Agenda Parks for London Recruitment, training & dev Good parks for London 2018 Amenity Forum Membership Action Groups Benchmarking: pitch & events fees GLA GS Commission survey/workshop Greener City Fund KBT: Litter & fountains Roundtable hot topics AOB

Action Groups Benchmarking group meetings 7/12/18 in Islington Park Trusts 12/10/18, 10-12am @ City Hall Outdoor events policy & 2018/19 fees: deadline 26/10 2018/19 Pitch fees: deadline 9/11

Piloting a behavioural intervention to prevent ‘abandoned picnics’ litter

LITTER GAUGE POSTER

LITTER GAUGE POSTER

METHODOLOGY Litter monitoring Behavioural observations Before and during intervention for a total of eight weeks Behavioural observations Total of 2,101 park users observed handling waste items before and during intervention Public perception surveys Total of 210 park users surveyed at the sites

OVERALL REDUCTION Overall, litter was reduced by 18 % across all parks. Hampstead Heath saw an increase in litter of 24%. Park Litter reduction (%) Overall litter reduction (%) Northala Fields, Ealing -48% -18% Finsbury Park, Haringey -32% Oak Hill Park, Barnet -16% Hampstead Heath, CoL +24

Percentage reduction (%) LITTER BEHAVIOUR The number of park-users observed littering reduced by 28% during the intervention phase Observed littering of food packaging reduced by 61% during the intervention phase   Percentage reduction (%) Food packaging (take away/picnic food packaging, cellophane wrapping, utensils) -62% Paper (travel tickets/receipts/cardboard) -48% Cigarette related litter (butts, papers, packaging, etc. -35% Plastic bags (loose bags/bags of rubbish) -32% Drinks packaging (plastic/glass bottles, cans, hot drinks cups/sleeves) -21% Baseline (n=219), base: 1046 respondents; intervention (n=157), base: 1055 respondents Food packaging: baseline (n=55), intervention (n=21) Baseline base: 1046, intervention base: 1055

DEMOGRAPHICS Park-users aged 70+ engaged most with the intervention, followed by under 12’s. The least engaged group were those aged between 16 to 24. 35% of couples observed had engaged with the intervention 30% of females and 28% of males observed engaged with the intervention 36% of those exercising in the park engaged with the intervention (n=303), base: 1055 70+ (n=8), base: 14; U12 (n=41), base: 113; 16-24 (n=18), base 176. Female (n=139), base: 462; male (n=164), base: 593. Park users exercising (n=217), base:611.

AWARENESS OF INTERVENTION 13% (n=27) of all respondents had noticed the litter gauge 14% (n=28) of all respondents had noticed posters Awareness of the intervention was highest amongst those aged 65+ Awareness of the intervention was highest in Hampstead Heath, with 24% of all respondents reported to have noticed the litter gauge 17% of females surveyed had noticed the intervention, opposed to 10% of males surveyed (n=27), base: 204 (n=28), base: 206 65+ (n=3), base: 11 (n=52), base: 13 Female (n=100), base: 17; male (104), base 10.

AWARENESS OF INTERVENTION Bases: “money spent on cleaning litter could be spent…” = 194; “how much money is being spent on cleaning up litter…” = 197; “the costs of littering” = 194.

ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE INTERVENTION Bases: “should be used in other parks…” = 195; “will result in less litter…” = 189; “makes me want to put my litter in the bin” = 199; “makes me want to tell others not to litter” = 193; “will encourage more people to put their litter in the bin” = 200.

BIN REMOVAL AN EXPERIMENT TO TEST WHETHER THE REMOVAL OF BINS FROM PARKS HAS A POSITIVE EFFECT ON LITTER LEVELS

BACKGROUND Anecdotal evidence that removing bins has a positive effect on litter levels Global interest in the impact of bin removal on litter levels We have a range of anecdotal evidence to suggest that removing public litter bins from certain locations (i.e. parks) has a positive effect on litter levels. For example, land managers have told us that when removing litter bins, which can often attract the wrong types of waste, they have subsequently observed an overall reduction in the amount of litter at the sites.   To our knowledge, no robust evidence currently exists globally regarding the impacts of bin removal on litter levels in parks, or the perceptions of people who use the parks. With funding from DEFRA, Keep Britain Tidy robustly monitored and evaluated the impacts of bin removal in parks, with a view to identify whether bin removal is an appropriate intervention for reducing litter. The experiment was conducted in three London parks, (Maytrees Rest Garden, North Acton Playing Field and Wandle Park) and consisted of a four week bassline monitoring phase before the removal of the bins, a four week intervention monitoring phase after the removal of the bins, and a final longer term impact monitoring three months after the removal of the bins. Perception surveys were also undertaken at each of the three phases of the experiment, to gauge park user’s perceptions of the litter levels at the site.

RESULTS Litter levels There was an increase in litter levels in the month immediately following the removal of bins (191% increase on average across the ) Litter levels began to decrease at two sites, two months after removal (litter levels were 169% higher than baseline levels) Across the three phases of the pilot, there was an increase in levels of litter found at each site, however litter levels started to decrease again at two of the parks.

RESULTS Maytrees Rest Garden, Ealing Initial impact: 21% increase in litter on baseline levels Longer term impact: 1% increase in litter on baseline levels Perceptions of cleanliness and litter – average scale ratings from 50 park users: Here are the results for Maytrees Rest Garden in Ealing, showing changes to litter levels and perceptions of park users that we surveyed at the sites. Interestingly, park users’ perceptions of the park’s cleanliness and litter levels started to improve in the longer term monitoring phase, which is in line with actual litter levels in the park. How would you rate the cleanliness of this park? (1 = very poor, 10 - excellent) Baseline 1 month after removal 2 months after removal 6.4 5.7 6.2 How much of a problem is litter in the park? (1 = a major problem, 10 = no problem) Baseline 1 month after removal 2 months after removal 5.3 4.3 5.1

RESULTS North Acton Playing Fields, Ealing Initial impact: 140% increase in litter on baseline levels Longer term impact: 173% increase in litter on baseline levels Perceptions of cleanliness and litter – average scale ratings from 50 park users: At the North Acton Playing Fields, we saw quite a significant increase in litter levels, and this continued in the longer term monitoring. Despite this, perceptions of cleanliness and litter in the park actually improved in the first month after bin removal, however these started to become less positive in the longer term monitoring. How would you rate the cleanliness of this park? (1 = very poor, 10 - excellent) Baseline 1 month after removal 2 months after removal 7.2 7.3 How much of a problem is litter in the park? (1 = a major problem, 10 = no problem) Baseline 1 month after removal 2 months after removal 6.0 6.2 5.4

RESULTS Wandle Park, Merton Initial impact: 411% increase in litter on baseline levels Longer term impact: 332% increase in litter on baseline levels Perceptions of cleanliness and litter – average scale ratings from 50 park users: In Wandle Park, Merton, which is a large country park, we saw a significant increase in litter levels and a corresponding worsening of perceptions of cleanliness and litter levels in the park. We are still conducting our analysis to understand why this particular park was so affected by the removal and will discuss our findings in our report. How would you rate the cleanliness of this park? (1 = very poor, 10 - excellent) Baseline 1 month after removal 2 months after removal 7.9 7.4 4.4 How much of a problem is litter in the park? (1 = a major problem, 10 = no problem) Baseline 1 month after removal 2 months after removal 6.2 4.6 3.1

LEARNINGS Liaising with key stakeholders is key Handling enquiries from the general public An extended pilot would be beneficial to measure longer term impact A key learning has been that community engagement is key to the success of bin removal. This includes liaising with local residents who may use the park regularly, particularly for routine dog walking, about the project and intended outcomes. Some park users at North Acton Playing Fields placed bagged dog poo on the ground where bins had been situated, we think as a sort of protest. Engaging with key, local stakeholders may prevent this from happening again. Ensure the partnering local authority has an appropriate lines to take document to handle enquiries from the general public, particularly enquiries through social media (e.g. Twitter and Facebook) Extending the pilot is recommended, as the litter levels at two sites began to decrease after the initial impact (Phase Two), therefore it would be beneficial to test bin removal as a longer-term project. However we would recommend that future experiments incorporate communications and community engagement. Our experiments deliberately did not communicate about the bin removal in advance as we wanted to test the effectiveness of the approach without drawing attention to it in a way that might influence the results.

Round table