2. MENE – scope
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 and changes over time, because the survey is continuous 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 collects origin and destination data for a selection of visits. 80 per
cent of visits where the destination is recorded were allocated a grid
reference and we were able to record visitors addresses in almost 100 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.
3. Survey method
In-home face to face interviews
Weekly interviews on TNS –RI omnibus survey
Representative of the English adult population
Years 1 & 2 - March 2009 to February 2011
Interviews – Year 1 48,514 , Year 2 46,099
Main visit details – Year 1 58,653 visits , Year 2 47,825 visits
Full visit details – Year 1 20,374 visits , Year 2 17,389 visits
Topics included in the survey
Volume of visits to the natural environment Transport used on visits
Places visited Reasons for taking visits
Activities undertaken on visits Expenditure during visits
Duration of visits Other forms of engagement
Distance travelled on visits Barriers to participation
5. Annual volume of visits
March 2010 to February 2011
2.5 billion visits to
Average of 60 About 1.2 visits
the natural
visits per adult per week
environment
13 per cent fewer
visits than between
March 2009 and
February 2010.
A statistically
significant decrease.
Year 1 - 2.9 billion
Year 2 - 2.5 billion
6. Participation in the last 7 days
39% of the population had taken 1 or more visits to the natural environment in
the 7 days prior to being interviewed. This is a decrease from 43% in Year 1.
Age 16-24 43 Took visits in last 7 days (%)
36
25-44 46
43
45-64 46
43
65+ 34
31
Long term illness or disability
None 46
41
33 2009/10
Any
30
2010/11
Socio-economic status
AB 53
52
C1 46
41
C2 42
38
DE 34
28
Index of Multiple Deprivation
Top 10% 54
49
Mid 11-89% 44
40
Bottom 10% 30
27
Took visits in last 7 days (%)
7. Volume of visits taken per month (millions)
March 2009 to February 2011
A seasonal pattern correlated to
daylight hours but a general
300m downward trend.
283
273 270
257 253 254
Visits to the natural environment
242
228 232
220 216
227 213
150m 205 206 206
218 217 200
199
188
178 180
168
0m
8. Where?
Around half of visits are to the countryside
Other coastline
0.11 bn. visits
-17%
Seaside resort/ town
4% 0.17 bn. visits
7%
53%
Countryside 37% Green space in a town or city
1.3 bn. visits 0.92 bn. visits
-5% -20%
9. Volume of visits taken
Changes between Year 1 and Year 2
INCREASES
Farmland
Woodland
Mountain, hill, moorland
AB socio-economic groups
Parks and other urban green
ABOVE AVERAGE
spaces
DECREASES
Eating and drinking out, road
cycling, horse riding
Aged 16-24, 65+
DE socio-economic
groups, unemployed
BME population
10. Changes between Year 1 and Year 2 – green space
and countryside visits
Visits to the countryside up
almost every month on 2009
Visits to green spaces in towns
and cities down every month on
2009
12. Levels of engagement
22% 21%
20%
16%
11%
9%
Every day Several times Once a week Once or twice Less often Never
a week a month
Frequent Infrequent Non
visitors visitors visitors
53% 37% 9% or
or 22 million or 16 million 4 million
adults adults adults
13. Age and socio-economic profile by frequency
of visits
Frequent visitors (%) Infrequent visitors (%) Non-visitors (%)
16 20
35
65+
32 45-64 More likely to be
33 non-visitors
AGE 25 25-44
16-24 Aged 65+(35%)
More likely to be 36 Retired (37%)
34 27
frequent visitors DE group (43%)
Aged 25-64 (68%) 16 Living in areas in
13 13
ABC1 groups (57%) bottom 10% of
White ethnicity (91%) Index of Multiple
21 14 Deprivation (19%)
27
24
AB Any long term illness of
SOCIO- 28 C1
disability (36%)
30 C2
ECONOMIC 19
DE Black or Minority Ethnic
GROUP 21 community (24%)
20
43
22 30
• Frequent visitor – at least once a week (53% of population)
• Infrequent visitor – twice a month or less often (37% of population)
• Non-participants – not visited in the last 12 months (9% of population)
14. Levels of physical activity by frequency of visits
Frequent visitors (%) Infrequent visitors (%) Non-visitors (%)
Number of days
48 undertake 30 mins+
of physical activity
66 0 to 2 days
79
3 or more days
There is a relationship between
visits to the natural environment
and levels of physical activity.
52
34
21
Frequent Infrequent Non-participants
• Frequent visitor – at least once a week (53% of population)
• Infrequent visitor – twice a month or less often (37% of population)
• Non-participants – not visited in the last 12 months (9% of population)
16. Volumes of visits by region and county
Influences on volume of visits
Size of population
Availability of accessible natural
environment
Visit estimates can now be made at a county
Greatest decreases in London, the South East level and these will become more robust as
and East of England. the sample sizes increase.
17. Types of place visited by county
Significant geographical variations
Town or city
Seaside resort
or town
Other seaside
coastline
Countryside
A clear variation in the
types of place visited by
county reflecting the large
proportion of visits to local
places.
18. Distances travelled
Most visits are close to home and taken on foot
40 63% of visits 30% of visits 3% of visits
are taken on are taken by are taken by
foot car public
26
transport
16
6 5
3
1 1 1 1
Less than 1 mile1 or 2 miles 3 to 5 miles 6 to 10 miles11 to 20 miles to 40 miles to 60 miles to 80 miles to 100 miles 100 miles
21 41 61 81 Over
19. Types of place visited – volume of visits
Park in a town or city
558m
679m
Path, cycleway, bridleway
360m
369m
Woodland or forest
326m
317m
Another open space in countryside
307m
319m
Farmland
233m
209m
River, lake, canal
232m
253m
Playing field/other recreation area
191m
195m
Another open space in town or city
189m
226m 2010/11
Country park
176m
199m 2009/10
A beach
159m
174m
A village
157m
176m
Other coastline
91m
98m
Children's playground
76m
82m
Mountain, hill, moorland
64m
61m
An allotment
16m
17m
0 200 400 600 800
Million visits
20. Types of place visited – changes between years
Farmland 13%
Mountain, hill, moorland 10%
Woodland 4%
0% Playing field or other recreation area
-2% Path, cycleway, bridleway
-3% Another open space in the countryside
-6% Allotment/community garden
-6% Children’s playground
-7% River, lake, canal
-8% Other coastline
-10% Village
-10% Beach
-13% Country park
-15% Another open space in town or city
-18% Park in a town or city
-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%
Percentage change between 2009/10 and 2010/11
22. Activities during visits to the natural environment
- volume of visits
Walking with a dog 1267m
1380m
Walking, not with a dog 660m
739m
Playing with children 212m
229m
Eating or drinking out 142m
182m
Visiting an attraction 89m
109m
Running 74m
80m
Wildlife watching 70m
77m
Informal games and sport 66m
85m
Road cycling 50m
64m 2010/11
Visits to a beach, sunbathing, paddling 50m
51m
48m
2009/10
Appreciating scenery from your car
53m
Picnicking 46m
53
Horse riding 27m
35m
Off road cycling, MTB 26m
34m
Fishing 15m
17m
Swimming outdoors 13m
16m
Watersports 11m
16m
Fieldsports 10m
15m
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500
Million visits
23. Activities during visits to the natural environment
- changes between years
-1% Wildlife watching
-3% Visits to the beach, sunbathing, paddling
-5% Running
-6% Watersports
-8% Walking with a dog
-8% Playing with children
-8% Appreciating scenery from your car
-10% Walking, not with a dog
-14% Fishing
-15% Picnicking
-19% Visiting an attraction
-20% Off road cycling/mountain biking
-21% Swimming outdoors
-21% Eating or drinking out
-22% Informal games and sport
-23% Road cycling
-23% Horse riding
-25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%
Percentage change between 2009/10 and 2010/11
25. Reasons for taking visits
48 Variations in motivations…
To exercise your dog
47
For health or exercise 38
34
To relax and unwind 26
25 By age
For fresh air or to enjoy pleasant 24 Under 25s – spending time with friends
weather 21 24 to 44 – spending time with family
22 45 to 65 – relaxing and unwinding
To enjoy scenery
20 Health and exercise – increasingly
For peace and quiet 16 important with advancing age.
15
To enjoy wildlife 14 2010/11
13
To spend time with family 13 2009/10
12 By gender
12
Men – health and exercise
To be somewhere you like Women – exercising dogs, time with
10
11 family, entertaining children.
To entertain children
11
To spend time with friends 9
9
To challenge yourself or achieve 4
something 3 By socio-economic group
To learn something about the outdoors 2 ABC1s – health and exercise, relaxing and
2 unwinding
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 C2DEs – exercising dogs.
Percentage of visits
26. Outcomes of visits to the natural environment
I enjoyed it 47 50 2
It made me feel calm and
32 52 9 5
relaxed
It made me feel refreshed
31 52 9 7
and revitalised
I took time to appreciate my
31 54 8 8
surroundings
I felt close to nature 25 50 12 11
I learned something new
10 26 23 42
about the natural world
Percentage of adult population
Agree strongly Agree Neither Disagree/ Disagree strongly
Women are generally Those who take visits most
more likey to report often report the most
positive outcomes, with positive outcomes
the exception of ‘learning including ABCs, people with
something new’. white ethnicity.
27. Outcomes of visits to the natural environment
- Variations in by type of place visited
Visits to the coast are most
% that agree strongly with I enjoyed it likely to have the strongest
each statement 100% positive outcomes.
It made me feel calm
I felt close to nature 50% and relaxed
0%
I learned something It made me feel
new about the natural refreshed and
world revitalised
Green space in town/city
Coast
I took time to
appreciate my Countryside
surroundings
28. Other types of engagement
Enjoying and appreciating the natural environment
29. Attitudes to the natural environment
Having open green spaces
close to where I live is 49 44 53
important
There are many natural
places I may never visit but I 42 51 52
am glad they exist
Spending time out of doors
(including my own garden) is 41 46 7 5
an important part of my life
I am concerned about
damage to the natural 34 52 10 5
environment
Percentage of adult population
Agree strongly Agree Neither Disagree/ Disagree strongly
Agreement was higher amongst women, older age
groups, those in the AB and C1 socio-economic groups
and those with a white ethnic background.
31. MENE Year Three
Fieldwork for the third year of MENE continues until the end of February
2012.
The third year of the survey will allow for the continued measurement
of changes in levels of engagement with the natural environment with
results published each month.
The cumulative sample of c.140,000 interviews will allow a robust
analysis at an overall population level and amongst key groups of
interest, including:
At a county level
By population group e.g. age, ethnicity, socio-economic status
By type of place visited
By activities undertaken
33. Accessing and using the data
2010/11 Technical
Annual Report Report Monthly updates On-line data viewer
For further information
relating to official
statistics contact
Stephen.herbert@
naturalengland.org.uk
Attitudes to the Segmentation
environment report Report ELVS comparison SPSS datasets
For all other questions
contact Erica Wayman,
MENE Project Manager
Erica.wayman@
naturalengland.org.uk
34. Accessing and using the data
Access the outputs by going to:
www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/enjoying/research/monitor
Or go direct to the online viewer at:
www.naturalengland.org.uk/mene
Please complete the MENE user engagement
survey ! (accessed via the main site above)
35. Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment
Results of the 2010 – 2011 survey
Editor's Notes
In total over the first two years of fieldwork almost 95,000 interviews have been completed for the survey (94,613) and key details have been collected for over 100,000 visits to the natural environment (106,478).This large base allows us to undertake detailed analysis of the changes in participation over time, to analyse the data amongst smaller geographic areas and amongst niche population groups (e.g. demographic groups or activity participants).
The key measurement from this survey is the volume of visits to the natural environment. Based on the survey results, we have produced estimates of around 2.5 billion such visits in the 12 month period from March 2010 to February 2011.Averaged out across the adult population, this equates to around 60 visits per adult in the 12 months, an average of 1.2 visits per week.By comparison, an estimated 2.9 billion visits were taken in the previous 12 month period from March 2009 to February 2010. The decrease of 13 percent between the first and second year of surveying is statistically significant.This equates to a decrease in the average number of visits taken per year, per adult from 69 to 60 visits.
Another key measure of engagement relates to the proportion of the population taking visits to the natural environment. Over the 12 month period from March 2010 to February 2011 an average of 39 percent of the adult population had taken one or more visit during the 7 days prior to the survey interview. This proportion was significantly lower than that recorded in the previous 12 month period when an average of 43 percent of the population visited the natural environment.Demographic variationsThe chart illustrates variations in this measure across different demographic groups. In both years the highest proportions were recorded amongst those aged 25 to 64, those in the most affluent AB socio-economic groups and residents of the most affluent areas. However the lowest levels were recorded amongst the oldest age groups and least affluent members of the population.Decreases are apparent across most of the population groups but most notable amongst younger people and the least affluent socio-economic groups. Geographic variationsLevels of participation in visits to the natural environment also vary geographically. The highest levels were recorded in the South West of England (52 percent) while the lowest levels were recorded in London (28 percent).
During the March 2010 to February 2011 period, just over half of visits were taken in the countryside (or around 1.3 billion visits), 37 [ercentwere taken in green spaces in towns and cities (or around 0.9 billion visits) while the remaining 11 percent were taken to either resorts or rural locations on the coast (around 0.3 billion visits).Comparing these volumes with those recorded in the previous year, while the overall volume of visits taken has decreased by 13 percent, it is notable that the decrease is much smaller for visits to the countryside (-5%) but larger for visits to green spaces in towns and cities (-20%).
Understanding the different levels of change in volumes of visits taken between the two years can help us to understand what is causing the overall decrease.As the map illustrates, the greatest volume decreases took place in London, the South East and East of England while volumes stayed the same or even increased in the South West, Yorkshire and North East.Also the volumes of visits taken to certain types of place actually increased including farmland, woodland and mountain and moorland areas and the volume of visits taken by the most affluent socio-economic groups, the ABs, also increased.However above average decreases were recorded for visits taken to parks and other urban green spaces; for visits involving certain activities including eating and drinking out, road cycling and horse riding; and amongst the youngest and oldest age groups, the least affluent and unemployed and the BME population.
This chart shows the difference in the volumes of visits month-by-month for countryside and green spaces in towns and cities. For 2009-10 the green bars on the left represent countryside, and the grey bars represent green spaces in towns and cities on the right. The red line equals the figures for 2010-11.
As mentioned the average adult in England took 60 visits to the natural environment in the 12 month period, an average of 1.2 visits per weekHowever, the chart highlights that when people are asked about participation over the previous 12 months, there was considerable variation across the population with 1 in 10 participating in such visits every day and, at the other end of the spectrum, a similar proportion who claim not to have taken any such visits in the 12 months’ period.We have classified the population into 3 segments – just over half being frequent participants who visit the natural environment at least once a week, just under 4 in 10 who do so infrequently – no more than once or twice a month and the non-visitors that we have already referred to.These proportions are all similar to those recorded in the first year of surveying.
It is useful to profile the members of each of these groups. This chart illustrates age and socio-economic profiles.Notably, those people who are frequent visitors (visiting the natural environment at least weekly) are more likely than others to be aged between 25 and 64, to be in the more affluent ABC socio-economic groups and, not shown on the chart, to have a white ethnicity.On the other hand, those who typically never visit the natural environment are more likely than those who do take visits to be aged 65 and over, to be in the least affluent DE socio-economic groups and to live in more deprived areas, to have a long terms illness or disability or to be a member of the black or minority ethnic community (24 percent are non-visitors compared to just 9 percent of those with white ethnicity).These results are all similar to those recorded in the first year of the survey.
Further analysis of the profile of these groups illustrates a relationship between frequency of visits to the natural environment and overall levels of physical activity.As the chart shows around half (52 percent) of those people who visit the natural environment at least once a week take part in 30 minutes or more of physical activity on 3 or more days per week compared to 34 percent of infrequent visitors and 21 percent of non visitors.
The results can also be analysed according to where people visit.As the map on the left illustrates we can analyse the findings in terms of regions as destinations for visits, with the greater decrease in the South East and East apparent.The increasing sample size also allows for more detailed geographic analysis such as on the chart on the right which illustrates the volumes of visits taken by county with the large squares indicating where the greatest volumes of visits were taken. The potential for analysis at this level will increase as the survey sample continues to increase.These results illustrate that where visits are taken very much reflects where people live, with many visits taken close to home but the availability of places to visit is also relevant with certain areas such as the South West more likely than others to draw visits from other areas.
This chart further illustrates how analysis can be undertaken at a more local level with each pie chart representing the mix of types of place visited in each of England’s counties. The distribution varies with more orange and yellow apparent, in the southern coastal counties and in the North East and Merseyside area while the grey share is much more apparent, particularly in London where the vast majority of engagement is to green spaces in an urban environment.
In 40% of visits the main destination was within on mile of the respondent’s home while the majority of visits were within 5 miles (82 percent). Some variations in this pattern included a greater proportion of visits to the coast involving longer journeys while visits to green spaces were more likely to be very close to home (49 percent). Reflecting this distribution most visits were taken entirely on foot (63 percent) while 30 percent were taken by car and just 3 percent were by public transport. All of these results are similar to those recorded in the first year of the survey.
This chart illustrates the estimate volumes of visits to different types of green spaces.Parks in towns and cities continued to be the most visited type of place with over 550 million visits over the March 2010 to February 2011 period. Other most visited places included paths, cycleways and bridleways, woodland and forests, farmland and other open spaces in the countryside.The significant numbers of visits taken even to the places lower in the chart should be noted, for example an estimate of over 60 million visits to mountain, hill and moorland areas.
This chart shows how the volumes of visits to different types of place has changed between the first and second years of the survey. While the volumes of visits to farmland, mountain and moorland and woodland have increased, volumes have stayed the same or decreased for other types of place. Most notably open spaces in towns and cities including parks.
This chart illustrates the estimate volumes of visits involving different types of activity.Walking with a dog continues to be the most frequently undertaken activity, accounting for 1.3 million visits or around half of the total.Other most frequently undertaken activities include other walking (660m or 26 percent), playing with children (212m or 8 percent) and eating and drinking out (142m or 6 percent).It is notable that even the activities undertaken in a lower percentage of all visits still represent several million visits – for example mountain biking was undertaken in an estimated 26 million visits while fishing was undertaken in 15 million visits. Also each of these activities now has a large survey sample size which would allow us to drill into the data to find out more about particular activity groups.
This chart shows how the volumes of visits involving different types of activities has decreased between the first and second years of the survey. While the overall average decrease is minus 13 percent, larger decreases were recorded for certain activities such as eating and drinking out which is one of the activities most often undertaken yet has declined by around a fifth.
A greater understanding is obtained by asking survey respondents why they took part in visits to the natural environment.Reflecting the activities undertaken, around half of visits included dog exercising as a motivation but it is notable that significant proportions included other reasons including health and exercise (38 percent of visits), relaxing and unwinding (26% of visits) and enjoying fresh air and pleasant weather (24% of visits).It is notable that motivations vary between population groups, as people grow older motivations shift from an emphasis of spending time with friends to spending time with family and then, in older age groups relaxing, unwinding and physical health benefits become more important.By gender, men are more likely than women to be motivated by health and exercise benefits while women are more likely to take visits to exercise dogs, spend time with their family or entertain their children.There are socio-economic variations too with those in the more affluent, ABC1 groups more likely to take visits for health and exercise or to unwind while for most C2DEs dog exercise was the motivation.This profile is very similar to that recorded in the first year of the survey.
The potential positive outcomes of visits to the natural environment were also recorded with respondents asked how much a series of statements reflected their experiences.The dark green bar shows the proportions agreeing strongly – around half agreed strongly that they enjoyed their visits while around a third agreed with the statements regarding feeling calm and relaxed, refreshed and revitalised and that they took time to appreciate their surroundings.However just a quarter agreed strongly that they ‘felt close to nature’ and 10% ‘learned’ something about the natural world during their visit.In general women were more likely to agree that they received these positive benefits as were those people who took visits most often.These results are similar to those recorded in the first year of the survey.
Still considering the proportions agreeing strongly with the various positive outcomes, this chart illustrates how visits to coast (shown in yellow) are most likely to provide the most positive outcomes while those taken urban green spaces are generally less rewarding.
To further understand the population’s attitudes to the natural environment they were asked to state how much they agreed with this series of statements. Focusing on the dark green bar which represents the proportions agreeing strongly, around half agreed strongly that having open green spaces close to home was important to them but only a third agreed strongly that they were concerned about damage to the natural environment.These results have remained the same as in the first year of the survey.
Mention that the spatial Report is due for publication mid-November and will be available on the NE website.
The link can also be found by searching on ‘Monitor of engagement with the natural environment’ in Google.