Truscott Research Fax Pro forma - City of Norwood Payneham and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PREDICTED FUTURE USE Very likely Quite likely Don't know Quite unlikely Very unlikely ALL Users Non-users Former users 0% 6% 60% 11% 11% 11% 3% 13% 13% 73% 14% 70% 62% 4% 5% 14% 17% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% % of respondents 3% 3% 6% PRELIMINARY REPORT Page 48
Cost perceptions All respondents were reminded that: during the pilot, the food waste system was provided at no direct cost to residents. They were then asked: If Council implemented the system, what statement best describes your thoughts on costs? (Understanding there may be a cost increase with the introduction of a new service) Not concerned – found the system very good and think it should be implemented regardless of cost Willing to pay $15 - $20 a year as part of rates Willing to pay $10 - $15 a year (as part of rates) Willing to pay $5 - $10 a year (as part of rates) Willing to pay no more than $5 a year (as part of rates) Not willing to pay any extra The last option was the most common answer – chosen by 55%. In each segment the most frequent response was not willing to pay any extra. This answer was given by 68% of those over 60 but only 42% of those under 40. There was no appreciable difference by gender or type of housing, or area. The following chart details the sector analysis: PRELIMINARY REPORT Page 49
Page 1 and 2: ZERO WASTE SA BIO BASKET PILOT SURV
Page 3 and 4: INTRODUCTION Truscott Research was
Page 5 and 6: PATTERNS OF USE 85% (482) of all r
Page 7 and 8: All respondents who had used the sy
Page 9 and 10: BARRIERS TO USING THE SYSTEM AND DI
Page 11 and 12: SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS A total of 5
Page 13 and 14: In each of the households included
Page 15 and 16: six or more five four three two one
Page 17 and 18: Types of waste used for Bio Basket
Page 19 and 20: Placement of Bio Basket bags Those
Page 21 and 22: DISPOSE OF LAWN CLIPPINGS AND GARDE
Page 23 and 24: Use of green kerbside organics bin
Page 25 and 26: Increased level of awareness Respon
Page 27 and 28: Reasons for not using the Bio Baske
Page 29 and 30: Reasons for stopping use of the Bio
Page 31 and 32: Another way of looking at usage is
Page 33 and 34: Difficulty in using Bio Basket syst
Page 35 and 36: Household use of the Bio Basket sys
Page 37 and 38: 83% of former users cited problems
Page 39 and 40: INCIDENCE OF CAPACITY ISSUES FORTNI
Page 41 and 42: RATING - EXISTING 3 BIN SYSTEM [MEA
Page 43 and 44: RATING - BIO BASKET SYSTEM [MEAN SC
Page 45 and 46: RATING - COLLECTION FREQUENCY RESID
Page 47 and 48: RATING - COLLECTION FREQUENCY - GRE
Page 49: Predicted future use of Bio Basket
Page 53 and 54: Respondents were invited to comment
Page 55 and 56: Predicted future use - if 150 bags
Page 57: BASKET ISSUES Need a stronger bask

Truscott Research Fax Pro forma - City of Norwood Payneham and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?