DOCSLIB.ORG

LIFE+ up and Forward:Case Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
LIFE+ up and Forward:Case Study LIFE+ Up and Forward Project: Case Study B7 Faith Area: Salford 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 Manchester Waste Disposal Authority (GMWDA) has carried out a 42 different communications campaigns across nine Districts within Greater Manchester (Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside and Trafford). 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 Patricroft area of Eccles 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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Barton Upon Irwell Conservation Area Appraisal
    Barton-Upon-Irwell Conservation Area Appraisal Draft October 2015 Barton – Upon – Irwell Conservation Area : Conservation Area Appraisal : October 2015 Barton-upon-Irwell Conservation Area Conservation Area Appraisal Draft: October 2015 Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Designation of Barton-upon-Irwell Conservation Area........................................................... 1 1.2. Definition of a Conservation Area ........................................................................................... 1 1.3. Value of Conservation Area Appraisals ................................................................................... 3 1.4. Scope of the Appraisal............................................................................................................. 4 2. Planning Policy Context ......................................................................................................... 5 2.1. National and Local Planning Policies ....................................................................................... 5 2.2. Conservation Area Policy Guidance ........................................................................................ 6 2.3. Control Measures brought about by Designation .................................................................. 7 3. Summary of Special Interest .................................................................................................. 9 3.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral Review of Salford City Council
    Electoral review of Salford City Council Response to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s consultation on Warding Patterns August 2018 1 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Salford in 2018 has changed dramatically since the city’s previous electoral review of 2002. Salford has seen a turnaround in its fortunes over recent years, reversing decades of population decline and securing high levels of investment. The city is now delivering high levels of growth, in both new housing and new jobs, and is helping to drive forward both Salford’s and the Greater Manchester economies. 1.2 The election of the Greater Manchester Mayor and increased devolution of responsibilities to Greater Manchester, and the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, is fundamentally changing the way Salford City Council works in areas of economic development, transport, work and skills, planning, policing and more recently health and social care. 1.3 Salford’s directly elected City Mayor has galvanised the city around eight core priorities – the Great Eight. Delivering against these core priorities will require the sustained commitment and partnership between councillors, partners in the private, public, community and voluntary and social enterprise sectors, and the city’s residents. This is even more the case in the light of ongoing national policy changes, the impending departure of the UK from the EU, and continued austerity in funding for vital local services. The city’s councillors will have an absolutely central role in delivering against these core priorities, working with all our partners and residents to harness the energies and talents of all of the city.
    [Show full text]
  • Case Study Manchester
    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Building for consumption: an institutional analysis of peripheral shopping center development in northwest Europe Evers, D.V.H. Publication date 2004 Document Version Final published version Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Evers, D. V. H. (2004). Building for consumption: an institutional analysis of peripheral shopping center development in northwest Europe. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:27 Sep 2021 CHAPTER 5: CASE STUDY MANCHESTER 5.0 Introduction On 10 September 1998, four years after the British Secretary of State for the Environment had announced a full-scale ban on all new out-of-town shopping center development, the £ 600-900 million Trafford Centre opened its doors for business.
    [Show full text]
  • Trafford Park Masterplan Baseline Assessment
    Trafford Park Masterplan Baseline Assessment A Report for the Trafford Economic Alliance By EKOS, CBRE, URBED and WSP August 2008 EKOS Consulting (UK) Ltd 2 Mount Street Manchester M2 5WQ TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES............................................................................................ 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................... 12 2 INTRODUCTION AND STUDY CONTEXT ..................................................................... 23 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 23 STUDY CONTEXT.................................................................................................................... 23 HISTORICAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................................ 24 STUDY CONTEXT AND MASTERPLAN OBJECTIVES .................................................................... 29 STUDY AREA.......................................................................................................................... 31 BASELINE REPORT OBJECTIVES AND STRUCTURE.................................................................... 31 3 REGENERATION AND PLANNING POLICY REVIEW.................................................. 33 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 33 NATIONAL POLICY
    [Show full text]
  • Barton Upon Irwell Conservation Area Appraisal SPD5.6A
    TRAFFORD COUNCIL SPD5.6: Barton Upon Irwell Conservation Area Appraisal SPD5.6a: Barton Upon Irwell Conservation Area Management Plan Consultation Statement March 2016 Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan Consultation Statement Trafford Council Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2. Statement of Community Involvement Review .............................................................. 1 3. Public Consultation ........................................................................................................ 1 4. Consultation Responses and Main Issues .................................................................... 3 5. Main Changes to the SPD ............................................................................................. 4 Appendix 1 – List of Consultees ........................................................................................ 13 Appendix 2 – Local Advertisement – Conservation Management Plan ............................. 17 Appendix 2 – Local Advertisement – Conservation Area Appraisal ................................... 18 Supplementary Planning Document Conservation Area Appraisal Consultation Statement Trafford Council 1. Introduction 1.1. In preparing Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs), the Council is required to follow the procedures laid down in the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012, and its adopted Statement of Community Involvement
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Greater Manchester
    Exploring Greater Manchester a fieldwork guide Web edition edited by Paul Hindle Original printed edition (1998) edited by Ann Gardiner, Paul Hindle, John McKendrick and Chris Perkins Exploring Greater Manchester 5 5. Urban floodplains and slopes: the human impact on the environment in the built-up area Ian Douglas University of Manchester [email protected] A. The River Mersey STOP 1: Millgate Lane, Didsbury The urban development of Manchester has modified From East Didsbury station and the junction of the A34 runoff to rivers (see Figure 1), producing changes in and A5145, proceed south along Parrs Wood Road and into flood behaviour, which have required expensive remedial Millgate Lane, Stop at the bridge over the floodbasin inlet measures, particularly, the embankment of the Mersey from channel at Grid Reference (GR) 844896 (a car can be turned Stockport to Ashton weir near Urmston. In this embanked round at the playing fields car park further on). Looking reach, runoff from the urban areas includes natural channels, south from here the inlet channel from the banks of the storm drains and overflows from combined sewers. Mersey can be seen. At flood times the gates of the weir on Alternative temporary storages for floodwaters involve the Mersey embankment can be opened to release water into release of waters to floodplain areas as in the Didsbury flood the Didsbury flood basin that lies to the north. Here, and at basin and flood storage of water in Sale and Chorlton water other sites along the Mersey, evidence of multi-purpose use parks. This excursion examines the reach of the Mersey from of the floodplain, for recreation and wildlife conservation as Didsbury to Urmston.
    [Show full text]
  • Barton Upon Irwell Conservation Area
    Barton Upon Irwell Conservation Area Conservation Area Management Plan April 2016 Barton Upon Irwell Conservation Area Conservation Area Management Plan Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Context ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Significance Statement ............................................................................................................ 2 1.3. Purpose of a Conservation Area Management Plan ............................................................... 4 1.4. Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 4 1.5. Planning Policy Framework...................................................................................................... 5 1.6. Conservation Area Policy Guidance ......................................................................................... 6 2. Design Analysis and Guidance ............................................................................................... 7 2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7 2.2. Architectural Styles, Materials & Techniques .......................................................................... 7 2.3. Boundary Treatments .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • For Public Transport Information Phone 0161 244 1000
    From 25 October Bus 66 Route changed to serve Barton Lane and Peel Green Road instead of 66 Liverpool Road but no longer serving Alder Forest. Buses will then run via Easy access on all buses the current route to Pendlebury and are then extended to serve Agecroft and Prestwich instead of Clifton, replacing Prestwich bus 484. New bus 21 will replace bus 66 Heaton Park for journeys to/from Clifton. Evening, Agecroft Sunday and public holiday journeys are Pendlebury also introduced running every two hours Swinton Wardley Moorside Worsley Winton Peel Green Barton upon Irwell Eccles From 25 October 2020 For public transport information phone 0161 244 1000 7am – 8pm Mon to Fri 8am – 8pm Sat, Sun & public holidays This timetable is available online at Operated by www.tfgm.com Diamond PO Box 429, Manchester, M1 3BG ©Transport for Greater Manchester 20-SC-0526–G66–1500–1020 Additional information Alternative format Operator details To ask for leaflets to be sent to you, or to request Diamond large print, Braille or recorded information Weston Street, phone 0161 244 1000 or visit www.tfgm.com Bolton, BL3 2AW. Easy access on buses Telephone 01204 937535 Email commentsdiamondbusnorthwest@rotala. Journeys run with low floor buses have no co.uk steps at the entrance, making getting on www.diamondbuses.com and off easier. Where shown, low floor buses have a ramp for access and a dedicated space for wheelchairs and pushchairs inside the Travelshops bus. The bus operator will always try to provide Eccles Church Street easy access services where these services are Mon to Fri 7.30am to 4pm scheduled to run.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf Copy of the Report
    City of Manchester Plan 1945, abridged edition This report has been digitised by Joe Blakey and Martin Dodge from the Department of Geography, University of Manchester. The digitisation was supported by the Manchester Statistical Society’s Campion Fund. The copy of the report digitised kindly provided by Richard Brook, Manchester School of Architecture. Permission to digitise and release the report under Creative Commons license was kindly granted by Manchester Libraries, Information and Archives, Manchester City Council. (Email: [email protected]) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. 20 July 2013. C O NTENTS PR A .. page 2 I. TH D · I N 3 The Purpose of Pla nning- The Pla n in Outline-Ways and Mean II . H F UN I ATION 7 Basic Surveys-Popula tion- The Fa mily Unit J II . II • RAM WORK 10 The Z ning Scheme- Indu trial Planning- Highways JV. T H STR TUR 16 Design fo r Li ving- Ho mes- Types of Dwelling - l ndoor Space- Outdoor Space- School - The eighbo urhood- The District Y. R H SJN 28 Density- The Overspi ll Pro blem- The Redevelopment Programme- The Satellite VJ. 36 Sy tem- Ri vers- A mokeless ity- District H eating YJL. T li E R , IONAL A PJT L 40 Learning, Med icine a nd Lhe rts-The ity Centre-Transport- C ivic Building V LJL. T I-l - OND IT IONS 0 u ss 51 Fu rther Legisla ti o n- Loca l Government- T he Prospect Th e author\· acknowl dgment and thanks ore due to MR.
    [Show full text]
  • Commissioning Across Government: Review of Evidence
    T hird Sector Research Centre Research Report (86) Commissioning across government: review of evidence Tony Bovaird, Helen Dickinson and Kerry Allen August 2012 Project for National Audit Office Revised version of Final Report (submitted 17 May 2010) Research Report Report Research ( 86 ) August 2012 2012 August Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 5 Approach and methods ........................................................................................................................ 6 Scoping phase ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Scanning and analysing the literature ..................................................................................................... 6 Updating government commissioning models......................................................................................... 7 What is commissioning? ...................................................................................................................... 8 Lack of agreed definition ......................................................................................................................... 8 Drivers of interest in commissioning ........................................................................................................ 8 Definitions of commissioning ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • De Trafford LOCATION: Navigation House, 1 Furness Quay, Salford, M50 3XZ PROPOSAL
    APPLICATION No: 17/69345/FUL APPLICANT: De Trafford LOCATION: Navigation House, 1 Furness Quay, Salford, M50 3XZ PROPOSAL: Demolition of office building and construction of residential development comprising 421 apartments (C3), 408 sqm of ground floor commercial space (A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, D2) across buildings ranging from 6 to 27 storeys, along with associated access and landscaping works. WARD: Ordsall Description of Site and Surrounding Area This application relates to an approximately 0.5ha site located within Salford Quays, off Furness Quay. The site is occupied by Navigation House which is a 3 storey office building with a pitched roof that stands on the southern part of the site, fronting The Quays road. The remainder of the site, although subdivided into two parcels of land, is in the main hard surfaced and used for car parking. There are landscaped areas with tree planting around the perimeter of the site, with some landscaped areas within the car parks. The site is relatively flat, but is on higher ground than the site to the north and the site rises up to meet The Quays road. All the buildings immediately adjacent to this development are accessed from Furness Quay. This includes the Dock Office and Ontario House, to the east and south east, and to the northwest is Custom and Furness House and the northeast Northern House and Parkside Court. The Dock Office has been redeveloped into apartments and Custom and Furness House have recently been granted planning consent for the redevelopment of the buildings and the wider site for residential use, this is known as the Fortis Quay scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • Manchester M2 6AN Boyle 7 C Brook Emetery Track Telephone 0161 836 6910 - Facsimile 0161 836 6911
    Port Salford Project Building Demolitions and Tree Removal Plan Peel Investments (North) Ltd Client Salford CC LPA Date: 28.04.04 Drawing No.: 010022/SLP2 Rev C Scale: 1:10 000 @Application A3 Site Boundary KEY Trees in these areas to be retained. Scattered or occasional trees within these areas to be removed SB 32 Bdy t & Ward Co Cons SL 42 Const Bdy Boro Chat Moss CR 52 Buildings to be Demolished MP 25.25 OAD B 62 ODDINGTON ROA STANNARD R Drain 9 8 72 D 83 43 5 6 GMA PLANNING M 62 36 35 SP 28 35 27 48 3 7 2 0 19 4 0 Drain C HA Drain TLEY ROAD 3 MP 25.25 6 23 King Street, Manchester M2 6AN 12 Planning and Development Consultants Chat Moss 11 CR 32 rd Bdy Wa nst & Co Co Bdy Const e-mail [email protected] o Bor 2 53 8 1 Telephone 0161 836 6910 - Facsimile 0161 836 6911 22 Barton Moss 10 16 ROAD F ETON OXHIL BRER 9 rain 43 D L ROAD 23 Drain 2 0 St Gilbert's 33 Catholic Church MP 25 Presbytery 10 3 2 2 4 Drain Barton Moss 2 Drain Drain CR Drain 1 13 15 Co Const Bdy 6 Track Barton Moss 16 Dra Boro Const and Ward Bdy in MP 24.75 27 Eccles C of E High S Drain FLEET ROAD 6 3 ORTH 26 N SL chool D rain 0 3 Drain 39 Drai n 36 Drain BUC KT HORN D E L OA R Drain AN E D ra ILEY in H M 62 53 44 51 55 Dra 5 9 0 5 in M 62 Drain Brookhouse k Sports Centre Barton Moss Primary School rac T 0 6 63 H ILEY ROA D 6 N 5 O BU RTH D 78 rai 2 CK FLEE n T 67 4 35 H O 3 3 54 RN LA 6 T Pavilion 3 ROAD 75 N 74 E 34 27 25 18 78 6 20 7 80 88 Drain 1 1 TRIPPIER ROAD 6 56 23 58 0 30 6 3 1 n 32 55 89 9 2 7 Drai 6 1 9 6 93 64 3 2 15 95 59 ROCHFORD R 59 2 9 15 66
    [Show full text]