LIFE+ Up and Forward Project: Case Study

B2: Celebrating Recycling Achievement Area: Trafford Date: August 2014

LIFE11 ENV/UK/000389

1

Contents

Page 1. Executive Summary 2

2. Introduction 5

3 Campaign Area 6

4. Demographics & Acorn Data 9

5. The Approach to the Campaign 10

6. Results 18

7. Conclusion 25

8. Key Learning Points 26

2

Section 1: Executive Summary

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 and involved 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 celebrating recycling achievements campaign reported on in this case study falls within the household theme. It was carried out in the Trafford area of Greater Manchester in partnership with Trafford Council, targeting 1140 low performing households. The campaign aimed to help local residents understand why they are asked to recycle and how to recycle correctly through a fun, family and community event.

1.3 The campaign’s main driver was the establishment of an events committee with

volunteers from the local community. Committee members were encouraged to work with other residents, existing networks and environmental groups to plan and run a family event focused on waste and recycling (empowering the community).

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 set outs and weight of dry recyclate collected post campaign indicates little positive change in behaviour amongst the residents targeted. Only the set out of the organics increased although the timings of the monitoring could account for this. Success was seen with the community engagement event held, which was well attended by approximately 150 residents from the local area and the recruitment of volunteers, with both assisting in spreading the recycling message.

1.6 Consideration should be given to the timing of the campaign. This campaign took place during the school summer holidays which meant many residents were away on

3

holiday. Also due to school closures over the summer period, it was not possible to promote the campaign through this avenue. It is also important to note that volunteers often have other commitments and can prove hard to recruit. Time spent on community engagement and attending meetings is often minimal and volunteers in this campaign required continuous support from Project Officers.

Aims of the Campaign 2.1 The main aim of the campaign was to help local residents understand why they are

asked to recycle and how to recycle correctly through a highly visual, fun, family event (organised by community volunteers).

Key objectives were as follows:

a) to develop positive recycling behaviours amongst residents in deprived areas; b) increase the level of recycling for all of the current materials collected; and c) raise awareness of the importance of recycling.

Key Facts 3.1 The total cost of delivering the activity was €15,591.38 (£12,901.99), of which

€9,434.90 (£7,813.99) was personnel costs and €6,156.48 (£5,088.00) was consumables. GMWDA received 50% towards the total cost of this activity from the EU LIFE+ programme.

3.2 548.31 hours were spent delivering the campaign.

3.3 Four recycling ambassadors were recruited and trained.

3.4 14 hours were spent by recycling ambassadors organising the event and engaging with

the community. 3.5 An events committee was established with four members from the local community

engaged in staging the event.

3.6 56 surveys were completed on recycling behaviour. 3.7 There was involvement from existing networks and associations at each stage of the

campaign including: Partington Health and Wellbeing Centre; Sure Start Centre; Positive Partington; Partington Allotments; and The People’s Church.

3.8 150 people attended the event. 3.9

1500 campaign newsletters were distributed within the community.

3.10 The set out rate for organics increased post campaign, all other waste steams decreased for both set out rates and weight of tonnages collected.

Results 4.1 Set out monitoring

The set out rates for organics increased post campaign whilst the dry recyclate waste

streams decreased.

4.1.1 The set out of the pulpables waste stream decreased by 2%, from 74%

4

(pre) to 72% (post).

4.1.2 The commingled decreased by 9%, from 76% (pre) to 67% (post).

4.1.3 The set out rate of the organics waste stream increased by 13%, from 43% (pre) to 56% (post).

4.2 Weight monitoring

The weight of both the dry recyclate waste streams decreased post campaign. It should be noted that the council were unable to provide the weight of the organics collected.

4.2.1 The weight of pulpables decreased from 9.69 tonnes to 6.71 tonnes

4.2.2 The commingled decreased from 11.19 tonnes to 10.49 tonnes

4.3 Targets Targets were set to increase both the set out rates in the study area and the weight

of recyclable waste collected. The set out rate of the organics waste stream increased by 13%, from 43% (pre) to 56% (post), therefore exceeding the target set of 46%.The set out rates for the dry recyclate waste streams decreased post campaign, with both failing to meet the targets set. The set out of the pulpables waste stream decreased by 2%, from 74% (pre) to 72% (post) and the commingled decreased by 9%, from 76% (pre) to 67% (post).

4.4 The event

Success was seen with the community engagement event held, which was well attended by approximately 150 residents from the local area and the recruitment of volunteers, with both assisting in spreading the recycling message.

5

Section 2: Introduction 2. 2.1

2.2

The celebrating recycling achievements campaign is one of 12 campaigns run by GMWDA’s Up and Forward project. The campaign was delivered by GMWDA in partnership with Trafford Council. It ran for 22 weeks, from April 2014 to August 2014 and targeted 1140 households in Partington, Trafford; a low yielding area that contained households with high levels of deprivation. As it has been recognised that there are often difficulties in reaching residents in hard to reach communities with the traditional approach of door knocking activities, the recycling message was refocused, moved into the community and delivered through the staging of a fun, family event, with the help of local community groups and volunteers.

2.3 A community committee made up of volunteer residents, representatives from

community groups and local environmental organisations in Partington, met on five separate occasions to plan a fun, family orientated, community event and organise activities. In addition, a group of four recycling ambassadors were recruited and trained to carry out surveys in the local area to understand why people are not recycling. Feedback from the survey was used on event leaflets. Surveys were also carried out through the local school and community groups by the Community Outreach Workers.

2.4 It was expected that by working with a range of stakeholders and through the use of volunteers the community would feel empowered to tackle their own waste and increase recycling. It was also expected that the highly visual event would raise the profile and importance of recycling in the local area, which would in turn help to mould positive recycling habits at home.

6

Section 3: Campaign Area

3. 3.1 The campaign area of Partington in Trafford was selected based on the following two

data sets:

a) weight of waste (tonnages) collected at the kerbside for the various waste streams (to select a waste collection round with a low yield); and

b) socio-demographic profile of the area (see section 4). This would enable a collection round to be identified that had both a low yield of recyclable materials in the kerbside collection and also had a demographic profile showing that it contained areas with high levels of deprivation. Map: Trafford campaign area

3.2 Identifying a low performing collection round

To identify a low performing collection round waste collection data was collected between August 2012 – October 2013 for both the dry recyclate waste streams and between July - October 2013 for the organics waste stream. Trafford 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. In addition, due to a phased round restructure that was running at the time of the round selection, any rounds that had less than 3 months’ worth of data were excluded from the analysis as this would not provide a robust overview of average yields collected. The tonnages provided for three of the recyclable waste streams (pulpables, commingled and organics) have been used to estimate the amount of kilograms produced per household for the selected round. Table 3.2 below presents the average tonnages of waste materials generated for the selected round. Where 1 is the lowest yield, the pulpables round ranked 7th and commingled ranked 16th out of 65 rounds operated by Trafford. The organics round was also low yielding ranking 2nd out of 45 rounds.

7

Table: Round ranking

3.3 About Trafford (www.infotrafford.gov.uk)

Trafford forms part of Greater Manchester lying south-west of the Greater Manchester

conurbation. It is an area of considerable diversity and contrast which brings together a vibrant mix of inner city, urban, leafy suburban and rural communities. Two fifths of the Borough is countryside. It is home to circa 217307 residents living in circa 96818 properties and covers 10,565 hectares.

Map: Greater Manchester Boroughs

Trafford has a diverse population and cultures which are reflected throughout the Borough. A large community of BME groups is located in the North, primarily centred in Old Trafford. The South of the Borough forms the centre of a more affluent area.

3.4 About Partington (www.infotrafford.gov.uk) Partington is situated 10 miles southwest of Manchester city centre on the edge of

Cheshire county. Historically the area has been seen as deprived with high levels of anti-social behaviour in the late 1980s and 1990s with a large community of gypsies and a legacy of residents being moved from poor city centre housing to the suburbs with little transport infrastructure. As a result this community has become isolated. Recent projects have seen improvements to the area and levels of unemployment are low; only 4.9% are receiving jobseekers allowance or incapacity benefits (2011 census). Due to Partington’s location and lack of transport links there is a strong community with many residents stating they would not move out of the area. 69.3% of residents either owned or mortgaged their properties. In comparison to other areas of Greater Manchester which has higher levels of deprivation, Partington has a small number of residents who were not born in the UK, only 7.2% being born outside of the UK and 88.8% stating they were.

Waste stream Route/Round

Total Kg

collected

during period

No. of

collections

recorded

during period

Average Kg

collected per

collection

Number of

properties

Average kg per

household per

collection

Ranking

(where 1 is

lowest yeilding)

Pulpables UNIFORM 3 Monday 114860 11 10442 1253 8.33 7th / 65

Comingled UNIFORM 3 Monday 103840 10 10384 1253 8.28 16th / 65

Organics YANKEE 3 Monday 95440 12 7953 1810 4.39 2nd / 45

8

3.5 Household collection service In addition to a residual waste collection, Trafford operates the following separate

recycling collections: a) four weekly collection of pulpables recycling in a blue wheeled bin – paper, cardboard,

tetrapaks; b) four weekly collection of commingled recycling in a black wheeled bin – glass bottles

and jars, plastic bottles, metals food and drink containers; and c) a weekly collection of food waste in a 23 litre caddy and fortnightly collection of

mixed food/garden waste in a green wheeled bin.

Table: Household waste collection schedule

Trafford B2 - Recycling collections

Waste stream

Collection day

Collection frequency

Containers used for collection

Commingled Monday Four weekly Black wheeled bin

Pulpables Monday Four weekly Blue wheeled bin

Organics Monday Weekly Green wheeled bin

3.6

Trafford’s current recycling rate is 58% (as at May 2014), the second best rate in Greater Manchester.

9

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.

4.1.1 ACORN profile by category

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. Over half (57%) of the sample are represented by ACORN 5 ‘Urban Adversity’, with 37% falling into Group P ‘Struggling Estates’. Households within this Category are more likely to be deprived, with higher levels of long term unemployment and higher proportions claiming benefits.

A further 18% were classified as ACORN 4 ‘Financially Stretched’, with 11% falling into 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 Trafford study area and Greater Manchester

In summary, based on the information collated above, the round selected for

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 0 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 640 26 258,428 22

3.F Countryside Communities 60 2 5,987 1

3.G Successful Suburbs 20 1 52,546 5

3.H Steady Neighbourhoods 313 13 109,703 10

3.I Comfortable Seniors 112 5 30,665 3

3.J Starting Out 135 6 59,527 5

4 Financially Stretched 435 18 303,715 26

4.K Student Life 0 0 22,982 2

4.L Modest Means 282 11 132,581 12

4.M Striving Families 76 3 82,082 7

4.N Poorer Pensioners 77 3 66,070 6

5 Urban Adversity 1,395 57 310,023 27

5.O Young Hardship 0 0 112,302 10

5.P Struggling Estates 906 37 83,816 7

5.Q Difficult Circumstances 489 19 113,905 10

6 Not Private Households 0 0 1,651 0

ACORN Classification

B2 Trafford study area

profile

Greater Manchester

profile

10

the B2 Bury campaign was low yielding and contained households with high levels of deprivation.

Section 5: The Approach to the Campaign

5.

5.1 The campaign employed two members of staff, a Campaign Officer and 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 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. Therefore, to encourage changes in recycling behaviour, the campaign looked to deliver targeted messages though a fun family community event (focused on recycling and waste issues) with the help of community volunteers.

5.4 A subtle 'bottom up' engagement method was used; volunteers and residents were

encouraged to discuss recycling between themselves in order to stage the event. This provided the opportunity to intervene in recycling behaviours, as the recycling message could be informally reinforced through designing, developing and staging the event.

5.5 The main elements were broken down into three distinct periods; research,

engagement and behavioural change, with pre and post monitoring occurring before and after the main campaign periods.

Research (5th April – 12th May)

-Developing contacts, communications, getting to know the area, list of businesses and business groups

Engagement (13th May - 4th July)

-Volunteer recruitment & training, business door-knocking and surveying, focus groups

Behavioural Change (7th July-15th Aug))

-Events, media, delivery of campaign material, peer to peer engagement, waste audits

5.6 Research period 5.6.1 Engaging with networks and groups

To incorporate existing local knowledge and experience, and to help develop effective delivery mechanisms for the campaign, Project Officers worked with existing networks. These networks helped to locate and tap into programmes already happening on the estate and identify key people to help facilitate with the event. Groups included: Positive Partington; the Sure Start Centre; People’s Church; and Partington Health and Community Centre.

5.6.2 Recruiting committee members

The recruitment of community volunteers was seen as key to the success of

11

the campaign and took the following approach: a) local members of the community who were known in their neighbourhood

were approached to form the events community; b) posters were distributed throughout the local community via shops,

libraries, schools and community noticeboards. All residents that showed an interest in becoming a volunteer were given the opportunity to assist in the campaign; and

c) local press adverts were developed to encourage attendance at community meetings.

Four committee members were recruited and trained through this process. Image: Event committee meeting

5.7 Engagement period 5.7.1 Understanding the community

Through researching and engaging with the community the specific waste and recycling issues they were facing were identified. To establish attitudes towards recycling surveys were carried out by Project Officers and recycling ambassadors. The key objectives of the survey were to: a) examine attitudes towards recycling; b) measure residents’ recycling behaviour; c) explore the levels of understanding; and d) identify the main motivators/inhibitors. 56 surveys were completed during the campaign. Key outcomes were used to inform the development of the event and the production of supporting campaign materials to promote correct recycling behaviour (see 5.7.2c).

5.7.2 Staging the event

Project Officers recruited four committee members from the local community who met on two separate occasions to plan and run a community event. Project Officers made frequent visits to the area to support the volunteers in the development of the event. During the campaign period the

12

committee undertook the following:

5.7.3 Developing the event theme and activities. Committee members were key to formulating ideas for the event. In order to include the wider community volunteers approached residents to gather views on what they would like to see at a family green event.

5.7.4 Establishing a suitable location and date/time of the event. Cross Lane Park was the initial chosen site due to its location and ease of access. A weekend date was selected to give the majority of the community the opportunity to attend.

5.7.5 Developing campaign materials.

Campaign materials were developed following community feedback and included a newsletter, poster, and bin stickers.

a) Posters

To promote the event posters were developed and located at popular places on the estate including shops, community centres, schools and housing offices.

Image: Poster promoting the event

b) Recycling newsletter

The newsletter incorporated information from resident’s feedback and survey findings. The surveys carried out pre campaign found that there was confusion around plastics, especially yoghurt pots, plastic trays and margarine tubs. The surveys also highlighted that not having time and bins not being collected enough were primary barriers to residents not recycling.

The newsletter therefore included facts and figures, case studies and personal stories, information about bulky waste recycling and clearer information about correct kerbside recycling. The newsletter also promoted

13

the recycling fun day. Image: Recycling newsletter

c) Bin stickers Bin stickers were developed and distributed in response to feedback form residents that bins were often stolen. The stickers allow residents to number their bins and also acted as a visual reminder of how to recycle correctly. The stickers had pictorial images of what could be recycled in each bin.

14

Image: Bin stickers – residual, organics, commingled

d) Reminder cards

Reminder cards were printed to co-inside with the August bank holiday and to remind residents to put their bins out the following day. The card showed which bins should be put out and what should go into them. The card also showed the collection dates for the following three months.

5.7.6 Event promotion.

The event was promoted throughout the community by Project Officers and recycling ambassadors as follows: awareness days at local community events such as the primary school fun day and community event at Partington Library; posters were produced and distributed in the community by volunteers; event information was posted on two local networking websites, PC Transmitter and Positive Partington; leaflets promoting the campaign were delivered door to door to the 1,500 targeted households and distributed via existing community groups, schools, housing associations and businesses; and Partington Primary hosted a recycling assembly delivered by Project Officers.

5.8 Behavioural change period – the event

The event was held in Cross Lane park within the target area for the campaign. It took place on a Saturday 9th August 2014 from 11.00am to 3.00pm. Activities at the event included:

5.8.1 Cookery demonstration The cooking workshop, delivered by the Manchester based social enterprise ‘Cracking Good Food’, encouraged residents to reflect on how to cook healthier, cheaper and more sustainable food. Particular attention was placed on giving suggestion to participants on how to reduce the amount of food wasted by planning meals and shopping wisely.

15

Image: Cracking Good Food demonstration

5.8.2 Technology corner Visitors were able to access the Life+ interactive software including the innovate game ‘Getting Wasted’.

5.8.3 Beat the bin men recycling challenge The physical recycling game invited people to challenge their knowledge of how to recycle correctly. The game timed people on how many items of waste they could place in the correct bin. Image: Recycling challenge against the clock

16

5.8.4 EAR4U

A local furniture and clothing reuse charity held a stall at the event to encourage people to donate unwanted items. donations for clothes, furniture for reuse

5.8.5 Recycling information point Advice and guidance was available to residents including the opportunity to order recycling bins. Image: Activities taking place at the event in Cross Lane park

5.8.6 Doctor Bike session A free Doctor Bike session was held at the event. A qualified Cytec bike mechanic gave a bike health check and fixed minor repairs for free. Image: Doctor Bike session

17

5.8.7 Other activities To encourage attendance by families, activities focused on younger children were also offered. These included a bouncy castle, smoothie bike, craft activities and composting. Image: Families enjoying the recycling focused event

Bike powered smoothie maker

18

Section 6: Results

6 6.1

The event

The event was well received within the local community with over 150 people visiting on the day. 76% of those attending said that it had made them think more about recycling.

6.2 Pre surveys – Understanding recycling behaviour Surveys were carried out in the community pre campaign to assess resident’s knowledge and barriers to recycling. The results of which are as follows:

6.2.1 Recycling behaviour The number of residents recycling the wrong items in the commingled waste stream was found to be high. 44% recycled margarine/butter tubs, 44% yoghurt pots. Almost all currently had a blue (paper) and a black (commingled) bin and green (organics) bin at home. On exploring the frequency of use of kerbside collection services, it was encouraging that most households put out each bin ‘every time’. To encourage the uptake of recycling bins, residents were able to order bins at the event.

6.2.2 Motivators/Inhibitors

On exploring the ‘barriers’ to recycling, 43% felt that the bins were not collected enough. While 14% felt that It's too much effort or it was too much effort or they didn’t have time to do it.

6.3 Participation monitoring

In order to establish if there had been a change in the number of households presenting recyclable waste for collection the set out rate was monitored in the study area before the campaign started, and repeated once the campaign concluded.

The graph below shows the percentage of properties that have presented containers

for collection at least once during the monitoring periods alongside the set out rate target. This highlights any progression towards this target as a result of the campaign. The two weekly set out rate of the pulpables waste stream decreased by 2%, from 74% (pre) to 72% (post), therefore failing to meet the target set of 75%. The set out of the commingled waste stream also decreased by 9%, from 76% (pre) to 67% (post) and therefore failed to meet the target of 77%. The set out rate of the organics waste stream increase by 13%, from 43% (pre) to 56% (post) and exceeded the target set of 46%.

19

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

6.3.1 Pulpables

The pre campaign two weekly set out rate for the pulpables recycling was 74%. The post campaign two weekly set out rate for pulpables recycling was 72%. The two weekly set out rate for pulpables recycling decreased by 2% following the campaign. Table: Weekly set out and two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign – pulpables

6.3.2 Commingled

The pre campaign two weekly set out rate for the commingled recycling

was 76%. The post campaign two weekly set out rate for commingled recycling was 67%. The two weekly set out rate for commingled recycling decreased by 9% following the campaign. Table: Weekly set out and two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign – commingled

Set out

week 1

Set out

week 2

2 Weekly set

out rate

Set out

week 1

Set out

week 2

2 Weekly set

out rate

Set out Blue wheeled bin 608 604 772 555 583 750

% 58% 58% 74% 53% 56% 72%

Excess 2 3 5 0 0 0

% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Total

PostPre

10421042

Pulpables round

Set out

week 1

Set out

week 2

2 Weekly set

out rate

Set out

week 1

Set out

week 2

2 Weekly set

out rate

Set out Black wheeled bin 766 627 865 675 577 767

% 67% 55% 76% 59% 51% 67%

Excess 40 38 52 3 3 4

% 4% 3% 5% 0% 0% 0%

Total

Comingled round Pre Post

1140 1140

20

6.3.3 Organics

The pre campaign two weekly set out rate for organics collection was 43%. The post campaign two weekly set out rate for organics collection was 56%. The two weekly set out rate for the organics collection increased by 13% following the campaign. Table: Weekly set out and two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign – organics

6.4 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. The majority of households in the target area (75%) are in ACORN 4 ‘Financially Stretched’ and ACORN 5 ‘Urban Adversity’, all of which reflect high levels of deprivation. A quarter of households in the target area (26%) 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.

6.4.1 Pulpables

The two weekly set out rate for ACORN 3 increased by 5%. The two weekly set out rate for ACORN 5 decreased by 3%. Table: Two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign by ACORN category – pulpables

6.4.2 Commingled

The two weekly set out rate for ACORN 3 decreased by 6%. The two

weekly set out rate for ACORN 5 decreased by 8%.

Set out

week 1

Set out

week 2

2 Weekly set

out rate

Set out

week 1

Set out

week 2

2 Weekly set

out rate

Set out rate overall (green wheeled bin/green food waste bin) 353 366 506 463 541 672

% 30% 31% 43% 39% 45% 56%

Excess overall 0 0 0 0 0 0

% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Set out green wheeled bin 353 366 506 463 541 672

% 30% 31% 43% 39% 45% 56%

Excess 0 0 0 0 0 0

% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Set out green food waste bin 0 0 0 0 0 0

% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Excess 0 0 0 0 0 0

% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Total

Organic round

1190

Post

1190

Pre

Pulpables round

AcornParticipated

Properties

Total

Properties%

Participated

Properties

Total

Properties%

1 Affluent Achievers 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

2 Rising Prosperity 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

3 Comfortable Communities 104 139 75% 111 139 80% 5%

4 Financially Stretched 36 44 82% 34 44 77% -5%

5 Urban Adversity 632 859 74% 605 859 70% -3%

6 Not Private Households 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

Total 772 1042 74% 750 1042 72% -2%

Change in

2 weekly

set out

Pre Post

21

Table: Two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign by ACORN

category – commingled

6.4.3 Organics

The two weekly set out rate for ACORN 3 increased by 20%. The two

weekly set out rate for ACORN 5 increased by 13%. Table: Two weekly set out rate pre and post campaign by ACORN category – organics

6.5 Tonnage Data A series of targets were set to increase the weight of recyclable materials collected

on each collection date in the study area. The recycling tonnages collected for two of the recycling waste streams showed a decrease post campaign and failed to exceed the targets set. The organics data has not been presented as the council were unable to provide the weights for the period monitored. The weight of both the pulpables and commingled collected decreased, with both failing to meet the targets set. Table: Pre and post tonnage data and targets

PULPABLES COMMINGLED

PRE CAMPAIGN COLLECTION TONNAGE 9.69 11.19

TARGETTED % INCREASE 5.18% 5.18%

TARGETTED TONNAGE INCREASE 0.50 0.58

TARGET TONNAGE (Y) 10.19 11.77

ACTUAL POST CAMPAIGN COLLECTION TONNAGE (X) 6.71 10.49

TONNAGE CHANGE -2.98 -0.70

% CHANGE -30.75% -6.25%

% OF TONNAGE TARGET ACHIEVED (X/Y) 65.84% 89.13%

Comingled round

AcornParticipated

Properties

Total

Properties%

Participated

Properties

Total

Properties%

1 Affluent Achievers 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

2 Rising Prosperity 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

3 Comfortable Communities 124 164 76% 114 164 70% -6%

4 Financially Stretched 37 48 77% 26 48 54% -23%

5 Urban Adversity 704 928 76% 627 928 68% -8%

6 Not Private Households 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

Total 865 1140 76% 767 1140 67% -9%

Change in

2 weekly

set out

Pre Post

Organics

AcornParticipated

Properties

Total

Properties%

Participated

Properties

Total

Properties%

1 Affluent Achievers 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

2 Rising Prosperity 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

3 Comfortable Communities 89 193 46% 127 193 66% 20%

4 Financially Stretched 27 56 48% 35 56 63% 14%

5 Urban Adversity 390 941 41% 510 941 54% 13%

6 Not Private Households 0 0 0% 0 0 0% 0%

Total 506 1190 43% 672 1190 56% 14%

Change in

2 weekly

set out

Pre Post

22

The graph below presents the average weight of recyclable materials collected (in tonnes) in the pre and post campaign periods.

Graph: Average volume of recyclate collected (in tonnes) in the pre and post campaign periods

6.5.1 Pulpables

A collection target of 10.19 tonnes was set for the pulpables recycling

waste stream. The tonnages of pulpables recycling decreased following the campaign from 9.69 tonnes to 6.71 tonnes, therefore failing to meet the target set.

Figure: Pre and post tonnage data and targets - pulpables

6.5.2 Commingled

A collection target of 11.77 tonnes was set for commingled waste stream.

The tonnages of commingled recycling decreased marginally following the campaign from 11.19 tonnes to 10.49 tonnes, therefore failing to meet the target set.

23

Graph: Pre and post tonnage data and targets – commingled

6.6 Staff cost/time

Roles (€) (£) Hours

Project Officer 99.12 82.09 3.75

Campaign Officer 6,614.86 5478.43 353.66

Outreach Worker 2,720.92 2253.47 220.90

TOTAL 9,434.88 7813.99 548.31

6.7 Cost of campaign/event materials

Description (€) (£)

Newsletter design and print

1,478.62 1,222.00

Bin stickers design and print

1,314.06 1,086.00

Reminder cards design and print

344.85 285.00

Bags for life 444.68 367.50

Event Activities: (£)

Cooking demonstration 665.5 550.00

Craft workshop 217.80 180.00

Bouncy caste 84.70 70.00

Event Equipment: (£)

Vehicle hire 67.76 56.00

Marquee 695.75 575.00

Generator 60.50 50.00

Table and chair hire 193.84 160.20

First aid 246.11 203.40

Other 342.31 282.90

Total 6,156.48 5,088.00

24

6.8 Cost per head (including personnel costs)

(€) (£)

12.14 10.36

6.9 Cost per head (excluding personnel costs)

(€) (£)

4.56 3.89

25

Section 7: Conclusion 7.

7.1

The campaign achieved its aim of delivering the recycling message through a highly visual, fun, family event; which was organised by community volunteers. A successful community event was held, with involvement from a number of local residents. Over 150 people attended the event, with 76% stating that it had made them think more about recycling.

7.2 The set out rates for the dry recyclate waste streams decreased post campaign, with both failing to meet the targets set. The set out of the pulpables waste stream decreased by 2%, from 74% (pre) to 72% (post) and the commingled decreased by 9%, from 76% (pre) to 67% (post). The set out rate of the organics waste stream increased by 13%, from 43% (pre) to 56% (post), therefore exceeding the target set of 46%. The increase in set out for the organics waste stream could be due to the timings of the monitoring activities. The pre was carried out between February and March and post between August and October periods; the latter timeframes are most likely to yield higher quantities of organics waste due to it being a more active growing season.

7.3 The weight of both the dry recyclate waste streams decreased post campaign; therefore

both failed to meet the targets set. The weight of pulpables decreased from 9.69 tonnes to 6.71 tonnes and the commingled decreased from 11.19 tonnes to 10.49 tonnes.

7.4 In summary, the set outs and weight of dry recyclate collected post campaign indicates

little positive change in behaviour amongst the residents targeted. Only the set out of the organics increased although the timings of the monitoring could account for this. It should be noted that the event and associated campaign materials were carried out during the school summer holidays and final monitoring took place during the August bank holiday. There was a noticeable absence of residents in the main community and shopping centre which could account for the low participation and tonnage rates with residents away on holiday.

26

Section 8: Key Learning Points

8. 8.1

Time was a major factor in this campaign. The location chosen by the committee to hold the event was owned by Trafford Council who had a strict policy in regard to staging events. The council also had a three month waiting period for permissions which did not fit into the campaign timescale. The campaign took place during the school summer holidays which meant residents were away on holidays. Consideration should be taken to the timing of the campaign as schools could not be used as part of the campaign promotion and residents tended to leave the estate during this time to go on annual holidays.

8.2 Consideration should be given to the selected campaign area. Although the area looked

suitable on paper, following engagement in the community it was suggested that a neighbouring area would have been more suited to aims of this campaign; as this area had more families living in the area and hence more schools.

8.3 It is important to note that volunteers often have other commitments and can prove

hard to recruit. Time spent on community engagement and attending meetings is often minimal and volunteers in this campaign required continuous support from Project Officers. During the initial stages of the campaign there was a lot of interest from community groups to get involved on the day and with the events committee however this did not translate into action or volunteers. This could be due to the time of the committee meetings (in the day), and also the time of year. In future campaigns Project Officers should forge closer links with community groups, regularly attending their meetings and giving updates on the campaign.

8.4

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. This means that the campaign and monitoring should be carried out over an extended period, (preferably over a year), to compare data from the same season. Due to the nature of this project and the timescales under which it was operated this has not been possible.

8.5 With a campaign such as this that is limited to a very short time period (i.e. one event) it is difficult to measure the impact of the event on the surrounding area. This is not necessarily a problem, and can in fact be seen as a positive in that additional households are receiving campaign information. There does, however, need to be an awareness that there is this possible crossover so that campaign communication materials do not contain information that is too area specific.

8.6 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 have highlighted the type and quantity of recyclable materials present in the residual waste stream in the study area and shown which materials offered the highest potential to increase the recycling yield if targeted by the campaign. A post campaign waste analysis would then have been able to track whether the residual waste contained a smaller proportion of the target materials. Unfortunately, the costs of waste analysis meant that monitoring in this fashion were outside the budget of the project for this campaign.