STATISTICAL RELEASE
Date: 2 November 2007
Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR
Out of hours telephone 020 7270 8960
2007 Survey of Attitudes and Behaviour in relation to the Environment
A full report of the results from the 2007 Survey of Attitudes and Behaviours in relation to the Environment is released today. It gives a representative picture of what people in England think, and how they behave, across a range of issues relevant to the environment, including transport and recycling.
The results presented here follow from previous Environmental surveys run by Defra and its predecessors in 1986, 1989, 1993, 1996-7 and 2001. The results for the 2007 survey were produced from data collected from a representative sample of 3,618 individuals in England during spring 2007. The data were collected on behalf of Defra by the British Market Research Bureau (BMRB) during computer assisted interviews.
Structure of the report
This full report, completed for Defra by BMRB, follows National Statistics releases of headline survey results released on 14 August 2007, and results of questions on wellbeing on 27 July 2007.
The survey itself was split into several sections. The report is presented using the same structure, as follows:
- Knowledge and attitudes
- Behaviours to reduce climate change
- Travel behaviour and attitudes
- Energy and water efficiency in the home
- Reducing waste, reusing and recycling
- Purchasing behaviours
- Green spaces
- Animal welfare
- Biodiversity
- Wellbeing
Where applicable, each section covers the following in relation to that subject:
- Attitudes
- Behaviours
- Barriers
The survey data, anonymised to protect confidentiality, is being concurrently released on the UK data archive website.
The full report can be found at: www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/pubatt/index.htm
The summary, as it appears in the report itself is detailed below:
1. Attitudes and knowlegde
Self-reported knowledge of environmental and climate change issues
Four in ten people felt they knew a lot about environmental issues. Some issues were better known than others. At least six in ten said they knew a lot or a fair amount about global warming and climate change, and over half knew a lot or a fair amount about CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions. However over half knew nothing about the terms ‘carbon footprint’ or ‘carbon off-setting’. (Section 1.2)
Do people try to influence others?
A substantial number of people say they try to influence others to be more environmentally friendly, with a third saying they talk to friends and family about things they can do, and one in five trying to persuade others to change their behaviour. A smaller proportion – around one in seven - say they have suggested improvements that could be made to their place of work or study, or told relatives and friends to avoid buying from particular companies. (Section 1.3)
Ecological worldview
The majority of people appear to be both aware of and concerned about the problems besetting the global environment, and to believe that human behaviour has brought these about. There were particularly strong views that humans are severely abusing the environment, and that man’s interference with nature may produce disastrous consequences. Much concern was also expressed about changes to the countryside and the loss of bio-diversity, and about the finite nature of the earth’s resources.
However, there was widespread optimism that it was not too late to do something about climate change and that it would be possible to overcome the world’s environmental problems. The majority believe that it is up to individuals to accept responsibility for this, by making lifestyle changes. (Section 1.4.1)
Barriers and motivations
For most people, being ‘green’ is seen as the socially acceptable norm, rather than an ‘alternative’ way of life. It seems that one of the most powerful motivations for an environmentally friendly lifestyle is guilt about harming the environment. Financial incentives such as savings on energy bills are not citied as a major motivation.
While the majority subscribe to the need for individuals to change their behaviour, there are a whole range of reasons which some people give to explain why they themselves do not do more. One of the most prevalent is the belief that individual actions will make very little difference to climate change in the national and global context. Around a quarter expressed this opinion, although around twice as many disputed this.
Other reasons included lack of information, lack of time and finding it hard to change established habits. Some people were quite frank about their lack of motivation to change their lifestyle, saying that the environment was a low priority for them compared with a lot of other things in their life, or that it would take too much effort to change. Many were resistant to making radical changes to their current lifestyle - almost half agreed that ‘any changes I make to help the environment will need to fit into my lifestyle’. (Section 1.4.2)
Carbon off-setting
Around two fifths of those interviewed claimed to know at least ‘a little’ about carbon off-setting, and one in five knew a lot or a fair amount. The latter seemed to hold rather negative views about it, with nearly six in ten agreeing that ‘carbon off-setting encourages people to carry on doing things that harm the environment’. There was also considerable cynicism about whether or not the schemes on offer would do what they were supposed to do.
A small minority of people, just over one per cent, had used a carbon off-setting scheme, most often to off-set flights or other forms of travel. Around one in ten claimed that they definitely or probably would do so in the future. (Section 1.4.3)
Which groups are most positive in their attitudes?
There were no really marked differences in attitudes towards the environment between different sex, age, and social groups. People beyond retirement age tended to express more pessimistic attitudes than younger people about the state of the global environment, and those in higher social grades were slightly more likely than others to feel it was not too late to find a solution to problems, and that this would involve lifestyle changes by individuals. The latter two groups were also the most likely to try and influence others to behave in a more environmentally friendly way.
Conversely, young people (especially men in the 16-29 age group), people living in rented accommodation, readers of tabloid newspapers and those in lower social grades were most likely to say that the environment was a low priority for them, and to offer a range of reasons for not changing their lifestyle.
2. Behaviours to reduce climate change
Perceived impact of specific behaviours on climate change
Out of nine specific behaviours, the change that most people thought would have a major impact on reducing climate change was recycling more, followed by changes to car usage, and cutting down on the use of electricity and gas in the home. At least half thought each of these would have a major impact. Between half and two fifths felt the same about taking fewer flights, improving or installing insulation at home, and cutting down on water usage at home. Least often seen as important were behaviours to do with food – wasting less and buying locally – thought to have a major impact by less than one in three people. (Section 2.1)
How many people would be willing to change behaviour?
Six in ten people thought a lot or quite a lot of people in this country would be willing to recycle more – and over half thought that a lot or quite a lot of people would be willing to improve or install insulation. Around two fifths felt a lot or quite a lot of people would be willing to cut down on electricity or gas, or to waste less food, and around a third thought this about using a more fuel-efficient car, cutting down on water usage or buying food produced locally. Taking fewer flights and using a car less were thought to be least susceptible to behavioural change, despite many more thinking these behaviours had the potential for having a major impact. (Section 2.2)
What people are now doing
When asked about their own current lifestyle in relation to eight of these nine behaviours, the activity most commonly claimed – by seven in ten people - as something they already did and intended to keep up, was recycling more, followed by wasting less food and cutting down on electricity and gas (both around six in ten), and cutting down on water usage (over half). Just over a third said they were buying food produced locally, and less than three in ten that they were using a more fuel efficient car, using a car less or taking fewer flights. The last two types of behaviour change were those to which people were most resistant – over a quarter said they didn’t really want to make these changes.
As a summary measure, respondents were asked to say which of five statements best described their current lifestyle in relation to the environment. Only six per cent admitted to doing nothing that was environmentally friendly, with the largest group –around four in ten - saying they did quite a few things, and a further third claiming to do one or two things. One in five claimed to be environmentally friendly in most things or in everything they did. The latter group were also the most likely to claim they were committed to specific types of environmentally friendly behaviour, and generally people’s self-assessments of their overall current lifestyle corresponded well with their stated specific behaviours. (Section 2.3)
Satisfaction with current lifestyle
When asked how they felt about their own behaviour, almost half said they were happy with what they were currently doing to help the environment, around four in ten said they would like to do a bit more, and less than one in ten wanted to do a lot more. (Section 2.4)
Which groups are most environmentally friendly in their behaviour?
The groups most likely to say they had already made certain changes to their behaviour (recycling more, wasting less food, cutting down on gas, electricity and water usage) were those aged 65+ and, to a lesser extent, those living in rural areas, or in higher social grades.
3. Travel and transport
Attitudes to car use
The balance of opinion seems to indicate that most people think people who own cars cannot use them as much as they like with only 20 per cent agreeing that people should be allowed to use their cars as much as they like, even if it causes damage to the environment, compared with 53 per cent who disagreed. However, a system where car users pay higher taxes for the environmental damage car travel causes is not strongly supported – twice as many disagreed with this suggestion (53 per cent) as agreed (25 per cent). And there was a fairly even split between those who feel that more roads are the answer to congestion (39 per cent) and those who disagree with this (37 per cent). There was a similar split between those who agreed and those who disagreed that driving their car was too convenient to give up for the sake of the environment.
Almost seven in ten people say they like travelling in a car, either as a driver or a passenger, although only slightly fewer also agree that it can sometimes be stressful. It is also a habit – six out of ten admitted that when they get ready to go out they didn’t usually consider alternative forms of travel, they just got in the car (37 per cent disagreed with this).
Reducing car use is not perceived to be easy for most people – less than one in three agreed that it would be, compared with 54 per cent who disagreed. Further, the statement, ‘I would like to reduce my car use but there are no practical alternatives’, was endorsed by twice as many (54 per cent) as rejected it (25 per cent). (Section 3.1)
Attitudes to bus travel
Two statements about bus travel were also included, and results indicated a somewhat negative attitude towards it. Nearly half of those interviewed (47 per cent) agreed that they would only travel by bus if they had no other choice, compared with 37 per cent who disagreed with this. However, a large majority (72 per cent) disagreed that bus travel was mainly for people who couldn’t afford any better and only 12 per cent agreed with this. (Section 3.1)
Attitudes to air travel
More people (42 per cent) claimed support for the principle that people who fly should bear the cost of the environmental damage that air travel causes, than those who rejected this idea (30 per cent). But only a minority (17 per cent) agreed that they felt guilty about taking short haul flights themselves – 55 per cent disagreed with this (after respondents answering ‘not applicable’ had been removed from the question base), with half of these people disagreeing strongly. (Section 3.1)
Modes of transport used
A number of questions were asked about people’s use of different modes of transport and from these, measures of ‘travel dependency’ were derived. The most frequent mode of transport was the car. Nearly two thirds of people said they drove a car or van on at least one day a week, including 37 per cent who did so practically every day. In addition, over half those interviewed used a car or van as a passenger on at least one day a week, although only eight per cent did so every day. Around a third of those interviewed (32 per cent) never drove a car or van, and 15 per cent never used one as a passenger.
After the car, the next most frequent mode of transport was the bus, used by 35 per cent of people on at least one day a week, and by six per cent nearly every day. One in three people (35 per cent) never used a bus. Bicycles were used at least one day a week by 11 per cent, and nearly every day by three per cent. But 71 per cent never used a bicycle. Only seven per cent used the underground, metro, tram or a light railway at least one day a week, although this proportion increased to 15 per cent of those living in big cities and 33 per cent among London residents. Over-land trains were used by only six per cent on a weekly basis, but by many more on an occasional basis – 39 per cent never used them, similar to the proportion who never used a bus. And motorcycles were the most infrequently used form of transport – just 2-3 per cent used one at least weekly, and 95 per cent never did so. (Section 3.2)
Travel dependency1
Not surprisingly, in the light of the relative frequency of its use, further analysis shows that car use (as either a driver or a passenger) made up 71 per cent of all travel. All forms of public transport (buses, over-land trains, underground, trams etc) made up 23 per cent and cycling just five per cent.
Car ownership
Around eight in ten people had a car that they could use as either a driver or a passenger, and on average there were 1.26 cars per household. People aged 16-29 or 65+ were least likely to have access to a car.
Just one in three cars had small engines (up to 1400 cc). Half of cars (52 per cent) had engines between 1401 cc and 2000 cc. Cars with engines over 2000 cc in size were less common (16 per cent). Nearly three quarters of cars had petrol engines, and most of the remainder had diesel engines (27 per cent). (Section 3.3)
Local journeys
The survey also explored the modes of transport people used for getting to work or the place where they studied, what mode of transport was used for their main food shopping, and for taking children to school. Overall, for journeys of one mile or less 45 per cent of respondents drove, six per cent took public transport and 46 per cent walked or cycled, and for journeys of three miles or less 58 per cent drove, nine per cent took public transport and 28 per cent walked or cycled. (Section 3.4)
Six out of ten people who travelled to work usually drove themselves there. The next most common methods of travel to work were walking (14 per cent) and taking a bus (nine per cent). Just four per cent usually cycled.
The mode of transport used varied according to the distance travelled. Driving became more common as the distance increased, as did travelling by train. Four in ten people who lived within three miles of where they worked got to work by walking or cycling, but very few walked or cycled greater distances.
Only a small minority of people interviewed, less than five per cent, travelled to a place of study, but for those who did there was a higher tendency to use public transport (42 per cent) or walk (24 per cent). Only 29 per cent went by car.
The modes of transport used to do food shopping also varied by the distance travelled. As for work, driving was the most common method (59 per cent), but for people who lived within a mile of where they shopped, walking (38 per cent) was almost as common as driving (43 per cent).
A third of respondents with children aged between 5 and 16 said their children were driven to school. The age of the youngest child made a big difference here: 43 per cent of those whose youngest child was aged between five and ten said they were driven to school, compared with 29 per cent of those whose youngest child was aged between 11 and 15. The main reasons for driving children to school were because it could be combined with another journey, because there was no practical alternative, or because it was the most convenient or the quickest way of getting the children to school. Safety concerns were mentioned by only 16 per cent of parents. (Section 3.4)
Air travel
Respondents were asked about their air travel for leisure purposes (not for business travel). Just under half of people (45 per cent) had taken at least one flight for leisure purposes in 2006, and this proportion increased with income and for those in higher social grades.
The most common destination for flights was Europe, with 34 per cent saying they had taken at least one flight there in 2006. Eighteen per cent of respondents had taken a long haul flight, and just eight per cent had flown within the UK. Of those who had flown within the UK, 58 per cent said they had done so because flying was quicker (58 per cent), cheaper (28 per cent) or the easiest or most convenient way to make their journey (27 per cent). (Section 3.5)
4. Energy and water efficiency in the home
Overall, most respondents showed that they tried to be reasonably energy efficient at home.
Attitudes to energy and water efficiency
Around six in ten respondents said they did think about saving energy at home, and around four in ten showed willingness to sacrifice their home comforts in order to save energy. Four in ten respondents said they would like to install insulation, but could not afford to, although two thirds of respondents thought it was worth paying more for energy efficient appliances. In general, respondents seemed less concerned about the amount of water they used than about the energy they used, but over half of respondents did pay attention to water use. (Section 4.1)
Wasteful behaviours
There were some wasteful behaviours that most respondents did at least occasionally: overfilling the kettle (63 per cent), choosing to have a bath rather than a shower (63 per cent), leaving the heating on while out (59 per cent), keeping the tap running while brushing their teeth (54 per cent), and leaving the lights on in rooms that are not in use (50 per cent). Only 36 per cent of respondents admitted to ever leaving their television on standby overnight, and 37 per cent said they at least occasionally left a mobile phone charger switched on at the socket when it was not in use.
Respondents were also asked how often they put on more clothes when they were cold rather then turning the heating on – phrased such that in this case, never doing so would be considered the most wasteful position. Eleven per cent of people said they never did this. However, a quarter said they always of very often did this, and a further 32 per cent said they did this quite often. (Section 4.2)
Recent improvements to energy efficiency
Homeowners, people aged 40 or over, and those with higher household incomes were the most likely groups to have made energy efficiency improvements to their homes in the last five years.
The most common energy efficiency improvement people had made was to replace normal light bulbs with energy saving light bulbs (64 per cent). In the last five years, 27 per cent had replaced their boiler, and the same proportion had installed or improved double glazing, 26 per cent had improved or installed loft insulation, 18 per cent had improved or added insulation to their hot water tank, and 17 per cent had improved or installed cavity wall insulation. (Section 4.3)
Heating and hot water
The majority of respondents (88 per cent) had a central heating boiler, and 29 per cent of these had a condensing boiler. Just under half of respondents had a heating system that was less than five years old, but a third had one that was more than ten years old. Almost all (94 per cent) of heating systems used mains gas, although the type of fuel varied more amongst respondents who did not have a boiler.
Around two thirds of respondents had a room thermostat and on average room thermostats were set at 19.6oC, although there appeared to be some confusion amongst a minority of respondents as some gave unrealistic answers to this question.
Two thirds of respondents had a hot water tank, and 94 per cent of them had it insulated. Hard foam insulation was a little more common than soft jacket insulation. (Section 4.4)
Household insulation
Around seven in ten respondents had cavity walls, and 62 per cent of these had insulation in all their cavity walls (a further eight per cent had some walls insulated). Most people (83 per cent) had a loft, and 94 per cent of them had loft insulation. Double glazing was also very common, 73 per cent had all their windows and doors double glazed, and a further ten per cent had double glazing on most windows and doors. (Section 4.5)
Energy saving light bulbs
Around three quarters of respondents had at least one energy saving light bulb, and 56 per cent had three or more. The average number of energy saving bulbs per respondent was 4.2. Of respondents who did not currently have any energy saving bulbs, 41 per cent had used them in the past.
Amongst respondents who did not have any energy saving bulbs, 19 per cent said they had not got round to fitting any and 20 per cent had not thought about it. This group also cited objections such as energy saving bulbs not being bright enough or costing too much, as reasons for not having them. (Section 4.6)
Renewable energy sources and green tariffs
Very few people had already installed renewable energy sources at home, but nine per cent were seriously considering solar panels for electricity and eight per cent were considering solar water heating. Five per cent of respondents were seriously considering getting a wind turbine to generate electricity. (Section 4.7)
Only three per cent of people were already buying their electricity on a green tariff, but a further six per cent claimed to be seriously considering switching to a green tariff. (Section 4.8)
Water meters
Three in ten people had a water meter, and of these only a third had asked for a water meter to be fitted. Of those that did not have a water meter, only 15 per cent were seriously considering asking for a water meter and 39 per cent thought their water bills would increase if they had a water meter installed (30 per cent thought their bills would decrease). (Section 4.9)
5. Reducing waste, reusing and recycling
Attitudes towards reducing waste and recycling
Six in ten people said they agreed with a ‘waste not, want not’ approach to life, compared with just 13 per cent who disagreed. An even higher proportion - eight in ten - thought that people had a duty to recycle, although only half were in favour of a system of reward for recycling everything they could and penalties if they did not. (Section 5.1)
Waste reduction behaviours
Just over half those interviewed admitted to throwing food away, at least occasionally, because it had gone off, and almost one in three said they did this very often or quite often. Only 15 per cent claimed they never did this. A high proportion – almost six in ten – also said they did not avoid buying goods they felt had too much packaging. (Section 5.2)
Reuse behaviours
The two most common reuse behaviours were giving away things which were no longer wanted to charity or to friends and family (87 per cent agreed they did this), and reusing things like empty bottles, tubs, jars, envelopes and paper (78 per cent did so at least some of the time, and around one in five did so always or very often). Slightly fewer, around six in ten, sometimes took their own shopping bag when shopping, with a quarter doing so always or very often. Around four in ten agreed that they often bought second-hand goods. (Section 5.3)
Awareness and use of council recycling collections
For most items, people’s perceptions of what their local council collected for recycling were reasonably well matched to reality (based on DEFRA Local Authority statistics).
Over eight in ten people claimed to put out paper for a recycling collection, around six in ten said they put out glass or tins/foil, and around half recycled cardboard or plastic packaging in this way. Fewer people said they used a recycling collection for other materials, ranging from four in ten for garden waste to around one in ten for shoes. (Section 5.4.1)
Use of recycling banks
Eighty-four per cent of people were aware of a recycling bank in their area and of these about two thirds said they or their household used the facility. The materials most commonly taken to a recycling bank, as a percentage of all those who use banks only, were glass bottles and jars (72 per cent), followed by clothes (44 per cent), shoes (35 per cent), paper (32 per cent), cardboard (29 per cent) and tins/foil (26 per cent). (Section 5.4.2)
Composting
Among people who had a garden, just over a third said they used a compost heap or bin to compost garden or kitchen waste. (Section 5.4.3)
Barriers to recycling
Around four in ten people said they were already recycling as much as they could. Among the remainder, the main reasons given for not recycling more were the lack of doorstep collections, lack of recycling facilities locally, and lack of space to store recyclables. (Section 5.4.4)
Which groups are doing most to reduce waste and to recycle?
Consistent with previous findings, the groups most likely to be engaged in waste reduction and recycling were older people, particularly those above retirement age, those in higher social grades, and people living in rural areas.
6. Purchasing behaviours
Attitudes towards purchasing behaviours
Half those interviewed agreed that they tried not to buy products from a company whose ethics they disagreed with, and that they made an effort to buy things from local producers, compared with around one in five who disagreed. Opinion was more divided on being prepared to pay more for environmentally friendly products (44 per cent agreed, 29 per cent disagreed) and on making a point of checking where fruit and vegetables are grown before buying them (36 per cent agreed, 36 per cent disagreed). (Section 6.1)
Awareness and purchasing of selected products/brands
When they were shown a list of names (but not logos) of six different products or brands, four in five people said they had heard of Fair Trade products, around a third had heard of timber products from sustainable sources, and a fifth had heard of fish from sustainable sources. Fewer people were aware of Red Tractor meat2 (16 per cent), Freedom food (15 per cent) or LEAF Marque food (four per cent).
Those who had heard of a particular product were asked whether they or their household made a conscious effort to buy it. Half of those who had heard of Fair trade products (45 per cent of all respondents) said they made a conscious effort to buy them. For the other product types, two fifths of those who had heard of fish from sustainable sources and Red Tractor meat also said they made an effort to buy them, and a quarter of those who had heard of timber from sustainable sources and Freedom foods made an effort to buy them. However, as indicated above, the proportion of people who had heard of all brands except Fair Trade was a third at most. Therefore the proportions of the whole population who made an effort to buy the other brands were between one per cent and eight per cent of all respondents.
Respondents were also asked whether they or their household regularly bought recycled toilet paper or kitchen roll, free range eggs or poultry, organic food, or other product types. The most frequently purchased of these items was free-range eggs (by 70 per cent). Less than one in three regularly bought any of the other items. (Section 6.2)
Shopping behaviour
Nearly all respondents used a supermarket at least once a month, and over 90 per cent used one to do most of their grocery shopping. After supermarkets, small independent shops and convenience stores were the most commonly used type of outlet. Markets, including farmers markets were also used by a high proportion of respondents. (Section 6.3)
Which groups purchase more of those product types covered?
People in higher social grades or higher income groups, and those living in the rural areas were more likely both to be aware of and to purchase certain product types with environmental, animal welfare or other benefits. They also tended to be more conscious of related issues in their attitudes towards purchasing, as did people in older age groups.
7. Green spaces
Nine in ten respondents had their own garden, and half of these said having a garden contributed a lot to their quality of life. Whether they had a garden or not, most respondents thought it was very important to have green spaces such as public gardens, parks and commons nearby (two thirds said this), and just over half of respondents visited these kind of green spaces at least once a week.
Visiting the open countryside was something people did less often: three in ten people did so at least once a week, but one in ten never visited the countryside. When visiting the countryside people tended to go to forests or woodland, rivers and lakes, open coastal areas, and country villages. The majority of respondents who visited open areas went walking (82 per cent), and picnicking was also a popular countryside activity (30 per cent). Fresh air and scenery were considered to be the two most important aspects of the countryside.
8. Animal Welfare
Farm animal welfare was an issue that most respondents had not given a lot of thought to, but four in ten had thought at least a fair amount about it. Just over a quarter of respondents were happy with most aspects of farm animal welfare, while one in ten were unhappy with most aspects of it. The most common issue of concern was how animals are transported, half of respondents were concerned about this and one in three said this was the issue that concerned them most.
More respondents had given thought to pet welfare, over a half had thought a fair amount about this. A third of respondents were happy with most aspects of pet welfare, but one in ten were unhappy with most aspects. How people treat their pets was the biggest issue of concern for one in four respondents, and over half were concerned about this issue to some degree.
Over half of respondents (57 per cent) thought the Government ought to be doing more about animal welfare, while a third thought it was doing enough already.
9. Biodiversity
Biodiversity was a term that two thirds of respondents knew nothing about, and two thirds had also given little or no thought to the loss of biodiversity in the UK and elsewhere in the world. However, when the term was explained, most respondents disagreed that we could afford to lose some biodiversity in the UK or in the world.
Two thirds of respondents were in support of the UK aiding developing countries to protect their biodiversity, and over half thought that farmers ought to be paid to protect the environment. Half of respondents thought there were things they could do to protect biodiversity in the UK, and only slightly fewer thought they could help prevent the loss of the world’s biodiversity. Seven in ten respondents said they were actively encouraging wildlife in their garden, and almost all respondents thought that schools ought to have field trips so that children could experience nature first hand.
10. Wellbeing
When asked to rate their overall satisfaction with life on a scale of 0 to 10, the average answer across all respondents was 7.3, suggesting that most people in England are reasonably satisfied with their life overall.
When looking at satisfaction with individual aspects of peoples’ lives, satisfaction with day to day activities, achieving goals, standard of living, and personal relationships seemed to contribute most to overall satisfaction with life.
Most respondents (79 per cent) generally felt positive about themselves and a similar proportion felt that what they do is valuable and worthwhile. Seven in ten people were optimistic about their future but 44 per cent found it hard to be hopeful about the future of the world. Around four in ten respondents agreed that they spent a lot of time worrying, and 33 per cent drew comfort and strength from their religious beliefs.
Looking at the way people feel, on average, respondents felt happy or contented more than half of the time, and felt energised or lively about half the time. Feeling depressed was fairly uncommon, but on average respondents had one or two days a week where they felt like everything was an effort.
Eight out of ten people spent time with friends and with family at least one or two days a week, and over a third spent time with family everyday. Only half of respondents were involved in social activities in their local area on a regular basis, but most (85 per cent) were regularly involved in some kind of hobby or leisure activity.
Finally, respondents were asked what the most important things affecting their life were. The most common answers were: spending time with friends and family (44 per cent), their health (31 per cent), their personal relationships (23 per cent), their future financial security (21 per cent), and their day to day activities (20 per cent).
1. Travel dependency scores for each mode of transport were calculated based on the number of days per year each respondent used that mode of transport. Scores for each mode were then added to create a total travel score. The dependency measure is a measure of the use of each mode as a proportion of total travel. For further explanation see section 3.2.7
Notes to editors
1. National Statistics publication
The headline results released on 14 August 2007 and the raw data which are being made available via the UK data archive are Defra National Statistics publications. The survey was administered by the British Market Research Bureau (BMRB) and they have provided this full report to Defra. It has been quality assured by Government Statistical Service staff but as an external contractor report is not itself classed as National Statistics (unlike the above). This report, and the headline results and data are all available on the Defra statistics website.
2. Basic Quality Information
Relevance: These results are relevant to Defra and Government policy on many areas including climate change. They provide data that will allow assessment of current levels of behaviour in different environmental subject areas, particularly transport, energy efficiency and recycling. The data also give an insight into people’s attitudes, and are being used to cluster the population into segments that will facilitate better targeting of information and publicity.
Accuracy: These data were collected by the British Market Research Bureau (BMRB) on behalf of Defra. They were contracted to administer a 45 minute survey entitled “2007 survey of public attitudes and behaviours toward the environment” on a sample of 3,618. BMRB also administered 15 minutes of additional questions that did not fit on the main survey to a sample of 1,661 as part of an omnibus survey.
Both surveys involved face-to-face, computer-assisted (CAPI) interviews of adults (16+) in England, at home using the sample design detailed below.
Sampling: BMRB utilised ‘random location’ sampling. Primary sampling units (PSUs) for random location samples were selected with a probability proportionate to size, containing approximately 300 addresses. A total of 378 PSUs were selected for the survey, with 9-10 interviews achieved in each area. Research shows only minor divergence between the results from random samples and high quality quota samples such as used here. The results of the weighting analysis, (see below) show the sample taken by BMRB was representative.
Weighting: BMRB’s statistical team carried out an analysis of the finished dataset to identify the best weighting variables and apply cell, rim or other form of calibration weighting as necessary. This checked whether there was need to bring the sample in line with the population profile on key variables. The weights should only be applied if they will demonstrably reduce bias (i.e. there should be a correlation between the demographic data and key survey data), and this was not applicable for these survey results – i.e. BMRB reported that there was no need to weight to correct for any disproportionate element in the sample design.
Timeliness: The fieldwork was completed by June 2007. Analysis and quality assurance were completed in the intervening period to ensure accuracy and accessibility of the results.
Accessibility: The data being released in this news release can be found on the statistics section of the Defra website.
Comparability and coherence: This survey has undergone a major overhaul since data was last collected in 2001 to improve and re-focus the questions to today’s policy agenda. Where possible, time series have been shown. The survey itself can be found on the statistics section of the Defra website so that the wording of a particular question can be compared to questions used to collect similar data on other surveys. For example, the National Travel Survey administered by the Department for Transport includes questions on method / frequency of travel.
National Statistics publication |
End
Public enquiries: 08459 335577
News releases available on our website:
www.defra.gov.uk
Defra's aim is sustainable development
Page published: 2 November 2007