beta

You're viewing our new website - find out more

Publication - Statistics Publication

Scotland's People: Results from the 2015 Scottish Household Survey

Published: 27 Sep 2016
Part of:
Statistics
ISBN:
9781786524416

Report presenting reliable and up-to-date information on the composition, characteristics and behaviour of Scottish households.

287 page PDF

5.4MB

287 page PDF

5.4MB

Contents
Scotland's People: Results from the 2015 Scottish Household Survey
11 Environment

287 page PDF

5.4MB

11 Environment

11.1 Introduction and Context

The Scottish Government and partners are working towards creating a greener Scotland by improving the natural and built environment, and protecting it for present and future generations. Actions are being taken to reduce local and global environmental impacts, through tackling climate change, moving towards a zero-waste Scotland through the development of a more circular economy, increasing the use of renewable energy and conserving natural resources. The Scottish Government is also committed to promoting the enjoyment of the countryside and of green spaces in and around towns and cities.

There are a number of Scottish Government National Outcomes relating to the environment [57] including:

  • We value and enjoy our built and natural environment and protect it and enhance it for future generations;
  • We reduce the local and global environmental impact of our consumption and production; and
  • We live in well-designed, sustainable places where we are able to access the amenities and services we need.

A range of National Indicators [58] have been developed to track progress towards environmental outcomes. Two of these indicators, 'increase people's use of Scotland's outdoors' and 'improve access to local greenspace', are monitored using data from the Scottish Household Survey ( SHS). The Land Use Strategy indicators [59] , which measure progress towards the objectives set out in the Land Use Strategy 2016-2021, also include three indicators measured using SHS data including 'community inclusion in land use decision-making'.

Some local authorities also use the SHS to assess progress towards environmental objectives, including those in their Single Outcome Agreements (a statement of the outcomes that they want to see for their local area).

This chapter begins by exploring attitudes towards climate change and then reports findings on the recycling of waste. It finishes by looking at visits to the outdoors, access to local greenspace and participation in land use decisions.

Responses to questions on litter and dog fouling are found in Chapter 4 ‑ "Neighbourhoods and Communities".

Main Findings

Climate change

Half of adults (50 per cent) view climate change as an immediate and urgent problem, an increase of 5 percentage points compared with 2014 (45 per cent). Concern about climate change remains lowest among the youngest and oldest age groups, but increased among the 16-24 age group in 2015.

Over half of adults (63 per cent) perceive a value in doing things to help the environment even if others do not do the same. However this proportion is lower compared with findings from 2008 (68 per cent) [60] .

Just over half of adults (54 per cent) believe that their behaviour and lifestyle contribute to climate change, an increase compared with findings from 2008 (48 per cent).

Over three quarters of adults (77 per cent) consider that climate change will have an impact on Scotland as well as on other countries. However this represents a decrease compared with 2008 (85 per cent).

73 per cent of adults consider that they understand what actions people like themselves should take to help tackle climate change.

Recycling

More households are now disposing of their food waste in local authority-provided food caddies (46 per cent in 2015 compared with 26 per cent in 2012).

Households in flats are much more likely to dispose of their food waste with their general waste as opposed to those living in houses (73 per cent compared to 45 per cent), while households in rural areas are more likely to use composting to dispose of their food waste than households in urban areas (20 per cent compared to 6 per cent).

Around 4 out of 5 households generally recycle each of the five main categories of dry recyclable materials. This is roughly the same proportion of households as in 2014. Those living in houses are more likely to recycle each type of recyclable material compared to households living in flats.

Visits to the outdoors and greenspace

Around half of adults (49 per cent) visited the outdoors at least once a week in the last year. This is around the same proportion as in 2014. Adults living in the most deprived areas were more likely not to have made any visits to the outdoors in the past twelve months (21 per cent) compared to those in the least deprived areas (8 per cent).

Most adults (67 per cent) live within a five minute walk of their nearest area of greenspace, a similar proportion to 2014.

More than a third of adults (36 per cent) visit their nearest area of greenspace at least once a week, which is around the same proportion as in 2014.

Around three-quarters of adults (76 per cent) are satisfied or very satisfied with their nearest area of greenspace.

Less than a sixth of adults (15 per cent) have given their views on land use in the last 12 months.

11.2 Attitudes to Climate Change

11.2.1 Introduction and Context

Action to address climate change is a high priority for the Scottish Government. The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 [61] set a target of reducing Scotland's greenhouse gas emissions by 42 per cent by 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050, compared with the 1990 baseline. The Scottish Government's Second Report on Proposals and Policies ( RPP2) [62] for meeting its climate change targets sets out how Scotland can deliver these targets over the period 2013-2027. The third Report ( RPP3), covering the period up to 2032, is in development. The Scottish Government recognises that all sectors of society will need to contribute to meeting these targets. Its Low Carbon Behaviours Framework sets out a strategic approach to encourage low carbon lifestyles amongst individuals, households, communities and businesses in Scotland [63] .

Public attitudes towards climate change are likely to influence their willingness to support initiatives to address climate change, as well as to take action themselves. For the last three years the SHS has included a question about the immediacy of climate change as a problem, which was first asked in the Scottish Environmental Attitudes and Behaviours Survey ( SEABS) in 2008 [64] . In 2015, the SHS added four new questions to explore people's perceptions about taking action to tackle climate change, three of which were also asked in SEABS 2008. The SHS results are discussed in relation to the SEABS results in this section, although it is worth noting that there were some differences between the surveys. In the SEABS survey, respondents were asked a more detailed set of questions about the environment compared with the SHS, in which climate change is one of a wide range of topics on which respondents answer questions.

11.2.2 Attitudes about the Immediacy and Urgency of Climate Change

Respondents were presented with four different statements about the problem of climate change and asked which, if any, came closest to their own view. Table 11.1 shows an increase in the proportion of adults who view climate change as an immediate and urgent problem, from 45 per cent in 2014 to 50 per cent in 2015. This figure remains lower than the finding of 57 per cent in 2008.

Table 11.1: Perceived immediacy of the problem of climate change

Column percentages

Adults 2013 2014 2015
Climate change is an immediate and urgent problem 46 45 50
Climate change is more of a problem for the future 25 26 23
Climate change is not really a problem 7 8 7
I'm still not convinced that climate change is happening 13 11 11
No answer 3 3 3
Don't know 7 6 7
Total 100 100 100
Base 9,920 9,800 3,100

Attitudes about the immediacy of climate change as a problem have consistently varied by age, with the youngest and oldest age groups least likely to view climate change as an immediate problem. In 2015, while this pattern continues, there has been an increase in concern among the youngest group, aged 16-24 (see Figure 11.1). Forty-six per cent of this group now consider climate change to be an immediate and urgent problem, compared with 40 per cent in 2014. The highest concern continues to be among adults aged 35-44 (58 per cent), with the lowest concern among adults aged 75+ (36 per cent).

Figure 11.1: Perceived immediacy of the problem of climate change by age

2015 data, Adults (minimum base: 260)

Figure 11.1: Perceived immediacy of the problem of climate change by age

Perceptions of climate change as a problem have consistently been closely related to educational attainment. In 2015, there is still a considerable gap in perceptions between adults with a degree or professional qualification (over six out of ten perceive climate change as an immediate problem), and adults with no qualifications (under four out of ten perceive it as an immediate problem). However this gap closed by four percentage points compared with 2014, reflecting an increase in concern about climate change amongst those with no educational qualifications.

11.2.3 Attitudes towards taking action to address climate change

People's willingness to take action to address climate change will be influenced by their views about whether climate change will affect Scotland; whether their actions will have any impact; and whether they know what actions they could take. Perceptions about these issues were explored through inviting respondents to agree or disagree with four statements. These statements vary in terms of whether agreement or disagreement represents a positive attitude towards taking action to tackle climate change.

11.2.4 The value of individual actions to help the environment

Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with the statement: "It's not worth me doing things to help the environment if others don't do the same". Disagreement with this statement would suggest a positive perception of the value of individual actions, regardless of the actions of others.

Table 11.2 shows that, in 2015, over half of adults (63 per cent) disagree with this statement, split equally between strongly disagreeing and tending to disagree. Twenty-three per cent agree with the statement, with only 5 per cent strongly agreeing.

Table 11.2: Perceptions about the value of individual actions to help the environment

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults
Strongly agree/Tend to agree 23
Neither agree nor disagree 10
Strongly disagree/Tend to disagree 63
Don't know 4
Total 100
Base 3,100

Total disagreement with this statement in 2015 (63 per cent) represents a decrease of 5 percentage points compared with the SEABS 2008 finding (68 per cent). That is, in 2015 a lower proportion of adults considered it worth undertaking individual actions to help the environment.

11.2.5 The contribution of behaviour and everyday lifestyle to climate change

Respondents were then asked about their agreement or disagreement with the statement: "I don't believe my behaviour and everyday lifestyle contribute to climate change".

Again, disagreement with this statement would suggest a perception that there is a link between individual behaviours and lifestyle and climate change.

Table 11.3 shows that in 2015 just over half of adults (54 per cent) disagree with this statement, of whom 20 per cent strongly disagree.

Table 11.3: Perceptions about the contribution of behaviour and everyday lifestyle to climate change

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults
Strongly agree/Tend to agree 26
Neither agree nor disagree 15
Strongly disagree/Tend to disagree 54
Don't know 5
Total 100
Base 3,100

Compared with 2008, there has been a considerable swing from agreement (a reduction of nine percentage points) to disagreement (an increase of six percentage points) with this statement. That is, in 2015, a higher proportion of adults do believe that their behaviour and lifestyle contribute to climate change.

11.2.6 Perceptions about where climate change will have an impact

Respondents were invited next to agree or disagree with the following statement: "Climate change will only have an impact on other countries, there is no need for me to worry". Disagreement with this statement would suggest a perception that climate change will have an impact on Scotland, as well as on other countries.

Table 11.4 shows that there is strong disagreement with this statement: 77 per cent of adults disagree, of whom 48 per cent strongly disagree.

Table 11.4: Perceptions about where climate change will have an impact

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults
Strongly agree/Tend to agree 7
Neither agree nor disagree 10
Strongly disagree/Tend to disagree 77
Don't know 6
Total 100
Base 3,100

Since 2008 disagreement with this statement has fallen by 8 percentage points, from 85 per cent in 2008 to 77 per cent in 2015. The level of agreement is unchanged. These findings show that, in 2015, a lower proportion of adults believe that climate change will have an impact on Scotland.

11.2.7 Understanding about actions that people can take to tackle climate change

Finally, respondents were invited to agree or disagree with the following statement: "I understand what actions people like myself should take to help tackle climate change". Agreement with this statement would suggest that respondents believe that they know what actions they could take personally to help tackle climate change, though it would not show whether they were actually taking any action in practice.

Table 11.5 shows that there is strong agreement with this statement: 73 per cent of adults agree, of whom 26 per cent strongly agree.

Table 11.5: Understanding about actions that people can take to tackle climate change

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults
Strongly agree/Tend to agree 73
Neither agree nor disagree 13
Strongly disagree/Tend to disagree 9
Don't know 5
Total 100
Base 3,100

11.3 Recycling

11.3.1 Introduction and Context

Scotland's first circular economy strategy, "Making Things Last" [65] , published in February 2016, sets out the Scottish Government's priorities for moving towards a more circular economy - where products and materials are kept in high value use for as long as possible. It builds on Scotland's progress in the zero waste and resource efficiency agendas.

Scottish Government's recycling and landfill targets, as originally set out in its 2010 "Zero Waste Plan" [66] , are as follows:

  • 60 per cent of household waste recycled by 2020
  • 70 per cent of all waste recycled by 2025
  • A ban on municipal biodegradable waste going to landfill from 1 January 2021
  • No more than 5 per cent of all waste going to landfill by 2025

In addition, a Scottish Food Waste Reduction Target was announced in February 2016, the first such target in Europe. This commits to a 33 per cent reduction by 2025.

To help achieve Scotland's recycling targets, the Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2012 require local authorities to provide separate household collections for recyclable materials. Outwith specified rural areas this includes collection of food waste. Food collected for recycling can be processed to produce nutrient-rich fertilisers and biogas - a low carbon energy source. In May 2016, Zero Waste Scotland estimated that 75 per cent of Scottish households (1.8 million) had access to a food waste collection service. Zero Waste Scotland ( ZWS) and the Scottish Government have also led initiatives to help people reduce unnecessary food waste ( e.g. the Love Food Hate Waste, ZWS Volunteer and Community Advocate Programme, and Greener Scotland campaigns), as well as to recycle food waste.

11.3.2 Food Waste Recycling

There has been a steady increase in the number of people using food waste recycling caddies, rather than throwing food out with general waste. Fifty-five per cent of households now dispose of food waste with their general rubbish (Figure 11.2), a decrease from 60 per cent of households in 2014. There has also been an increase in the proportion of households making use of local authority-provided food caddies between 2014 and 2015, from 40 per cent to 46 per cent. This represents a substantial increase from the 26 per cent of households using food waste recycling caddies in 2012. Nine per cent of households dispose of their food waste by home composting, which is a similar proportion to previous years.

Figure 11.2: Methods used to dispose of food waste in the past week

2015 data, Households (base: 3,480)

Figure 11.2: Methods used to dispose of food waste in the past week

Percentages add to more than 100 per cent since multiple responses were allowed.

Table 11.6 shows that less than half of those living in houses (45 per cent) dispose of their food waste with the general rubbish while 73 per cent of households living in flats dispose of their food waste in this way. This represents a statistically significant decrease from 2014, where 51 per cent of those living in houses disposed of their food waste with the general rubbish.

Table 11.6: Method used to dispose of food waste by property type

Percentages, 2015 data

Household House or bungalow Flat, maison-
ette or apartment
Scotland
General waste with other rubbish 45 73 55
Local Authority-provided caddy or other receptacle 55 29 46
Home composting e.g. Heap in garden or allotment, green cone 11 3 9
Base 2,420 1,050 3,480

Columns may not add to 100 per cent since multiple responses were allowed.

A higher percentage of households living in houses use a food waste caddy (55 per cent) or home composting (11 per cent) to dispose of their food waste compared to households living in flats. This may reflect differences in the amount of space available for food waste caddies and home composting.

Table 11.7 shows that the largest difference between urban and rural households is in the higher rate of food waste composting in rural areas (20 per cent compared to 6 per cent in urban areas). This might be due to households in some rural areas being provided with compost bins as opposed to food waste caddies.

Table 11.7: Methods used to dispose of food waste by Urban/Rural classification

Percentages, 2015 data

Household Urban Rural Scotland
General waste with other rubbish 56 46 55
Local Authority-provided caddy or other receptacle 46 45 46
Home composting e.g. Heap in garden or allotment, green cone 6 20 9
Base 2,750 730 3,480

Columns may not add to 100 per cent since multiple responses were allowed.

11.3.3 Recycling of Dry Recyclable Materials

Around four in five households report that, in general, they recycle each of the main categories of dry recyclable materials: paper, card, glass, food and drink cans/tins and plastic bottles/tubs.

The recycling rate is highest for paper (86 per cent) and lowest for glass (77 per cent), which is the same pattern as observed in the previous year.

Figure 11.3: Household who reported they generally recycle certain materials

2015 data, Households (base: 3,480)

Figure 11.3: Household who reported they generally recycle certain materials

Percentages add to more than 100 per cent since multiple responses were allowed.

Table 11.8 shows that households living in flats have a lower rate of recycling for all materials compared to those living in houses. As in the previous year, this difference is largest for cans and tins, where 89 per cent of those living in houses report that they generally recycle these compared to 63 per cent of households living in flats.

Table 11.8: Recycling of materials by type of property

Percentages, 2015 data

Household House or bunglow Flat, maison-
ette or apartment
Scotland
Paper 93 72 86
Card 92 69 84
Glass 85 61 77
Metal 89 63 80
Plastic 91 68 82
Base 2,420 1,050 3,480

Recycling behaviour shows a clear pattern across areas with different levels of deprivation (Table 11.9). The most deprived areas have the lowest rates of recycling while rates improve in less deprived area.

Table 11.9: Recycling of materials by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

Percentages, 2015 data

Households 20% most deprived 20% least deprived Scotland
1 2 3 4 5
Paper 76 83 87 91 92 86
Card 74 82 84 90 92 84
Glass 62 73 78 86 87 77
Metal 70 77 81 87 86 80
Plastic 73 80 83 89 89 82
Base 650 710 760 740 610 3,480

11.4 Visits to the Outdoors, Greenspace and Land Use Decisions

11.4.1 Introduction and Context

Spending time outdoors has been associated with numerous benefits, with urban green and open spaces having been shown to contribute to public health and wellbeing [67] .

Responsibility for promoting visits to the outdoors is shared between Scottish Natural Heritage, other agencies such as Forestry Commission Scotland, local authorities and the National Park Authorities. Local authorities and National Park Authorities are also responsible for developing core path networks in their areas. People have a right of access to most land and inland water in Scotland, for walking, cycling and other non-motorised activities.

The National Performance Framework includes two National Indicators which aim to measure progress in this area. These are 'Increase people's use of Scotland's outdoors' [68] and 'Improve access to local greenspace' [69] . The second indicator was added during the recent National Performance Framework review to reflect the importance of accessibility to greenspace in Scottish Planning Policy ( SPP) [70] and National Planning Framework 3 ( NPF3) [71] , which aims to significantly enhance green infrastructure networks, particularly in and around Scotland's cities and towns.

The Land Use Strategy 2016-2021 [72] also emphasises the importance of giving communities more opportunity to engage with and have some control over the land where they live and how it is used. This can be achieved in many ways, including through community-run schemes such as those funded through the Climate Challenge Fund ( CCF) [73] . 'Community Inclusion in Land Use Decision-Making' [74] has been included as one of the ten Land Use Strategy Indicators used for monitoring the progress of the Land Use Strategy.

This section starts by looking at key factors and characteristics associated with outdoor visits for leisure and recreation purposes. This is followed by an exploration of the access and use of greenspace for adults in the local neighbourhood and their satisfaction with that greenspace. Finally, this section concludes by looking at people's participation in land use decisions.

11.4.2 Visits to the Outdoors

Outdoor visits for leisure and recreation purposes include visits to both urban and countryside open spaces (for example, parks, woodland, farmland, paths and beaches) for a range of purposes (such as walking, running, cycling or kayaking). The associated National Indicator is measured by the proportion of adults making one or more visits to the outdoors per week.

There has been no change in the proportion of adults visiting the outdoors at least once a week between 2014 and 2015. Forty-nine per cent of Scottish adults visited Scotland's outdoors at least once a week in 2015 compared to 48 per cent in 2014 (see Table 11.10). A further fifth of adults report visiting the outdoors at least once a month while 14 per cent of adults report that they did not visit the outdoors at all in 2015 (down 2 per cent from the previous year).

Table 11.10: Frequency of visits made to the outdoors

Column percentages

Adults 2012 2013 2014 2015
One or more times a week 42 46 48 49
At least once a month 19 20 19 20
At least once a year 20 18 17 17
Not at all 20 16 16 14
Base 9,890 9,920 9,800 9,410

There is substantial variation in the proportion of adults making visits to the outdoors by level of area deprivation (Table 11.11). In the most deprived areas of Scotland, 40 per cent of adults visit the outdoors at least once a week, compared to 56 per cent of adults in the least deprived areas. Adults in the most deprived areas are also more likely not to have visited the outdoors at all in the past twelve months (21 per cent) compared to those in the least deprived areas (8 per cent).

Table 11.12 shows that adults living in rural areas are more likely to visit the outdoors at least once a week compared to adults living in urban areas (56 per cent compared to 47 per cent). There was little difference in the proportion of men and women visiting the outdoors at least once a week in 2015 (Table 11.13).

Table 11.11: Frequency of visits made to the outdoors by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults 20% most deprived 20% least deprived Scotland
1 2 3 4 5
One or more times per week 40 42 51 54 56 49
At least once a month 19 20 21 21 21 20
At least once a year 19 21 15 16 15 17
Not at all 21 17 13 9 8 14
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
Base 1,740 1,900 2,050 2,080 1,640 9,410

Table 11.12: Frequency of visits made to the outdoors in the past twelve months by Urban/Rural classification

Column percentages, 2015 data

Household Urban Rural Scotland
Once or more times a week 47 56 49
At least once a month 21 17 20
At least once a year 18 14 17
Not at all 14 13 14
Total 100 100 100
Base 7,420 1,980 9,410

Table 11.13: Frequency of visits made to the outdoors in the past twelve months by gender and age group

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults Male Female 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60-74 75+ All
One or more times per week 49 48 46 54 57 49 48 29 49
At least once a month 21 20 23 23 23 21 16 15 20
At least once a year 17 18 19 15 13 18 18 21 17
Not at all 13 14 11 8 7 12 18 34 14
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Base 4,240 5,160 750 1,210 1,390 2,440 2,380 1,240 9,410

Thirty-four per cent of the over 75 age group report that they did not visit the outdoors at all in the past twelve months, which may reflect declining mobility and accessibility issues. This is further reflected in the high proportion of those adults describing their health as either bad or very bad, who did not visit the outdoors at all in the last year (41 per cent). Conversely, 53 per cent of adults who describe their health as good or very good report that they visit the outdoors at least once a week (Table 11.14).

Table 11.14: Frequency of visits made to the outdoors in the past twelve months by self-perception of health

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults Good / Very Good Fair Bad / Very Bad All
Once or more times a week 53 41 25 49
At least once a month 21 20 13 20
At least once a year 16 20 21 17
Not at all 9 19 41 14
Total 100 100 100 100
Base 6,570 1,980 840 9,410

11.4.3 Walking Distance to Local Greenspace

Accessibility of greenspace is an important factor in its use, both in terms of its proximity to people's homes and the ease of physical access. The accessibility standard is taken to be equivalent to a five minute walk to the nearest publicly usable open space, which is the measurement used for the National Indicator. Greenspace is defined in the SHS as public green or open spaces in the local area such as parks, play areas, canal paths and beaches (private gardens are not included). Respondents are asked how far the nearest greenspace is from their home and how long they think it would take the interviewer to walk there.

In 2015, 67 per cent of adults reported living within a 5 minute walk of their nearest greenspace (see Figure 11.4).

Figure 11.4: Walking distance to nearest greenspace

2015 data. Random adults (base: 9,410)

Figure 11.4: Walking distance to nearest greenspace

11.4.4 Frequency of Use of Local Greenspace

As shown in Figure 11.5, there has been little change in how often local greenspace is used between 2014 and 2015. In 2015, 36 per cent of adults reported visiting their nearest green space several times a week compared to 37 per cent in 2014, while nearly a quarter of adults reported not visiting their nearest greenspace at all during the same period (24 per cent in 2014 and 23 per cent in 2015).

Figure 11.5: Frequency of use of nearest greenspace

2014 and 2015 data. Random adults (minimum base: 9,300)

Figure 11.5: Frequency of use of nearest greenspace

Table 11.15 shows that a higher proportion of people who live within 5 minutes of their nearest greenspace report using it at least once a week compared to people who live a 6-10 minute walk away (44 per cent compared to 24 per cent).

Table 11.15: Frequency of use of nearest greenspace by walking distance to nearest greenspace

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults A 5 minute walk or less Within a 6-10 minute walk An 11 minute walk or more All
Every day / Several times a week 44 24 11 36
Once a week or less 37 49 50 41
Not at all 20 27 38 23
Don't know 0 0 0 0
Base 6,210 1,920 1,180 9,300

As shown in Table 11.16, a higher proportion of people who describe their health as good or very good report using their nearest greenspace several times a week (38 per cent) while nearly half of those who describe their health as bad or very bad (48 per cent) report not visiting their nearest greenspace at all in the last 12 months.

Table 11.16: Frequency of use of nearest greenspace by self-perception of health

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults Good / Very Good Fair Bad / Very Bad All
Every day / Several times a week 38 33 20 36
Once a week or less 43 37 31 41
Not at all 19 30 48 23
Don't know 0 0 0 0
Base 6,520 1,960 820 9,300

11.4.5 Satisfaction with Local Greenspaces

In order to be effective, greenspace needs to be viewed as suitable for use by the local population. If individuals feel that greenspace is unsafe, unclean or otherwise not fit for purpose then people may be less likely to make use of it. Over three quarters of adults described themselves as satisfied with their nearest greenspace in 2015, while only 9 per cent were dissatisfied.

Figure 11.6: Satisfaction with nearest greenspace

2015 data, Adults (base: 9,300)

Figure 11.6: Satisfaction with nearest greenspace

Table 11.17 shows that those who describe their neighbourhood as a fairly good or very good place to live are more satisfied with their local greenspace than those who rate their neighbourhood as a fairly poor or very poor place to live. This may be because higher levels of satisfaction with local greenspace contribute to a more favourable impression of the neighbourhood in general, or vice versa.

Table 11.17: Satisfaction with nearest greenspace by rating of neighbourhood as place to live

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults Very good Fairly good Fairly poor Very poor No opinion Scotland
Satisfied/Fairly Satisfied 81 71 54 50 * 76
Neither Satisfied or Dissatisfied 7 12 16 9 * 9
Dissatisfied/Fairly Dissatisfied 7 11 23 31 * 9
No opinion 5 6 7 10 * 6
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
Base 5,530 3,300 320 120 30 9,300

While those living closer to their nearest greenspace are more likely to use it more frequently, satisfaction with greenspace does not have much effect on the frequency of use (see Table 11.18). Although, those who describe themselves as satisfied or fairly satisfied with their local greenspace are slightly more likely to use it than the national average.

Table 11.18: Use of nearest greenspace by satisfaction with nearest greenspace

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults Satisfied/ Fairly Satisfied Neither Satisfied or Dissatisfied Dissatisfied/ Fairly Dissatisfied No opinion All
Every day / Several times a week 42 18 29 1 36
Once a week or less 44 37 41 8 41
Not at all 15 44 30 91 23
Base 7,120 830 770 580 9,300

11.4.6 Greenspace by level of area deprivation

People's distance from their nearest greenspace and their use and satisfaction of that space seem to vary with the level of area deprivation. Table 11.19 shows that a greater proportion of adults in deprived areas live at least an 11 minute walk away from their nearest greenspace compared to adults in the least deprived areas (15 per cent compared to 10 per cent).

Table 11.19: Walking distance to nearest greenspace by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults 20% most deprived 20% least deprived Scotland
1 2 3 4 5
A 5 minute walk or less 60 66 70 72 68 67
Within a 6-10 minute walk 23 21 18 16 22 20
11 minute walk or greater 15 12 11 11 10 12
Don't Know 2 1 1 1 1 1
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
Base 1,740 1,900 2,050 2,080 1,640 9,410

Also, Table 11.20 shows that adults in the most deprived areas are less likely to be satisfied with their nearest greenspace than adults in the least deprived areas. This could lead to fewer people in deprived areas making use of their nearest greenspace, as people are more likely to use greenspace if it is close by and of good quality.

Table 11.20: Satisfaction of nearest greenspace by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults 20% most deprived 20% least deprived Scotland
1 2 3 4 5
Satisfied/Fairly Satisfied 66 72 77 81 83 76
Neither Satisfied or Dissatisfied 11 10 9 9 8 9
Dissatisfied/Fairly Dissatisfied 14 11 9 7 6 9
No opinion 8 7 5 4 4 6
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
Base 1,710 1,890 2,030 2,060 1,630 9,300

This is supported somewhat in Table 11.21. Adults in the most deprived areas are more likely than adults in the least deprived areas not to have used their nearest greenspace in the past 12 months (32 per cent compared to 17 per cent). Adults in more deprived areas are also less likely to use their nearest greenspace several times a week compared to adults in less deprived areas.

Table 11.21: Frequency of use of nearest greenspace by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults 20% most deprived 20% least deprived Scotland
1 2 3 4 5
Every day / Several times a week 30 31 39 41 39 36
Once a week or less 37 43 40 39 44 41
Not at all 32 26 22 20 17 23
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100
Base 1,710 1,890 2,030 2,060 1,630 9,300

11.4.7 Participation in Land Use decisions

Participation in land use decisions is important for giving communities more control over the land where they live and encouraging greater engagement. In 2015, 15 per cent of adults reported that they gave their views on land use in at least one of the ways listed in Table 11.22.

The most common way in which people report giving their views on land use is by signing a petition (7 per cent of adults) and the least common is through discussions with a land owner or land manager (2 per cent of adults). This may be because signing a petition does not require much effort and is more likely to be about an issue affecting a larger number of people. Having a discussion with a land owner or manager, on the other hand, requires more time and effort and is more likely to be about an issue affecting fewer individuals in that specific area (smaller area issues).

Table 11.22: Percentage of people who gave their views on land use in the last twelve months

Column percentages, 2015 data

Adults
Been involved with interest group or campaign 3
Attended a public meeting/ community council meeting 5
Took part in a consultation or a survey 5
Signed a petition 7
Contacted an MP, MSP or Local Councillor 4
Responded to a planning application 4
Had discussions with a landowner/land-manager 2
None of the above 85
Base 9,410

Columns add to more than 100 per cent since multiple responses were allowed.

As shown in Table 11.23, a greater proportion of adults living in rural areas report giving their views on land use compared to adults living in urban areas (21 per cent compared to 14 per cent).

Table 11.23: Percentage of people who gave their views on land use by Urban/Rural classification

Percentages, 2015 data

Adults
Urban 14
Rural 21
All 15
Base 9,410

Contact