators.

The case study projects once again echoed the findings of the telephone and electronic surveys, which showed that the evaluation of the impact of projects on behaviour remained a difficult area. The majority of projects interviewed attempted to assess changes in attitudes as a result of their activities via questionnaire surveys. However, measurement of the effects on waste arisings or capture of recyclables were more rare, particularly among community groups whose access to collection data tends to be restricted unless they work in partnership with collection authorities.

Few projects attempted to evaluate the behaviour change processes or had referred to behaviour change theory such as the 4 Es model in the development of their projects. In many instances, this was due to the fact that projects had preceded the recent policy interest in this area. Similarly, there are few examples of longitudinal studies. This is partially due to the lack of funding for these kinds of studies, as most projects relied on short-term grants averaging three years.

Virtually no projects considered cost-effectiveness as part of their evaluations, although some stated that they believed future projects could be delivered at lower cost. This was either because resources developed could be used in other projects or because large parts of the budgets were spent on publicising the project.

Interviewees were asked whether they supported the idea of a common assessment framework for community-based projects. Many felt some generic guidance on evaluation

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report would be useful, but expressed reservations as to the applicability of a standard approach in view of the diversity of community-based engagement approaches. External assistance with developing monitoring and evaluation frameworks was welcomed by many projects however.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Case studies

Project Name Aberdeen EcoChallenge Principal delivery agent Aberdeen Forward Partners Aberdeen City Council, Aberdeen City Environmental Forum Project duration 2003 - 2004

1. Project background and operational details

The Aberdeen EcoChallenge was conceived as a sustainable communities’ project and was developed by the community-based Aberdeen City Environment Forum. Established in 2000, the 100-plus members of the forum represent a wide range of local organisations and groups including environmental, community and government organisations, educational establishments and businesses.

The Forum identified a need to engage with the city’s householders more directly to reduce their environmental impact and as a result, members were looking to develop and support a waste minimisation project based within the local community, which would engage the public and bring about a genuine behaviour change. A steering group, consisting of the partner organisations, was established in March 2002 to take the initiative forward.

The reference point for the development of the idea was another local project, the Buchan Countryside Group’s Village Initiative project, which focused on recycling and waste minimisation. This project had successfully seen a community reduce their waste from an average of 18kg a week to 3kg per week. The Aberdeen EcoChallenge used this as a model and expanded it to encompass some wider environmental issues including energy and transport.

The Aberdeen EcoChallenge, run by Aberdeen Forward in partnership with Aberdeen City Council, looked to recruit 100 householders in two areas of the city (Dyce and Torry) and to help and mentor the volunteers towards a greener way of living.

Starting with waste, the EcoChallenge took the volunteer householders through a step-by-step programme aimed at changing their everyday behaviour. Volunteers were issued with specially designed manuals to assist them in the challenge. Once comfortable with the waste element of the project, volunteers moved on to home energy reduction before embarking upon sustainable transport issues.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The EcoChallenge was intended as a stand-alone two-year project, but was designed so that the challenge could be taken up by householders in the future via a website and elements of it could be taken forward by other organisations to address individual areas of sustainable living.

Funding The project was funded through a variety of sources, including a £40,000 grant from Fresh Futures, a Scottish Lottery Fund for sustainable communities projects. This constituted approximately thirty percent of the total project expenditure.

The Fresh Futures grant required match-funding, which was met by Aberdeen Forward from a Landfill Tax Credit grant (£31,000). Additional funding was provided by Aberdeen City Council (£1,800), the Home Energy Conservation Association (£5,500), SITA (£2,000) and BAA (£200). A further £33,000 was made up of in-kind contributions such as volunteer time.

The original budget projected delivery costs at £126,800 and there was a slight shortfall in cash funding received. However, the project was brought in on budget, as there was an underspend due to a lower number of composting bins required and a reduction in the costs claimed by the volunteers.

Approximately half of the funding was spent on core costs (including officer time). Incentive payments to participating households made up £4,500, with the remainder being spent on developing and producing the action packs for participants and the website.

During the bidding process, AF received assistance from the Fresh Futures grant officer in developing the project proposal and budget. This input was considered very useful by AF and ensured that the project stood a good chance of being funded.

Partners AF’s principal delivery partner was Aberdeen City Council (ACC), drawing on the expertise of a range of departments including the Home Energy Conservation team, the Office of the Chief Executive, the Environment and Infrastructure, City Development Services (Transport Strategy Section), Learning and Leisure and Neighbourhood Services. In addition fortnightly project management meetings were held between the Project Officer, the Aberdeen Forward Manager and the Council’s Local Agenda 21 Co-ordinator.

The project also received regular input from a steering group, which included members from Fresh Futures, the Aberdeen City Environment Forum, Torry Community Council as well as a Dyce community representative. The group met quarterly to receive reports on progress and discuss ongoing project strategy.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Staffing Aberdeen Forward appointed a Project Officer, who, with the assistance of the steering group, was responsible for the day-to-day running and implementation of the project including the recruitment of volunteer mentors and households.

Specialist advice on each of the three main themes was received from Aberdeen City Council personnel. Input into the individual project elements was provided by the Project Team Leader, the Clean and Green Officer and Community Waste Co-ordinator provided, the Home Energy Co-ordinator and the Senior Transport Planner provided. The Local Agenda 21 Co-ordinator, provided general environmental advice throughout.

Representatives from both communities were involved in the development of the EcoChallenge project. The Council’s Area Co-ordinator for Torry and the Principal Community Learning Worker of Dyce Community Education Centre sat on the Eco Challenge Steering Group Committee. Members of both communities are also represented at the Aberdeen City Environment Forum, which provided the original idea.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The EcoChallenge was designed to take 100 participating households through a series of steps to reduce their environmental impact in the areas of waste, home energy and personal transport. Waste was selected as the first challenge, as it was considered the easiest to tackle for householders.

Householders received a range of resources and support services for each topic, including the following:

Waste Element • Waste Guide • vouchers for compost bins • a dual kitchen waste bins to help separate compostable and residual waste • a recyclables storage bag • a reusable shopping bag • scales for weighing residual waste • Workshops on Aberdeen’s Waste Implementation Plan and how it affects residents and on eco-friendly products

Energy Element • Energy Guide

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

• National Home Energy Rating Survey • Low energy light bulbs • Hot water tank jackets • Radiator foils • Funding advice for larger energy efficiency measures such as cavity wall and loft insulation and the installation of condensing boilers • £50 cashback for any energy efficiency measures costing £50 or more • Energy meetings for mentors and a ‘family fun day’ at Satosphere Educational Centre

Transport Element • Transport Guide • Bus pass (free local bus travel for one week) • Aberdeen City Cycle Map • Free bicycle hire for one day • Cycling safety guides • Reflective armbands and disks • Public transport information • Travel focus groups to give participants the opportunity to discuss concerns about local transport provision and travel safety • Transport meeting to discuss issues with representatives of First Bus, Aberdeen City Council and the Aberdeen Cycle Forum • Personal safety course

Participating households also received two newsletters during each of element of the challenge, providing further information and feedback on their progress.

The households were asked to regularly record their progress on forms and diaries provided as part of the starter packs for each element throughout the project. For the energy element, participants were asked to submit one years’ worth of energy bills.

Participating households who were already more environmentally aware were asked to help mentor other participating householders. The mentor’s role was to help deliver the project aims by providing a local point of contact and feeding issues back to the Project Officer. Each mentor was given a list of households within their area to work with along with details of Aberdeen Forwards Volunteer Policy.

The concept of the mentoring system was found to work with some groups but not others. For example, in those groups whose mentors were known to be more active, the return rate of forms and attendance at events was greater. Some groups increased their activity

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

further, for example, by arranging joint transport to events. However, some mentors and their groups were far less active. The voluntary nature of the mentoring system meant that it was difficult to be selective about most appropriate people for this role.

The EcoChallenge approach was considered effective because it provides householders with a structured step-by-step methodology to reducing their environmental impact. By detailing specific actions for each individual theme, sustainable living is made more tangible and achievable for householders.

The EcoChallenge was a pilot project and therefore required a comparatively large amount of staff time and resources to develop the individual elements of the project, such as the action packs and the website. However, these are now available for use in a wide range of contexts by council staff, community groups as well as individual householders.

AF is looking to take the learning from the project forward and apply it in a smaller group setting or within ‘communities of interest’. For example, AF is in discussion with Aberdeen University to pilot the EcoChallenge toolkit among university staff.

Wider social benefits of the project are difficult to measure, but AF feel that the EcoChallenge has resulted in a greater sense of community in the two project areas and a strong awareness of the work of AF amongst residents. A number of EcoChallenge participants have also continued to work as volunteers for AF on other projects.

Target Audience AF selected two distinct areas in Aberdeen, Torry and Dyce, to participate in the EcoChallenge project. The purpose of this was to allow some comparison in terms of the different target audiences and to assess whether there was any difference in the uptake of the challenge.

Torry with a population of 4,448 is close to the City Centre. Traditionally a fishing village, the area has a diverse population living in pre- 1900 tenement housing and post-war Council housing. The area is seen as one of the more socially deprived areas of Aberdeen with unemployment rates in its Balnagask and Victoria wards standing at three times the city average. In its remaining Glenbervie ward it is over twice the city average (figures taken from Aberdeen City Council’s area profile). Despite this, Torry is a close community that has shown itself willing to embrace new ideas and was seen as an ideal location for the EcoChallenge.

Dyce with a population of 4,838 is quite different and is to the north west of the City. Largely built in the last 50 years, it has specific problems relating to transport and energy that affect the quality of life in the area. During council-led, citywide energy surveys, Dyce was found to be an ‘energy poor’ area that suffers from an aging housing stock which is poorly insulated. Home to a large number of industrial estates and businesses as well as the City’s airport, Dyce also suffers peak time traffic congestion on a daily basis. However,

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

again this area displays a strong sense of community spirit; there is a very active community centre and garden club, the latter having established an award winning community garden.

Branded posters and leaflets requesting volunteers and displaying contact numbers were produced as a recruitment tool. These were displayed in the first six months of the project in community centres, doctors and dentist surgeries, schools, shops, churches and community group meeting places in both areas.

Articles announcing the launch of the project, requesting volunteers and advertising public meetings and information sessions were printed in the local press and environmental publications. This was supported by talks given to local community groups, clubs and associations. Two open meetings were held in each area. These were designed to give further information about the project and to recruit interested householders.

The first 70 volunteer householders were recruited within 3 months of the project starting. The remaining householders were recruited during the course of the first year. Of the total 100, 9 householders withdrew from the project for a variety of reasons including being too busy to participate and moving away from the area. Six householders in each area were recruited as volunteer mentors.

AF did not undertake any specific research about the target audience prior to the project, but asked all participating households to complete a baseline questionnaire at the outset of the challenge. This contained questions about participants’ socio-economic background and the current knowledge of and attitudes to sustainable living.

Some of the participants had a greater environmental awareness than others, but in general participants were not predisposed to pro- environmental behaviour. However, they all displayed a great interest in the project and were highly motivated to participate.

Contact with residents was continuous throughout the project. There were quarterly meetings for all participants, but more intensive contact was maintained with some households who required more support or were particularly enthusiastic.

Information and resources provided were the same across the board to allow comparison between the two areas, but the Project Officer varied the timing of the individual elements of the challenge depending on the progress made by each household and the degree of difficulty encountered.

3. Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation formed an integral part of the project and was built into the project plan from the outset. The purpose of the monitoring regime was to assess which approaches worked best and achieved the greatest impact.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

At the end of the project, the project Officer and the AF Manager produced a comprehensive evaluation report, which details the outcomes and achievements for each theme alongside recommendations for improving the delivery of any similar projects in the future. The report also provides an assessment of the relative success of the engagement methods used and how easy or difficult participants found to undertake the challenges set out in their action packs.

The project plan set out the following targets for the individual areas and monitoring indicators were chosen to correspond to these:

Waste reduction • Reduce participating household’s residual waste by an average of 50% • Increase the average recycling rate by 25% • Introduce home composting or kerbside collection of green waste to 75% of households

Energy reduction • Half the households to have one or more energy saving measures carried out on their homes during the two years • Reduce average energy consumption by 20% over a two-year period

Travel improvements • Each household to see a 15% reduction in total car mileage per person per week • All journeys less than 400 metres (800 metres round trip) that do not involve carrying luggage or heavy shopping to be undertaken on foot or bicycle rather than by private car • In those households from which children are taken to school by car, an alternative to the car to be used at least twice a week • Current single-occupancy car commuters to use an alternative at least twice a week (e.g. car sharing) • Households to become familiar with bus routes and bus frequencies in their area

General • Raise general environmental awareness within the communities • Hold a minimum of 6 community meetings in each area • Provide links with the city council and other organisations to enable the communities to lobby effectively for new facilities • Produce a website on the project for community use • Produce a Toolkit for use in future communities

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

AF used a range of monitoring methods to assess the impact of the project. For the waste element, this included weekly weighing of residual waste by the project participants for a twelve-week period. In the first week, householders were asked not to change their normal practices to provide a baseline for comparison. They were then asked to implement the steps outlined in the waste guide.

As both areas were not served by a kerbside recycling collection during most of the project period and householders needed to take materials to public recycling banks, it was considered impractical to weigh recyclables separately. As result, it was not possible to measure the increase in recycling levels or overall waste arising.

For the energy component, participants were asked to submit one year’s worth of electricity bills. However, it proved difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from this data due to the seasonal variation in energy use. Furthermore, to evaluate the impact of the project over the longer term, a longer monitoring period would have been required.

Assessing the project’s impact on travel patterns was considered particularly difficult. Participants were asked to keep travel diaries for the duration of one week at the start and at the end of the project. However, these only provide a snapshot of households’ travel patterns and transport use.

At the start of each challenge, participants were given a self-completion questionnaire survey to assess their existing attitudes and behaviour in relation to the three themes. This survey was then repeated at the end of each of the challenges. Free-post envelopes were provided as an incentive to return the questionnaires. Return rates averaged around 60 percent. Lower return rates were experienced for electricity bills, however, with 30 percent of first-year bills and 20 percent of second year bills being submitted.

An overall project evaluation was undertaken by distributing questionnaires to all householders, 51 of which were completed and returned. This focused on the usefulness of the information and resources provided to participants and their experiences in taking up the individual challenges.

No specific amount of the budget was set aside for monitoring and evaluation. However, the final three months of the project were dedicated to compiling and analysing the data collected and producing the evaluation report.

4. Outcomes

AF felt that the EcoChallenge was well received by participants and that householders were generally keen to participate in the activities. However a tailing off of involvement as the project progressed was noticeable.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Waste was the activity which elicited the strongest response due to previous public waste education at local and national level and this component being the first stage of the challenge, when interest and enthusiasm levels were at their highest. Additionally, changes to waste behaviour are comparatively easy to make and require little change to daily routine.

The energy component was of particular importance to a number of householders who were keen to find out how they could save on the cost of their annual fuel bills. Those who underwent the home energy surveys were the most likely to make energy efficiency improvements to their homes.

Transport was the most complex and difficult of the three elements, both in terms of devising feasible actions for householders and in bringing about behaviour change. Many householders recognised their dependency on their cars but also found that alternative ways to travel with comparable convenience and speed were often not available.

Correspondingly, the impact of the project was greatest in the area of waste, where participants achieved an average 63 percent reduction in residual waste, from an average total of 16kg to 6kg per week. The questionnaire surveys also indicated a significant increase in the amounts of waste recycled, reused or avoided.

Nearly two thirds of participating households had their homes surveyed and one third carried out efficiency measures. Home energy savings were more difficult to gauge from the billing data received. Calculations were therefore based on the energy saving measures undertaken by participants and a resulting average reduction of 20 percent in CO2 emissions was extrapolated.

The response rate to the first travel survey was similar to that of the energy and waste surveys, but there was a significant drop in return rates for the second diary, resulting in a very small sample size. A number of households, whose car use increased during the project period, therefore affected the overall results and an overall increase in car mileage was recorded. However, 62 percent of households reported that they used public transport more often and 83 percent of car users stated that they now consciously combined car journeys.

The overall project evaluation also assessed the mentoring system. The great majority of participants were satisfied with the support they received from the mentor in their area and generally found the mentoring system useful. The evaluation report notes that in some areas the system was a greater success than in others depending on the level of commitment and capacity of the mentor. As a result, AF concluded that future projects using a mentoring approach should consider the following lessons learnt:

• Invest more resources into training and enthusing mentors • Greater scrutiny of applicants for mentor roles • Define mentor role and tasks from outset • Maintain regular contact with regard to mentor tasks

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

5. Further information and contact

Lynn Warren, Aberdeen Forward

Email: [email protected] www.aberdeenforward.co.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Small steps to change the world Principal delivery agent Action for Sustainable Living Partners various (see text) Project duration 2005 - 2008

1. Project background and operational details

Action for Sustainable Living (AfSL) is a small Manchester-based organisation founded in March 2004 by four entrepreneurs with an interest in sustainable development.

The aim of the organisation is to make local areas in Manchester more sustainable by engaging with residents on an individual and group level to bring about changes in attitude and behaviour. The main outreach tool is home visits to provide households with a comprehensive ‘Eco Check-up’ and personal tailored advice for reducing their environmental impact.

The founding directors used their own savings to employ a part-time member of staff for a 6-month period before obtaining funding in early 2005 to expand the organisation. Initially, AfSL targeted Chorlton-cum-Hardy, a fairly ‘green-minded’ area of Manchester which already had a number of community groups focusing on sustainability issues such as Fair Trade. For the first six months of the project, the part-time Sustainability Advisor was solely responsible for promoting the Eco Check-up service and building up contacts with local community groups.

When the group obtained a three-year grant in April 2005, additional staff were recruited and the project activities were expanded to other Manchester communities (Hulme, Old Trafford and Whalley Range). The funding also allowed AfSL to produce publicity materials and develop other project resources.

The project concept was developed by the four directors who drew on their personal experience of a Manchester-based Local Exchange Trading Scheme (LETS) and working as ethical financial advisors. Advice to householders focuses on a number of ways to reduce environmental impact including waste and recycling, buying local and fair trade goods, energy efficiency and switching to renewable energy suppliers. By providing tailored and locally relevant advice, the AfSL hopes to achieve maximum behaviour change impacts.

Funding The project has received a grant of £150,000 over three years from Defra’s Environmental Action Fund (EAF), which requires that projects secure 50 percent match funding. AfSL has obtained funding for this purpose through the local ‘Community Chest’ fund, which

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

aims to support community activity in deprived areas, to allow more people to become involved in the regeneration of their communities and neighbourhoods.

Although the home visits are free, residents are asked to make a small donation where possible to create an additional income stream. In addition, volunteer hours are counted as in-kind funding towards the match funding.

AfSL has also developed a range of ‘affiliate deals’ with companies such as the Co-operative Bank, Smile online banking and the renewable energy supplier Ecotricity, who make a payment of £15 for every new customer referred from AfSL. Other affiliate partners are being explored to ensure the long-term sustainability and financial viability of AfSL’s activities.

A joint bid to Defra’s Climate Change Challenge Fund was submitted in partnership with Emerge Recycling and Manchester Metropolitan University. AfSL have also recently employed a part-time development officer who will be responsible for fundraising and the development of new projects.

The majority of funding is spent on staff time and office rental.

Partners AfSL works with a wide range of organisations including Manchester City Council, University of Manchester and Manchester Metropolitan University, the Manchester Environmental Education Network (MEEN), Friends of the Earth, Oxfam and local community and voluntary groups such as Chorlton Civic Society, Chorlton Fairtrade Action Group, Hulme Energy Action Team and Old Trafford Community Allotment Group.

Collaboration with other organisations lies at the heart of AfSL’s approach as they provide vital networks to disseminate information and promote AfSL’s aims and objectives. Partners’ support also adds to AfSL’s credibility as a relatively young organisation.

Staffing At present, AfSL employs three full-time Sustainability Advisors, who engage with projects partners, deliver workshops and generally promote AfSL within a specific area of Manchester. Two part-time staff are responsible for administrative support and business development. The four co-founders act as directors on an unpaid basis.

AfSL can also rely on the support from a number of volunteers, some of whom attend on a very regular basis, and assist in all aspects of the organisation from running workshops and events to helping with administration and monitoring impact. Volunteers represent recent graduates and unemployed people seeking work experience and full-time mothers with an interest in sustainability issues.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach AfSL’s main engagement methods are ‘Eco Check-up’ home visits and the delivery of sustainability-themed workshops and events for community organisations.

The three Sustainability Advisors research local organisations in each of their assigned Manchester areas and explore opportunities for engaging with their members and audiences. Some of the groups engaged with have an environmental focus, such as the Hulme Energy Action Team (HEAT) and Chorlton Green Transport Group, but increasingly AfSL is also establishing contacts with church networks and other local networks such as special interest societies. The workshops offered are on the following themes:

• Energy efficiency and renewable energy • Recycling and waste prevention • Transport • Local food • Fairtrade • Clothing • Sustainable holidays

AfSL also attends meetings organised by other groups and links in with local community events. For example, AfSL ran a ‘Local Food’ event for a church group and supported Manchester City Council in its ‘In town without my car’ day in September 2006. Permaculture workshops and community gardening are also on offer. All events are used as an opportunity to promote sustainability messages and recruit householders for Eco Check-Up home visits.

The Eco Check-Ups involve individuals or households booking a home visit with AfSL. Householders are asked to indicate which areas they are particularly interested in, for example green electricity, organic food, nappies, recycling, household products, Fairtrade tea and coffee, green holidays or ethical banking. The Sustainability Consultant is then able to address the specific queries and assist in finding relevant information and tailored solutions. At the end of the visit, householders are asked to make pledges to alter specific aspects of their day-to-day behaviour and whether AfSL may conduct a follow-up phone call to review their progress.

To raise its profile, AfSL organised a Sustainable Fashion Show (see photo) at Manchester’s held at prestigious Bridgewater Hall in April 2006. The event was attended by four hundred visitors, filling the venue to full capacity. A selection of stalls at the event gave people the opportunity to browse and buy ethical clothing and products from local designers. Spectators were also asked to participate in a ‘Clothing

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Amnesty’, contributing items they no longer wanted and choosing 'brand new second hand' outfits for themselves. Contributions to the show were received from companies such as the Body Shop, who donated make-up, and volunteer hairstylists.

AfSL also worked with the universities to develop an Eco-Calendar for Freshers’ Week 2006. In the calendar, each month the focus is on a different sustainability theme, e.g. Fairtrade or green energy. Eco Check-Ups and waste audits are also being offered to halls of residence.

Local schools are another target audience and AfSL offer assemblies and workshops for teachers. Local artists have also run arts workshops with children producing paintings and displays on Fairtrade and recycling themes.

AfSL feel strongly that a community-based approach is effective in achieving behaviour change. This is because all activities are centred on the local community and their needs and interests. The in-home consultations in particular ensure that information and advice is tailored to the requirements, motivations and circumstances of the household or individual resident. Unlike standard communications campaigns, AfSL’s approach does not attempt to tell people how to behave but seeks to enable them to take positive steps in areas where they feel they can make a difference.

Furthermore, AfSL’s non-hierarchical structure allows the community to play an active role in the project. Volunteers are encouraged to be involved in all aspects of the project and AfSL aims to implement a volunteer development programme whereby volunteers take on responsibility for their own projects. Another aspect of this is a volunteer ‘buddying’ system, where lead volunteers mentor and guide newer volunteers. The project thus provides wider social benefits in that it offers residents opportunities to get involved in the project, develop new skills and make a difference to the environment in their area.

As sustainability is an overarching principle, generally some common ground with other organisations can be found, and AfSL therefore tries to reach out to as many community groups as possible. In working with other organisations, AfSL is mindful of their objectives and ensures that activities are geared towards these. For example, where community groups hold cake stalls to raise funds, these can be linked with local food and Fairtrade themes.

Feedback from Sustainability Advisors, volunteers, workshop participants and householders is used to continually update and improve AfSL’s approach and resources. For example, a more formal structure was devised for the home visits following comments from residents who had received an Eco Check-Up.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Target Audience AfSL defines anyone who lives or works in the communities where it operates as its target audience. However, to date, most interest in home visits has come from couples in their mid- to late 30s with children or from single women. The workshops attract a similar target audience.

This audience tends to be pre-disposed to pro-environmental behaviour. However, a street survey conducted by the directors prior to the launch of the project showed that although there was a high degree of environmental awareness, this did not necessarily translate into concrete action.

This survey, carried out in front of a shop in the Chorlton area, provided a useful insight into the attitudes of the target audience and identified a perceived lack of time as a major barrier to behaviour change. AfSL’s approach therefore seeks to address this barrier by focusing on areas where people can easily make different choices before broaching more difficult challenges.

AfSL is exploring ways of engaging other segments of the community such as black and Asian groups by liaising with religious leaders to identify possible in-roads.

Although contact with the target audience tends to be one-off either through home visits or workshops, AfSL seeks follow-up with householders to review progress against pledges, usually three months after the visit, and provide further support where required.

3. Evaluation

As the project is still in its early stages, no evaluation report has been produced to date, except for project progress reports for the funder.

At the outset of the project, it was not possible to monitor impact due to the limited resources, which were necessarily focused on delivery activities. Since the allocation of Defra funding, monitoring and evaluation has become a greater priority and now forms an integral part of the project. Evaluation methods are evolving with the project. The main tools for monitoring the projects impact on individuals’ behaviour are the pledges and the follow-up visits and phone calls. This information is being collated over the course of the project and will be analysed at regular intervals. The Chorlton street survey provides a useful baseline on the attitudes of residents against which to compare these data and future attitudinal surveys.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Because monitoring and evaluation are integral to the project, no specific proportion of staff time or the budget has been allocated against it. However, a record is being kept of the amount of staff or volunteer time spent on each activity, enabling AfSL to make an assessment of the time required for monitoring and evaluation in the future.

A contact rate of 1,200 households per year has been set as a target for the three-year funding period. Similarly, AfSL aims to hold a number of workshops per month with an audience of between 10 and 20 people. A further indicator is the set-up of other projects such as community allotments, local food groups and school arts projects.

4. Outcomes As the project is only in its early stages, it is not been possible to assess the impact as yet.

The project is transferable to any context nationally or internationally, but a key criterion for its success is to remain flexible in its delivery and to adapt engagement techniques to the target community. Another important aspect is to make clear to householders that home visits don’t offer quick-fix solutions, but that the service provided aims to facilitate their behaviour change.

AfSL is hoping to expand its activities nationally in the future if further funding can be secured.

5. Further information and contact Anna O’Sullivan, Sustainability Advisor, Action for Sustainable Living

Email: [email protected] www.afsl.org.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Rethink Rubbish Principal delivery agent Bath and North East Somerset Council Partners various (see text) Project duration ongoing since 2001

1. Project background and operational details

Bath and North East Somerset (BaNES) is a unitary council in the south west of England. The population is 170,200 and includes 1.6 percent from ethnic minority communities, which is well below the national figure of 5.5 percent.

BaNES Council provides a range of waste collection services to its residents, including dry recyclables and kitchen and garden waste. The primary aim of the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign is to encourage residents to fully participate in the council’s recycling service and improving material capture rates, particularly among harder to reach resident groups.

The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign was developed in 1999 with the Rethink Rubbish name and logo. The name was subsequently adopted by the National Waste Awareness Initiative and has been used nationally. The profile of ‘Rethink Rubbish’ is now well established in Bath and North East Somerset with 75percent of respondents recognising the phrase and/or logo.

The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign contains a wide variety of engagement approaches, ranging from leaflet drops, doorstepping promotions, events and roadshows, advertising in the local media to working with schools, universities, housing associations and community groups.

The campaign has evolved over time to target different audiences and address their individual barriers to recycling. To date the campaign has predominantly centred on recycling messages, but in high-performing areas, the focus is shifting to waste reduction.

Funding For the first two years, the campaign was funded through the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme (LTCS) with grants of £75,000 from Biffa Waste Services Ltd and from Cory Environmental Ltd. BaNES Council contributes £35,000 per annum from its core budget. Following the end of LTCS funding, the campaign received a £75,000 communications grant from WRAP.

Other funding sources in the past have included the Lottery’s Community Recycling and Economic Development (CRED) grant scheme, which supported a partnership project between Bath and Bristol Universities, BaNES Council and Envolve in 2004. The CRED grant required match funding, which was provided by BaNES Council and the universities.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

A further £67,000 grant was received through Defra’s Recycling Incentivisation scheme for a partnership project, lead by BaNES Council, between South Gloucestershire Council, North Somerset Council, Bristol City Council and The Recycling Consortium.

The short-term nature of funding streams presents a challenge to the long-term planning and the continuity of communications campaigns. For example, following the end of LTCS funding, the Waste Team was not immediately able to obtain a WRAP grant, which meant that activities had to be scaled back to fit within the Council budget. Similarly, funding for partnership projects means that resources need to be shared and their use is restricted to deliver the objectives of the specific project.

Partners The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign has involved a great amount of partnership working with a range of organisations. Some of these partnerships have been created to deliver specific one-off projects such as the CRED-funded project with Bath and Bristol Universities and Envolve.

BaNES also collaborated with South Gloucestershire Council, North Somerset Council, Bristol City Council and Bristol-based The Recycling Consortium (now Resource Futures) on an incentive scheme project.

The council has also set up the ‘Rethink Rubbish Partnership’ which includes a wide range of organisations based within the area. These include the Children’s Scrapstore, environmental education charity Envolve, the Genesis Furniture Project, the Sofa Project, Somer Community Housing Trust and its associated Sustainability Forum and The Recycling Consortium (TRC - now Resource Futures).

BaNES has also worked with Go Zero (also featured in this report), a community initiative based in the Somerset village of Chew Magna.

The partnerships have been very important in reaching specific audiences, as BaNES has been able to draw on partners’ experience of and expertise in engaging with specific resident groups. Where collaboration has taken place on self-contained projects, each partner was essential in delivering specific aspects of it.

Engaging with community organisations has proved to be the greatest challenge as these often operate on a small scale and have very limited resources and capacity to enter collaborative working arrangements. BaNES seeks to support community groups wherever possible, for example through in-kind contributions such as publicity material, but do not have funding to provide direct financial support.

Staffing The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign is led by one full-time Waste Campaigns Officer, who is supported by a full-time assistant. The latter post was created in December 2005.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

In addition to BaNES staff, staff from partner organisation such as the community furniture recycling projects are involved in the delivery of the campaign.

External contractors were used to develop the campaign branding.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach Ongoing awareness-raising of the services available forms a fundamental and permanent component of the campaign. The campaign has been made up of four main elements:

• Advertising and publicity • Promotional materials • Events and exhibitions • Research and Monitoring

A range of communications and engagement techniques have been used in the past, including leaflet drops, doorstep promotional campaigns and surveys, advertisements in the local press and event attendance.

The main form of advertising is through newspapers and journals, often using free events listings. Radio advertising was also considered but judged to be too expensive. Advertising proved particularly essential for events and the more comprehensive, the better the attendance. This was confirmed in surveys of how people had heard about events.

A significant part of the campaign also focuses on using buses and the refuse vehicles to promote the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ brand, which served as moving billboards with wide coverage. The designs for the buses adapted existing ‘Rethink Rubbish’ advertising. However, a professional public relations company were used to help put across an effective message that was appropriate for a refuse vehicle and involved consultation with the public to ensure the appeal of the messages. The use of such branded vehicles means that the public have a constant reminder that can be used to make direct links with other promotional materials. It is intended to make further use of the images used on refuse vehicles to extend vehicle advertising to other council vehicles.

A wide variety of leaflets were provided for the public to promote the many services on offer including ‘Waste General Services’, ‘Green Box Collection’, ‘What Happens Next?’, refuse and recycling dates, home composting and garden waste and cardboard collections. The main challenge has been to find ways of distributing promotional materials effectively and without them being perceived by residents as junk mail. Information points are useful for reaching those people using these facilities particularly when backed up by a wider range of

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

outlets such as events and exhibitions. Other opportunities for distributing the leaflets have been explored, for example using local channels such as estate agents, community groups, Parish Councils, newsletters and local retail outlets in addition to tailoring the distribution to the most effective audiences and outlets (e.g. issuing the recycling crews with ‘What Happens Next?’ leaflets in order to deal effectively with questions from householders).

Other promotional materials were tested for their effectiveness and the general finding was that ‘less is more.’ A range of materials were designed with this in mind. These included bin stickers to remind the public what could be put in the recycling box, credit card sized cards with contact details and a summary of the services and returnable postcards for people to apply for a recycling box.

All communications materials have been carefully designed to inform residents of the services as effectively as possible and responses from various channels (those distributed to individual properties, enquiries to the Action Line and feedback to the publicity questionnaire) all suggest that they have been effective.

Door-to-door canvassing was undertaken with properties that were identified through participation monitoring as having either not put their box out over the monitoring period (categorised as non-recyclers) or having put their box out only once during this period (low recyclers). Results from the first year of the project found that the weight of material collected per household increased for those rounds that were visited, although evidence of an increase in participation varied from route to route.

An important issue with door-to-door visits identified is maintaining the momentum once the initial enthusiasm has been tapped. This was done by follow-up telephone calls for those who had requested boxes. The telephone calls revealed that where delays had occurred in the delivery of boxes (as a result of delivery problems encountered at the depot at the time), enthusiasm fell quickly and a number of people who had not received their boxes on time were reluctant to participate in the scheme. Door-to-door canvassing proved less effective in areas where there were a high density of flats and shared housing. Such householders proved difficult to canvas individually and future campaign work will look at other ways in which these people can be reached, such as working closely with local management companies.

Exhibitions at events and roadshows form another vital part of the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign. Exhibits were set up at existing events with the intention of targeting those events with a known high footfall and aiming to reach the whole of the Bath and North East Somerset area. The most successful of these was the Bath Flower Show. Activities offered included a home composting bin sale, a can fishing game with prizes for children, free reusable canvas shopping bags and free competitions (e.g. ‘Guess the weight of…’). Visitor numbers and the sale of compost bins and equipment were consistently high at the Bath Flower Show which has now become an established event. Compost sales have been held every 6 months in the 3 main towns in Bath and North East Somerset. The event is used as a promotional activity with literature and information and compost bins for sale.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The Waste Team has also worked with the SOFA Project, The Recycling Consortium and the Sustainability Forum (Somer Community Housing Trust and Envolve) in organising the sale of quality second-hand furniture. The sales are held in local community centres and include exhibitions and giveaways. These kinds of events have proved to be very popular, but the Team have learnt that the success depends on extensive publicity prior to the event and on choosing a suitable location. Working in partnership has meant that cost can be split making this a very cost-efficient way of engaging the community and providing a valuable service.

Bath University Freshers’ Fair has also been used to promote the recycling services to new students and to take box orders. Reusable shopping bags were offered as an incentive to attract students to the stall and proved very popular.

These engagement and communications approaches are complemented by a schools-based education programme, which links in with the national curriculum as well as every-day activities children are likely to experience at home. Targeted schools were given ‘Rethink Rubbish’ assemblies and a follow-up activity, which consists of a postcard to be signed by parents and to declare whether they were recycling or needed a recycling box. All children returning their postcards were rewarded with a recycled pencil and the school with the highest percentage of returns was rewarded with £150.

BaNES also took part in both the WRAP nappy and home composting trials, which provided residents with the opportunity to receive subsidised real nappy kits and home composting equipment.

A recent initiative, shifting the focus from recycling to waste reduction, was ‘Zero Waste Week’, which ran during the last week of October 2006 and challenged residents to only use things that could be reused, recycled or composted and not to produce any residual waste.

All communication and engagement activities are tailored to the local community. Events, such as compost sales, in particular tend to appeal to a specific audience with a defined interest. Targeting at specific location has also proven a useful strategy, particularly for activities such as second-hand furniture sales which are more likely to appeal to low-income residents. Publicity is also tailored to best fit the objectives of the aspect of the campaign. For example, newspaper advertising has been proven as the most effective way of informing the public about forthcoming events.

However, the communications campaign can only be effective if residents are provided with the basic recycling infrastructure to enable them to change their habits. The locally based campaign serves to reinforce messages of the national campaign and vice versa.

Wider social or economic benefits resulting from the campaign are difficult to quantify, but include access to low-cost furniture provided by the reuse projects and potential financial savings through waste minimisation activities.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Target Audience The target audience of the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign are all BaNES residents, totalling approximately 74,000 households.

However, specific resident groups, such as low-performing areas, may be targeted with different activities and engagement techniques and with varying frequency.

Doorstepping campaigns and street surveys are a good mechanism to capture a wide-ranging audience and usually good contact rates have been achieved. Doorstepping and community events also provide an opportunity for the council to answer resident’s queries and establishing face-to-face contact. The use of incentives, such as free reusable shopping bags, has been a useful tool to engage residents.

3. Evaluation

The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign was evaluated by the Waste Team in June 2004. Monitoring had been built into the project from the outset, however, and forms an ongoing activity and is integral to the development of the campaign.

The main monitoring methods are participation monitoring, capture rate monitoring and tonnage recycled.

Participation monitoring was conducted over four continual weeks for a total of twenty rounds. The percentage of householders putting their box out over this period was recorded along with a set-out rate for each week. On both occasions, sixty percent of the rounds selected were areas with low recycling, twenty percent medium and twenty percent high. The rounds were split equally between the more rural Temple Cloud depot and the more urban Bath depot to allow for differences in the nature of the two areas. The cost of the monitoring project was approximately £8,000.

Simultaneously, the weights of material collected for each round were recorded. By calculating the number of properties per round, this enabled the Council to determine the proportion of waste recycled for each round.

The impact of the publicity work is evaluated using an annual questionnaire survey and by monitoring the number of telephone enquiries to the Council’s Action Line in relation to specific initiatives such as composting. The first questionnaire survey in 2004 was sent to a random sample of 1,000 residents, offering a small cash prize incentive, with a return rate of just over thirty percent. The survey is now being sent out annually at a cost of approximately £2,000.

It has been difficult, however, to measure the effectiveness of the bus and refuse vehicle advertising in terms of behaviour change. However, data from the questionnaires confirm that many people have seen the bus adverts. A radio survey revealed that the images on the refuse vehicles were effective in reminding people of less usual items that could be recycled such as foil.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

4. Outcomes The tonnage monitoring in 2004 showed an overall increase in the amount of material collected for recycling, with a peak during the introduction of the plastic bottle and garden waste and cardboard collections. Variations occurred between Bath and Temple Cloud rounds. The percentage of material recycled increased from 23.4 percent in 2002 to a current rate of 37 percent of household waste. This exceeds the council’s government target of 30 percent and BaNES’ own target of 36 percent.

The evaluation report states that the school assembly and parent activity generated good responses with up to 84 percent of children responding and the incentives playing an important part of this. In the second phase of assemblies, nearly 250 box requests were received from nine school visits and anecdotal evidence from the recycling crew suggested a significant increase in recycling in the area directly after a school visit.

The 2004 resident survey gave a useful indication of materials that the public believed they could recycle via the recycling collection scheme. For example, 91 percent correctly stated that paper could be recycled, whereas only 24 were aware that foil was also collected as part of the scheme. Amongst the effectiveness of different forms of publicity, the questionnaire also showed that 25 percent of respondents had seen the vehicle recycling adverts (despite being on only two buses in the area).

Most elements of the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign would be transferable to other areas, but it is vital that any community engagement work bears in mind the specific characteristics of its target audience. BaNES council have benefited from the existence form a range of active community waste sector and sustainability groups such as Envolve, the SOFA project and Go Zero. Their enthusiasm and willingness to cooperate with the council have been an essential factor in making ‘Rethink Rubbish’ a success.

5. Further information and contact

Sarah Raban, Waste Campaigns Officer, Bath and Northeast Somerset Council

Email: [email protected] www.bathnes.gov.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name MAGIC (Manningham & Girlington Inspired Communities) Principal delivery agent Bradford Environmental Action Trust Project duration April 2004 – March 2007

1. Project background and operational details

The ‘Manningham & Girlington Inspired Communities’ (MAGIC) project is an initiative instigated by the Bradford Environmental Trust (BEAT) to work with local community groups and engage them in environmental issues.

In 2003, BEAT submitted an application for funding from the Lottery Community Recycling and Economic Development (CRED) fund with the intention to roll out the MAGIC project within the two inner-city areas of Manningham and Girlington engaging with a wide range of community groups. However, the application was unsuccessful and project activities had to be scaled back to fit with a substantially smaller local funding stream.

The fundamental aims of the project are to increase the capacity of local communities to effectively challenge local waste issues and to raise awareness and develop practical grassroots solutions. It was also planned that the Project Team would be seeking to help residents to establish income-generating projects within the target area. However, this component had to be dropped due to the lack of funding.

Using two existing community centres as its focus, the project involves the local communities through workshops and the recruitment of volunteer community champions. The workshops, predominantly attended by local women, centre on the reuse of textiles and other materials, which are turned into useful household items such as bags and curtains.

The project was inspired by a report published by an environmental health officer from Bradford Metropolitan District Council (Bradford MDC) on engaging ethnic minorities with environmental issues and local environmental quality and waste avoidance. His research of fifty households in the Manningham area showed that there was a considerable lack of knowledge among the Pakistani community on how to engage with the council to secure improvements in local environmental conditions. The project plan also drew on the experience of a similar project in the Coventry area.

Funding The project is funded by Bradford MDC through the community funding unit, which invites applications from community projects bi- annually. The grant awarded to BEAT is £13,000 per annum for three years.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

BEAT originally intended to deliver the project with a wider range of activities with funding from CRED. As BEAT’s funding application was unsuccessful, the project had to be scaled back to fit with the Bradford MDC grant available and the amount of staff time this would fund.

As an environmental trust, BEAT relies entirely on grant funding, but is currently seeking opportunities for income-generating projects such as a carbon off-set scheme linking in with the ‘Forest of Bradford’ project the Trust has been running since 1998.

Approximately ninety percent of the funding for the MAGIC project is spent on officer time, with the remainder covering the cost of materials used in the reuse workshops.

BEAT is currently seeking funding from agencies such as Yorkshire Forward for a variety of projects which may also provide an opportunity to extend the MAGIC project, which is likely to end after funding runs out in March 2007 unless further funds can be secured.

Partners There are no partners directly involved in the delivery of the MAGIC project.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The emphasis of the MAGIC project is on building the capacity of local groups to identify and address waste issues on a local level. The specific objectives of the project are to:

• develop community-based skills and knowledge of waste issues • identify local waste issues not adequately addressed • support the development of new, community-led schemes to reuse, recycle and compost material • support improvements to local infrastructure (e.g. adopted bring sites, composting initiatives, kerbside recycling services) • improve participation in existing reuse, recycling and composting programmes • build effective communications within target communities and between these partnerships and local recycling service providers • empower marginalised sections of target communities (e.g. through mosques and community meeting places) to take action on local waste problems

The project delivers a number of events and activities with partners in the area. Due to the limited funding and staff time available, activities have focused on delivering weekly workshops at two community centres in the project area and working with a limited number of community groups including the Girlington Community Centre, the Bangladeshi Youth Organisation (BYO), the Council of Mosques and the Bradford Community Environmental Project (BCEP).

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Prior to their funding application, BEAT established strong contacts within the target areas to garner support for the project and to assess the best way forward in delivering awareness-raising activities. This included:

• publication and dissemination of ‘Bradford’s Little Green Recycling Guide’ to communities throughout the District • ‘Trash Cam’ - a photographic competition for the public organised by BEAT and supported by the Bradford Telegraph and Argus • presentation of a draft strategy for raising waste awareness in the District to council officers • production of a proposal to introduce recycling credits for recycling operators in the District • establishment of the Bradford Waste Forum for organisations from all sectors

Initial outreach activities took the form of targeted small group meetings, communications through faith groups and other community organisations. These groups were chosen because they were already established and are based at local community centres which are used by a large number of local residents.

The key success factor in working with the community groups is to offer activities and services, which are valued by the community centres and their users and would not be provided otherwise, such as the reuse workshops with the Girlington Community Centre. BEAT have also been instrumental in facilitating the improvement of the immediate environment of the BYO community centre. The centre had been affected by overflowing storm water drains for some time, and the Council found it difficult to tackle the problem because of lack of cooperation from residents who parked their cars on the road on cleansing days. BEAT organised a communications campaign to draw residents’ attention to the problem which was greeted with a very positive response and resulted in the majority of drains being cleaned on the next cleansing day. This helped establish a relationship of trust between BEAT, BYO and the local community.

BEAT is also assisting in a current consultation on the proposed development of a local park. The council’s Parks Department requested to use BEAT’s workshops to disseminate information about the consultation to allow as many residents as possible to get involved.

The project activities also includes providing advice to the Bradford MDC Recycling Education Officer and providing environmental education activities and workshops for schools in the Manningham and Girlington areas such as a visit to a waste treatment centre and reuse workshops to make musical instruments from reuse materials.

In collaboration with community partners, BEAT also instigated the installation of Islamic Relief textile collection banks at a number of locations such as mosques. Plans for introducing collection points for other materials such as paper could not be implemented due to safety concerns.

In partnership with the council, BEAT has also developed translated versions of a range of council recycling communications literature such as the ‘Be proud of your environment’ and ‘What to do with your waste’ leaflets. Using community volunteers, the leaflets were

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

translated into the local community languages Bengali and Urdu. This is a particularly important aspect to BEAT’s work, as many community centre users are women, who are not fluent or literate in English.

This kind of local work is crucial to complement national or district-wide communications campaign, which can be seen as anonymous by specific communities and may by-pass others altogether. The face-to-face interaction provided by BEAT is a very effective way to disseminate information and acts to create peer pressure.

The project also delivers wider social and environmental benefits in that it empowers residents to take action to improve their own environment by equipping them with knowledge of the local institutional set-up and ensuring access to information about local authority services.

Target Audience The project’s target area is covered by four wards, all of which are among the 10% most deprived in the country, according to the Government’s Index of Multiple Deprivation.

In 2002 a report was published exploring the attitudes of members of the Pakistani community to environmental quality issues and waste avoidance in Manningham. The research was carried out by an environmental health officer from Bradford MDC, who was himself a longstanding member of that community, and was based on a survey of 50 households living on and around Oak Lane, an area identified in a previous questionnaire of all the District’s residents as the worst ‘Grot Spot’ in Bradford.

The report showed that although local environmental quality was of great concern, only a minority of people had ever complained through official channels. Virtually no pressure had been brought to bear through newer, community-based initiatives such as the Area Panel and Neighbourhood Forum. The most common reason cited for not complaining was that respondents didn’t know how to complain or that they thought it made no difference.

Also in 2002, BEAT commissioned a survey of households in a range of deprived areas of the District. The aim was to establish some trends in people’s attitudes to waste issues and their awareness of what actions they might take to reduce their environmental impact. The findings confirmed those of the Oak Lane study, i.e. that awareness of waste issues was very low in Manningham and that residents were recycling very little. The suggestion was that this is due to a combination of lack of access to facilities and a lack of knowledge of the services available. The research also indicated, however, that residents felt that they should be recycling more and that there was a high level of willingness to separate recyclable materials at source. People in Manningham also seemed particularly willing to share responsibility for waste reduction with the Council, although how this should be achieved was greeted with uncertainty. This suggested a good opportunity for waste education work to take root in the area.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

BEAT’s workshops are attended by 20 to 25 people per week, many of whom return to the workshops on a regular basis. The workshop activities were tailored to suit the cultural predispositions of the target audience. For example, the reuse of textiles is an accepted practice among the community and provided a way of linking creative activities with dissemination of information about recycling.

3. Evaluation BEAT produces quarterly and annual reports on activities carried out for Bradford MDC, but has no plans to produce a final evaluation report at the end of the project due to the limited funds available. Quarterly reports cover the number of activities delivered and the officer time spent.

Extensive research into the waste behaviour and attitudes of the target audience (see the above section) was undertaken by BEAT prior to the start of the project. However, this was funded separately through the discontinued Landfill Tax Credit Scheme. Because this funding stream is no longer available and the project needs to be focused on project delivery, BEAT are not in a position to follow up the survey to establish whether a change in attitudes and behaviour has taken place as a result of the project.

4. Outcomes

The project is delivering regular workshops for two local community centres and three schools in the area, which reach more than 25 people per week. The project has also succeeded in recruiting more than five volunteers to support the project and who are likely to continue the activities after the project has officially ended.

The project has also resulted in the installation of three bring sites for textiles, providing the local community with access to new recycling facilities.

Through continued face-to-face contact, residents have received information about locally available recycling and reuse services such as bulky waste collections and furniture re-sales and have been encouraged to participate in these. BEAT feel that the project has had a significant impact on residents’ awareness of recycling and waste issues.

5. Further information and contact

Janice Frost, Bradford Environmental Action Trust

Email: [email protected] www.beat.org.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name/Principal delivery agent Blooming Bottoms Project duration ongoing since 2002

1. Project background and operational details

Blooming Bottoms is a non-profit cooperative, promoting the use of washable nappies. The enterprise was founded in 2002 as a result of the premature birth of the founders’ first child and their experience of using real nappies, which they found not to fit babies with a below average birth weight. In addition, at the time there were no real nappy suppliers in Northern Ireland and no funding was available to support the kind of nappy schemes that were already operating in England.

The aim of Blooming Bottoms is to promote the use of real nappies, which are easy and convenient to use and are competitively priced so that parents from all income groups can afford them.

Unlike real nappy schemes elsewhere, which ask parents to pledge the use of real nappies before their baby is born, Blooming Bottoms advocate the use of real nappies after the first four months as nappies offer a better fit and are also more convenient to use by this time. Research undertaken by Blooming Bottoms with parents had shown that a large majority of parents (70%) who had purchased reusable nappy packs, often at a cost up to £200, prior to birth and used them during the first few months stopped using them after three months because of difficulties encountered.

Funding Now in its fourth year, Blooming Bottoms relies entirely on self-generated funds to run the business. An initial £83,000 grant from the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme was used as start-up funding. Of this, £60,000 was used to purchase equipment and stock for the laundry service and £23,000 was spent on revenue costs, staff salaries and to produce promotional materials.

By expanding its services to include eco-friendly and fairtrade foods and household products as well as toiletries, the business has now become self-sustaining.

A funding application for £7,500 was submitted, however, to the Awards for All fund. If successful, this grant will be used to develop a portable display stand with samples of nappies.

Partners Blooming Bottoms do not maintain any formal partnerships with other organisations, but works close with the maternity units of local hospitals, SureStart centres and the local development department of Belfast City Council.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Staffing Currently, Blooming Bottoms employs four part-time staff, who each work approximately twenty hours per week. The founders act as voluntary director and nappy advisor respectively.

The team are supported by up to thirty active volunteers, who tend to be women on maternity leave.

Friends and personal contacts have in the past helped with the graphic design of promotional material.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach In its first year, Blooming Bottoms offered a nappy laundry service and, as a way to promote the new business, set up a free reusable nappy scheme at Belfast’s largest maternity unit. This approach was partially successful, but uptake of reusable nappies by mother depended greatly on the support of the ward sister. Where they were biased towards disposable nappies, less than ten percent of mothers started using reusables. In other wards, uptake was up to ninety percent.

Blooming Bottoms also produced posters and flyers to promote their service, but these were found to be far less effective than direct contact. A personal approach is therefore considered essential.

This was achieved by visiting maternity units across Northern Ireland, ante-natal classes, mother and toddler groups, breast-feeding support groups, health visitors and midwives as well as individual customers. Blooming Bottoms also has a regular stand at Belfast’s Farmers Market. This generates an average of 300 enquiries per month. Some of these predominantly seek advice, which Blooming Bottoms are willing to give as part of their service.

Blooming Bottoms also visit festivals across England such as the Big Green Gathering, where parents can test reusable nappies.

Blooming Bottom’s approach is different from other nappy schemes in that it advocates a less ‘militant’ and guilt-free approach to using real nappies. As their research has shown, some parents are more likely to take up real nappies when their children are four months and over and reusable nappies are more convenient to use. In these cases, retention rates are much higher with 82 percent of parents using reusable nappy full-time until potty training. The cost of reusable nappies also drops considerably after the first four months as there are fewer changes in nappy size required. This makes delaying the use of real nappies a more attractive option for lower-income families.

Blooming Bottoms also actively encourages home washing or using a laundry service for the first two to three months only, while parents get used to using real nappies. Again, this represents a much more cost-effective option.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

An inclusive approach, which offers all parents the opportunity to use real nappies is also vital to Blooming Bottoms. An important factor in this is the competitive pricing of nappy packs, which start from £49 for a Four Months plus pack compared to an average cost of £200 for the more standard Birth to Potty Training packs. Being a non-profit cooperative, Blooming Bottoms deliberately charge a comparatively low mark-up, which benefits parents on lower incomes. A ‘Partnership Deal’ is also offered whereby better-off families can donate a real nappy starter pack to a family of asylum seekers.

Other social benefits that the Blooming Bottoms bring to Belfast are family-friendly employment opportunities and a programme to offer six-month training placements to twelve mothers, who have become long-term unemployed as a result of post-natal depression.

Target Audience Blooming Bottoms target audience are all parents and carers across Northern Ireland, but particularly low-income families. As parents, with a currently four-month old baby, the founders use their personal knowledge and experience to promote the service and are able to respond to parents’ concerns and needs.

The other elements of the business appeal to environmentally and ethically aware consumers, who wish to reduce the impact of their lifestyles.

3. Evaluation

In 2002, Blooming Bottoms carried out a baseline survey of real nappy use in Belfast. This entailed a random survey of approximately 300 people with children under the age of five visiting a local shopping centre over a one-week period. Volunteers asked respondents whether they had ever used reusable nappies. Out of the sample of 300, only four responded positively.

In the most recent repeat survey in low-income and highly-segregated areas of Belfast, fifteen and twelve parents reported that they had or were still using reusable nappies, respectively.

A customer feedback survey is also undertaken, whereby all new customers are contacted three and nine months after they first purchased a nappy pack. This is to establish whether they are still using reusables and to discuss any problems and offer advice.

Feedback at Mother and Toddler or breastfeeding support group meetings is also used to further tailor the service and advice offered.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

4. Outcomes

A key ingredient in succeeding to make Blooming Bottoms a viable self-sustaining social enterprise has been the personal dedication and commitment of its founders.

In terms of continued support and loyalty from its customers, the highly personal and individual approach and a willingness to provide support and advice rather than just a sales service is considered vital. The personal knowledge and experience of Blooming Bottoms staff is also essential in establishing trust and ensuring a willingness on the part of parents to test reusable nappies in the first place.

An inventive business strategy, focusing on the diversification of the business, has enabled Blooming Bottoms to become self-financing.

The business model is highly replicable and transferable and Blooming Bottoms are currently exploring the possibility for community- based franchise model.

5. Further information and contact

Blooming Bottoms

Email: [email protected] www.bloomingbottoms.org

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name/Principal delivery agent Cae Post Recycling Ltd. Partners Powys County Council Project duration ongoing since 1986

1. Project background and aims

Cae Post is a recycling enterprise providing training and employment for people with learning disabilities, who would not otherwise be able to work. Cae Post was originally established in 1986 as a residential small-holding project providing accommodation and employment to up to five adults with learning difficulties. Later this was developed into a garden maintenance service, followed by the introduction of a printer cartridge collection and Christmas tree recycling service. Processing recyclables was identified as a growth sector into which the enterprise could expand.

In 2001, Cae Post entered into a 15-year partnership contract with Powys County Council. Currently, Powys County Council (PCC) collects dry recyclables, including paper, cardboard, textiles, steel and aluminium cans and plastic bottles from approximately 30,000 households. The recyclables are transferred to Cae Post’s commercial-scale materials recovery facility in Welshpool, where they are sorted and baled by trained staff.

Cae Post also provides a recycling collection service for 40 schools and a number of local businesses, as well as 30 bring sites, using their own fleet.

A pilot project to provide rural households with regular multi- material kerbside collections, involving 4,500 households, was rolled out in three different areas in Montgomeryshire in 2005. In early November 2006, the ‘Cleanstream’ service was extended across Powys. It is planned to include kitchen waste once approved recycling facilities become available.

Cae Post’s overall aim is to achieve social inclusion of people with varying degrees of learning disabilities by providing meaningful jobs. The collection and sorting of dry recyclables is a means to achieve this and simultaneously delivers a valuable service to the wider community. As a result, the behaviour change goals of Cae Post are two-fold. The primary objective is to support people with learning disabilities and develop their confidence and sense of self-worth and to demonstrate that people with learning disabilities can make a meaningful contribution to their community. Secondly, with the growth of its recycling operations, Cae Post’s objective is also to involve

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

all residents served by its collections in recycling and waste prevention both to support its operations and to achieve environmental improvements.

Funding Cae Post received a grant of £1million in 2001 from the Big Lottery Fund. In addition, it has received funding from the European Union Economic & Social Fund. PCC provided in-kind funding by upgrading a redundant building which is now being used for Cae Post’s operations. The ‘Cleanstream’ collection service also received start-up funding from the Wales Development Agency and the Welsh Assembly. The sale of recyclate also provides income, which is reinvested into the business.

The expansion of the ‘Cleanstream’ collection service and processing capacity is a major step towards securing the long-term financial viability of Cae Post. The input of local businessman Richard Marsh, who gave his services on a voluntary basis for more than two years and is now the company director, has been vital in making Cae Post a business able to compete with the processing rates of larger commercial waste recyclers.

Partners Cae Post works with a variety of partners reflecting its two aims of social inclusion and increased recycling. For example, Cae Post has contracts with PCC Social Services to provide 30 paid sessions per week for 24 volunteer placements for adults with learning disabilities. It also works closely with the Shaw Trust through the Workstep, the Government's supported employment programme.

Another important partner is PCC’s waste management section and the 15-year partnership contract is crucial in ensuring the long-term future of Cae Post.

Staffing Currently Cae Post has approximately 60 staff. Of these, 24 are supported volunteers, who work one day per week for four hours, predominantly in the materials sorting operations. A further 27 staff, including the collection crews and the management team, have permanent part-time contracts and work over 16 hours per week. Two volunteers provide their service to Cae Post for free, assisting with administrative and other tasks.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach Cae Post’s engages with residents by providing a dry recyclables kerbside collection service throughout Powys, including rural areas, and by providing employment opportunities for local people with learning disabilities.

Residents are provided with regular updates about the service via leaflets and the quarterly Cae Post newsletter. The latter gives details of recycling performance, developments at Cae Post such as the arrival of a new vehicle fleet, visits to the Cae Post recycling centre by other community groups from the UK and abroad and the achievements of staff and volunteers.

Cae Post staff members also give talks at local schools and events using display booths (pictured below) showing the recycling process. Visitors, including local community groups and schools, are invited to tours of the Cae Post centre as a way of demonstrating the positive impact Cae Post has on the life of its employees.

Cae Post work closely with the Waste Education Officer at PCC. This included a recent six-month challenge for Powys schools to increase their recycling efforts.

With the start of the new rural kerbside collection service, Cae Post will have two Community Liaison Officers working within the communities to help with any issues householders may have concerning both the service and recycling in general. They will be available to give advice over the telephone or conduct home visits where requested.

Prior to the roll-out of the service, a doorstepping campaign is being undertaken to inform residents of the new service and establish a baseline of attitudes towards recycling. Collection crew also carry out canvassing during their rounds and are on hand to answer residents’ queries. Staff are recruited to ensure they have an adequate level of ability to undertake these tasks.

Cae Post consider that a grass-roots approach is essential to involve the community in recycling and to support the social inclusion aims of the organisation.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Apart from the environmental benefits achieved through recycling, the project offers great social inclusion benefits by creating meaningful employment for people with learning disabilities.

Target Audience Cae Post’s target audience are all Powys residents served by the kerbside, schools and business collections.

3. Evaluation

The impact of the enterprise is measured predominantly by weighing the amount of recyclables collected and processed. For the previous year, tonnages collected were as follows:

Percentage of waste Year to date Tonnes collected produced in PCC 2006 November 310.83 9%

2006 October 285.33 7%

2006 September 258.80 10%

2006 August 307.68 8%

2006 July 230.04 8%

2006 June 265.33 9%

2006 May 290.25 9%

2006 April 262.33 8%

2006 March 260.66 8%

2006 February 213.16 7%

2006 January 261.63 8%

2005 December 226.94 7%

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The amount of waste sent to landfill after processing is also monitored to provide an understanding of both the quality of the materials received from householders and of the overall efficiency of the operation. Recyclates sold to reprocessors is also measured.

Month Amount (tonnes) 2006 October 257.82 2006 September 209.23 2006 August 268.48 2006 July 216.93 2006 June 234.22 2006 May 257.32 2006 April 226.21 2006 March 261.59 2006 February 203.41 2006 January 251.78 2005 December 167.92 2005 November 300.98 Total 2855.89

During the trial for the Cleanstream rural kerbside collection service, electronically tagged collection boxes were used to monitor the recycling performance of individual households. This will be continued once the service is rolled out and will enable Cae Post to identify areas of low recycling performance to be targeted by the Community Liaison Officers and through communications campaigns.

4. Outcomes

The Cae Post business model has proven itself highly cost-effective and able to compete with bigger waste businesses. The existing facilities have a capacity for processing 5,000 – 6,000 tonnes of recyclables per year.

The approach is transferable; however, scaling up of the operation would be likely to conflict with the requirement of providing an adequate place of employment for adults with learning disabilities.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

5. Further information and contact

Phillip Williams, Business Development Manager

Email: [email protected] www.caepost.co.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Recycling Champions Project Principal delivery agent The Centre for Environmental Initiatives Partners London Borough of Sutton, LM Barry Textile Merchants Project duration April 2005 – December 2007

1. Project background and operational details

The Centre for Environmental Initiatives (CEI) is an independent community organisation, registered as a charity, run by local people with a specific interest in the environment and sustainable development. Since being founded in 1987, the CEI has played a central role in the establishment of range of local environmental projects and has been providing valuable services to the local community including:

• providing resources; meeting space, access to computers, internet and other office equipment, library and research materials, advice and support, to local people - from its base in Carshalton

• enabling active participation and volunteering within local communities, recognising that there is not a single "community", but a diverse range of communities which is reflected this in the CEI’s approach

• providing both staff, volunteer resources and technical help to develop and support projects within the community

• promoting the ideas of environmentally sustainable development locally through public meetings and events, talks, presentations, workshops, press releases, articles in various publications, flyers, leaflets, etc.

One of CEI’s current projects is the ‘Recycling Champions’ programme, which aims to encourage residents of the London Borough of Sutton (LB Sutton) to participate in the kerbside recycling collection service provided by the council, start home composting and collect recyclable clothes and shoes to benefit local schools and community groups through the income generated.

The project originated with the Sutton Environment Network which is run by CEI in partnership with Sutton Council, a group made up of local residents, the LB Sutton recycling officer and the local MP. The networks’ Consumerism and Waste Working Group identified contamination of recycling bins as a major barrier to improving the borough’s recycling rate, which had not been effectively addressed by previous approaches. A more long-term education project was therefore required to achieve the behaviour change required.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Funding The CEI is supported by the London Borough of Sutton, the Department for Education and Skills, the Big Lottery Fund, Sutton Primary Care Trust, Transport for London, Sutton Early Years Development and Childcare Partnership, Sutton College of Learning for Adults and the Safer Sutton Partnership.

The ‘Recycling Champions’ project is funded through the Big Lottery’s Community Recycling and Economic Development (CRED) scheme with approximately £115,000 over 2.75 years. This funding is matched by LB Sutton’s Waste Management Service, the Early Years Development and Childcare Partnership and income from the new textile collection service. The CEI did not experience any problems in securing the match funding, as there is a long-standing partnership with LB Sutton.

The current programme will end when the funding runs out. However, the CEI is exploring social enterprise options in waste collection that could be run in conjunction with targeted education and awareness raising work.

Partners LB Sutton’s Waste Management Team is CEI’s main partner in the ‘Recycling Champions’ project, as well as a long-standing financial supporter of the CEI. This partnership is considered essential to the success of the project and ensures that the project complements the local authority’s waste management and education services.

LB Sutton’s Early Years Development and Childcare service team have also contributed to the project funding and provide input when required.

Other essential partners include textile processors, who purchase the textiles collected, and the schools and community groups where the textile banks are housed.

Staffing CEI employs five full-time staff and 4 part-time staff in total and the ‘Recycling Champions’ project is run by a full-time dedicated Project Coordinator, who was recruited in July 2005.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach There are three ways in which the ‘Recycling Champions’ engages the local community:

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

• schools and community group based waste education • providing collections of used textiles and shoes for schools and community groups • recruiting ‘Recycling Champions’ to promote recycling and home composting

The CEI delivers waste education assemblies, workshops and talks in the participating schools (as well as community groups), which engage the whole school through fun activities, and link waste specific issues with general environmental care such litter picks or the healthy schools agenda. Home composting is also introduced and linked with wildlife gardening.

At each school, children are given a recycling survey, which they are asked to take home to be completed by their parents. The survey aims to establish existing waste and recycling habits and to draw parents’ attention to waste issues. Recycled pencils are offered as incentives to children to return the questionnaires.

Local schools and community groups are also offered clothes and textile bins to be placed at their premises. The items collected are sold on to textile processors LM Barry Textiles and the proceeds from the sale are passed on to the schools and groups as an incentive to continue their participation in the scheme.

There are currently 45 pairs of collection bins, which have a capacity of 25 kg each. Initially, larger collection containers were proposed, but due to concerns over potential contamination of these, smaller bins were chosen, which are emptied on a more frequent basis.

Recycling Champions are being recruited from all parts of the local community, including school children, teenagers, job-seekers, families and community groups. School children joining the project through their school or after school club receive ‘Recycling Champion’ packs with useful tips, free goods and competitions.

To attract older volunteers, the ‘Recycling Champion’ project is linked in with the Millennium Volunteers scheme also run by CEI, which targets 16 to 24 year olds. To date, the CEI has recruited 38 volunteers, including participants in the MV scheme who have received recognition for their contribution.

Many of the champions encourage residents to recycle and home compost through doorstepping campaigns in addition to other promotional activities such as events. These also provided a valuable opportunity to distribute 824 free composting bins and encourage home composting.

The champions provide valuable feedback, as a result of which the CEI introduced a standard script for champions to work from when they visit residents.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

By involving local residents, schools and community groups, ownership of the project is conferred to the local community, which is likely to increase their receptiveness to the messages. Other schools-based waste education projects have shown that working with children is an effective method for engaging with parents. Furthermore, using volunteers is also a cost-effective way of engagement, as this greatly decreases the need for staff salaries, which would otherwise have to be secured, although these volunteers still need support from a paid member of staff.

The project also delivers wider benefit to the community by linking waste and recycling to events, which enhance the local environment such as litter picks and the Environmental Fair.

Target Audience The primary target audience are seven wards within the Sutton local authority area (St Helier, Wandle Valley, The Wrythe, Wallington North, Beddington South, Carshalton South and Clockhouse and Sutton Central)

These areas were chosen as a result of a waste stream analysis cross-referenced with ACORN data carried out by LB Sutton in 2003. This showed that ‘striving’ households concentrated in these areas were doing less well at recycling than other parts of the borough. The analysis also identified the types of recyclable materials that were being thrown away and could be targeted as part of a communication campaign and community engagement project.

Working with schools was identified as a relatively easy first step to engaging with the community whilst other methods such as doorstepping by champions were being developed. CEI are also in the process of exploring innovative approaches, such as recycling pub quizzes, to spread the message and recruit more champions.

CEI research has indicated that children’s ‘pester power’ is a useful tool in communicating with parents who are less well informed and less well educated. It can provide these parents with a useful source of information in a format they feel they can understand and use – simple information and practical steps which can, and does, result in behaviour change.

For example, a suggestion made by one primary school parent was that projects that the children do at home with parental support are particularly important. Many less well educated parents find it difficult to help their children with formal curriculum subjects such as maths, but are more confident about, and enjoy, helping them with a project where they can learn together.

In working with schools, the enthusiasm of teachers and other staff are essential in developing successful partnerships and long-term working relationships. Where recruitment of champions is concerned, CEI have found that it is vital to influence community leaders. By gaining their buy-in and support, it is much easier to influence other community members.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

3. Evaluation

There primary indicators for the success of the ‘Recycling Champions’ project are:

• the tonnage of textiles and shoes collected • the number of champions recruited • the number of new compost bins used • participation in the LB Sutton kerbside recycling scheme

These indicators were chosen at the outset of the project to reflect the primary aims and targets of the initiative. Targets for the project included to deliver waste education to 30 schools (equivalent to 5,000 school children) in Sutton and targeting 10,000 households with the aim of increasing recycling participation and reducing contamination. However, at the time, no indicators were selected to show the impact on waste prevention, which the Project Coordinator feels could have been beneficial.

A baseline participation survey was carried out prior to the start of the project and is being followed-up by two further surveys. A mid- project survey was carried out recently and a final survey will be carried out in time for the end of the project in December 2007.

Initially, it was intended to examine tonnage data on a ward by ward basis to ascertain any increases in recycling, but it transpired that the collection rounds did not correspond with the ward areas.

4. Outcomes

Since November 2005 the Recycling Champions service has worked with 25 schools and colleges and 20 community groups and nurseries, providing 38 assemblies and 142 workshops to over 8,000 children.

An additional 22.5 tonnes of clothes and shoes have been collected using the new free mini-textile bins, raising almost £1,500 for the schools and community groups.

5. Further information and contact

Michael Dees, Project Manager, Recycling Champions, The Centre for Environmental Initiatives Email: [email protected] www.ecolocal.org.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Pilands Wood Recycling and Waste Minimisation Project Principal delivery agent Eastleigh Borough Council Partners Eastleigh Borough Council/ Project Integra Project duration May 2006 – May 2007

1. Project background and operational details

The idea for the Pilands Wood Recycling and Waste Minimisation scheme came into being approximately three years ago, but the project was not realised until this year, when it could be fitted into the council’s work programme.

Pilands Wood is a 610-household estate housing approximately 1,400 residents, in the south of Eastleigh Borough. The estate is made up predominantly of two to three bedroom houses and there are a large number of children aged between 9 and 12 years. Only ten percent of residents are owner-occupiers with the majority renting from four housing associations.

The area is characterised by a high unemployment rate and there are many cases of residents with learning difficulties. Anti-social behaviour has also been a problem in the area.

The estate has a general shop, a church and a large community centre (see photo), which was opened in 2002 and is run by the Pilands Wood Community Association.

Eastleigh Borough Council provides an alternate-weekly kerbside recycling service collecting paper and cardboard (including catalogues and junk mail), food and drink cans and plastic bottles. Thirty flats on the estate share residual waste bins, but currently do not benefit from the recycling service due to high levels of contamination. It is intended to extend the service to these households by the end of the project.

Recycling participation among Pilands Wood residents averages at about ten percent less than the rest of the borough and the quality of recyclables collected is frequently very poor. Contamination ranges from unclean or incorrect materials to large amounts of residual waste being placed in the recycling containers. The council’s overall impression is that some households are trying to participate in the recycling scheme, but do not have sufficient knowledge, whereas others do not regard recycling to be of any importance.

The objectives of the project are to: • improve the recycling rate within the area so that it matches or exceeds the current average rate in the borough • create awareness and better understanding of waste minimisation and recycling • make a change in waste behaviour throughout the entire community

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

• ensure that each property in the area has access to the council’s recycling service • introduce the community to other waste minimisation measures

Specifically, the project aims to increase residents’ understanding of the recycling process and ‘closing the loop’, the items that are collected as part of the kerbside service and through other recycling facilities and to offer support, advice and solutions to those who find recycling difficult to manage.

The project was not conceived as a pilot project but will provide a model for other, less resource intensive behaviour change projects in other areas of the borough.

The behaviour change methods are based around educating and enabling residents to participate in recycling and other waste reduction measures. Engagement techniques are based around delivering education through a range of networks, door-knocking and a ‘traffic light’ recycling monitoring scheme.

Funding The project is funded by Hampshire County Council and Eastleigh Borough Council, which contribute £30,000 and £10,000 respectively. The main expenditure is a full-time project officer, amounting to approximately £25,000 per year.

The bulk of the funding for the project had been secured about three years prior to the start of the project, but it proved difficult to obtain the additional funding to recruit a suitable officer to deliver the project.

The current project activities are expected to cease with the end of the funding. However, it is expected that some community engagement will continue after the end of the project in May 2007 depending on the level of the core budget allocation the team is able to obtain.

Partners The project officer has enlisted the support of a range of organisations. These include the four main housing associations providing housing on the estate, local area committees, and the Hampshire County Council community development officer. Advice was also sought from police as in the past vandalism and anti-social behaviour have occasionally prevented the collection of waste and recyclables from the estate.

The collaboration with Pilands Wood Community Centre is particularly instrumental in the engagement approach in that it provides a focus for the project activities.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The project team have been less successful in bringing on board other local organisations such as church groups, which is thought to be due to a lack of interest in recycling on their part.

Staffing The project is delivered by a full-time dedicated project officer and additional support is provided by the Research & Development Officer, twenty percent of whose time is allocated to this project.

A student was also recruited on a voluntary work placement to assist the project officer in doorstepping the estate.

Furthermore, the partners have been involved in the delivery of project activities. For example, the community centre recently organised a Fun Day, which was supported by Hampshire County Council, the housing associations and other agencies.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The project approach is based on educating residents about recycling and waste prevention and providing hands-on advice.

The main element of this is a visible presence on the estate for the duration of the project and providing opportunities for residents to ask questions and seek advice close to their own homes. This is achieved by basing the project officer at Pilands Wood Community Centre, where she can be contacted by residents at any time.

The project also offers fortnightly ‘Recycling Surgery’ drop-in sessions. Once a week, the community centre hosts a toy library. Occasionally, Swap Days are held at the centre, where residents can exchange reusable items. ‘Nappucino’ mornings are also held to encourage new mothers to use real nappies and to provide them with an opportunity to socialise with other parents living on the estate.

A particularly memorable event was a recent Fun Day, which included a recycled fashion show, where 8 to 13 year-olds created outfits of reused clothing. The success of the event extended beyond raising awareness of recycling because it also provided children with an opportunity to have fun and be imaginative and instilled in their parents a sense of pride. A measure of the success of this event was the extent to which the fashion show continued to be talked about on the estate long after the event.

Waste education lessons for children are offered via two local schools and the project team are developing activities on waste and recycling for two pre-schools and a nursery in the area. Possibilities for involving further education colleges are also being explored.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

A doorstepping survey was undertaken to assess residents’ awareness of waste issues and the facilities provided on the estate and to establish their current participation in recycling. In September 2006, a ‘traffic light system’ for monitoring recycling performance was rolled out. All kerbside recycling bins were fitted with stickers on the inside of the lid (to ensure confidentiality), which show three sets of traffic lights. For a four month period, recycling bins were inspected every fortnight to assess the quality of the materials placed in them and to determine the level of contamination. The findings are recorded and residents are given feedback via the traffic light sticker, which is marked according to the three ratings: green for correct recyclables, amber for ‘incorrect recyclables’ (e.g. yogurt pots, Tetrapaks etc) and red for ‘highly contaminated’ (e.g. food waste, nappies, etc). Information on how to improve their recycling performance is also provided. Households failing to improve over the course of the monitoring period are visited by the project officer and offered personal recycling and waste minimisation advice. The concept was initially developed by Portsmouth City Council, but adapted for this project.

The project is distinct from standard communications campaigns in that it is highly targeted at the location and the specific challenges faced by the residents of the area. For example, all publicity materials are branded with a ‘Recycle for Pilands’ slogan rather than the standard ‘Recycle for Hampshire’ branding.

The project team also feel that residents have responded well to the project because the intensive and targeted approach instils the sense that the council is taking an interest in its residents. This is particularly important as the area often receives negative publicity in the local press. Improvements in the area’s recycling performance are therefore used to highlight achievements and to portray the estate and its residents in a more positive light.

Face-to-face contact with residents is also an important success factor of the approach. Because the project officers spends several hours at the community centre every day, residents have become familiar with her and a level of trust has been established.

The project also delivers wider social benefits in that it enhances residents’ self-esteem and provides opportunities to engage with the council and socialise with other residents. The project team feels that a greater pride in the area will have a positive impact on other issues such as fly-tipping, particularly in view of the no-side waste policy adopted by Eastleigh Borough Council.

Target Audience The project’s target audience are all residents of the Pilands Wood estate. The estate was chosen because of its below average recycling performance and the perception that Pilands Wood residents are ‘hard-to-reach’. Targeting this area would show where the council had been going wrong in the past with its communication and demonstrate whether other approaches might be more effective. Furthermore, because the area forms one collection round, the impact of the project would be relatively easy to assess and attribute.

The doorstep survey achieved a 60 percent contact rate with nine percent of households completing the survey questionnaire.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

It has also been relatively easy to engage with residents who use the community centre, but those who don’t are harder to reach. In addition, the recycling drop-in sessions are often attended by people from outside the area rather than Pilands Wood residents.

Social issues such as illiteracy, a high unemployment rate and lack of confidence are general barriers to engaging with Pilands Wood residents. In addition, discontentment with the no-side waste policy introduced by Eastleigh Borough Council in October 2005 was expected to raise residents’ resistance to recycling.

To learn more about the target audience prior to the project, the team studied a report prepared by the Pilands Wood Community Association, which provided detailed information on the area’s residents, history and development. Socio-demographic data from the Office of National Statistics and knowledge from other EBC officers were also used to establish a better picture of the estate and its specific challenges.

The team’s approach to delivering the project is highly flexible and engagement activities are adapted as the particular needs of the target audience emerge. There is continuous contact with residents throughout the duration of the project by maintaining a presence on the estate and undertaking activities such as community events, frequent newsletters and doorstepping on a regular basis. By providing drop-in sessions, the project is also able to offer tailored advice and support to individual householders.

The target audience is generally not pre-disposed to pro-environmental behaviour. However, conversations with residents at the Fun Day demonstrated that there is an interest in waste issues and that Pilands Wood households participate in the recycling scheme, but often do not have the correct knowledge of how the scheme works. The national communications campaign was considered confusing, as it gives contradictory messages to those at local level.

3. Evaluation

Evaluation is considered an integral part of the project and the area was chosen partly because it constitutes a single collection round for waste and recyclables, making it possible to isolate the impact of the project and assess the effectiveness of the approach.

A comprehensive evaluation report will be produced following the end of the project in May 2007. A range of indicators will be used to assess impact on recycling including residual waste and recycling tonnages, the number of bins rejected due to contamination as well as participation in the recycling scheme. This will be based on anecdotal evidence and visual inspections by the collection crews in addition to quantitative data obtained through the traffic light monitoring scheme.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The doorstep survey was designed to provide a baseline against which to judge the change in residents’ awareness of waste issues and the available recycling facilities and their participation in the scheme. The baseline survey was carried out in July 2006 prior to the launch of the project in August, with 59 households completing the questionnaire. The survey will be repeated in May 2007 at the end of the project.

A study of attitudes to and participation in recycling in one of the borough’s high-performing areas provides a useful comparison on the motivational and behaviour change factors.

4. Outcomes

At the time of the research, the project had only been very recently launched and no impact assessment had taken place. In the short time that it has been operating, baseline data has been gathered and residents have been engaged via a Fun Day and a project launch event.

The project team consider the approach very transferable and hope to utilise the lessons learnt through the Pilands Wood project in other areas of the borough. Although future projects are likely to be less resource-intensive, their focus will remain very local and targeted at the specific area. It is also intended to maintain a presence at Pilands Wood after the end of the project via occasional drop-in sessions and the regular provision of information.

5. Further information and contact

Angela Taylor, Recycling & Development Manager, Eastleigh Borough Council

Email: [email protected] www.eastleigh.gov.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Rethink Rubbish – Small actions, big changes Principal delivery agent East Sussex County Council (ESCC) Partners Brighton & Hove City Council, Common Cause Cooperative, Global Action Plan, East Sussex District and Borough councils Project duration ongoing since 2003

1. Project background and operational details

East Sussex County Council’s ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign has been running since 2003, when the council received funding from Defra to purchase a 7.5 tonne vehicle – the ‘Rethink Rubbish Bus’ – for information and public education purposes. The vehicle was adapted to house an exhibition, containing a range of interactive displays, quizzes, competitions and information on waste and recycling issues. The exhibition was designed by the National Science Museum, ensuring a high level of interaction and engagement with visitors.

Under the banner of the Rethink Rubbish campaign, East Sussex County Council (ESCC) promotes a variety of recycling and waste reduction initiatives run by ESCC and other organisations. This includes kerbside recycling collection schemes run by the boroughs and districts, a reusable nappy scheme run jointly with Brighton & Hove City Council, a home composting campaign in conjunction with local co-operative Common Cause and an EcoTeams project with London-based NGO Global Action Plan (GAP).

The main aim of the campaign is to reduce waste going to landfill and increase recycling participation. The majority of the campaign consists of information provision to encourage and enable behaviour change, while the EcoTeams project is a structured programme directly engaging small groups of householders in practical activities to reduce their every-day environmental impact.

Funding The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign is funded through a number of funding streams. These include a grant from Defra’s Waste Minimisation and Recycling Fund for the purchase and customisation of the vehicle, Landfill Tax Credit Scheme and WRAP funding for the nappy scheme (£74,985), a European Union grant for the EcoTeams programme and contributions from the county’s and districts’ budgets.

The county has been reasonably successful in securing funding. However, most recent funding streams are geared towards recycling, which makes it more difficult for a county council to obtain grants, unless bids are in partnership with a waste collection authority.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The European Union grant required match funding, which was predominantly made up of the staff time contribution from GAP.

Although the bus was purchased using grant money, the Waste Services Team ensured from the outset that the council’s budget would meet the long-term delivery costs of the campaign.

Partners ESCC has partnered up with a number of organisations to deliver different aspects of the campaign.

ESCC staff deliver all aspects of the general waste and recycling communications campaign, including visits by the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ bus.

The ‘Composting Doctor’ home composting initiative is run by Common Cause, a local cooperative promoting sustainable development and supporting the local economy through training, advice and networking for producers, running a Farmers' Market and supporting local food links.

GAP, a London-based environmental charity, is responsible for the delivery of the EcoTeams programme.

ESCC’s experience of working with these partners has generally been positive and the Waste Services Team believes that community groups are best placed to engage with the community because of their local knowledge and credibility.

The most important aspect of working with community groups and other external agencies is to be clear about their respective roles and responsibilities and to avoid duplication. In working with the district and borough councils it has occasionally been difficult to coordinate communications activities.

Staffing One ESCC full-time officer is responsible for the overall coordination of the Rethink Rubbish campaign. In addition, six further staff, some of whom work full-time and others part-time, are involved in the delivery of the campaign. Four nappy support workers, who are contracted to work 10 hours per month, are responsible for all outreach work on reusable nappies.

GAP staff members deliver the EcoTeams programme.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The approach centres on the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ bus and its interactive displays. The bus is used to visit events and schools across the county.

Using the bus and other publicity and communications outlets such as newspaper advertorials and press releases, the various recycling and waste minimisation services provided by the districts and other organisations are promoted.

This includes the service of the Brighton & Hove and East Sussex Real Nappy Network. Promotional activities include:

• Four Parent Nappy Supporters are employed to visit antenatal groups and other events. • Training sessions for midwives and health visitors • The ‘nappies.org’ website continues to run • Events across the county • Nappies are promoted on the Rethink Rubbish Bus • Starter packs are subsidised by the County Council and sold from County Hall, some of the District and Borough offices, by a network of shops around the county and on the Bus at some events • Loan packs are promoted to parents who are in receipt of certain benefits • Adverts and editorials in local media and one television interview

In addition, a range of home composting equipment is promoted using the bus, promotional leaflets made available at Council buildings, through the Boroughs, Districts, Town and Parish Councils and Royal Mail mailouts. Editorials and advertisements are placed in local and national publications and press releases are issued to the local media on a regular basis.

A recent addition to the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign has been preventing unwanted mail. Promotional activities in this area have consisted of:

• A web page, developed in the Waste Management section of the ESCC website • press releases and an editorial have been issued • Mailing Preference Service (MPS) registration forms and leaflets as well as a fact sheet with tips on how to reduce junk mail have been provided on the Rethink Rubbish Bus, at County Hall reception and on request

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The concept of the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ bus was developed to provide a solution to the very rural nature of the county, which makes the dissemination of information more difficult. Housing the exhibition on-board the bus ensures only a limited number of staff are required to run the display, as it requires no setting up, and is an ideal way of reaching all parts of the county.

It also constitutes a very cost-effective way of disseminating information and engaging with the public, as the long-term running of the bus requires relatively few financial resources.

In addition to the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ bus, the Waste Management Team works with a range of community organisations to promote behaviour change. This includes Common Cause, a Lewes-based co-operative promoting environmentally sustainable development and supporting the local economy by offering training, advice and networking for producers, and running a Farmers' Market. As part of their ‘Compost Doctor’ service, which is funded by East Sussex County Council, Common Cause offers telephone or email advice, information packs, individual or group visits and workshops.

East Sussex County Council also supports an ‘EcoTeam’ programme, delivered by GAP, which invites residents across the county to join one of the many groups of locals to jointly reduce the environmental impact of their lifestyles. (GAP’s EcoTeams engagement approach is also featured as a case study in this report.)

The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign is considered effective because the bus generates a permanent presence throughout the county and the community group partners are in an ideal position to engage with their respective audiences and are able to respond to their interests and needs.

Target Audience The target audience of the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign are all East Sussex Residents. The bus is designed to convey a range of waste minimisation and recycling messages covering all aspects of the waste hierarchy.

The reusable nappy campaign aims to inform parents and carers, nurseries and hospitals about the existing services.

Communication on home composting was initially targeted at properties with gardens, but has been expanded to include information on composting kitchen waste, so is aimed at all householders.

In terms of the schools’ waste education work, it has been difficult to book time with secondary schools because of competing curriculum pressures and teaching staff being too busy to take on additional responsibilities, but there is usually a positive response and follow up engagement work once an initial visit has been made.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

3. Evaluation

The ESCC Waste Management Team produces regular evaluation reports measuring the impact of the campaign, including quarterly reports on the campaign activities, six-monthly publicity reports, an annual evaluation report and schools’ evaluation forms report.

Enquiries, via telephone, email or in person at events, relating to the different waste minimisation and recycling services are recorded, which allows the team to keep a record of the response generated by the campaign and to follow up enquiries. The reports account for the amount of staff time spent, the costs incurred for advertising and event attendance. It also lists the number of waste-related press releases issued and media coverage received.

The financial saving and tonnage diversion impact of the home composting scheme are arrived at by taking the number of new composting units sold and multiplying it with WRAP’s 2006 composting diversion estimates as follows:

• Tonnes diverted per unit per household, per year = 0.140

• Per tonne cost to the authority to dispose of the waste including landfill tax = £56

Similarly, nappy waste diverted from landfill is calculated by using WRAP’s nappy diversion figures and multiplying these with the number of starter packs given out by the Nappy Support Officers and loan pack’s issued.

Waste avoided through the No Junk mail campaign is calculated using the National Resource and Waste Forum’s Waste Prevention Toolkit estimate that every household registering with the Mail Preference Service saves an average of one third of a kilogram (0.333kg) per month in paper waste.

A baseline study of public attitudes to waste and waste behaviour was carried out prior to the start of the campaign. A public telephone survey is undertaken by an external market research agency to monitor attitudinal changes.

In 2004, waste audits of random households in the county were undertaken to provide a waste composition analysis. The results of this were used to inform the development of the campaign and to help pinpoint where householders had difficulties recycling specific materials or avoiding waste.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

4. Outcomes

The ‘Rethink Rubbish’ bus is a very cost-effective way of communicating waste minimisation and recycling messages to the community, as it serves as a visible and mobile communications tool, with which the team can easily reach all parts of the county.

To date, an estimated 42,000 residents (of an estimated population of 497,000) have been reached by the campaign bus and an additional larger section of the population via the county magazine and other communications literature.

A key success factor in engaging the public is the enthusiasm of staff, both within the ESCC Waste Management Team and among community group workers. Schools’ enthusiasm is also essential in rolling out the waste education programme. The support from Councillors’ is also vital in ensuring the ongoing funding of the ‘Rethink Rubbish’ campaign.

5. Further information and contact

Amelia Peacock, Assistant Waste Services Manager (Waste Awareness)

Email: [email protected] www.eastsussexcc.gov.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project/organisation name Finstock Recycling Partners Charlbury Area Waste Action Group (CAWAG), West Oxfordshire District Council, Oxfordshire County Council Project duration 2002 - 2006

1. Project background and operational details

Finstock Recycling is a community recycling initiative instigated by residents of the Oxfordshire village Finstock (approximately 2,500 inhabitants). In 2002, a group of residents called a general meeting, which welcomed anyone living in the village, to address the lack of a recycling collection. As a result of this meeting, which was attended by 35 people, a community action group (CAG) was formed.

The objective of the CAG was to raise awareness of recycling and waste prevention and to lobby West Oxfordshire District Council (WODC) to set up a collection service.

Over its four-year existence, the CAG organised numerous awareness-raising events such as swap shops for larger reusable items such as bicycles and TV sets, mosaic workshops and a ‘Wild Waste’ show and participated in village fetes and fairs. The group also produced an ‘A-Z of how to Reduce, Reuse and Recycle locally’ in partnership with Charlbury Area Waste Action Group. Five hundred reusable cloth bags were produced, which were given out free of charge to local residents and neighbouring villages and sold at fairs and local shops.

The organisation supported the local school in joining the District school recycling campaign and in securing regular recycling collections from waste contractor Grundon. Similarly, Finstock recycling have tried to find ways for local businesses to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill. The major supermarkets were also lobbied with letters requesting a change in their policies on plastic bag use and packaging.

Finstock Recycling organised special collections of a range of materials including cardboard, plastic bottles, timber, clothes and shoes, green garden waste, Christmas trees, paint and Yellow Pages. A free green garden waste service operates once a month, collecting organic waste from the kerb every first Saturday.

As WODC now provides kerbside collections of dry recyclables for Finstock, Finstock Recycling was disbanded at the end of June 2006. Four 360 litre wheeled bins, which were used for the special collections, were donated to be used to collect recyclables at school and church fetes and other large local events.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

A bi-monthly newsletter, edited by a member of the Finstock Recycling executive, was used to provide information on a wide range of environmental issues, including recycling. Further information is available on the dedicated website which was developed by one of the members of Finstock Recycling.

The group also undertook a doorstep campaign to promote the special collection and raise awareness and knowledge of recycling.

The group sought ideas from existing recycling organisations such as the Bristol-based Recycling Consortium (now Resource Futures), who provided advice on promotional materials such as leaflets and posters.

Funding Because the organisation was set up and all activities run by volunteers, to a large extent Finstock Recycling did not to rely on funding. A small sum of money was obtained from Oxfordshire County Council, which was used to produce promotional material, the cloth bags, the recycling A-Z and a banner for events.

Four wheeled bins were donated by WODC, which were used for special collections and to collect recyclables at village events. These will continue to be used for future events.

Partners Finstock Recycling’s major partners were the recycling officers at Oxfordshire District Council (OCC) and WODC. Their support has been great and vital in achieving the introduction of kerbside recycling collections. An obstacle to maintaining an ongoing relationship with the councils has been staff turnover at the local authority, which required additional time to rebuild personal relationships and resulted in the discontinuation of waste tonnage data provision.

Cooperation with the CAG of neighbouring Charlbury, CAWAG, has also been an important element in achieving Finstock’s objectives. The organisations joined forces in researching and producing the recycling A-Z and shared a display booth at events.

Finstock Recycling has also established links with other organisations such as the Wychwood Network, an organisation promoting local sustainability and community enterprise in the rural context, the Sutton Courtney Environmental Education Centre in Abingdon and Witney Organic Growers.

Staffing The initial founding meeting was attended by 35 community members. Of these, four were active members throughout the organisation’s existence.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Students undertook an attitudinal survey with Finstock householders at the start of the project in 2002.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach Finstock Recycling’s behaviour change strategy centred on the provision of a household recycling service accompanied by awareness- raising initiatives.

Communication tools used included doorstepping, leaflet and poster campaigns and organising and being present at local events. The approach also very much relied on the personal contacts and social interaction which all Finstock Recycling volunteers have as members of their local community. Their presence in the community meant that people with special needs such as elderly and disabled people could easily be identified and given particular assistance with, for example, the disposal of bulky items or house clearances.

Finstock Recycling placed emphasis on ‘leading by example’ to encourage fellow community members to take up or increase their recycling. This approach generated peer pressure and contributes to shifting social norms.

A community-based approach is very cost effective, as all activities were undertaken by community volunteers and required very little funding.

Target Audience Finstock Recycling identified all of Finstock village as its target audience, as well as residents from the neighbouring villages of Charlbury, Witney and Hayley.

Volunteers did not encounter any particular problems in reaching their audience, except in terms of providing a recycling service to some residents. For example, many elderly people found it difficult to participate in the collections because of mobility constraints. Where such problems were reported, Finstock Recycling offered personal advice and practical assistance to overcome any barriers to residents’ ability to use the service.

Generally, most residents were willing to participate in recycling and had a relatively high level of environmental awareness, which did not always translate into concrete action however.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

3. Evaluation

Finstock Recycling did not undertake an evaluation of the impact of the project. However, the group consider that their awareness raising work has made a significant contribution to increasing the levels of recycling participation in the village, which is one of the best rates in the district. Based on data from WODC, Finstock Recycling estimates that currently 30 percent of the waste produced by the village is diverted from landfill.

In addition, the bi-monthly waste green collections capture approximately one tonne of compostable waste, thus diverting six tonnes per year.

A face-to-face questionnaire survey was undertaken in 2002 to establish the level of awareness of and knowledge of recycling. A follow- up survey is planned for the end of 2006 and it is intended to recruit students of Oxford University to carry it out.

Measuring the tonnage impact of the project is very difficult because collection data is not recorded separately for Finstock.

4. Outcomes

Enthusiasm on the part of community volunteers is a vital factor for guaranteeing the success of a community initiative like Finstock Recycling. Furthermore, residents need to be reassured that the initiative is serious and will be sustained in the longer term. The support of the district and county council was also an important element in achieving effectiveness.

Although Finstock’s recycling collections have now been replaced by WODC’s more regular and comprehensive service, volunteers are intending to continue the information and awareness-raising work via the Finstock News newsletter and the Wychwood Network.

The approach is highly transferable and the Finstock volunteers have assisted a number of other community action groups in the Oxfordshire area in setting up collections and undertaking promotional activities.

5. Other points

Joy Murphy Email: [email protected] http://www.finstock.org.uk/recycle/index.htm

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name EcoTeams Principal delivery agent Global Action Plan Partners various Project duration ongoing since 1999

1. Project background and operational details

Global Action Plan (GAP) have been running a range of EcoTeam projects since 1999. The EcoTeams approach centres on recruiting groups of six to eight households, who follow a 3-month programme to reduce their environmental impact. Behaviour change on the part of individual householders is an explicit aim of the programme and the primary objective is to encourage EcoTeam participants to take small steps to taking practical action, at home and at work, to reduce their environmental impact. A secondary objective is greater community cohesion.

The EcoTeams concept originated in the USA, where it was pioneered by David Gershon. Gershon developed the approach as a practical way of taking forward the aims of the 1992 Earth Summit. In 1993, the approach was trialled on a large scale in the Netherlands in a project fully funded by the government and involving 10,000 households. One of the initiators of this project moved to Nottingham in the UK and set up a smaller scale version (approximately 200 households) of the project there.

GAP is currently trialling EcoTeams projects in a number of spheres of daily life – in the home, at work, in schools and at social clubs and faith groups (such as the Women’s Institute and the Quakers). Each group is made up of 6 to 8 participants, who may be neighbours, colleagues or friends. The EcoTeams programme provides a structured approach to enable behaviour change relating to waste generation, water and energy consumption and transport. Participants are provided with a programme workbook and a video, which detail specific everyday actions householders.

Each group holds monthly meetings to discuss which steps participants have taken and whether they have experienced any difficulties doing so. The meetings, usually held at participants homes’ on a rotating basis or at another local venue, are also an opportunity to exchange information and ideas and to socialise. Currently, two EcoTeams projects are fully facilitated, whereby a GAP staff member attend the group meetings and is available to provide advice and support throughout the project. The remainder of projects are partially facilitated with only limited support for individual groups.

The central notion underlying the Eco Teams approach is that participants are enabled to take positive action in their daily lives and that through interaction with friends, colleagues and neighbours, they share in a social learning experience that reinforces new habits to achieve permanent behaviour change.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Funding GAP has secured from funding from a number of sources to run EcoTeam projects in a variety of settings. Funders include the Big Lottery Fund, the EU, local authorities and Defra’s Climate Change Communications Fund and Environmental Action Fund. Running costs for the smaller partly-facilitated projects amount to approximately £5,000. The 3-year fully-facilitated Nottingham initiative, in partnership with the Women’s Institute, has received funding of £50,000. In-kind funding such as staff time and publicity materials by local authority project partners also plays an important role.

The programme is also offered to companies to run with their employees. GAP charges approximately £6,000 for a facilitated programme involving up to 120 staff members.

GAP reports that securing funding remains difficult and forms one of the primary tasks of a dedicated business development officer. A particular obstacle is the prescriptive nature of many funding streams, which initiatives like EcoTeams are difficult to fit into. Furthermore, the limited number of funding sources available results in intense competition for funds. GAP currently rely primarily on grant funding with approximately 70 to 80 percent of funding derived from such sources. The organisation is developing links with different sectors, such as local businesses, with a view to diversifying the funding base.

The majority of current projects will end when funding runs out. However, EcoTeam projects are conceived to run only over three to six months and participants are aware from the outset that support will be provided only over that period. The emphasis of the EcoTeams approach is on enabling participants to achieve permanent behaviour change resulting in sustained project impact.

Partners GAP works with a variety of partner organisations, such as Nottingham City Council, the Quakers, the Barbican Centre in London and the Women’s Institute. These may solely act as funders or adopt a more active role as intermediaries facilitating the engagement of specific target groups by providing access to existing social networks. Partners also add credibility to the projects.

GAP maintains links with other Global Action Plan organisations across the globe.

Staffing Currently, a total of five regionally based full-time members of staff are responsible for delivering the Nottingham and South East EcoTeams programmes. Their role is to recruit and support each EcoTeam by assisting with monthly meetings and providing advice and information. Liaison with GAP’s London head office, partners and funders is also one of their tasks.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

In addition, volunteers are used as team facilitators. A number of student volunteers have also been involved in researching information for individual teams and collating data. Academic expertise from a former trustee and other university contacts have been used in the development of the monitoring methodology and in evaluating the overall impact of the EcoTeams programme.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The EcoTeams approach is a comprehensive methodology for reducing the environmental impact of people’s lifestyles, focusing on five separate areas: energy, water, waste, shopping and transport.

Each EcoTeam is made up of six to eight households. Recruitment of participants takes place using a variety of means including doorstepping in specific geographic areas, tapping into existing social networks or clubs or targeting workplaces or educational establishments.

The teams meet once a month over a four month period to follow a step-by-step process of simple actions relating to the five topic areas. Team members measure their household’s environmental impact, share their results and agree on practical changes to their everyday lives.

There is a mix of facilitated or partially facilitated teams in operation. Facilitated teams are led by a full-time GAP staff member. Other teams are provided with less direct staff support from GAP. Former participants also volunteer as facilitators and are encouraged to set up their own groups in their neighbourhood or workplace. The role of the facilitator is to guide participants through the process and to encourage discussion. They also offer information, help and advice when it is requested, but generally participants are encouraged to find out information for themselves.

The approach builds on a number of principles:

• No one can do everything, but everyone can do something • Sharing the experience in a group enables members to support and encourage one another, share experiences and ideas and tackle obstacles encountered. The group approach also generates peer pressure and a way to shift social norms towards more sustainable behaviour • The step-by-step process helps participants to change their lifestyles by making small adjustments that become lasting habits • By measuring resource use, improvements are monitored during the course of the programme and provide an incentive for participants to achieve further environmental impact reduction

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The level of support provided depends on the financial resources available to each self-contained programme. For example, the 3-year Nottingham project benefits from two full-time members of staff, who each service 15 to 20 teams at a time. The facilitators can also draw on the experience and support from GAP’s management staff.

GAP engages with a wide range of community organisations, locally based interest groups and networks. These groups provide a valuable means for the recruitment of participants as well as offering specific ‘hooks’ by linking into existing interests and values of the group members. GAP will consider working with any group as the EcoTeams approach can be used in any setting and the involvement of a breadth of agencies ensures wide-spread impact. A key ingredient to working with community groups and volunteers is to provide them with as much support as possible.

The approach works by providing participants with locally relevant information such as real nappy schemes, recycling facilities and locally sourced food. The knowledge and feedback from facilitators, volunteers and participants is therefore considered crucial to the development of each project and forms a key part of the programme.

Cost effectiveness The programme is free of charge to householders where funding is available. If it is offered through a workplace, the participating company is charged approximately £6,000 for up to 120 households. The average cost to GAP is £200 for each individual team, equating to between £25 and £33 per household.

Cost-effectiveness will vary from project to project and depend on a range of factors such as the audience targeted and the ease of access to the audience. For example, where it is not possible to tap into existing social networks or specific geographical areas are to be targeted, participants may be recruited through doorstepping. This constitutes a substantial cost at an average of £1 per household doorstepped.

EcoTeams run with volunteer facilitators are clearly substantially more cost-effective as they require only a lower level of staff input.

Target Audience The target audience varies from project to project and often depends on the requirements of the funder. For example, local authority partners may identify particular areas or groups of residents as target groups. The approach can be used in a wide range of settings as long as participants are able to meet on a monthly basis.

To date, 70 teams and approximately 300 people have participated in the EcoTeams programme. GAP estimate that the programme has impacted on a total of 700 individuals once the influence of individual householders on other members of their household is taken into account.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Engaging with the target audience is relatively easy once a team is established. However, the initial recruitment of teams faces many constraints. GAP report that it is difficult to engage truly community-based groups, whereas it is relatively easy to recruit participants through established social networks such as the Women’s Institute.

Barriers encountered include householders’ perception that they are doing everything possible to reduce their environmental impact already, resistance to change and reluctance to meet their neighbours or invite them to their homes.

GAP facilitators undertake research at the start of each project to familiarise themselves with the specific characteristics and requirements of the target audience. Project partners are called on to provide local information. The recruitment strategy and the management of the monthly meetings can then be tailored to the target audience. For example, it may be appropriate to provide a neutral meeting venue for some groups rather than asking the group to host meetings in their homes.

Many participants are already environmentally aware and take some actions to reduce their environmental impact prior to joining the programme, but often this is limited to recycling.

Throughout each 4-month project, GAP maintains continuous contact with the team participants. Facilitators attend and support the monthly meetings, provide telephone advice when required and facilitate communication between teams.

The workbook provided to each participant is generic, but each team is encouraged to undertake research about local facilities to help them reduce their environmental impact.

3. Evaluation

Measurement forms a vital part of the EcoTeams approach in that it enables participants to appreciate the immediate impact of their actions on their environmental impact. Participants are asked to weigh their residual and recyclable waste on a weekly basis. The number of persons present in the household during that week is also recorded. Electricity, gas and water consumption are measured and recorded once a month. Crucially, during the first month of each programme, participants retain their usual habits while measuring takes place to provide a baseline for comparison. These monitoring methods were chosen to provide participants with an easy way to measure their success.

Team members in all programmes are provided with monitoring sheets as part of their programme workbook and are guided through the measurement methodology devised by GAP. This is to ensure consistent and accurate data is captured by each team. Nevertheless, measurement errors and data omissions occur frequently, adding complexity to the evaluation of the results. In the evaluation of results,

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

GAP removes any misleading or inaccurate data. Where participants have consistently recorded data incorrectly, this data is used because, although the absolute figures presented may not truly reflect the energy use or waste generation by the team, the change between measurements is likely to be relatively accurate.

In early 2006, GAP commissioned Tom Hargreaves of University of East Anglia to undertake an evaluation of its three programmes, including EcoTeams. The report provides an analysis of the results recorded by the 70 EcoTeams run to date.

Results from gas meter readings were not included in the analysis as the data had not been converted to ‘degree day’ data, whereby gas usage data is normalised to take into account seasonal and geographical variations. Water meter readings were also omitted because only a small number of participants have meters or are able to access them.

Waste arisings data was available for 58 EcoTeams and showed an average reduction in waste of 19.7 percent across these teams. This is equivalent to 0.59kg per person per week. The proportion of recyclable waste increased by 7.7 percent on average, whilst overall waste arising were reduced by an average of 6 percent Energy consumption fell by an average of 6.9 percent which equates to 714kWh per person per year.

There is currently no UK-based data to evaluate the long-term impact on behaviour. Dutch evidence indicates that behavioural changes achieved during the 4-month programme last for up to 2 years. Furthermore, anecdotal evidence shows that some UK EcoTeams have continued meeting after the formal programme has ended and are also maintaining links with other EcoTeams.

As impact measurement is integral to the EcoTeams approach, no specific portion of the project budget is dedicated to monitoring and evaluation.

Targets for projects tend to be output focused rather than outcome oriented, including numbers of participants recruited and data sets generated. Environmental impact savings do not feature as targets.

4. Outcomes

The EcoTeams offers an approach to behaviour change which allows everyone to become involved at a local level. In addition to the environmental impact achieved, EcoTeams therefore also contribute to the development of community identity. The group approach targets underlying behavioural drivers by utilising peer pressure and shifting social norms.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Whereas broad-brush communication campaigns often have little local relevance, the EcoTeams method focuses on the specific circumstances and needs of the participants. Furthermore, participants are provided with simple tools to achieve lasting change and are asked to undertake only the tasks they feel they can achieve.

The EcoTeams model is clearly more expensive than standard communication methods, which rely on providing information. However, measurable behavioural changes are achieved in a short space of time and evidence suggests that these are sustained long after the end of the project.

The EcoTeams model has proved to be applicable in many different contexts and settings. However, a major success factor is choosing the right target audience. For example, GAP’s experience has shown that ‘hard-to-reach’ groups are very difficult to recruit as there are greater barriers to participation. Nevertheless, the model is easily transferable. Operating EcoTeams at a larger scale is less likely to be beneficial, as the groups would become difficult to manage and loose their close-knit character.

5. Further information and contact

Mark Gorman, Business Development Officer, Global Action Plan Email: [email protected] www.globalactionplan.org.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Go Zero Principal delivery agent Go Zero Ltd Project duration ongoing since January 2004

1. Project background and operational details

Go Zero is a community initiative by residents of the North East Somerset village of Chew Magna, located about ten miles from Bristol. The village has approximately 500 households, totalling 1,200 residents.

The idea for the initiative originated in the 2004 ‘Coffee House Challenge’ instigated by the Royal Society of Arts (RSA), which saw RSA Fellows helped organise more than 80 meetings in coffee houses across the UK, with over 2,500 people taking part in discussions about how to address the RSA manifesto challenges: encouraging enterprise, moving toward a zero-waste society, fostering resilient communities, developing a capable population and advancing global citizenship. Chew Magna residents who had entered the challenge were awarded a £2,000 cash prize by the RSA in recognition of the project’s achievements.

A parish plan survey, which was returned by 60 percent of households surveyed, also highlighted a strong concern for the environment among Chew Magna residents.

In response, a local instigator called a meeting which was attended by approximately 40 residents and resulted in the formation of a steering group and four focus groups. These groups are structured around four themes and have their own specific vision an aims:

Recycling • To raise awareness of the environmental and financial costs related to waste • Initiate new waste reduction schemes within our community • Develop and deliver waste reduction projects and schemes • Work in partnership with Bath and North East Somerset (BaNES) Council where appropriate

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

• Provide facilities to make reuse and recycling easier • To help to affect changes in behaviour where this is necessary (and possible)

People and consumption • Promoting a sustainable local economy • Promoting the local food economy - increasing the amount of food bought from as close by as possible • Promote the fact that consumers are powerful and can have enormous influence • Investigate a skills swapping scheme within the Parish

Transport and energy • Raising awareness of energy use and it’s consequences • Reducing energy consumption within homes, businesses and schools • Promoting renewable energy projects • Promoting carbon neutral wherever it is possible • Examining the possibility of undertaking an energy audit of all households who are willing to participate, with a view to identifying the most pressing problems and finding affordable financing options to enable improvements • Developing a transport plan to minimise congestion and car use throughout the parish and improve bus links to Bristol and Bath

Converging world • To support existing campaigns and initiatives for social justice and development – like Make Poverty History and direct, local efforts in the Chew Valley to alleviate poverty and improve healthcare in the ‘South’ • To develop personal links between the Go Zero communities and Social Change and Development (SCAD) in Tamil Nadu, India • To promote ecotourism and sustainable travel • To promote fair trade – obtaining FairTrade Village status

Funding As Go Zero is an entirely community driven project, the delivery of the work programme by and large relies on voluntary contributions from local activists in terms of their personal time and resources.

The RSA award of £2,000 has been invested in developing the Go Zero website, which provides information on Go Zero’s projects, offers practical advice on issues related to the four working group themes and how to get involved in the initiative.

The steering group has submitted an application for a £2,500 grant from Awards for All, a Lottery grants scheme for local communities.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Sponsorship from a local cafe was also received for the production of a local food guide. BaNES Council has also contributed in-kind funding such as the printing of leaflets.

Partners Go Zero has not worked with any partners so far. However, the waste group have liaised with BaNES Council to coordinate activities.

Staffing Currently, there are eleven members of the steering group and four residents work as focus group leaders. Each focus group has approximately six members. In addition, approximately 35 residents have been recruited as ‘street reps’. Everyone involved in Go Zero is working on a voluntary, unpaid basis.

Approximately 150 residents have to date joined the mailing list and may be called upon to assist with projects and events.

A professional IT consultant was contracted to develop Go Zero’s website.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The Go Zero programme is structured around four themes (outlined above). Their purpose is to explore the issues around each subject and to stimulate action. Each group meets on a monthly basis and will develop a range of activities and tools to engage with residents and to provide practical help and information.

In April 2005, a launch event was held in Chew Magna, which was attended by approximately 200 people. This was followed by a local food event in October 2005, which attracted approximately 200 people over the course of the day.

The People and Consumption group has compiled a Local Food Directory, which provides maps of retailers of food grown and produced within ten miles of the Chew Valley. Updates to this publication are provided on a regular basis via the Go Zero website to make it as practical as possible.

An audit of the village’s energy use, travel and recycling habits was carried out in spring 2006. Questionnaires were delivered to every household in the village and residents were asked to return them by post or via two collection points. Responses were received from approximately 25 households (equivalent to 20 percent) and the results are currently being collated and analysed by the leader of the Energy and Transport focus group.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Go Zero also plans to produce a number of ‘starter packs’ which will contain products such as ‘Ecoballs’, battery chargers, electricity meters, recycled pens and spring balances to weigh waste. These will be loaned out to households for one month to allow residents to test the products and measure their energy consumption and waste generation.

Open meetings featuring guest speakers such as the BaNES recycling officer are being held on a regular quarterly basis. In addition, Go Zero is working with local schools to offer more opportunities for children to understand the food cycle and to raise their awareness of where their food comes from as part of the national ‘Growing Schools’ campaign.

Thirty-five ‘street reps’ were recruited, whose task it is to provide their fellow residents with advice on specific issues, such as energy efficiency and recycling, and to deliver leaflets to alert householders to Go Zero’s projects and events. A doorstepping campaign is also being considered, which the street reps may deliver.

While the steering group members find inspiration in the activities of other projects, the engagement methods are very much chosen with a view to the target audience. For example, Go Zero intended to organise a ‘Clear your house out’ day in collaboration with the Bath- based furniture reuse organisation SOFA Project. It was intended to provide residents with stickers to be placed on any large household items they wished to dispose of, which would be left outside people’s houses for collection on the allotted day by the SOFA Project. However, the idea proved less successful as it was felt that this approach was not right for an affluent community like Chew Magna and would also have been logistically difficult due to the layout of the village. Similarly, junk swap days were also considered unsuitable.

Target Audience Go Zero considers all residents of the village as their target audience. Specific activities focusing on the different themes are being developed for the local primary and comprehensive schools.

The focus group members are also looking at ways of providing particular assistance to elderly people, who may find it more difficult to participate in recycling and other activities due to mobility constraints.

Many people in Chew Magna feel they are already ‘doing their bit’; for example, Go Zero received a donation of 500 energy-efficient light bulbs, which were given out to residents free of charge, but found that some households had already fitted all of their lights with low energy lights. Recycling participation in the village is also above average with 80 percent of households recycling on a regular basis. However, Go Zero consider that there is scope for raising awareness of the wider environmental impacts of consumer lifestyles and intend to encourage residents to take further action.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Go Zero also intends to work with local businesses although it is recognised that these are more difficult engage with. The Chamber of Commerce has been identified as a possible in-road, which is currently being explored.

3. Evaluation

As the project is still relatively new, to date no impact evaluation has been undertaken. It is planned to repeat the energy and recycling survey on an annual basis, with the 2006 survey serving as a baseline.

The steering group has not set specific targets, but hopes to receive audit questionnaires from a greater number of households next year. Rather than asking residents to return questionnaires by post, a door-to-door collection is likely to achieve a greater response rate.

If funding can be secured, starter packs will be made available to residents and Go Zero hopes that these will be taken up by at least 130 households.

A range of evaluation methods will be used to measure the impact of future initiatives. These include a participant diary to be included in the starter pack, feedback from the street reps, focus group discussions and doorstepping.

4. Outcomes

The initiative has generated a great deal of interest within the parish of Chew Magna itself, as well as on a national scale. Go Zero recently was featured in articles in the Guardian and Independent newspapers.

It is important that Go Zero maintains its high profile over time, particularly within the community. It is planned that the steering group is rotated after two years to allow other residents to participate and new ideas to be tested. A flexible approach, which adapts to the needs and expectations of the target audience, is also considered vital for the longevity of the project and for it to reach maximum impact.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The Go Zero approach is transferable to any small rural community that already has good waste and recycling collection facilities in place. Some elements of the planned work programme, such as the starter pack would lend themselves to be operated on a larger scale. However, the project benefits from being locally based within the community, as activities are more likely to be relevant to and targeted at the local audience.

5. Further information and contact

Sally Scholefield, Go Zero Email: [email protected] http://www.gozero.org.uk/

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Community Waste Action Groups Principal delivery agent London Borough of Hounslow Partners Brentford Recycling Action Group, Chiswick Recycling Action Group, Community Action for Recycling and the Environment (Hounslow and Heston) Project duration ongoing since 1999

1. Project background and operational details

London Borough of Hounslow’s Waste Action Group programme has been running since 1999, when the Recycling Team facilitated the formation of the first waste action group in Brentford.

The aim of the programme is to directly involve the community in raising awareness of recycling, increase participation in the kerbside collection scheme, obtain feeback on the service and to promote waste minimisation messages. The approach originated partly in response to inquiries from local residents expressing an interest in recycling as well as the Community Waste Action Toolkit first published by The Recycling Consortium (TRC) in 1995. Between 1995 and 2006, TRC’s Community Waste Action programme supported local authorities and other interested parties in trialling the toolkit and enouraging the development of community waste initiatives.

Community waste action groups are groups of local residents interested in educating their community on local waste issues. The groups are made up of volunteers, who devise and implement projects with local schools and businesses to maximise the ‘reduce, re-use and recycle’ potential in their area.

There are currently three groups in the borough, which cover between half and three quarters of the borough’s area:

• Brentford Recycling Action Group (BRAG) – formed in 1999 • Chiswick Recycling Action Group (CRAG) – formed in 2002 • Community Action for Recycling and the Environment (CARE) in the Hounslow and Heston area – formed in 2005

LBH assists in promoting the groups through leaflets disseminated via local doorstepping communications campaigns, which the council runs in the borough on a regular basis. The groups also receive administrative support for their meetings, such as facilitating and hosting meetings and typing and disseminating minutes. In addition, LBH provides funding for the groups to produce their own publicity materials or allocates in-house materials for use by the groups.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Funding The project receives £600 per year from the LBH’s core budget and is further funded by a full-time senior officer post. Initially, the cash funding was available to spend for BRAG only, but as CRAG and CARE were formed, the funding is now being divided between them.

In 2005/06, an additional £1,000 was made available for the groups from the Recycling Team’s advertising budget.

BRAG also raise a small amount of their own funding by charging a £3 per year membership fee.

Partners The groups work with a number of other community and local organisations in promoting recycling and waste prevention. These include Grand Union Community Development, a regeneration organisation set up in the former Brentford Single Regeneration Budget area, which co-sponsored the Brentford Community guide.

BRAG also cooperates with Friends of Boston Manor, who organise the annual Brentford Festival. Other local groups such as the local anti-air pollution group Hacan ClearSkies and Friends of the Earth.

Both BRAG and CRAG have worked with the Hounslow Education Business Partnership (EBP) to promote recycling and waste prevention through the local EBP network.

While these partnerships have been important in disseminating information through partners’ networks and events, they are not considered the most important success factor, as the emphasis is on action by the community itself.

Staffing LBH funds one full-time Senior Community Recycling Officer, who spends approximately one third of her time in supporting the action groups.

BRAG appointed a VSO volunteer to assist in the updating of their community guide, who was managed by LBH during their stay. However, the project turned out to be unsuitable for an overseas volunteer, who had no knowledge of the local area.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The aim of the Community Waste Action Programme is to harness residents’ initiative to promote increased awareness and action on recycling and waste prevention. By engaging with residents through representatives of their own communities, LBH hopes to generate

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

peer pressure and credibility. Linking in with existing local interests and social clubs, such as horticultural societies and healthy school events, ensures that waste issues are covered from a different perspective and allows people to think about them in a new way.

BRAG was set up in conjunction with the Hounslow Council Recycling Team and local Brentford residents in 1999. The group is now independent, running their own projects and holding regular meetings.

Projects the group have worked on include promotion of the Green Box recycling scheme, promoting home composters, producing an A-Z guide of what can be reused and recycled in Brentford and participation at the local carnival.

Their most recent project was producing a guide to the Brentford community and a Sustainable Living Map of the area. The group currently has about 80 members who receive the monthly newsletter and participate in projects.

Chiswick Recycling Action Group (CRAG) was set up with the help of the Recycling Team in November 2002. They have gained high recognition amongst the local community, with over 100 people receiving regular monthly updates on the group's activities. The group worked closely with local schools, in a ‘design-a-logo’ competition, which challenged local school children to create ideas for BRAG’s logo.

Projects so far include monitoring Green Box participation and production of a leaflet to encourage more people to use the scheme. The group have been involved in a trial, and subsequent promotion to reduce the amount of junk mail received by residents in the area. The group is also lobbying local businesses to recycle more of their own waste and provide better services for local residents.

In September 2005, the recycling team facilitated the formation of a third community group. The CARE group are based in Hounslow, Heston and Feltham and have monthly meetings at the Hounslow Civic Centre. The group have already worked with local schools, inviting design ideas for CARE’s logo with the school producing the winning idea receiving a prize of £100 in book vouchers. The group have also produced a leaflet to raise awareness of recycling and composting in their area.

During the national ‘Big Recycle’ campaign in June 2006, the groups undertook waste audits with three local families. These were followed by two weeks of monitoring of the families’ waste to ascertain by how much the households were able to reduce their

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

rubbish. The campaign was publicised in the local press as well as in the action group newsletters.

LBH’s experience of working with the three waste action groups has been overwhelmingly positive due to residents’ continued enthusiasm for the issues concerned. The groups have also been interested in promoting wider sustainable development issues beyond waste and have contributed to fostering the local community spirit. The groups have also provided valuable feedback on the recycling services to the council, providing an essential channel of communication with residents.

The approach is very cost effective, as it requires a relatively low resource input from the council and relies predominantly on volunteer input.

Unlike other areas of London, Brentford has a relatively stable population, which has helped both in maintaining the membership of the waste action group and in gradually increasing residents’ awareness of their activities and waste issues in general over time.

The most important success factor in working with the groups has been the provision of ongoing support and good communication. It has also been crucial that feedback from the groups is acted on and ideas are implemented.

Target Audience The target audience of the project are all residents of the borough willing to get involved in the action groups.

Participants for the Brentford group were recruited via a doorstepping campaign which contacted approximately 2,000 households. Initially, forty residents expressed an interest, of which about twenty remain active members.

Recruitment of group members is a relatively difficult task and lack of time is cited as the most significant barrier to participation. Many residents also feel that is it the council’s job to promote recycling rather than their own LBH has sought to overcome these barriers by minimising the amount of time group members spend on the project and by providing ongoing support and encouragement.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Contact with existing community groups, for example the Hounslow Voluntary Sector Forum, provided a further starting point for the recruitment of group members and to provide information on the target audience and which kind of engagement activities might be most suitable.

Many action group members are likely to be pre-disposed to pro-environmental behaviour, which may be a motivating factor for becoming involved in the group.

3. Evaluation

Evaluation is undertaken by the Senior Community Recycling Officer on an annual basis with data being collected throughout the year and presented at the groups’ Annual General Meetings. This covers the number of events held per year and associated attendance numbers, as well as the number of recycling bins ordered as a result of the groups’ activities. The annual report also details income such as sponsorship and membership contributions and expenditure including publicity materials.

It is very difficult to attribute the impact of the project on residents’ behaviour. However, the Recycling Team have attempted to isolate the effect of communication campaigns by monitoring recycling participation on specific rounds following the distribution of recycling leaflets by the action groups. This has established that participation tends to increase following such communication activities. Impact on residual waste is more difficult to establish, as collection data is not available on a round by round basis.

A further indicator of effectiveness is the take-up of home composting bins where these are promoted by the action groups.

There is no specific budget allocation for evaluation, as it forms part of the Senior Recycling Officer’s responsibilities.

4. Outcomes

Whilst it is difficult to quantify the impact of the Community Waste Action Group Programme, the Recycling Team feel that it has had a positive impact on awareness of recycling and participation rates in the borough.

The approach complements other awareness-raising work carried out by the Team and is thought to reinforce the messages disseminated through the more traditional channels of communication. Awareness of the action groups themselves is also high in the areas they serve. The programme is transferable to any area as the expansion of the programme has shown. However, the focus must remain on the small scale and activities need to respond to the interests and needs of the local population.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

LBH consider the approach as a cost-effective method for engaging the community in recycling, as most of the on-the-ground activities are carried out by unpaid volunteers. However, any local authority launching this type of project must be prepared to dedicate sufficient officer time and resources to provide ongoing support to the action groups to ensure their long-term sustainability.

5. Further information and contacts

Natasha Epstein, Community Recycling Officer Email: [email protected] http://www.hounslow.gov.uk/wasteactiongroups

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name ‘Be the change’ Sustainable Schools programme (England) Principal delivery agent Peace Child International Project duration April 2005 – March 2008

1. Project background and operational details

Peace Child International (PCI) is a UK-registered educational charity registered which aims to empower young people to take responsibility for peace, human rights and the environment through education, leadership development and direct participation in the events that shape the world community such as the World Summit on Environment and Sustainable Development.

PCI maintains a network of more than 500 youth eco-groups in 120 countries and offers support and advice to young people to create and complete a variety of different projects serving the needs of their community, including creating a bicycle taxi service in Kenya, bringing electricity to a rural school in Georgia and starting a water and sanitation health project in Uganda.

The ‘Be the change’ Sustainable Schools programme is a 3-year project promoting behaviour change among young people. The programme offers a 3-stage schools-based learning programme which explores ways in which young people can achieve more sustainable consumption patterns.

Assemblies and workshops are delivered by a team of young people (less than 25 years of age) from around the world, who, for one year, live and work at PCI’s Hertfordshire headquarters as interns. Working on a range of projects, interns receive training and guidance from PCI’s adult Management Team.

At the heart of all of PCI’s work is its principal objective of empowering young people to bring about social and political change. This philosophy underlies the ‘Be the Change’ Ambassador Programme, as well as the ‘Be the Change’ Sustainable Schools project.

Funding The programme is funded over three years through the Defra Environmental Action Fund, receiving approximately £40,000 per year. The EAF grant scheme requires projects to secure 50 percent match funding from other sources, which PCI have obtained from schools, private donors and local companies. PCI are currently also exploring the possibility of funding with the waste management company, Shanks.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The majority of resources tend to be devoted to single project delivery. Reliance on project-by-project grant funding means that it is difficult to plan programmes in the longer term. PCI is therefore constantly seeking to diversify its funding base. As for all NGOs, fundraising constitutes is a disproportionately time-consuming and resource-intensive activity.

PCI intends to continue the programme, or certain aspects of it such as the Ambassador Training, if future funding can be secured.

The majority of funding is spent on providing food and accommodation for the interns and on PCI staff time. Promotional materials and educational resources also form a large part of the outgoings, as does petrol for schools visits.

Partners PCI works with a range of partners, predominantly local authorities which have signed up to the schools programme and aim to engage as many schools as possible in their area. These include the London Borough of Barnet, Worcestershire County Council and Macclesfield Borough Council. PCI also develops on-going relationships with individual schools.

Other partners range from the Cornish Youth Parliament and Cornwall Youth Service to other Hertfordshire organisations such as the Renewable Energy Centre and the Boxmoor Trust. These organisations are very important to the success of the project as they provide the initial contact with schools as well as links to youth organisations in the areas PCI works in.

PCI’s experience of working with these partners has been mostly positive. In developing new partnerships, PCI recognises that many of the organisations worked with face greater constraints and may therefore be less flexible than PCI.

Staffing Currently, seven full-time and seven part-time members of staff are involved in the delivery of the Sustainable Schools programme. These include the Hertfordshire-based interns and teachers located in the partner authorities.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The Peacechild team undertakes three visits in each school. During the first, the programme is discussed with the Head Teacher or School Council and the school’s existing environmental performance is assessed, identifying areas for improvement. The workshops on offer are discussed and a plan for the second visit is developed.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The second visit consists of an assembly and a workshop on one of the topic areas of waste and recycling, energy, transport, environmental footprints and fair trade. The workshop is followed by the introduction of the Lifestyle Contract, which forms an integral part of the programme and reinforces the behaviour change messages.

A ‘Lifestyle Contract’ is used to ask pupils to sign up to a number of pledges based on changing their lifestyles. The pledges range from simple everyday actions such as recycling and composting, buying locally grown food and travelling on foot or by bike, to greater commitments such as changing to a vegetarian diet or volunteering for an environmental organisation.

Pupils monitor their progress on these challenges for a month with the help from their teachers and using a monitoring form provided. After 4 to 6 weeks, the PCI team returns for a third visit to review pupils’ success. This might be through a presentation delivered by PCI or the pupils themselves, either to the class or the entire school. Award certificates are presented to pupils who have lived up to their commitments.

Through an additional programme School Council members can opt to be trained as Action Challenge Ambassadors within the school, using the materials on our CD-ROM to deliver workshops to other pupils.

Assemblies for Key stage 2 usually involve the performance of a 20-minute sketch entitled ‘Me and My World.’ Workshops on specific topics such as waste, energy, ecological footprints, fair trade and transport are provided for individual classes and are tailored to the age range of the students. Workshops also include games and quizzes to get pupils thinking about sustainability issues.

Secondary schools are also offered the option of holding a Recycled Fashion Show or producing an ‘info-mercial’. For the latter, students script, direct and form the cast of an info-mercial which will be shot, edited and woven into existing components to form a ‘sustainability commercial’ to present to the school at assembly or to a parents evening.

Students are also encouraged to produce a Neighbourhood Directory, which is a listing of local shops and stalls rated against criteria such as whether or not they carry Fair Trade goods and locally sourced foods and whether they repair, recycle or re-use damaged or broken items bought from the store.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

In keeping with its focus on young people and inclusive philosophy, PCI developed the approach by consulting secondary school students on the best way of raising awareness of sustainable development issues among youths and to inspire them to change their consumption behaviour.

PCI’s approach differs from other education programmes in that the all classroom activities are delivered by young people. Engaging young people through their peers is an effective approach as it makes the issues more accessible and bestows greater credibility onto the solutions and actions offered. PCI’s central philosophy of ‘Be the change’ aims to encourage young people to adopt sustainable practices themselves, lead by example and spread the message to others.

By making young people ‘ambassadors’ for change and involving their schools, families and communities, the project is a cost-effective way of reaching a large audience beyond the immediate target group. The project activities are tailored to the age range of the youths engaged with and has a local focus.

Workshops are designed to tie in with the curriculum and other campaigns such as the Healthy Schools campaign. The benefits of the project are therefore wider in that students are encouraged to adopt not only more sustainable but also healthier lifestyles, for example by eating organic locally grown food and walking or cycling.

Target Audience The programme’s target audience are pupils and students aged between eight and eighteen years old. This age group was chosen because it constitutes PCI’s traditional target audience of young people. Working through schools was identified as the most effective method to reach young people as PCI’s experience of working through youth clubs and other associations had shown that the latter are more difficult to engage with.

Since the start of the Ambassador Programme, PCI has reached over five thousand students. Lack of interest or time on the part of teachers forms the most significant barrier to engaging with schools. The PCI team’s approach is to be as persistent as possible in recruiting schools onto the programme and establishing contacts with staff.

In the London Borough of Barnet, council officers make contact with the schools to promote PCI’s service. This gives the programme added credibility and allows project staff time and resources to be directed at delivery activities rather than at recruitment of schools.

The interns also speak at conferences to raise interest in PCI’s projects and programmes and PCI maintains links with a number of organisations such as the UK-based Development Education Association, which aims to raise awareness and understanding of how global

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

issues affect the lives of individuals, communities and societies via all aspects of learning. Other more locally based networks, such as the Hertfordshire Network and the Essex Environmental Action Group, which represents teachers interested in sustainable development, also provide advice, ideas and contacts.

PCI aims to make all activities as relevant and targeted to each particular school as possible. The objective of the first visit is to establish an understanding of the school’s record in environmental and sustainable development issues and to ensure that the activities chosen link in with existing initiatives. PCI undertakes a minimum of two visits to each school, but is keen on developing and maintaining long-term relationships with interested staff.

3. Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation form an integral part of the programme. The main form of monitoring impact is through the Lifestyle Contracts signed up to by students and the pledge forms returned by them a month after the first visit. The aim of the evaluation is to establish how effective the programme is in changing students’ and their families’ behaviour.

At the start of the first visit, following the Lifestyle Contract pledge form, students are asked which kinds of actions to reduce their environmental impact they are already taking in their daily lives via a show of hands and the results are recorded by the project team. This serves as a baseline used to establish the degree of behaviour change.

Students committing to a Lifestyle Contract are asked to keep a record over a four week period of the number of behaviour change pledges they have made, detailing how many times per week they have adopted the new habit. Secondary school students are also asked to report which were the most difficult challenges, which aspects of the new habits they are likely to maintain and what their family thought about it. The monitoring forms are collected by the project team during their third visit.

The pledge form data will be collated and analysed to give an overall picture of the impact of the programme. This type of evaluation was chosen as it presented a practical way of gathering data from a large number of participants, whilst the show-of-hands approach is also a simple monitoring method which can be applied in the lower age groups. Similarly, the pledge monitoring forms are designed with the specific age group in mind. PCI intends to publish a full evaluation report at the end of the currently funded project in 2008.

4. Outcomes

The Peace Child interns have reached approximately 4,450 pupils. The Ambassadors have reached around 1,500 pupils. Up to the autumn term all the evaluations have been anecdotal. For instance pupils have recorded which pledges that they undertook have become habits and described how it affected other members of their families. Peace Child are now contacting schools, one year on to see whether or not

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

taking part in the lifestyle contracts had any lasting effects. They are now giving out questionnaires before the process to find out what they are doing now, then having completed the contracts will see whether they are doing anything differently. They will also continue to monitor which pledges have become habits.

5. Further information and contact

Rosey Simonds, Peacechild International Email: [email protected]

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Seeding sustainable communities Principal delivery agent Peterborough Environmental City Trust (PECT) Partners Various – including Defra ONH Hampton, Peterborough City Council, Anglian Water, Richmond Fellowship, StudentForce for Sustainability, Energy Saving Trust, English Nature, Ecover Project duration April 2005 – March 2008

1. Project background and operational details

The project was developed by Peterborough Environmental Trust in response to the rapid housing expansion programme currently underway in the Peterborough area. The main objective of the project is to influence householders’ behaviour when they move into their new homes and are likely to develop new habits. Through providing householders with information and practical advice, PECT seeks to embed good environmentally sustainable patters of behaviour before negative practices can gain foothold. Simultaneously, the development of community spirit in new developments is encouraged by fostering new and existing community organisations and bringing them together through events and other activities.

During the first year, PECT has been targeting the new Hampton Township in the south of Peterborough, which is currently the largest private housing development in Europe. Other developments will be supported as they come on stream.

The main technique used by PECT are home visits to new residents within six months of moving in. Householders are presented with a ‘Sustainable Living Welcome Pack’, which contains information about environmental issues, activities available in the local community and a range of free environmentally friendly goods such as Ecover cleaning products and energy-saving lightsbulbs. Information about local environmental and community organisations such as the Wildlife Trusts is also provided.

Residents are provided with practical information addressing different themes including waste, water, energy, transport and wildlife, which is presented in individual folders. For example, leaflets highlighting the local recycling facilities and tips on waste minimisation are included in the waste folder. The transport folder contains copies of local bus timetables and information on car sharing. During the home visit, residents are also asked to fill in a questionnaire about their water and energy usage, waste generation, transport and purchasing habits and involvement in the local comunity.

The main inspiration for this approach came from the doorstepping technique used by many local authorities to promote recycling, which has shown that direct contact is the best mechanism for delivering sustainability and behaviour change messages. PECT sought to extend this approach by providing more comprehensive sustainability information and lifestyle change tools.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Funding The project is funded through a grant from the Defra Environmental Action Fund. Match funding is provided by Anglian Water who contribute £21,000 annually, as well as in-kind funding such as fat traps and CDs included in the Sustainable Living Pack. ONH, the master developer of the Hampton housing development, give £2,000 per annum. PECT further adds to the match funding with £5,000 annually from its core funds. Other in-kind funding has been secured from Ecover, who supply free samples of their environmentally- friendly cleaning products, and the Energy Saving Trust, who contribute low energy light bulbs.

PECT report that finding match funding has constituted a difficulty, particularly due to restrictions which exclude public funds from being counted as match funding. As a result, in-kind contributions from Peterborough City Council, such as leaflets and other promotional materials, cannot be counted towards match funding.

Partners PECT works with a range of different partners, twelve of which participated in the project launch event. Defra and Anglian Water are important partners in that they provide the main funding. They are not involved in the day-to-day management of the project, but are important in delivering community outreach events, such as a recent water efficiency event run by Anglian Water.

A range of organisations such as the Richmond Fellowship, the Wildlife Trusts and StudentForce for Sustainability provide PECT with volunteers for activities such as preparing Sustainable Living packs, assisting with data entry and conducting home visits. Sustrans, which is based at the same building, have provided advice on personalised travel marketing.

PECT has also established links with a multitude of local community organisations, ranging from Weigh Watchers, sports clubs to neighbourhood and residents associations, who are considered vital to the development of a sense of community.

PECT’s experience of working with partners has been very positive. All partners have been very supportive of the project and have made generous contributions to the sustainability packs. The only challenge PECT have faced is in ensuring effective and regular communication with all partners due to the large number of organisations worked with. Keeping partners up-to-date about the progress and achievements of the project are vital to keeping them on board and ensuring their continued commitment.

Staffing Two full-time members of staff are currently working on the ‘Seeding sustainable communities’ project.

Between 4 and 12 volunteers help out with the project on an ad hoc basis. PECT provides work placements and experience for volunteers from the Richmond Fellowship, who may otherwise be excluded from the workplace because of mental illness. These volunteers

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

predominantly undertake office-based work such as the preparation of the Sustainable Living packs. Volunteers from StudentForce for Sustainability participate in the home visits and processing and evaluation of the survey questionnaires.

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The primary community engagement tool is home visits. Each visit starts with the survey, which provides a springboard for discussion and encompass a range of topic areas, including waste, water, energy, transport and wildlife. Householders are then invited to receive a Sustainable Living Welcome pack, which is delivered at a later date.

The waste section of the survey was developed with assistance from Peterborough City Council. There is a strong focus on waste prevention in the information provided in the Sustainable Living pack, such as tips on home composting, reducing plastic bag waste and smart shopping. Furniture and electrical goods reuse and washable nappies are also promoted.

Ways to reduce energy and water consumption are also highlighted in the questionnaire and information pack. The wildlife and community sections provide information on wildlife centres in the area and a community directory listing local clubs and associations and activities offered by these community organisations.

In addition, PECT participate in events on environmental topics, such as a water efficiency event organised by Anglian Water or Peterborough City Council’s recycling roadshows and environment fairs.

The PECT project officers also attend a wide range of events and meetings of local community organisations including residents and tenants associations, drama groups, social groups for retired people, football and other sports clubs. Articles about the project are also occasionally featured in the newsletters of these organisations.

Although doorstepping is now an established method for promoting recycling, its use in the context of new housing developments and to raise awareness of the concept of sustainable living is a novel approach. In contrast to doorstepping campaigns, where recycling promoters tend to spend only a few minutes at each doorstep, PECT have adopted a more flexible approach. As a result, home visits may last more than an hour, depending on the level of interest by the householder. Emphasis is placed on a deep level of engagement and genuine conversation rather than sole information provision. The provision of practical tools and information is also considered an important aspect in enabling residents to change their behaviour.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Delivering a project focused on the local community ensures greater relevance of the information and advice provided to householders. Face-to-face contact with residents also delivers a more personable approach in line with the community-building objectives of the project. Working with the master developer ONH Hampton, PECT are also able to act as an interface between residents and developers and answer queries relating to the ongoing construction.

Cost-effectiveness and wider impacts The cost-effectiveness of the approach is difficult to assess, but the planned follow-up surveys will obtain information on changes in waste and recycling behaviour as well as water and energy consumption. The project is clearly more resource intensive than standard communication and marketing models. However, PECT feel that the greater intensity and direct delivery method is likely to be more successful in achieving behaviour change outcomes.

Wider social and environmental benefits may result from the project in a number of ways. For example, a greater number of people are walking or cycling instead of driving is likely to enhance community safety because of greater presence of people on the streets. However, a challenge in promoting such messages is that the local infrastructure development has not kept up with the number of people who have moved to the area. As a result, public transport provision is currently inadequate.

The project also raises residents’ awareness of a wide variety of local community organisations and encourages them to get involved. This contributes to the development of greater community cohesion.

Target Audience The project’s target audience are the residents of the Hampton housing development, which was chosen because it provided a specific target group of people setting up a new home. Home moves provide an ideal point of intervention for behaviour change relating to everyday household habits, particularly when householders are provided with practical tools.

To date, approximately 2,000 new households have moved to the area, of which PECT have visited 800. Approximately 350 of these have completed the survey and received a welcome pack. Repeats visits at different times of the day are planned for households where no contact was established. Some residents also completed the survey at local events attended by PECT.

The greatest difficulty presented by the doorstepping approach is making contact with residents in the first place, as many people are at work during the day. Hence visits must be timed to ensure residents are at home but are not inconvenienced. On average, PECT have a contact rate of 67 percent (i.e.33 percent of households could not be contacted). Of the households spoken to, an average of 50 percent has participated in the survey. Only 17 percent of people spoken to are not willing to complete the survey.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Language barriers were encountered on very few occasions as 97 percent of Hampton households are made up of white British-born residents.

PECT report that the opening of the conversation is particularly important in establishing residents’ trust and interest, particularly in conveying that the visit is not a sales call.

PECT undertook extensive background research on its target audience, for example by speaking to the City Council planning department, to community groups and regeneration agencies. A socio-demographic survey of the area, which was conducted prior to the start of the development, also proved a useful source of information.

Despite a high level of interest and some established pro-environmental behaviour patterns, particularly in the area of water and energy efficiency, the target group is largely not pre-disposed to ‘green’ behaviour. PECT observed high levels of recycling participation and greater receptiveness to recycling messages than to waste prevention messages.

Contact with residents tends to be on a one-off basis and the information provided in the welcome pack is the same for everyone. A limited number of householders receive a follow-up telephone call or visit if they have expressed interest in a particular event or have queries on a specific issue, such as reusable nappies or home composting.

3. Evaluation

PECT produces regular progress reports in line with funders’ requirements. The main purpose of this is to track progress against agreed targets, such as the number of households visited.

An interim evaluation, assessing the impact of the project to date, is currently underway. This involves follow-up telephone calls and visits to a sample of 5 percent of the 350 survey respondents. The initial and follow-up questionnaires of each respondent will be compared individually to establish whether a change in attitudes and behaviour has taken place. For example, survey respondents are asked to estimate the volume of their residual and green waste bins. This method was chosen because changes in behaviour, and consequent environmental impact reductions, are difficult to quantify.

PECT also monitor interest in community activities and attendance of events, as well as the uptake of membership in community groups and clubs.

One family received an in-depth lifestyle audit by PECT, assessing the overall environmental impact of the household. However, this was used largely for publicity purposes and to generate local media interest rather than as a monitoring tool.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Impact assessment forms an integral part of the project and was built into the project plan from the outset, as it is considered vital to assessing the effectiveness of the technique in achieving behaviour change. As such, no specific proportion of the budget was allocated to impact assessment and staff time spent on monitoring activities is not accounted for separately.

A comprehensive evaluation will be produced at the end of the currently funded project in 2008. This is likely to include all aspects of the project, from inputs to outputs and outcomes, as well as an assessment of the effectiveness of the engagement technique.

4. Outcomes

To date, more than 350 households have been contacted, have filled in the baseline survey and have received a Sustainable Living Welcome pack. As the interim evaluation has not yet been concluded, impact could not be assessed at the time of the research.

A key ingredient to the project’s success is PECT’s relationship with its project partners who support the project in a variety of ways. Although it was initially a challenge to build these relationships in the first place and to generate contacts, once established, PECT has found them relatively easy to maintain.

A further important element is the approach to community engagement itself which the project is testing.

PECT are in discussions with the Government Office for the East of England (GO East) to investigate ways to expand the existing programme and duplicate the project in other areas in the East of England. Funding from local authorities and from housing developers via a Section 106 agreement are other avenues PECT is exploring to ensure the long-term viability of the project.

5. Further information and contact

Janine Starling, Project Officer Email: [email protected] www.pect.org.uk

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Somerset Waste Action Programme (SWAP) Principal delivery agent Somerset Waste Action Programme Partners Somerset County Council, Carymoor Environmental Trust Project duration ongoing since 2002

1. Project background and aims

The Somerset Waste Action Programme is a joint venture between the Somerset Waste Partnership (SWP), consisting of Somerset County Council and its five District/Borough Councils, and the Carymoor Environmental Trust, an environmental educational charity based at a landfill site near Castle Cary. The creation of SWAP has been one of the outcomes of the Joint Best Value Review undertaken by the Somerset Waste Partnership. The review, one of the first of its kind in the country, identified the need to increase waste awareness throughout the county in order to deliver enhanced waste targets and improve public awareness. Rather than each authority delivering its own education programme, the SWP considered it favourable to outsource the schools and community education programme to an independent organisation with existing experience in waste education. This was to ensure a consistent approach and receptiveness by residents.

The programme promotes waste awareness, including waste minimisation, reuse, recycling and composting, in schools and community groups across the county using a team of specially trained education officers. The team provide a variety of workshops and assemblies to schools and awareness raising presentations to community groups such as youth groups, furniture reuse groups and scrap stores. Monthly open evenings featuring compost demonstrations are also held at Carymoor Environmental Centre (see photo above). Initially, the SWAP only focused on waste, but a new assembly on energy is being offered for the academic year 2006/07.

By providing waste education to both primary and secondary schools and working with schools to set up their on-site composting facilities, the principal aim of the programme is to influence the behaviour of students and their families.

In developing the teaching materials and presentations, SWAP drew on existing resources, such as the Waste Watch ‘Dustbin Pack’, and received training from the Bristol-based Recycling Consortium (now Resource Futures) and Wiltshire Wildlife Trust. The education officers also included teachers, so the project is able to utilise their experience of working in schools.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Funding For the first two years, the programme received £100,000 per annum through the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme (LTSC) with an additional £75,000 made up of contributions from the County Council and the borough and district councils.

Following the end of the LTCS, SWAP applied for Defra funding but was unsuccessful. In recognition of the need to ensure the continual delivery of the programme to facilitate lasting behaviour change, funding is now provided from the core budgets of Somerset County Council (£150,000 pa) and the districts and boroughs (£5,000 pa each). The councils are committed to maintain the programme for the foreseeable future.

While SWAP is not dependent on grant funding, the Carymoor Environmental Trust relies on it to a great extent. A merger with the Somerset Wildlife Trust is currently being discussed with a view to ensuring the long-term financial viability of the organisations.

The largest proportion of the funding (approximately £100,000 pa) is spent on salaries. A further £10,000 pa is spent on producing teaching and demonstration resources. The remainder of the budget is used to cover overhead and transport costs.

Partners SWAP’s principal partners are Somerset County Council and the borough and district councils. However, beyond initial shadowing of the schools visits and regular reporting and update meetings, SWAP are able to exercise complete autonomy in the day-to-day delivery of the programme.

SWAP’s experience of collaborating with the Somerset local authorities has been largely positive. For the first two years, the relationship was governed by a Service Level Agreement, which was highly target-driven. This was motivated by the authorities’ desire to achieve high diversion targets. However, a good relationship and mutual understanding has developed over time and SWAP now has good links with recycling and waste communication officers in all councils. The key ingredients for this successful partnership working are a clear framework of expectation on both sides and good ongoing communication. SWAP particularly value the regular updates on policy decisions affecting waste services, as this enables frontline staff to answer residents’ queries effectively and efficiently.

SWAP has collaborated with the Community Recycling Network (CRN) in establishing a network of waste educators in the South West of England. The aim of this is to share teaching resources and help train new education officers.

SWAP also maintains links with other educational centres promoting sustainability and acts as an assessor for the Eco Schools programme. Furthermore, SWAP gives joint workshops on composting and local food growing with Somerset Foodlink.

The education officers also provide support to the recycling officers on their roadshows.

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Staffing SWAP employs six full-time staff to deliver the schools and community education programme. The posts include two primary school education officers, two secondary school education officers, one adult group officer and one programme manager.

The County Council and the other Somerset authorities can be called on to provide assistance with communications and marketing materials, as well as occasional human resources or legal advice. Wiltshire Wildlife Trust has also provided assistance in the development of the education programme.

In addition, SWAP outsourced the evaluation of the schools and community education programme by commissioning Dr Alan Peacock of Exeter University to undertake an ongoing review over the first two years of the project (further details below).

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The principal community engagement methods adopted by SWAP are the delivery of assemblies and educational activities for schools, further education colleges and youth groups as well as workshops and presentations for community groups. All visits by SWAP education officers are provided free of charge.

The schools programme involves a wide range of activities for both primary and secondary school age children and are linked to the national curriculum. Primary school workshops include energy, composting and mask, paper and musical instrument making. A workshops on the global impact of waste and role-play and debate sessions are also being offered. Secondary level workshops are tailored to specific subjects including, English, Citizenship, Geography, Music, Science and Design and Technology.

SWAP also offers a range of longer term challenges and awards for schools with the ‘SWAP Pledge’. Schools can choose to work towards a bronze, silver and gold award, starting with easier tasks such as setting up paper reuse trays and using a compost bin through to setting up an environment group and buying recycled products. Schools receive practical help and tools, including free

100

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

composting bins, from the SWAP education officers in achieving these tasks and are encouraged to join the Eco Schools scheme once they have achieved the gold award.

Primary schools can request up to four free visits per year; this rises to eight per secondary school. Tours of Carymoor Environmental Centre and the adjacent operational landfill site are also offered.

Community groups can request talks on a range of topics as well as practical assistance with improving their recycling and reducing their waste.

What is special about the approach? SWAP believes their education programme is particularly effective because it is delivered by an independent agency rather than the local authorities themselves. This enhances the credibility of the messages and thereby increases their effectiveness in achieving the desired behaviour change outcomes.

By receiving visits free of charge, all schools and community groups in Somerset are able to take advantage of SWAP’s specialised educational services and expert knowledge. The approach is highly tailored to the individual age groups or the needs and interests of each community group to ensure that SWAP’s visits provide an enjoyable and memorable experience, which instils the messages. Additionally, the unique siting of Carymoor Environmental Centre allows SWAP to demonstrate the real-life issues of waste management.

In SWAP’s view, the programme offers a very cost effective way of increasing recycling rates, because of its wide impact not only on school children but also on their families, who are encouraged to attend assemblies and become involved in the pledge scheme. Somerset has experienced large increases in recycling participation rates, rising from an average 13% to 40% since 2002.

Target Audience The programme’s target audience are school children, youth groups, further education colleges and community groups of all ages.

Since June 2002 the team has visited 95% of the schools in the county and carried out over 1,000 visits. Over 500 community groups have also received presentations and workshops.

Teacher’s lack of time to take on additional responsibilities forms the biggest barrier to engaging with schools, but generally, schools have been relatively easy to engage with. Many primary schools are booking repeat visits and maintain ongoing contact with SWAP through the pledge scheme. SWAP is also establishing longer-term relationships with secondary schools, although making initial contact is more difficult because secondaries tend to be larger and more departmentalised organisations than primary schools.

101

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Community groups find out about SWAP predominantly by word of mouth and, to date, it has been feasible to reach this audience without advertising or marketing. However, SWAP report that the 20 to 50 years age group has been more difficult to engage with, as many community groups represent either youths or retired people. The SWP is currently developing a project to target harder to reach audiences, such as the 20 to 50 age group, and low participation areas.

The schools programme is specifically tailored to the age group and workshops and other activities are tied in with the national curriculum. The SWAP education officers will also liaise with teachers to develop specific lesson plans and involve them in the preparation of specific activities to ensure these are suitable for the specific class.

Some research is also undertaken prior to community groups’ visits to learn about their local facilities and to tailor presentations to their needs and interests.

The majority of SWAP’s audience is not predisposed to pro-environmental behaviour.

3. Evaluation

SWAP commissioned Dr Alan Peacock of Exeter University to undertake an independent ongoing assessment of the programme during the first two years of its delivery (June 2002 to June 2004). The evaluation covered a range of aspects including: • Inputs (incl. staffing levels, funding, other resources) • Outputs/targets (incl. number of schools and community groups visited) • Outcomes (incl. change in children’s awareness and knowledge of waste and recycling issues, claimed changes in attitudes and behaviour, in participation, take-up of alternative products) • Delivery model success factors (incl. format of workshops and presentations, level of ongoing support to schools)

The evaluation was included in the SWAP programme plan from the outset and aimed to address both the needs of the funders, the SWP, and the SWAP team itself. Firstly, the evaluation sought to generate ‘hard’ evidence or quantitative data relating to government targets required by the SWP. Secondly, the SWAP team made a case for a greater evaluative emphasis on identifying the quality of programmes and their impact on schools, children and their communities.

The main data gathering involved observations of the SWAP education officers working with a range of school and community groups; observations of schools’ follow-up visits to Carymoor; questionnaires to schools about effectiveness of the team’s input; review of documentation produced by the team; in-depth interviewing of children and their teachers in representative ‘case study’ schools (8 primary, 2 secondary), and a questionnaire survey of community members in the catchment areas of case study schools.

102

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The qualitative data has been easy to collect and analyse. However, it has not been possible to establish the impact of the programme on schools’ waste arisings, because their waste is not collected separately. Similarly, it is not possible to discern the effect on household waste arisings and recycling rates because of the absence of waste data specific to individual schools’ catchment areas.

The cost of the evaluation was £10,000 over two years, which equates to approximately 3% of the annual programme budget.

SWAP is currently considering ways to undertake a further external evaluation of the programme, potentially by a PhD student as part of their research.

4. Outcomes

The evaluation indicated that at the end of the first year of the programme (June 2003) most targets were being consistently achieved, particularly those associated with the numbers of schools and community groups being reached, the SWAP team’s growing reputation across the county was enhancing its ‘reach’ to new groups and its ability to respond flexibly to demands, and targeting schools directly had been a very effective strategy, especially where the youngest children (5-7) were involved.

The follow-up interviews in case study schools after 18 months indicated that: • Waste minimisation has become a high priority in schools, and children have taken on a lot of responsibility. Children are very committed to this work, and they clearly have an influence on teachers and parents. • Children’s knowledge about recycling and re-use has developed a great deal as a consequence of the SWAP team visits. For example, they can remember considerable detail from the presentations made by the team, and have become very active in a wide range of ways, both inside and outside school. • There are indications that recycling activity in primary and secondary schools will continue and gain momentum, as more children become involved and after-school clubs develop. A groundswell of interest and activity is developing. The main focus is on recycling paper and composting, both of which are well developed. • Children are less confident when talking about consumption and waste reduction strategies. However, children feel very strongly about excessive packaging by supermarkets. At all ages, they have conflicting views on shopping elsewhere (e.g. farmers markets), depending on their location. • SWAP objectives have usually been linked to other initiatives in most schools, e.g. to citizenship/environment/globalisation. This has reinforced the messages taken home. • Children have strong positive memories about their visits to Carymoor Environmental Centre, and seem to understand the main processes involved in the recycling that takes place.

103

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The ongoing commitment of the SWP to the programme and the relative security of funding have enabled SWAP to take a long-term approach and build lasting relationships with schools and community groups. SWAP highlighted this as a major success factor. Other ingredients to the programme’s success include SWAP’s ability to provide a free expert service to schools, which in the absence of the programme would not be able to deliver this kind of specialised waste education to children; tailoring the approach to the audience, specifically the age levels; and making the activities a fun experience. Furthermore, the partnership with Carymoor Environmental Trust and the location at the environmental centre have contributed to SWAP’s success.

The programme is transferable to any area and there are opportunities for scaling it up to national level, which is likely to improve standards and data availability. However, operating such a programme on a national scale risks diminishing the local relevance built into the current county-wide programme.

5. Further information and contact

Rupert Farthing, Programme Manager, Somerset Waste Action Programme Email: [email protected] www.carymoor.org.uk/swap/swap.htm

104

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name The Surrey Real Nappy Network Principal delivery agent Surrey County Council Project duration The Network began in June 2005 but the nappy project has been ongoing since 1998.

1. Project background and operational details

Background Waste minimisation has been part and parcel of the waste management strategy in Surrey for a number of years. Its aims and objectives are about to be formalised in the new Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy that will be published in the coming year.

The waste minimisation department in Surrey County Council is divided into two sub-divisions: one that focuses on businesses and one that deals with the community. The waste minimisation team dealing with the community is very active in a number of domains and has initiated a range of projects to help the local population change behaviour. Community-based projects initiated by the local authority include a real nappy network, SMART shopping roadshows, the Surrey Waste Action Fund, the Innovations fund and various other projects looking to encourage reuse, home and community composting and to reduce junk mail. This case study will focus on the nappy projects initiated by this team.

Funding Funding devoted to the nappy projects consists in the salary of the full-time Council employee responsible for co-ordinating the nappy network. There are also some resources – estimated to be around £10,000 per year - devoted to expenses for network members, venue hire, leaflets and display as well as any other event costs.

Partners The success of the nappy projects relies on forming successful relationships with partners such as hospitals, nurseries and other community groups. It is indeed essential for volunteers promoting washable nappies to have access to antenatal groups or groups of new mothers.

Staffing As mentioned above, there is one full-time Network co-ordinator employed by the Council. This co-ordinator supports a network of 70 volunteers promoting washable nappies throughout Surrey.

105

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

2. Behaviour change in action

The section below gives details about the two nappy projects currently run by the Waste Minimisation division in Surrey County Council.

The Real Nappy Network Approach The Surrey Real Nappy Network (SRNN) consists of a network of volunteers co-ordinated by a Council employee. The Network has been going in name only for several years but it has expanded greatly in the past year with the appointment of a Council employee whose sole responsibility is to work on the promotion of real nappies. The Network now includes 70 volunteers, all current or previous users of real nappies, who attend pre-or post-natal meetings to expose the benefits of real nappies to future or new mothers. The network members undertake both home visits and demonstrations across the county.

A countywide incentive scheme exists that was created by the Coordinator; so far, four local authorities have begun to offer the incentive to their residents. In these areas, people wishing to give real nappies a try are offered a subsidised start-up nappy kit. The co-ordinator also holds regular ‘Nappucinos’ events in each local council area.

One of the reasons for the regular and steady expansion of the Network is the inclusiveness of the Network, all members are valued highly by the coordinator and their help is always appreciated. Regular feedback is ongoing between coordinator and volunteers to ensure that any useful changes are incorporated into the running of the project and that any issues are resolved at an early stage. Rewards are offered to Network members and various ‘fun’ options are available, such as having their babies in the 2007 SRNN calendar, or joining other members on a ‘day out’ as a thank you for a years work. As far as real nappies are concerned, the Council’s objective is to offer parents a choice. New parents are gently encouraged to give it a go, either on a part-time basis (i.e. not switching to real nappies completely) or on a full-time basis. Meetings with the co-ordinator are also an opportunity for volunteers to air their views and for the co-ordinator to pick up new ideas.

As a result of this two-way exchange, volunteers feel appreciated and are able to go back in their community to trial new approaches within the remit of the Council. Our interviewee also believed that the fact that the Network is Council-backed gives it a sense of

106

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

legitimacy that some community-based nappy networks may lack. She also firmly believed that this is an essential factor in attracting new volunteers. In addition, volunteers know that the council supports them in what they do and this gives them confidence to undertake talks or demonstrations in the knowledge that they are part of something wider.

This Network is also a relatively cost-effective way to engage the community. Apart from the cost of the co-ordinator, there are indeed very few costs involved in running the Network. The cost of developing promotion materials includes a one-off cost and is relatively low thereafter. Similarly, the cost of demonstration materials does not exceed £50 per volunteer. Volunteers are reimbursed for their out-of- pocket expenses but maybe because of the socio-demographics of Surrey, very few volunteers claim their expenses.

The fact that the time of a Council employee is completely devoted to the promotion of real nappies has also played a major part in helping develop the Network.

Target Audience The target audience for this project includes both ‘bumps’ and new mothers. Friends, grandparents and other peer groups are also targeted.

Real Nappies in Nurseries A trial with a Sure Start Children’s Centre has also been running since September. Children’s Centres provide a range of services for children aged birth to five years and their families. These services include childcare, self help groups and parenting groups, child and family health services, support for children with special needs. They are intended to be the focus of the local community and the intention is that there is a Children’s Centre for every 800 children in Surrey.

This ‘flagship’ centre has opted to use washable nappies without compromise in its nursery. Parents who wish to use disposables must bring them in and take them home. The nappies for the nursery at the Children’s Centre were bought by the local council in that area and are washed on-site using facilities capable of meeting the relevant standards. The SRNN will also be providing regular talks to new and existing parents.

This is the first of 50 proposed centres in Surrey. Should this trial be successful, the programme will be rolled out to the other centres. This range of services ensures that almost any parent in Surrey will have a use for the centre giving the SRNN and Washable Nappy project the best possible reach to its target audience.

107

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Other independent nurseries have expressed an interest in moving to washable nappies. Where no on-site facilities exist, a collection is offered, on a trial basis, for the removal of nappies to an NHS laundry in Chichester (nearest suitable facility) and clean nappies returned. This trial has yet to begin, as nurseries are deciding how to implement the scheme and how best to bear the cost of the laundry service when the Council trial is over. Most nurseries are preparing to simply increase the costs of day care accordingly and have not expressed any undue concerns over this. This may be because the nurseries that volunteered to be on this scheme have staff already pro-washable nappies. This is definitely the type of project that could be transferable elsewhere provided local conditions are favourable, i.e. nurseries are willing to change to real nappies.

Target audience The potential multiplier effect of targeting nurseries/children’s centres is large. Children attending the children’s centres are in effect a captive audience since this is not an opt-in scheme. It would be interesting to see the results from this trial, especially in terms of whether parents with children attending the participating children centres start using washable nappies at home too.

3. Evaluation

Due to her focus on real nappies, the co-ordinator has been able to closely monitor the impact of her work. Although there has not been any formal evaluation of the Network, the co-ordinator makes an informed guess on the number of mothers who will take up real nappies after a Nappucino event. She will then go back to the same group of people to see how good her ‘guess’ was.

Since the target audience are ‘bumps’ and new parents, the evaluation of the Surrey Real Nappy Network follows the guideline set out in the WRAP toolkit and assumes that those converted to real nappies use them all the time. Since there has not been any formal evaluation of the Network yet, there is no published tonnage number of nappies diverted from landfill. Other indicators used include the number of people: • SRNN interacted with; • who benefited from home visits; and • who have joined various incentives schemes.

A questionnaire was sent out in October 2006 to evaluate some of these approaches. A summary report on the impact of incentives should be available in January 2007.

It is expected that the Network co-ordinator will adopt a more systematic approach in evaluating the impact of the Nappy Network in Surrey. A new monitoring and evaluation package has indeed been designed and will be in effect from January 2007. Indicators used as

108

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

part of this package will include an estimate of tonnage diverted, as well as number of new users, current users, whole or partial users. The number of events, home visits and incentivised packs sold will continue to be captured. These indicators will be compared to total births per year in Surrey to help estimate the impact of the Network on new parents. They will also be used to calculate the impact of the Network on diversion as a percentage of the possible nappy waste available that year.

4. Outcomes In terms of impact, it has reportedly been relatively easy to help local mothers to make the decision to switch to washable nappies. The message transmitted through volunteers that every action counts is crucial to this success as it does not seek to make new parents feel guilty if they only use one real nappy a day.

The SRNN has undoubtedly help raise awareness as more packs are requested and more talks are required by interested parties. In addition, publicity is never paid for as it is always freely offered or gained by successful events, which suggest that the Network is seen as credible and innovative. From 2007, there should be more ‘hard data’ to back up success claims but our interviewee felt that it was important to continue capture the ‘stories’ associated with this project, for its value in a social context as well as an environmental one.

However, it remains difficult to measure whether parents using washable nappies do so in a consistent way throughout the day every day or whether they also use disposable nappies.

The Council attributes its overall success with the Real Nappy Network to the gentle approach adopted. The objective of the project is to inform the local population about choices available to them. It also believes that one reason for its success was its willingness to be bold as it is a big investment to dedicate an officer to this. But the rewards have been in line with this investment and the network is now one of the largest and most active networks in the UK, as well as a constantly innovative project to engage and advise.

5. Further information and contact

Marianne Cole, Waste Projects Officer, Surrey County Council Email: [email protected] www.surreycc.gov.uk

109

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name The Surrey Scholar Research Project in Waste Recycling Principal delivery agent University of Surrey Partners Guildford Borough Council Project duration 2003-2004

1. Project background and operational details

Background The Surrey Scholar Research Project was conducted at the University of Surrey in 2003-041. The full project was primarily a research project explicitly concerned with changing household recycling behaviour. It involved: • a literature review, • a series of quantitative surveys and questionnaire-based experiments, • a large-scale field experiment and; • a qualitative focus group study.

The field experiment is the focus of this case study.

The overall aims of the research were to identify the psychological factors involved in household recycling and to find innovative ways to increase participation in recycling. The study followed a rigorous process starting with a literature review that looked at psychological evidence on interventions to increase recycling with a view to establish a framework. Findings were classified in terms of personal and social identities and their respective social and personal norms.

The research team then related this framework to a sample of the Guildford Borough population’s personal and social characteristics in order to establish a predictive model of individual kerbside participation. The personal and social characteristics of this sample population were collected through the Social Incentives Survey in the Onslow Village and Park Barn area of Guildford Borough. Findings showed that • attitudes are just one contributor to recycling intentions and behaviour. Where attitudes are already very positive, it is more efficient to focus on other predictors. • it is important to make people feel like good recyclers rather than point out their failings. Indeed, self-identification was found to be a significant predictor of both intentions and actual recycling behaviour.

1 The Surrey Scholar Research Project in Waste Recycling 2003-2004, Full Report, D. Nigbur, E. Lyons. D. Uzzell & R. Leach, 2005

110

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

• another way to increase recycling is by emphasising that recycling makes a real difference as responsibility for recycling was also found to be a good predictor of recycling intentions. • social norms and the social context were the other two variables found to be important predictors, hence the importance of campaigns making recycling socially normative.

After identifying predictors and barriers for local recycling behaviour in the preceding phases, the objective of the field experiment was to try and develop identity and norms towards increased participation through group-level feedback.

A number of focus groups were subsequently conducted with residents to explore whether the ‘recycler’ identity is a desirable one and to probe other issues such as local recycling routines, spontaneous responses to participation feedback, responsibilities for environmentally friendly waste management and potential improvement to the kerbside scheme.

Funding Funding was provided by the Surrey Scholar Fund. Details about funding for this particular phase of the project are not available.

Partners The field experiment was specified in partnership with Guildford Borough Council. The Council also supported the research team by providing all the marketing materials. When the research was complete, the research team presented the findings to local councillors and civil servants from the local authority.

Staffing For the field experiment, the research team consisted of the main researcher, supported by a couple of students.

2. Behaviour change in action

The Experiment The approach taken in this experiment was not specifically community-based nor did it directly appeal to people to change behaviour. Instead, it subtly called upon people’s psychological construct in terms of their self-identity as a recycler. In addition, the approach sought to test the extent to which recycling was already established as a social norm or could become established as a social norm through a performance feedback mechanism.

111

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The field experiment used the same residential sample that participated in the Social Incentives Survey2 and involved 1,872 households. The sample area was divided into street neighbourhoods and the project consisted in giving feedback to households on how participation in their own street neighbourhood compared with either other street neighbourhoods or with participation at the last collection or with a fixed target.

Each street was randomly allocated an experimental condition. Four experimental conditions were defined: • ‘better than other’ feedback (downward social comparison) • ‘worse than other’ feedback (upward social comparison) • ‘two weeks ago’ feedback (temporal) • target feedback (arbitrarily set at around 10% above the baseline level of participation for Onslow Village and Park Barn).

The sample area was therefore divided into seven different groupings as the last two conditions included two sub-groups (‘better than’ and ‘worse than’) and a larger control group.

The experiment consisted of monitoring participation in the sample area for a period of 10 weeks which included five collections. On collection day, the main researcher and an assistant followed the collection vehicle recording Green Box set out for each address in the sample area. The first trip was not preceded by any feedback. Results from this trip were used as a baseline measure for three purposes: • to fix the comparison target; • to find out participation rates before feedback started; • to classify households into baseline recyclers and non-recyclers.

The following three monitoring trips were preceded by feedback sent to residents according to the experimental conditions to which their household had been allocated. Feedback was sent by post in the form of an A5 sheet such as the one reproduced on the right hand side.

After three rounds of feedback to households, feedback was discontinued. Participation was however monitored one last time to see whether the participation effects recorded when feedback was given would continue when feedback information was no longer provided.

2 See Section 1

112

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Target Audience As mentioned in the previous section, the research team identified and surveyed their target audience before starting the field experiment. The objective of this baseline survey was to relate psychological predictors to actual participation (as recorded during the field experiment).

The research team received 531 questionnaires back3, a response rate of 28.4%. Recyclers were slightly over-represented in this self- selecting sample but researchers decided that the sample was sufficiently well-balanced to be able to use the survey results.

The research team did not ‘use’ the survey findings to define and plan the field experiment. However, survey findings provided corroboration for the theory of planned behaviour. They also confirmed that attitudes towards recycling, perceived control over recycling and the personal pro-recycling norm did not necessarily predict actual behaviour but were linked to behaviour via the intention to recycle. The results were also used to make recommendations for education and communication interventions.

3. Evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation were an integral part of the field experiment as the objective of this experiment was to test the predictive model developed in the precedent phase of the overall project (See Section 1).

As described in Section 2, participation was monitored by the main researcher and an assistant during a period of 10 weeks. Outcomes (i.e. changes in participation) were then statistically analysed in relation to the experimental condition in each area in order to draw conclusions about the impact of feedback. The research team had to manipulate the data to correct for the relatively large variations in the baseline set-out rate amongst the different areas. This was necessary to allow meaningful comparisons between areas and experimental conditions.

4. Outcomes

Comparisons with the control group showed that feedback can lead to an increase in recycling participation but it is necessary to tailor feedback to the audience. In particular, • non-recyclers may be most receptive to messages telling them that their street had performed better than other streets or a fixed target;

3 A total of 1,872 questionnaires were mailed to residents in the Onslow Village and Park Barn areas of Guildford in the autumn of 2003.

113

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

• they also found that residents in the higher socio-demographic groups responded better to a wider variety of feedbacks than residents in lower socio-demographic groups who tended to only respond to feedback relating to other street neighbourhoods. • Although the researchers did find a positive link between the residential group that received ‘better than others’ feedback and self- identification as a recycler, they noted that “the analysis of psychological variables before and after the feedback experiment did not yield many insights about the operation of feedback”.

Since the project specifically focused on participation, the evaluation did not measure the impact of feedback on tonnes of waste diverted through recycling.

Findings from this research project prompted Guildford Borough Council to launch a new project called ‘Community Recyclers’. The objective of this project is to develop a network of volunteers who are prepared to encourage their local communities to recycle. Volunteers are asked to reinforce the ‘recycling’ social norm by one or several of the following tasks:

• making sure their kerbside collection boxes are put out on the correct day and time to remind their neighbours to do the same; • writing articles for their community, church, school or parish council newsletter; • putting posters up on noticeboards in their community; • delivering leaflets to their neighbours; • organise a clear-out day or book swap

5. Further information and contact

Professor David Uzzell, University of Surrey Email: [email protected] www.surrey.ac.uk

114

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name What not to waste Principal delivery agent Waste Watch - Recycle Western Riverside Team Partners London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham, Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, London Borough of Lambeth, London Borough of Wandsworth, Western Riverside Waste Authority Project duration April – June 2006

1. Project background and operational details

The ‘What Not to Waste’ (WNtW) project was a two-month initiative directly engaging households in waste prevention and minimisation activities. The project formed part of the five-year Recycle Western Riverside (RWR) communication and education campaign run by Waste Watch on behalf of the four London Western Riverside Boroughs (see above) and the Western Riverside Waste Authority. The five- year campaign aims to increase recycling, reduce residual waste and encourage purchase of recycled products.

The aim of the WNtW project was to test the effectiveness of directly engaging households in a single waste prevention initiative and the impact this has on reducing overall waste output and changing waste behaviour.

Participating households were selected from across the four Western Riverside boroughs. Each household was given three fortnightly missions to reduce their waste and to adopt more sustainable consumption habits. Households received assistance, advice and ongoing support in the form of information packs, home visits by RWR support officers, training workshops with RWR staff and equipment. The performance of all households was monitored over the duration of the campaign.

The WNtW project took inspiration from successful approaches used in Europe, particularly by the Belgian NGO Espace Environnement, and selected specific waste prevention activities that were considered to be relevant and feasible for Western Riverside residents and fitted with the overall objectives of the RWR campaign.

Funding The overall five-year RWR campaign is funded by Cory Environmental through the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme. Additional funding was received from the European Union through the Interreg III grant scheme, which was used to deliver the WNtW project, among others.

The EU grant required match funding, which proved difficult to obtain. However, Waste Watch succeeded in securing additional funding from a number of sources including the partner authorities and a Defra Waste and Resources R&D programme research grant.

115

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The project was funded with approximately £9,000 in addition to staff time. The latter consisted predominantly of the Waste Prevention Officer’s time with approximately ten weeks full-time dedicated to the overall coordination project. Fifteen days each were spent on the project by the team of four Project Support Officers (PSOs) responsible for direct contact with the participating households throughout the project. The Community Outreach Officer also spent approximately fifteen days recruiting participants through community events, assisting with the launch event and coordinating the composting workshop.

Two thirds of the budget was dedicated to communications support provided by another part of Waste Watch, who managed all press releases and media contacts and publicity events at the start and the end of the project.

Approximately £800 was spent on equipment provided to participating households, in addition to a further £800 for vouchers which were used as an incentive for participants to try out more sustainable products from the Natural Collection catalogue range. A composting training workshop cost a further £600.

The project was conceived and marketed as a one-off initiative to inform future campaigns and initiatives focusing on waste prevention and behaviour change.

Partners There were no partners directly involved in the delivery of the WNtW project.

Staffing A range of Waste Watch staff were involved in the delivery of the WNtW project, with day-to-day project management responsibility being held by the RWR Waste Prevention Officer.

Community engagement and support was provided by a team of four PSOs. Their primary role was to undertake advise the participating households on the challenges and give practical advice on recycling and waste minimisation. They also carried out regular waste audits used to monitor the impact of the initiative on waste generation. Waste audit training was provided by the RWR Education Officer.

Participating households were recruited by the Community Outreach Officer, using an existing network of community contacts in each of the four boroughs. Other staff involved included members of the communications team, who assisted in generating media coverage for the project.

116

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach Each participating household was given fortnightly challenges focused on the three core campaign aims of ‘recycle’, ‘reduce’ and ‘reuse’. The project was launched by events in each of the four boroughs, which were attended by the participating households and representatives from the respective local authorities, as well as local media.

During the first week of the eight-week initiative, Project Support Officers visited participants in their homes to train them on how to separate their waste correctly and how to store it for weekly weighing.

The first challenge was then introduced in week 2 of the project and involved educating households to correctly use the kerbside collection system provided by the local authorities by separating all their recyclable materials into their recycling sack and composting all kitchen and garden waste. Participants were invited to a composting workshop run by the London Community Recycling Network to enable them to make the most of their home composting equipment. The workshop was attended by four households.

Challenge two focused on educating households how to reduce their waste by preventing junk mail, smarter shopping and reusing shopping bags. Participating households were also provided with £50 vouchers from the Natural Collection to enable them to buy recycled and more sustainable products.

The final challenge focused on reuse, for example donating or swapping unwanted items, buying second-hand items and recycled products. The project team provided households with advice and information on charity shops in their area and one of the participants, a new mother, became particularly interested in reusable nappies, prompting her to become involved in a local nappy network. Another participant also held a very successful ‘Reuse Party’ with friends and family.

The challenges were introduced to participants in three stages (one per fortnight), rather than all at once, so as to gradually raise the level of difficulty. Written instructions were given at the start of each challenge to provide key information and a reference point to which they could refer to at any point throughout the initiative.

At the start of each challenge, participants received an in-home briefing from the Project Support Officers, who were also on hand throughout the challenges to provide advice and support. In total, each participating household received five home visits in total.

Participants were given equipment and materials that were considered to be useful to successfully complete the challenges, such as kitchen caddies, spring balances, ‘No junk mail’ and ‘Return to sender’ stickers and reusable cotton bags. Participants were also able to select other optional equipment and materials including composting bins and wormeries, can crushers and dual indoor bins.

117

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

To support the participating households and reinforce messages about recycling and sustainable waste management, the WNtW Challenge also involved a number of additional activities such as site visits to Mucking Landfill Site and to Grosvenor Materials Recycling Facility.

The project was concluded by a final publicity event held at the London Eye. All project participants were invited to a ride in a private capsule, which had been hired for the occasion. This kind of event was chosen both to award the participants for completing the challenge and to maximise attention by the Western Riverside and London media.

The initiative was designed to complement the other elements of the Western Riverside communications campaign and one of the aims of the project was to publicise the reduction in waste achieved by participants and use this as a motivational tool. Therefore, a large proportion of the project budget (nearly two thirds) was allocated to communications support and publicity events, making the project very resource intensive. However, it could be delivered with a considerably lower budget if fewer resources are dedicated to publicity.

The results of the project showed that by providing ongoing hands-on support and relevant advice, behaviour change can be achieved. The local community focus of the initiative was particularly important, as the participants’ achievements serve as an example of what other residents in the borough can do to reduce their own environmental impact by making simple changes to their daily lives.

Target Audience The project targeted four specific resident groups, which were shown to have below average recycling rates in a MORI report commissioned by the RWR Team in 2005, and are generally considered to be ‘hard-to-reach’ in terms of recycling communication: Black and Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME), parents and children, residents living on estates and 16-24 year olds. Other criteria were also considered, including low participation and awareness of recycling and waste prevention, perceived receptiveness to change, willingness to participate for the entire length of the campaign and willingness to participate in publicity events.

Out of thirty interested parties, sixteen households, four from each borough, were selected to participate in the challenge. Of these, two dropped out over the course of the project: one due to a change in workplace, which made it more difficult to participate, and the other as a result of loss of motivation.

Participants were recruited using existing contacts to environmental and community groups in the boroughs, such as the local Time Bank. Despite access to this network, it proved difficult to engage a large number of people and most of the interested people were more likely to have a high environmental awareness. For example, of the participating households, only three did not recycle any of their waste at the start of the challenge. However, many of those recycling did not always use the collection systems correctly or consistently. None had attempted to undertake any waste prevention activities.

118

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The challenges and activities were chosen specifically to make it as easy as possible for participants to complete them, so as to highlight that everyone can do something to reduce their waste generation.

3. Evaluation

As the project aimed to test the effectiveness of a range of household waste prevention initiatives and engagement techniques, evaluation formed an integral part of the project. Evaluation and monitoring methods adopted during the campaign were selected to measure the impact that waste prevention activities had on changing waste behaviour and overall waste output.

The four PSOs, who delivered the participant engagement component, were trained in undertaking waste audits. Each household was audited by one of the PSOs prior to the first challenge and after the completion of the final challenge. This was to assess the change in the types of waste disposed of by the participants, evaluate their recycling performance and find out which kinds of materials were still deemed difficult to recycle or reduce. Initial waste audits were performed over two days by different staff members and as a result some inconsistencies occurred in the recording of data. Where there was incomplete data, this was removed from the calculations to prevent bias. In addition, waste audit collection weeks for both audits fell on a Bank Holiday weekend. An average was therefore taken for households away on holiday for any days of the collection week.

Participants were also asked to weigh their residual waste and recyclables every time they put a bag out for collection to monitor any changes over the three challenges. However, participants did not always remember to weigh their waste, leading to inconsistency in the data obtained. As a result, this method was not considered effective at monitoring waste production levels over the campaign and was not included in the overall report.

All participants completed a questionnaire survey prior to the first challenge, which focused on their knowledge of and attitudes to recycling and waste prevention as well as waste and shopping habits. This survey was repeated after the final challenge. Participants were also asked to complete an evaluation questionnaire for each challenge to provide information on the effectiveness and uptake of specific activities and to monitor any changes in attitudes and behaviour of participants as a result of the individual challenges. It was not possible to obtain a complete set of attitudinal data and evaluation data, however. While the first pre-survey questionnaire was administered face-to-face, the post-survey was posted to participants for self-completion. As a result, three households did not return the second questionnaire, the final evaluation or the monitoring and evaluation form. Results from the questionnaire surveys were only included in this report if both sets of data were obtained. For all other data, results were based on the average of responses that were received.

119

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Two envelopes were provided to each household to collect all junk mail received for each month of the challenge. Envelopes were weighed to evaluate any changes to the volume of mail received. However, this method of evaluating the volume of junk mail proved to be ineffective. Some households had already signed up to the MPS and had a ‘No Junk Mail’ sticker on the door so this measurement was not applicable to them. Participants also forgot to collect all their junk mail. An average was calculated from those who successfully collected their junk mail, for all other households.

As the monitoring activities formed part of the PSOs’ and Waste Prevention Officer’s staff time, no separate budget allocation was made and no data is available on the amount of time spent on monitoring and evaluation activities.

4. Outcomes

Almost all participating households reduced their total waste arisings over the duration of the project, which decreased from a total of 173kg per week at the outset of the project to 113kg after the completion of the final challenge.

There has been a significant change in the proportion of waste recycled, with participants recycling an average of 58 percent at the end of the project compared to an initial 39 percent. Contamination also decreased significantly from 7 percent at the beginning of the project to 1.7 percent at the end.

Other behavioural impacts the project has had include a reduction in the use of one-way plastic carrier bags (62 percent to 7 percent) and a corresponding increase in ‘Bags for Life’ being used to carry shopping (93 percent at the end of the project).

Data was monitored for the duration of the campaign, i.e. an eight-week period. While the data gathered showed significant changes during this time, the short duration of the project makes it difficult to gauge the impact on behaviour change in the long-term. The project team are planning to undertake a follow-up survey with the participants after about six to eight months to ascertain whether the households have maintained their new recycling and waste prevention habits.

The project is transferable to any setting, but it is important to keep the focus of all activities local and relevant to services available to participants. Tailoring the challenges to suit the particular interests of participants was also a useful tool for ensuring ongoing enthusiasm and involvement.

However, the project required greater than anticipated input from the PSOs. For example, fewer home visits per household had been expected to be carried out, but the number was increased as a result of requests for greater support from the participating households.

120

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

5. Further information and contact

Jackie McKeay, Waste Prevention Officer, Waste Watch Email: [email protected] www.westernriverside.org.uk

121

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Project Name Climate Friendly Communities (CFC) Principal delivery agent Wiltshire Wildlife Trust (WWT) Partners Wiltshire County Council, Swindon Borough Council, Kennet District Council, Salisbury District Council, West Wiltshire District Council, North Wiltshire District Council, Envolve, Bath University, The Women’s Institute, Friends of the Earth, Climate Outreach and Information Network (COIN) Project duration March 2005 – March 2008

1. Project background and operational details

The ‘Climate Friendly Communities’ (CFC) project is a pilot project trialling a new model of engaging residents in activities to reduce their environmental impact. The idea originated from a previous Wiltshire Wildlife Trust (WWT) project entitled ‘Switch on Swindon’, which was a year-long competition to find Swindon’s most energy-efficient council ward in. The Fair Trade town concept also influenced the project’s development.

The aim of the CFC project is to stimulate debate about climate change and to demonstrate that everyone has the capacity to reduce their environmental impact and adopt a more sustainable lifestyle. It was conceived to change everyday behaviour patterns by posing communities a set of challenges focusing on four topics: sustainable transport, energy efficacy and renewable energy, waste minimisation and local, organic, seasonal food.

A ‘Climate Friendly Community’ is classified as a town, village or street (in larger urban areas) that has registered on the CFC scheme and has committed itself to taking action to reduce its CO2 emissions.

Funding The main source of funding for the CFC project is Defra’s Environmental Action Fund (EAF), contributing approximately £30,000 per year for three years. The EAF grant regulations require the grant to be match funded by an equal amount. WWT have sought to obtain match funding from electricity provider Npower, through appeals to their membership and by making applications to charitable trusts.

Securing match funding remains difficult and is one of the priorities of the project officer. However, it constitutes a time-intensive activity, which reduces the time available for project delivery.

Approximately 70 percent of the project funding is spent on staff salaries, with the remainder going on promotional and support materials and transport.

122

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

The Wildlife Trust relies on grant funding to a large extent, but core funding is covered by membership contributions, donations and fundraising. The project is anticipated to end with the end of the current funding. The aim of the engagement method is to instil a high degree of self-sufficiency and initiative in participating communities, so it is hoped that activities will continue long after the project has ended and that permanent behaviour change will be achieved.

Partners WWT collaborates with a wide range of organisations in delivering the project. The support and involvement of the county, district and borough councils is considered important because the councils endorse the project and thereby enhance its credibility.

The University of Bath provides research support. Bath-based organisation Envolve and the Oxford-based Climate Outreach and Information Network (COIN) as well as TravelWise, a Wiltshire County Council initiative, are invaluable for their expert advice on issues such as sustainable food and transport.

WWT’s experience of working with these partners has been largely positive and good working relationships have been established. A number of districts have trialled alternate weekly collections for residual waste. There is some concern that potential negative publicity resulting from this may impact on public attitudes towards the project.

The most important aspect of successful partnership working is to be clear about the objectives and roles of all partners, as well as their individual capacity to deliver and resources available.

Staffing One project officer, who is supported by WWT’s management, works full-time on the CFC project. However, there are overlaps with other projects, such as the Compost Advisor programme, and other WWT staff members provide input and support as appropriate. Staff of partner organisations, such as the councils, may also assist with events and meetings. Local authority community development officers are also involved to ensure links with the implementation of parish plans are identified and utilised.

Occasionally, community members receive payment, but the project largely depends on community volunteers to set up local groups and to engage and recruit other residents to take part in the programme activities and events.

123

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

2. Behaviour change in action

The approach The CFC project invites communities across Wiltshire and Swindon to join a challenge to adopt more sustainable lifestyles with the aim to cut greenhouse gas emissions, particularly CO2, by 20 percent. As an incentive, gold, silver and bronze awards will be given to each community as they progress through a programme of action on four areas of daily life: energy, waste, transport and food.

Drawing on the ‘Four Es’ behaviour change model highlighted in Defra’s 2005 Sustainable Development Strategy, the challenge proposes three ways in which participating communities should seek the support and involvement of as many residents as possible:

• Engage – involving more people in the effort to become ‘climate friendly’ and stimulate their interest in climate change • Exemplify – show and demonstrate what others have achieved in their own or other communities • Enable – help people to make changes in their homes and lives by providing appropriate information and assisting with problem solving

Bronze, silver and gold grades will be awarded in accordance with how many behaviour change techniques or activities have been used per topic, with three being required to receive the highest ‘gold’ award. The details of the scoring system are yet to be developed.

In addition to the action areas, communities are also asked to undertake some ‘core’ elements. These are:

• Pass a council resolution (at parish or town council or other appropriate level) in favour of becoming a Climate Friendly Community • Appoint a Team Leader • Define the community by the approximate number of households involved • Carry out an initial community audit to provide baseline data • Complete an Action Plan, on which the award assessment will be based • Report progress and conduct a carbon survey • Provide records of volunteer time spent • Hold promotion, publicity and educational events • Organise own schools workshop, or one to be carried out by WWT • Promote and attend training days, which will be provided by WWT on request • Appoint an ‘ambassador’ or key volunteer, who can provide information about issues • Develop a community initiative

124

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

Specific activities chosen will depend on what the action group members deem appropriate for their community. WWT groups actions into different categories reflecting the degree of difficulty and effort involved. For example, fitting energy-efficient light bulbs is classed as a ‘fit and forget’ measure, which is relatively easy to achieve. Similarly, there are ‘opportunity measures’ focusing on one-off opportunities to reduce environmental impact, for example by purchasing an energy efficient appliance when the opportunity arises. Other everyday actions, termed as ‘good habits’, require a greater level of effort to achieve and sustain behaviour change such as filling the kettle with only the required amount of water or choosing to travel by local transport.

To date, ten communities have joined the award scheme, with others following their own programme and two of these have held launch events in February and May 2006. As more communities come on board, WWT aims to facilitate active collaboration, information exchange and resource sharing in order to foster a network of climate friendly communities.

In each community, an individual is recruited, who invites others to set up a local action group. The CFC project officer joins the group at their first meeting to work out an action plan, focusing on one or more of the four topics, and to plan a launch event at a local venue. The purpose of the launch is to raise awareness of the project and to engage the entire community.

The approach is different in that it brings together people in their endeavours to reduce their environmental impact. Linking together individuals and communities creates additional momentum or a ‘multiplier effect’ by encouraging people to take further action. It is also hoped that the awards aspect of the challenge will stimulate innovation and competition. It is planned to involve the local media in awards ceremonies in order to galvanise public interest and obtain recognition of communities’ achievements.

Wider benefits resulting from the project may include enhanced community cohesion, greater spending in the local economy and personal financial savings for participants. The approach is deemed cost-effective because by involving volunteers in engaging their own communities, a large audience can be reached with a relatively low resource input. The effectiveness of national campaigns on energy saving or recycling is also likely to be reinforced through these local on-the-ground activities.

The key ingredients to successfully working with community volunteers include instilling a sense of ownership in the participants; being clear on expectations and the level of support WWT can provide. An awareness of the fact that participants are volunteers and the resulting constraints faced by them, such as limited availability of time and resources, is also considered crucial. Furthermore, it is important to harness and sustain participants’ enthusiasm in order to ensure the longevity of the project and its desired outcomes.

Target Audience The target audience of the CFC project are residents across Wiltshire, particularly those who have the capacity to or are already involved in coordinating community groups and networks.

125

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

To date, WWT has established close contacts with 41 individuals, who in turn represent a wide range of people in their community. No advertising or marketing was required to recruit participants because coverage of the project in the local media and the Trust’s membership publications has generated sufficient interest to reach its target of 10 groups. However, WWT recognise that this means that communities involved tend to represent specific socio-economic groups and people already pre-disposed to pro-environmental behaviour.

Throughout the project, the WWT project officer will provide support to the community groups in developing their own initiatives, facilitate their meetings where necessary and attend public events. It is estimated that each group will be supported by WWT for one year during which participants work through the four topic areas.

3. Evaluation

As the project is still in its early stages, to date no project or impact evaluation has been undertaken. The evaluation methodology is currently being developed with assistance from a Defra-funded advisor. There is no specific budget allocation for monitoring and evaluation activities, as it is considered a core activity and performance monitoring is closely linked with the performance assessment for award purposes.

Targets set as part of the funding contract include the engagement of twelve communities in total over the three year period, with at least one community having completed the entire programme by the end of the project. A further target is a 20 percent reduction of CO2 output by the participating communities.

It is intended to undertake ‘community audits’ to produce baseline data for each participating community to act as a benchmark against which to measure impact. Suitable measurement techniques, such as weighing of household waste by participants, are still being considered. It is intended that the participating community will carry out these audits themselves.

In addition to measuring CO2 tonnages, WWT is likely to use awareness and attitudinal surveys to gauge the impact on declared behaviour.

4. Outcomes

To date, ten communities have signed up to the ‘Climate friendly communities’ challenge. However, all of these are yet to embark on the programme.

The approach developed by WWT is transferable to any setting, provided sufficient interest and delivery capacity can be generated among communities. Traditionally ‘hard to reach’ groups are likely to be more difficult to recruit as in other contexts.

126

Establishing the behaviour change evidence base to inform community-based waste prevention and recycling – Case Study Report

5. Further information and contact

Liz Nimmo-Scott, Project Officer, Wiltshire Wildlife Trust Email: [email protected] www. wiltshirewildlife.org

127