LIFE+ Up and

Forward Project: Case Study

B7 Faith

Area:

Date: June 2014

LIFE11 ENV/UK/000389

Contents

Page 1. Executive Summary 2 2. Introduction 5 3 Campaign Area 6 4. Demographics & Acorn Data 8 5. The Approach to the Campaign 10 6. Results 19 7. Conclusion 26 8. Key Learning Points 27

1

Section 1: Executive Summary

1. Introduction

1.1 As part of the EU LIFE+ project Greater Waste Disposal Authority (GMWDA) has carried out a 42 different communications campaigns across nine Districts within (, Bury, Manchester, , , Salford, , and ). Each campaign has had slightly different focus, targeting sections of the community that have traditionally been hard to reach, making the success of recycling schemes in these areas particularly challenging. This project enabled GMWDA to target smaller groups, generally around 1500 households, with much focused recycling messages. This allowed a variety of communication methods and messages to be piloted and the impact of each to be monitored.

The project started in June 2013 and ran until January 2015 across nine Greater Manchester Districts. The project is split into 12 campaigns covering one of the four following themes:

a) Households – focused on communities in disadvantaged areas; b) Students and Short lets – focused on those areas with a high level of rental properties or student rental accommodation; c) Faith and Culture – focused on those areas with a strong religious or cultural background; and d) Apartments – focused on those areas with a high level of low rise or high rise apartments.

1.2 The culture communication campaign reported on in this case study was carried out in the area of It targeted 1301 households and was initiated to explore whether religious beliefs, core attitudes and the way of life promoted by particular faiths can influence communities waste prevention and recycling behaviour.

1.3 The campaign involved engaging with a community following the Christian faith. By engaging with faith groups and leaders the campaign was able to develop innovative ways to increase recycling participation rates across this community. Engagement was supported by social housing providers and the campaign was also able to engage with the local Castle Community Centre, two primary schools (Christ Church Primary School and Lewis Street Primary School), Incredible Edibles (a community planting activity) and finally with the residents in Patricroft. The following also took place; engagement days which hosted activities such as information stands, skip days, bin cleaning, numbering of bins and community planting events; and an art competition at the two selected primary schools.

1.4 Monitoring the impact of the campaign took place in a variety of ways. The number of households that were actively recycling was monitored and any change in the yield of recyclable materials collected in the area was calculated. Targets were set to increase both the set out rates in the study area and the weight of recyclable waste collected. These targets, and the formula used to set them for all of the GMWDA / EU LIFE+ projects are explained in more detail in the project handbook document.

1.5 The organics set out rates increased, however the amount of material collected decreased. The decrease in weight of organics collected could be due to the timings of the monitoring activities. The pre was carried out in June and post in 2

October; the latter timeframes are most likely to yield lower quantities of organics waste due to the inactive growing season. The set out and weight of both the pulpables and commingled waste streams decreased, however, industrial action and school holidays could be mitigating factors. It is therefore hard to say what sort of success the campaign has had on changing residents’ behaviour. Although it is clear that the community interaction and events held brought residents together and hopefully got them thinking about waste disposal habits.

1.6 Religious leaders and charitable organisations of the area welcomed the campaign and worked hard to disseminate throughout the community. They have a heavy influence on the community, many of which see them as role models, their involvement in the campaign helped Project Officers to gain community support and access to schools and parish groups.

2. Aims of the Campaign

2.1 The aim of the faith campaign was to increase recycling in low performing areas that have a high proportion of a particular faith and where the place of worship is the focal point for the community.

Key objectives were as follows:

a) increase the level of recycling for all of the current materials collected; b) raise awareness of the importance of recycling; and c) embed recycling behaviour within identified low performing areas.

3. Key Facts

3.1 The total cost of delivering the activity was €10,093.09 (£8364.04), of which €7,341.02 (£6,079.82) was personnel costs and €2.752.07 (£2.284.22) was consumables. GMWDA received 50% towards the total cost of this activity from the EU LIFE+ programme.

3.2 411 hours spent delivering the campaign.

3.3 Two faith led focus group were held; which led to the launch of the campaign theme ‘Respect’ following the bible principles of ‘Stewardship’.

3.4 Two ‘Respect’ campaign school assemblies were presented.

3.5 Two presentation assemblies for the winners of the ‘respect’ banner colouring competition were held. 60 Primary School children entered the ‘Respect’ banner colouring competition.

3.6 Two religious leaders fully supported the campaign.

3.7 Two volunteer recycling ambassadors were recruited with one being one of the youngest recruited across all campaigns at the age of 15 years. The young volunteer was an asset an inspired other youths within the parish/campaign area.

3.8 Three campaign banners were displayed in the campaign area for three months post campaign.

3.9 1,000 ‘Respect’ Campaign fridge magnets distributed to the campaign community.

3

3.10 An ‘Action Week’ event was organised which involved two volunteers, Local Authority Officials, Social Housing landlords, Charity organisations, community groups and local business enterprises, along with Life+ staff.

4. Results

4.1 Set Out Monitoring

Set out rates for the pulpables and commingled waste streams decreased post campaign, therefore failing to meet the targets set. The pulpables collection decreased by 17%, from 51% (pre) to 34% (post) and the commingled decreased by 16%, from 49% (pre) to 33% (post).

Positively, the set out of the organics waste stream increased post campaign from 20% (pre) to 22% (post).

4.2 Weight Monitoring

The weight of all recyclate collected decreased post campaign. The pulpables materials collected decreased marginally following the campaign, from 3.69 tonnes to 3.52 tonnes, failing to meet the target set of 3.97 tonnes. The weight of the commingled materials collected also decreased from 3.67 tonnes to 2.98 tonnes, failing to meet the target set of 4.02 tonnes. The organics material collected decreased from 12.09 tonnes to 6.90 tonnes, therefore failing to meet the target set of 15.05 tonnes.

4.3 Targets

The weight of pulpables materials collected decreased following the campaign, with the weight of waste collected decreasing from 3.69 tonnes to 3.52 tonnes, which is 88.61% of the target set. The weight of commingled materials collected decreased also, with the weight of waste collected decreasing from 3.67 tonnes to 2.98 tonnes, which is 74.91% of the target set. Finally the weight of organics materials collected decreased following the campaign, with the weight of waste collected decreasing from 12.09 tonnes to 6.90 tonnes, which is 45.84% of the target set.

4

Section 2: Introduction

2. 2.1 The faith campaign is one of 12 campaigns run by GMWDA’s Up and Forward project. Each campaign has had slightly different focus, targeting sections of the community that have traditionally been hard to reach, making the success of recycling schemes in these areas particularly challenging.

2.2 The campaign targeted 1301 households in the Patricroft area of Eccles to raise awareness of the importance of recycling, embed correct recycling behaviour and increase recycling rates across three waste streams – pulpables, commingled and organics. It ran for 22 weeks from June 2014 until October 2014.

2.3 As many faith groups tend to have a religious focal point in the area, and religion has a deep meaning, the campaign looked to explore whether their religious beliefs could be aligned to pro recycling behaviour. To help promote the recycling message, the campaign sought support from community and faith leaders and religious group from the Christian faith. Religious gatherings were used as focal points for the campaign and community ambassadors were recruited to carry out local research to understand the practices and obstacles to recycling. Whilst traditional methods of delivering a recycling message were still used, this campaign focused highly on ‘face to face’ engagement, through schools, church workshops, community events and ‘door to door’.

2.4 As a result of feedback received early on in the campaign an ‘Action Week’ event was organised for August 2014. This involved two volunteers, Local Authority Officials, Social Housing landlords, Charity organisations, community groups and local business enterprises, along with Life+ staff. The campaign had a positive impact on the campaign area and resident awareness. The ‘Action Week’ involved:

a) information, distribution and activities via an on-street ‘pop-up’ stand; b) removal of large items including a charitable furniture collection service; c) bin cleaning; d) bin marking/paint spraying; e) door to door step engagement; f) community planting activity; and g) litter picking.

2.5 It was expected that over the duration of the campaign residents would feel empowered to tackle their own waste, improving recycling rates in the area.

5

Section 3: Campaign Area

3 3.1 The campaign area of Patricroft, Eccles was selected based on the following two data sets:

a) records of the weight of waste collected at the kerbside for the various waste streams; and b) socio demographic profile of the area and local knowledge.

Examining these two data sets enabled the selection of a study area that is both low performing in the yield of recyclable materials collected and is home to clusters of populations belonging to different faith groups.

Map: B7 Patricroft, Eccles study area by output area

3.2 About Salford (www.salford.gov.uk)

3.2.1 The is a city and of Greater Manchester, . It is named after its largest settlement, Salford but it covers a far larger area of 20 wards which include Eccles, Swinton and , and which all (apart from Irlam) each have a population over 35,000.

3.2.2 The city has a population of 233,933 and is administered from the in Swinton. Of the Usual total residents in households 37.1% live in flat/apartment/maisonette accommodation, 30.1% terraced, 40.2% Semi- detached and 10.8% detached.

6

3.2.3 Of the total population the majority of white 90.1%, followed by Asian 4.1%, Black 2.8% and mixed ethnic groups 2%.

3.2.4 Salford has a recycling rate of 41% (as at June 2014).

3.3 About Eccles (www.salford.gov.uk)

3.3.1 Eccles is a ward in Salford of North West, England and includes areas of Patricroft, Barton Moss, Chorlton Fold, Winton, , Westwood , Alder Forest, Bent Lanes, , Hope, , Monton, Little Bolton, Lyntown Trading Estate Business and Technology Centre, Newhaven Business Park and Barton Business Park.

3.3.2 In the 2011 census the population of Eccles was 11,217 and is made up of approximately 50% females and 50% males. The average age of people in Eccles is 41, while the median age is lower at 40.

3.3.3 92.8% of people living in Eccles speak English. The other top languages spoken are 1.6% Arabic, 1.3% Polish, 0.7% Bengali, 0.4% Urdu, 0.3% Czech, 0.2% Tagalog/Fillipino, 0.2% Punjabi, 0.2% All other Chinese and 0.1% Slovak.

3.4 Household Collection Service

3.4.1 offers facilities for commingled recycling of glass, plastic bottles, cans (brown bin); organics including garden and food waste (pink lid bin); and pulpables including paper, cardboard and drinks cartons (blue bin). Organics are collected weekly, pulpables and commingled are collected every two weeks. Residual waste is collected two weekly.

3.5 Identifying a low performing collection round

Waste collection data was analysed for the period between May to August 2013. Salford were unable to provide an accurate count of households served per collection round, therefore the number of properties per round was estimated and based on the total number of properties in the District receiving a kerbside collection, divided by the number of rounds for each waste stream.

The tonnages provided for the three recyclable waste streams (pulpables, commingled and organics) have been used to estimate the amount of kilograms produced per household for the selected round. The table below presents the average tonnages of waste materials generated for the selected round. Where 1 is the lowest yield, the pulpables round ranked 10th and the commingled round ranked 12th out of 72 rounds operated by Salford. The organics waste stream ranked 9th out of the 36 rounds operated.

Table: Round ranking based on average kg collected per household per collection

7

Section 4: Demographics and Acorn Data

4 4.1 ACORN data was used to determine the demographic profile of the study area. ACORN is a segmentation tool which categorises the UK’s population into demographic types. ACORN combines geography with demographics and lifestyle information, and the places where people live with their underlying characteristics and behaviour, to create a tool for understanding the different types of people in different areas throughout the country. ACORN segments households, postcodes and neighbourhoods into 6 categories, 18 groups and 62 types.

4.2 The table below presents the ACORN profile by Category and Group classifications of the study area and compares this to Greater Manchester as a whole. Around two thirds (60%) of the sample is represented by ACORN 5 ‘Urban Adversity’, with 30% falling into Group O ‘Young Hardship’ and 25% falling into Group Q ‘Difficult Circumstances’. Households within this Category are more likely to be deprived, with higher levels of long term unemployment and higher proportions claiming benefits.

A further 38% are classified as ACORN 4 ‘Financially Stretched’, with 18% falling into Group M ‘Striving Families’ and 13% Group L Modest Means’. ACORN Category 4 is characterised by having a mix of families, including singles, couples with children and single parent households. The age profile of this Category is younger and incomes fall below the national average. Unemployment levels may be above average.

Table: ACORN classification of B7 Salford study area and Greater Manchester.

Greater Manchester B7 Salford profile ACORN Classification profile Count % Count % 1 Affluent Achievers 0 0 212,941 19 1.A Lavish Lifestyles 0 0 11,111 1 1.B Executive Wealth 0 0 103,091 9 1.C Mature Money 4 0 98,739 9 2 Rising Prosperity 0 0 63,314 6 2.D City Sophisticates 0 0 18,119 2 2.E Career Climbers 0 0 45,195 4 3 Comfortable Communities 57 2 258,428 22 3.F Countryside Communities 0 0 5,987 1 3.G Successful Suburbs 0 0 52,546 5 3.H Steady Neighbourhoods 0 0 109,703 10 3.I Comfortable Seniors 0 0 30,665 3 3.J Starting Out 57 2 59,527 5 4 Financially Stretched 1,029 38 303,715 26 4.K Student Life 0 0 22,982 2 4.L Modest Means 361 13 132,581 12 4.M Striving Families 492 18 82,082 7 4.N Poorer Pensioners 176 6 66,070 6 5 Urban Adversity 1,644 60 310,023 27 5.O Young Hardship 810 30 112,302 10 5.P Struggling Estates 153 6 83,816 7 5.Q Difficult Circumstances 681 25 113,905 10 6 Not Private Households 5 0 1,651 0

4.3 The table below presents the ethnic profile of the B7 Salford study area; this shows similar proportions of White residents to the Greater Manchester area (87% and 84% respectively). There are slightly lower proportions of Asian or Asian British residents in the 8

study area than in the Greater Manchester area (6% and 10% respectively).

Table: Ethnic profile of B7 Salford study area and Greater Manchester

B7 Salford Profile Greater Manchester Ethnicity (%) Profile (%)

White 87 84 Mixed 2 2 Asian or Asian British 6 10 Black or Black British 2 3

Chinese or Other Ethnic Group 3 1

4.4 The table below presents the religious profile of the Salford B7 Study area; this shows a similar proportion of Christian residents when comparing the Greater Manchester area (both at 62%)

Table: Religious profile of B7 Salford study area and Greater Manchester

4.5 In summary, based on the information collated above, the round selected for the B7 Salford campaign was both low performing in the yield of recyclable materials collected and, whilst showing high levels of deprivation, also contained a high population of populations of Christian residents.

9

Section 5: The Approach to the Campaign

5 5.1 The campaign employed two members of staff, a Campaign Officer and an Outreach worker from GMWDA.

5.2 Following the selection of the target area (see section 3), monitoring of set out rates took place and the current weight of waste and recycling collected at the kerbside was established. Targets were then set to increase both the set out rates in the study area and the weight of recyclable waste collected.

5.3 The campaign focused around the Christian community and targeted key places of worship which formed a focal point for the local community. The campaign was initiated to carry a recycling message to a demographic group that was recognised as being ‘hard to reach’ where traditional doorstep canvassing have proved to be ineffective. It set out to explore whether pro recycling behaviour could be aligned to religious beliefs. To encourage changes in recycling behaviour, the campaign looked to deliver targeted messages though community engagement with the recruitment of recycling ambassadors and the involvement of religious leaders and groups around the Christian faith.

5.4 The delivery of the campaign followed three set phases: research, engagement and behavioural change, with pre and post monitoring occurring before and after the main campaign periods. The main elements of the campaign were as follows:

Research (30th June Engagement (28th July Behavioural Change (25th 2014 – 26th July 2014) 2014 – 22nd Aug 2014) Aug 2014 – 14th Oct 2014) Developing contacts, Volunteer recruitment & Events, Media, delivery communications, training, door-knocking of getting to know the and surveying, focus Campaign material, peer area, list of groups to community groups Peer engagement, Waste Audits.

5.5 Research period

5.5.1 Pre-monitoring

Prior to the campaign research, pre-campaign monitoring was carried out by MEL Research (MEL) over a four week period. This covered four recycling collection days for the campaign area; two pulpables and two commingled. MEL Officers count how many bins were put out on each collection day and how many were contaminated. As part of the pre-campaign monitoring, tonnages of recyclables collected from that round were also measured by the waste vehicle collection weights. Each waste stream was measured twice on two separate collection days.

5.5.2 Identifying community focal points

Using demographics and knowledge from social housing provider City West focal points in the community were established. A number of

10

Christian faith led organisations were contacted including:

a) Christ Church Parish; b) Bridgewater Baptist Church; c) The Castle Community Centre; d) Lewis Street Primary School; e) Christ Church Pre and Primary School; f) Salford UCRC; g) City West Housing Trust; and h) Incredible Edible Salford.

All of these organisations assisted and participated with the campaign.

5.5.3 Developing the campaign theme

Project Officers met with faith leaders from two local Christian churches, Christ Church Parish and Bridgewater Baptist Church. Following discussions the campaign was developed to link in with bible teachings in the principles of stewardship; with people being responsible for the world created by God. The word ‘Respect’ was also seen as important as this is often seen as core value in schools.

Following the above discussions and school liaison the theme of ‘Respect your environment’ was developed and built upon during the campaign.

5.6 Engagement Period

5.6.1 Recruitment of Volunteer Recycling Ambassadors

Two ambassadors were recruited from within the targeted community. Efforts were made to recruit ambassadors by attending local events and established community groups. One of the volunteers recruited was 15 years old and was a valuable asset in inspiring other youths and during the delivery of services during ‘Action Week’ which fell within school holidays.

Image: Recruited Volunteer Ambassadors pictured during ‘Action Week’

11

5.6.2 Focus groups

One focus group was held within the community centre/hub ‘The Castle’. The focus group attendees were leads from project/charity groups, social housing neighbourhood officers and community leaders; all working in the campaign area and in contact with residents on a regular basis. This focus group helped to: understand the previous history of the area; establish current barriers residents’ were facing to recycling; and establish links with existing groups/activities in the area.

Separate meetings with faith leaders also occurred to help engage with parishioners and access linked schools.

5.6.3 Doorstep engagement

Doorstep surveying was carried out by Project Officers to explore recycling barriers and to find out what activities residents would like to see as part of the campaign. This was also an opportunity for households to request waste recycling bins prior to the main delivery of the campaign. Surveys showed that 19% of residents asked were putting food waste in the residual bin (see section 6.2).

5.6.4 Producing campaign materials

a) Respect competition

Pupils from two local schools were invited to enter an art competition to design the campaign’s ‘Respect’ logo. The logo was subsequently used on campaign literature including fridge magnets and large format display banners.

Banners were designed to promote the recycling of items that had been shown to be poorly recycled from the results of door step surveys (see section 6.1.2).

The banners were placed in following three community focal points for three months; Lewis Street Primary School; Christ Church Pre and Primary School; and the entrance to Ivy Street Park.

Image: Respect your environment banners

12

a) Fridge magnets

Following feedback gathered from focus groups and informal meetings it became apparent that residents had already received information from Salford City Council regarding recycling waste, mainly in the form of leaflets which were hidden away in a drawer/cupboard.

It was therefore decided to produce a recycling fridge magnet following the campaign theme of ‘Respect’. 1000 campaign fridge magnets were distributed in the target area and a quantity passed to City West Housing Trust to be included in their ‘sign up’ new tenancy pack.

“It would be really great to receive a permanent reminder, how to recycle properly. The fridge magnet is my personal choice, leaflets tend to get thrown away or stuck in a drawer”

Feedback from local resident

Image: Campaign specific ‘Respect’ fridge magnet

13

5.7 Behavioural Change Period

5.7.1 Events

Project Officers alongside Salford Waste Recycling Officers, Social Housing Officers and local faith leaders linked together to deliver various events focused on the ‘Respect’ theme.

a) Picnic in the park

In co-ordination with City West Housing Trust and the Castle community centre, two summer ‘picnic in the park’ events took place. Due to bad weather one of the events was held inside the Castle community centre.

During both engagement days the following activities took place: ordering of recycling bins; waste recycling advice and guidance; alley gate keys given to residents to encourage ownership and to discourage fly-tipping in the neighbourhood; distribution of food waste caddies, liners and recycling bags for pulpables and commingled waste); campaign area specific collections information and contact information; and cake decorating activities to encourage engagement.

Image: Campaign Officers delivery ‘make your own bin’ activity at picnic in the park.

b) Action week

As a result of feedback received early in the campaign, in August 2014 a week of action took place, specifically targeting low performing streets (identified through set our rate monitoring). To promote the event leaflets were distributed door to door by Project Officers and Social Housing Officers.

14

The event involved two volunteers, Local Authority Officials, Social Housing landlords, Charity organisations, community groups and local business enterprises, along with LIFE+ Project Officers.

Image: Action week promotional leaflet

The campaign had a positive impact on the campaign area and resident awareness. The ‘Action Week’ involved:

Day 1

Removal of bulky waste items and prevention of fly-tipping. FREE services were provided to encourage households to alternative methods of disposing of waste ‘bulky’ items. A skip was located within the campaign area for waste items and a charity removal/reuse service was arranged to collect usable unwanted items. A ‘pop-up’ information stand offered advice, activities and take away information and resources.

Image: City West Housing Trust Staff supporting ‘Action Week’

15

Image: Furniture reuse by local firm Mustard Tree

Day 2

Focused on parish community planting activities at the local community centre with the services of environmental education company ‘Incredible Edible’. Project Officers engaged ‘face to face’ at the event and completed mid campaign surveys, whilst offering advice to residents.

Image: LIFE+ Campaign Officer assisting young attendees of the community planting session.

Day 3

Delivered a FREE cleaning and numbering service to residents for their waste recycling bins. Project Officers also engaged door to door to collate feedback and to prompt residents to use the service.

16

Image: Providers of the bin cleaning and the numbering service

Day 4

Repeat of day one services focusing on different low performing streets in the campaign area.

Image: Salford City Council Officer giving ‘Advice & Guidance’ as well as practical solutions such as kitchen food waste caddies, liners and campaign leaflets/information.

Day 5

Project Officers supported by volunteers organised a community letter pick in the parish area.

Image: Lewis Street Alley, after ‘Action Week’ community litter pick

“Usually a real hotspot for collecting litter, the alley off Lewis Street is hardly recognisable after today’s litter pick”.

“I hope today’s efforts and results inspire the community to keep the area clean and litter free!”

Resident feedback

17

c) Messy Church

Planting and biblical event based at Christ Church parish with Sunday parishioners. The event was focused around the campaign theme of ‘Respect’ and was delivered by Reverend Anne-Louise Critchlow who made biblical references to ‘Stewardship’ of reading the bible story the ‘Creation’. Incredible Edible Salford showed parishioners how they could create their own ‘piece of heaven’ by upcycling plant pots and planting their own lettuce.

Image: Messy Church planting session

d) One off events

Other events such as a one day annual event at ‘Eccles Festival’ were attended by Project Officers to promote the campaign.

5.7.2 ‘Respect’ assemblies

Project Officers alongside a representative from the Baptist Church delivered assemblies at Christ Church and Lewis Street primary schools. The assemblies were focused on the theme of ‘Respect’ and the bible teachings of stewardship.

18

Section 6: Results

6 6.1 Surveys

6.1.1 Recycling behaviour/barriers (Pre campaign)

49% said nothing prevented them from recycling. The common barriers were lack of understanding about what goes in each bin (8%) and too lazy (8%). The most common items recycled were glass bottles and jars (92%), cans (92%) and paper/cardboard (90%).

6.1.2 Understanding (Pre campaign)

A high percentage of people were unsure of which bin to put items in or were putting items in the wrong bin. 41% were putting foil in the residual bin (black bin), 44% were putting juice cartons/tetrapaks in the wrong bin instead of the pulpables (blue) bin; 19% were putting food waste in the residual bin.

Graph: Which bin do you put the following in?

6.1.3 Campaign events / materials (Post campaign)

Positively 38% said they had participated in one or more of the services provided during the campaign’s ‘Action Week’. 77% of those asked also remembered receiving a ‘Respect’ fridge magnet.

6.2 Participation monitoring

In order to establish if there had been a change in the number of households presenting recyclable waste for collection set out rate monitoring was carried out in the study area before the campaign started and this was repeated soon after the campaign concluded. The campaign was monitored on at least two set out occasions before and after using an outside consultancy.

19

Figure: Two weekly set out rate pre and post monitoring with target

6.2.1 Pulpables

The pre campaign two weekly set out rate for the pulpables collection was 51%. The post campaign two weekly set out rate for pulpables collection was 34%. The two weekly set out rate for pulpables collection decreased by 17% following the campaign.

Table: Weekly set out and two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign – pulpables.

Pulpables round Pre Post

Set out Set out 2 Weekly Set out Set out 2 Weekly week 1 week 2 set out rate week 1 week 2 set out rate Set out rate overall (blue wheeled bin/blue bag) 453 459 660 345 319 436 % 35% 35% 51% 27% 25% 34% Excess overall 0 1 1 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Set out Blue wheeled bin 451 457 657 345 319 436 % 35% 35% 50% 27% 25% 34% Excess 0 1 1 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Set out Blue bag 2 2 4 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Excess 0 0 0 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Total 1301 1301

6.2.2 Commingled

The pre campaign two weekly set out rate for the commingled collection was 49%. The post campaign two weekly set out rate for commingled collection was 33%. The two weekly set out rate for commingled collection decreased by 16% following the campaign.

20

Table: Weekly set out and two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign – commingled.

Comingled round Pre Post Set out Set out 2 Weekly Set out Set out 2 Weekly week 1 week 2 set out rate week 1 week 2 set out rate Set out rate overall (brown wheeled bin/brown box) 422 457 636 331 337 430 % 32% 35% 49% 25% 26% 33% Excess overall 0 1 1 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Set out Brown wheeled bin 420 457 634 331 337 430 % 32% 35% 49% 25% 26% 33% Excess 0 1 1 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Set out Brown box 2 0 2 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Excess 0 0 0 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Total 1301 1301

6.2.3 Organics

The pre campaign two weekly set out rate for organics collection was 20%. The post campaign two weekly set out rate for organics collection was 22%. The two weekly set out rate for organics collection increased by 2% following the campaign.

Table: Weekly set out and two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign – organics.

Organics round Pre Post Set out Set out 2 Weekly Set out Set out 2 Weekly week 1 week 2 set out rate week 1 week 2 set out rate Set out rate overall (pink lidded wheeled bin/green food waste bin) 163 141 237 146 191 255 % 14% 12% 20% 12% 16% 22% Excess overall 1 1 2 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Set out Pink lidded wheeled bin 129 115 189 101 138 186 % 11% 10% 16% 9% 12% 16% Excess 1 1 2 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Set out Green food waste bin 38 30 55 46 54 72 % 3% 3% 5% 4% 5% 6% Excess 0 0 0 0 0 0 % 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Total 1185 1185

6.3 Demographics

Using the ACORN segmentation tool which categorises the UK’s population into demographic types it was possible to identify high levels of deprivation in the area chosen for the campaign and the subsequent monitoring exercise. The areas that were selected for the campaign and the subsequent monitoring exercise showed high levels of deprivation and produced a low yield in the kerbside recycling collections.

The majority of households in the target area (98%) are in ACORN 4 ‘Financially Stretched’ and ACORN 5 ‘Urban Adversity’, all of which reflect high levels of deprivation. A small number of households in the target area (2%) are in ACORN 3 ‘Comfortable Communities’. The tables below present the two weekly set out rate of the rounds by ACORN Category pre and post campaign.

6.3.1 Pulpables

The two weekly set out rate for ACORN 4 and 5 decreased by 17% and 18% respectively.

21

Table: Two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign by ACORN category – pulpables.

Pre Post Change in 2 Acorn Participated Total Participated Total % % weekly Properties Properties Properties Properties set out 1 Affluent Achievers 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% 2 Rising Prosperity 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% 3 Comfortable Communities 30 51 59% 23 51 45% -14% 4 Financially Stretched 231 436 53% 155 436 36% -17% 5 Urban Adversity 395 801 49% 254 801 32% -18% 6 Not Private Households 4 13 31% 4 13 31% 0% Unclassified 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% Total 660 1301 51% 436 1301 34% -17%

6.3.2 Commingled

The two weekly set out rate for ACORN 4 and 5 decreased by 15% and 16% respectively.

Table: Two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign by ACORN category – commingled.

Pre Post Change in 2 Acorn Participated Total Participated Total % % weekly Properties Properties Properties Properties set out 1 Affluent Achievers 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% 2 Rising Prosperity 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% 3 Comfortable Communities 34 51 67% 25 51 49% -18% 4 Financially Stretched 224 436 51% 158 436 36% -15% 5 Urban Adversity 374 801 47% 242 801 30% -16% 6 Not Private Households 4 13 31% 5 13 38% 8% Unclassified 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% Total 636 1301 49% 430 1301 33% -16%

6.3.3 Organics

The two weekly set out rate for ACORN 4 and 5 increased by 3% and 1% respectively.

Table: Two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign by ACORN category – organics.

Pre Post Change in 2 Acorn Participated Total Participated Total % % weekly Properties Properties Properties Properties set out 1 Affluent Achievers 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% 2 Rising Prosperity 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% 3 Comfortable Communities 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% 4 Financially Stretched 91 436 21% 102 436 23% 3% 5 Urban Adversity 143 740 19% 151 740 20% 1% 6 Not Private Households 3 9 33% 2 9 22% -11% Unclassified 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0% Total 237 1185 20% 255 1185 22% 2%

6.4 Tonnage data

A series of targets were set to increase the weight of recyclable materials collected on each collection date in the study area. For the Salford B7 campaign area, the weight of all three waste streams decreased.

22

Table: Pre and post tonnage data and targets for B7 Faith recycling.

6.4.1 Pulpables

A collection target of 3.97 tonnes was set for the pulpables waste stream. The tonnages of pulpables recycling decreased marginally following the campaign from 3.69 tonnes to 3.52 tonnes, therefore failing to meet the target set.

Figure: Pre and post tonnage data for pulpables

23

6.4.2 Commingled

A collection target of 4.02 tonnes was set for the commingled waste stream. The tonnages of commingled recycling decreased following the campaign from 3.67 tonnes to 2.98 tonnes, therefore failing to meet the target set.

Figure: Pre and post tonnage data and targets for commingled

6.4.3 Organics

A collection target of 15.05 tonnes was set for the organics waste stream. The tonnages of organics recycling decreased following the campaign from 12.09 tonnes to 6.90 tonnes, therefore failing to meet the target set.

Figure: Pre and post tonnage data and targets for organics

24

6.5 Staff costs / time

(€) (£) Hours Campaign Officer 5,504.40 4,558.74 265 Outreach Worker 1,836.62 1,521.09 146.22 TOTAL 7,341.02 6,079.82 411.22

6.6 Cost of campaign materials

Description (€) (£) Respect banners x 3 design and artwork 228.25 275.00

Respect magnet design and artwork 91.30 110.00 Bin cleaning (Action Week) 207.50 250.00 Print of 1,000 respect fridge magnets 303.78 366.00

Print of 3 x respect banners 265.60 320.00

Bin numbering artist 146.08 176.00 Prize fund respect art competition winners 76.29 91.92 Print of 1,500 respect where you live A5 140.27 169.00 leaflets Other 825.15 994.15

TOTAL 2,284.22 2,752.07

6.7 Cost per head (including personnel costs)

(€) (£) 7.55 6.44

6.8 Cost per head (excluding personnel costs)

€) (£) 2.48 2.12

25

Section 7: Conclusion

7. 7.1 Set out rates for the pulpables and commingled waste streams decreased post campaign, therefore failing to meet the targets set. The pulpables collection decreased by 17%, from 51% (pre) to 34% (post) and the commingled decreased by 16%, from 49% (pre) to 33% (post). The decrease in set out rates post campaign could have been affected by two factors, firstly during the first week of monitoring there was industrial strike action. Secondly, there were school holidays during the second week of monitoring. These factors may have contributed to changing behaviours. Positively, the set out of the organics waste stream increase post campaign from 20% (pre) to 22% (post).

7.2 The weight of all recyclate collected decreased post campaign. The pulpables materials collected decreased marginally following the campaign, from 3.69 tonnes to 3.52 tonnes, failing to meet the target set of 3.97 tonnes. The weight of the commingled materials collected also decreased from 3.67 tonnes to 2.98 tonnes, failing to meet the target set of 4.02 tonnes. The organics material collected decreased from 12.09 tonnes to 6.90 tonnes, therefore failing to meet the target set of 15.05 tonnes. The decrease in weight of organics collected could be due to the timings of the monitoring activities. The pre was carried out in June and post in October; the latter timeframes are most likely to yield lower quantities of organics waste due to the inactive growing season.

7.3 In summary, the set out and weight of both the pulpables and commingled waste streams decreased, but the industrial action and school holidays could be mitigating factors. It is therefore hard to say what sort of success the campaign has had on changing residents’ behaviour. Although it is clear that the community interaction and events held brought residents together and hopefully got them thinking about waste disposal habits.

26

Section 8: Key Learning Points

8. 8.1 Religious leaders and charitable organisations in the area welcomed the campaign and worked hard to disseminate the recycling message throughout the community. These organisations had a strong influence on the community; their involvement in the campaign helped Project Officers to gain community support and access to schools and parish groups.

8.2 It is suggested that participation monitoring is not the best indicator of success due to seasonal variations in pre and post monitoring periods. To provide direct data comparisons pre and post intervention it is necessary to undertake the set out monitoring at a similar time of year. This is especially relevant where organics collections are being assessed. It is advisable that monitoring should be carried out over an extended period, (preferably over a year), to compare data from the same season.

8.3 It is recommended that waste composition analysis work is carried out on the residual waste stream in conjunction with the weight monitoring. An initial waste analysis would highlight the type and quantity of recyclable materials present in the residual waste stream in the study area and show which materials offer the highest potential to increase the recycling yield if targeted by the campaign. A post intervention waste analysis would be able to track whether the residual waste now contains a smaller proportion of the target materials by carrying out a comparison using the pre intervention analysis as a benchmark.

27