• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment - Results of the 2009/2010 survey
 

Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment - Results of the 2009/2010 survey

on

  • 518 views

Presentation given by David Solly, Specialist, People and Access, Natural England, GSNF, Nov 2010

Presentation given by David Solly, Specialist, People and Access, Natural England, GSNF, Nov 2010

Statistics

Views

Total Views
518
Views on SlideShare
518
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • In 41% of visits, the main destination was within one mile of the respondents home, with the majority of visits (81%) taking place within 5 miles of the start point. Visits to coastal destinations were more likely to involve longer journeys whereas visits to green spaces within urban areas were more likely to involve a distance of less than one mile. Visits amongst DE social classes were more likely to take within a mile of the home.
  • Make point about geocoding being done and number of visits.
  • Make point about geocoding being done and number of visits.
  • Mention large sample sizes even with niche activities.
  • Spend by destination Town and city – spend on 27% of visits - av. £22 Countryside – 19% - av. £28 Seaside resort/town – 53% av. £47 Other seaside coastline - 30% av.£34
  • Spend by destination Town and city – spend on 27% of visits - av. £22 Countryside – 19% - av. £28 Seaside resort/town – 53% av. £47 Other seaside coastline - 30% av.£34

Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment - Results of the 2009/2010 survey Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment - Results of the 2009/2010 survey Presentation Transcript

  • Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Results of the 2009 – 2010 survey
  • Agenda
    • Background to the survey
    • Survey methods
    • Results from the first year of interviewing
    • Year Two
    • Accessing and using the results
    Year One Key results Who? Profiling visitors and non-visitors Where? Visit destinations What? A profile of visits Why? Motivations and barriers Other engagement Appreciating the natural environment
  • Background to the survey
    • Between 1996 and 2005 a series of surveys were carried out to track participation in leisure day visits.
    • These surveys included ‘days out’ in the countryside but they did not provide detailed information on people’s day to day use and enjoyment of the natural environment.
    • In 2009 Natural England, Defra and the Forestry Commission commissioned TNS Research International to undertake the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment (MENE).
  • The survey aims
    • MENE provides the most comprehensive dataset yet available on people’s use and enjoyment of the natural environment.
    • It includes comprehensive information on visits to the natural environment as well as other ways of enjoying the natural environment such as gardening , watching wildlife and volunteering .
  • Why is MENE important?
    • MENE can:
      • help to assess the impact of previous policy interventions
      • enable all those engaged at a national or a local level to make informed decisions in developing or promoting access to the natural environment.
      • inform future investment strategies, to help bring private money into the natural environment sector and to help service providers better tailor their offer to the needs of local communities and tourists .
      • enable organisations to tailor their promotional activity to the specific requirements of their constituents.
  • What makes MENE different?
    • MENE captures information on all visits to the natural environment, including visits to local informal green space which were under recorded by previous surveys.
    • It provides more accurate estimates of the volume of visits to the natural environment, because the survey ran throughout the year rather than being a one-off snap shot in time.
    • Data is collected at a range of different spatial scales (including small areas) and amongst different socioeconomic groups.
    • The survey collected origin and destination data . 79 per cent of visits were allocated a grid reference and we were able to record visitors addresses in 85 per cent of cases.
    • It is also important to understand why people don’t visit, so the survey collected this data too.
    • The survey collects information on attitudes towards the natural environment.
  • Survey method
    • In-home face to face interviews
      • Weekly interviews on TNS –RI omnibus survey
      • Representative of the English adult population
    • Topics included in the survey
      • Volume of visits to the natural environment
      • Places visited
      • Activities undertaken on visits
      • Duration of visits
      • Distance travelled on visits
      • Transport used on visits
      • Reasons for taking visits
      • Expenditure during visits
      • Other forms of engagement
      • Barriers to participation
    • Year One - March 2009 to February 2010
      • 48,514 interviews
      • Main details of 58,653 visits and full details of 20,374 visits
  • Levels of engagement Infrequent visitors 54% Frequent visitors 37% Non visitors 10% 2.9 billion visits to the natural environment Average of 69 visits per adult About 1.3 visits per week
  • Volume of visits taken by month Low temperatures and significant snowfalls Millions of visits
  • Volume of visits taken by month Millions of visits
  • Changes since 2005 Comparing MENE with ELVS
      • A calibration exercise has been undertaken to allow comparisons to be made between MENE and certain results from the England Leisure Visits Survey .
      • ELVS results have been adjusted to take account of the different survey method and coverage.
      • Comparisons can only be made for activities included in both surveys – walking, cycling, visits to beaches, visiting attractions, sightseeing by car and picnics.
      • The volume of visits involving these activities increased by 10% from 898m in 2005 to 990m in 2009/10.
      • The percentage of the population participating in these activities increased from 20% to 24% .
  • Age and socio-economic profile by frequency of visits
    • Frequent visitor – at least once a week (54% of population)
    • Infrequent visitor – twice a month or less often (37% of population)
    • Non-participants – not visited in the last 12 months (10% of population)
    Frequent visitors (%) Infrequent visitors (%) Non-visitors (%)
    • Frequent visitors
      • ABC1 socio-economic groups (55%)
      • White ethnicity (92%)
    • Non-visitors
      • Aged 65+(36%)
      • Retired (40%)
      • DE socio-economic group (47%)
      • Living in areas in bottom 10% of
      • Index of Multiple Deprivation (19%)
      • Any long term illness of disability (33%)
      • Black or Minority Ethnic community (20%)
  • Levels of physical activity by frequency of visits Frequent visitors (%) Infrequent visitors (%) Non-visitors (%) Number of days undertake 30 mins+ of physical activity
      • There is a correlation between visits to the natural environment and levels of physical activity.
    • Frequent visitor – at least once a week (54% of population)
    • Infrequent visitor – twice a month or less often (37% of population)
    • Non-participants – not visited in the last 12 months (10% of population)
  • Participation in the last 7 days
      • 43% of the population had taken 1 or more visits to the natural environment in the 7 days prior to being interviewed.
    Proportion amongst total adult population Took visits in last 7 days (%) Took visits in last 7 days (%)
  • Who? DEFRA segmentation using MENE data – The Futures Company Middle Segments – 35 to 54 Younger Segments – under 35 Older Segments – 55 and over
  • Who? DEFRA segmentation using MENE data – The Futures Company Limited resources More likely to visit urban green spaces Often dissatisfied with local environment Life priorities are shaped by lifestage – friendships, socialising, enjoyment and, for some, children. Busy with lives, home, family, competing interests Have children and/or dogs Engage with the natural environment locally Spent time in the outdoors when they were younger Nostalgic, proud and patriotic Few time pressures Sensitive to crowds and commercialisation Price sensitive – even if they can afford to pay Face barriers to participation and are frequently disappointed Financial and personal independence – act on their pride of the outdoors & travel further .
  • Who? DEFRA segmentation using MENE data – The Futures Company Limited resources More likely to visit urban green spaces Often dissatisfied with local environment Life priorities are shaped by lifestage – friendships, socialising, enjoyment and, for some, children. Busy with lives, home, family, competing interests Have children and/or dogs Engage with the natural environment locally Spent time in the outdoors when they were younger Nostalgic, proud and patriotic Few time pressures Sensitive to crowds and commercialisation Price sensitive – even if they can afford to pay Face barriers to participation and are frequently disappointed Financial and personal independence – act on their pride of the outdoors & travel further . 59% 52% 47% 67% 57% 48% 55% 35% Visit at least once a week
  • Where? Almost half of visits are to green spaces in towns or cities Town or city 41% 1.2 bn. visits Countryside 48% 1.4 bn. visits Seaside resort/ town 7% 0.21 bn. visits Other coastline 4% 0.11 bn. visits
  • Volume of visits by region
    • Influences on volume of visits
      • Size of regional population
      • Availability of accessible natural environment
    251-300 million 301-400 million 401-531 million 157-250 million Volume of visits by residents of each region
  • Volume of visits by region
    • Influences on volume of visits
      • Size of regional population
      • Availability of accessible natural environment
    157-250 251-300 301-400 401-531 Volume of visits by residents of each region
  • Types of place visited Parks in town and cities 24% 679m visits Woodland and forests 11% 317m visits Rivers, lakes, canals 9% 253m visits Paths, cycleways, bridleways 13% 369m visits
  • Urban parks Providing access for all Urban parks are particularly important to younger people , the BME population and people who live in more deprived areas . Proportion amongst total adult population Urban parks visited – proportion of visits
  • Distances travelled Most visits are close to home and taken on foot 61% of visits are taken on foot 3% of visits are taken by public transport 31% of visits are taken by car
  • Density of visit destinations Density of visit destinations Visits of 5 miles or less Visit distribution reflects population distribution
  • Density of visit destinations Density of visit destinations Visits of 60 miles or more Density of visit destinations Visits of 5 miles or less Visit distribution reflects population distribution Visits clustered around key ‘tourist’ destinations
  • Density of visit origins South Pennines example
  • Visit duration
    • An average visit duration of 2 hours.
    Less than an hour 1- 3 hours 3 hours or more 28% of all visits 51% of all visits 22% of all visits On foot – 85% Less than a mile from home – 61% Dog walking – 71%% By car – 60% Over 5 miles from home – 51% Walking – 32%, Eating Out – 20%
  • Activities during visits to the natural environment Walking with a dog 48% 1,380m visits Other walking 26% 739m visits Eating or drinking out 6% 182m visits Playing with children 8% 229m visits
  • Activities during visits to the natural environment Variations by population group Walking with a dog + aged 45 to 64 + C2DE socio-economic groups + White ethnicity Other walking + aged 65 and over + AB socio-economic groups + BME population Eating or drinking out + aged 16-24 + BME population Playing with children + aged 25-44 + BME population
  • Expenditure during visits to the natural environment 25% of visits involve any expenditure – 709m visits An average of £29 is spent during these visits Equates to around £20.4bn spend in total. Expenditure by category For every £1 spent on a visit to the natural environment, 53 pence was spent on food and drink and 13 pence was spent on fuel.
  • Expenditure during visits to the natural environment 25% of visits involve any expenditure – 709m visits An average of £29 is spent during these visits Equates to around £20.4bn spend in total. Expenditure by category For every £1 spent on a visit to the natural environment, 53 pence was spent on food and drink and 13 pence was spent on fuel. Visits involving expenditure: Seaside resorts – 53% Other seaside coastline – 30% Town & city – 27% Countryside – 19% Total expenditure by place visited
  • Visit profile by population segment Activities & motivations Barriers? Dog walking Poor health Old age Disability Too busy at work or at home No particular reason Not interested Not interested, too expensive Eating & drinking. Time with friends. Playing with children Playing with children. Time with family. Walking for health Dog walking Dog walking Unwinding, scenery, fresh air Less than 1 hour 3 hours or more 1 – 2 hours 59 mins
  • Reasons for taking visits Variations in motivations… By age Under 25s – spending time with friends 24 to 44 – spending time with family 45 to 65 – relaxing and unwinding Health and exercise – increasingly important with advancing age. By gender Men – health and exercise Women – exercising dogs , time with family , entertaining children . By socio-economic group ABC1s – health and exercise , relaxing and unwinding C2DEs – exercising dogs.
  • Outcomes of visits to the natural environment Variations in outcomes… Those who take visits most often report the most positive outcomes - ABCs, people with white ethnicity – a cause and effect relationship? Visits to countryside and coast are more likely to have positive outcomes than those taken to urban green spaces. Women are generally more to report positive outcomes, with the exception of ‘learning something new’.
  • Reasons for not participating more often No car access Have young children Too busy at work Men Aged 25 to 44 Too busy at home Women Aged 25 to 64 Poor health, old age, disability Women Aged 65 and over DE socio-economic group White ethnicity No particular reason or not interested Men Aged 16 to 24 DE socio-economic group BME population Too busy at work Infrequent participants Non-participants Too busy at home No particular reason Poor weather Poor health Old age A physical disability Too expensive Not interested Prefer other leisure activities
  • Other types of engagement Enjoying and appreciating the natural environment
  • Other activities involving the natural environment . 93% of the population undertook at least once of these activities. c. 2 million adults Higher participation amongst men , people aged 55+ and/or still in education , regular visitors to the natural environment.
  • Attitudes to the natural environment Agreement was higher amongst women, older age groups , those in the AB and C1 socio-economic groups and those with a white ethnic background.
  • Changing lifestyle to protect natural environment The majority of the population are concerned about damage to the natural environment but far fewer intend to make lifestyle changes to protect it. Around 1 in 5 adults would like to make changes but cite real or perceived barriers.
  • Pro-environmental behaviours . 89% of the population undertake at least once of these activities. People who take visits to the natural environment are more likely than non-participants to undertake any of these activities. Frequent visitors to natural environment Non-visitors Adult population
  • MENE Year Two
    • Fieldwork for the second year of MENE continues until the end of February 2011.
    • The second year of the survey will allow for the measurement of changes in levels of engagement with the natural environment over the two year period.
    • The cumulative sample of c.90,000 interviews will allow a robust analysis at an overall population level and amongst key groups of interest, including:
      • At a regional and county level
      • By population group e.g. age, ethnicity, socio-economic status
      • By type of place visited
      • By activities undertaken
  • Accessing and using the data 2009/10 Annual Report, Technical Report and summary data tables www.naturalengland.org.uk Also available or coming soon… Additional analysis reports Detailed data tables Electronic data viewer Opportunities for bespoke analyses
  • Further questions
    • For further information relating to official statistics contact [email_address]
    • For all other questions contact Ben Nichols, MENE Project Manager [email_address]
  • Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Results of the 2009 – 2010 survey