Draft Scottish Marine Litter Strategy: Analysis of Consultation Responses

Question 7 - 9 Strategic Direction 1

• Strategic Direction 1: Improve public and business awareness of, and behaviour changes around, marine litter

Q7. What are your views on the possible actions?

Q8. Which do you believe is the most important possible action in helping to deliver the Marine Litter Strategy?

Q9. Can one or more of these possible actions be delivered under existing activities or do you think more action is needed under the Marine Litter Strategy?

For the purposes of analysis, Questions 7 - 9 will be considered together based on the comments received to the consultation.

88 respondents commented on Strategic Direction 1. 66 (75%) responses gave a standard comment highlighting the importance of alignment between the Marine and National Litter Strategies.

• One respondent stated concerns about delivery of Strategic Direction 1 via the National Litter Strategy, in particular, the issue of whether opportunities to reduce litter and change behaviour can be achieved for the marine environment.
• One respondent highlighted that the National Litter Strategy must identify beach litter as a key issue.
• Two respondents indicated that they would welcome co-ordinated approaches with consistent messages across both litter Strategies.
• One respondent highlighted the issue of fixed penalties as broader move towards deterring littering and flytipping.
• One respondent suggested that the proposed actions could be strengthened by adopting a 'zero tolerance' approach in conjunction with the National Litter Strategy.
• One respondent suggested that a comprehensive landward litter-awareness programme is required as a preventative measure, as well as promoting use of less damaging materials in the common litter types.

In the remaining mixed responses, 3% of respondents indicated that the possible actions identified under Strategic Direction 1 did not go far enough while 16% were broadly supportive of the possible actions but offered comments or recommendations.

• There were views from three respondents that the work of community groups, volunteers and schools, and other initiatives such as Fishing for Litter, should be recognised and supported through the Strategy.
• One respondent suggested that the Strategic Direction should highlight that actions are aimed at land based sources and sea based sources and activities, that contribute to the marine litter problem.

In response to Question 7, and the specific possible action of education and awareness raising, there were a number of comments and suggestions:

• One respondent suggested that education should focus on visual impacts, with a focus on marine life, and the need to change the design of some products. It was suggested that Secondary schools, colleges and universities should be included in a litter education programme. It was also suggested that this should be extended to include Community Councils and Tenants & Residents Associations.
• The need for appropriate council cleaning services was highlighted, in relation to footfall, particularly in the vicinity of rivers and beaches.
• One respondent highlighted that it would be useful to identify good practice and any gaps in existing programmes and initiatives. It was also suggested that there may need to be a different focus in different areas to take account of the varying types of litter. On a similar theme, another respondent suggested that public campaigns may benefit by focussing on specific categories of litter, linking into existing initiatives. It was suggested that segmentation behavioural research would be helpful to inform actions.
• Two respondents suggested that the focus of education and raising awareness should be on the most prevalent items found on beaches, and consideration should be given to regional variations in the types of litter, and more research may be required.
• One respondent suggested that campaigns are useful tools, and another respondent highlighted that they must be on-going and focussed on tackling sources of litter.
• One respondent suggested that the actions should be aligned with 'information' strand of the National Litter Strategy, which could incorporate education on marine litter.
• Three respondents expressed a view that education and awareness needs to be extended to items such as microplastics and plastic pellets.
• One respondent stated that they would like to see commitment to include marine litter in the curriculum. It was also suggested that local approaches to education programmes should be incorporated into Strategic Direction 1.
• One respondent suggested that the focus of the education programme should include impacts of litter on marine species.

In response to the possible action to encourage producers to change the manufacturing design of products commonly found in the marine environment, there were a number of comments and suggestions:

• One respondent commented that if producers change the manufacturing specification of their products, they could also reinforce correct consumer behaviours in marketing campaigns.
• Two respondents suggested that influencing product design for key items found on beaches would be welcomed. It was also highlighted that while industry and manufacturers should be encouraged to change the design of products, it was essential for the public to be made aware of the impact of their actions.
• It was suggested by two respondents that in addition to engaging with manufacturers to reduce/redesign products, there could be penalties imposed on the use of the most harmful or prevalent items to encourage the development of alternatives.
• One respondent highlighted that there are examples of products which have been designed to avoid the marine litter problems e.g. degradable cotton bud sticks, but are not widely available in Scotland. It was suggested that increased uptake of these type of products may require intervention through industry voluntary agreement etc.
• One respondent commented that producers are only likely to respond if there is public pressure to do so.
• One respondent stated that there should be a ban on products that pollute the environment. It was also suggested that there should be a stricter approach to tackling littering and there should be more powers to raise on the spot fines by, for example, beach rangers.
• One respondent indicated that product development and labelling were of primary importance.
• One respondent suggested that more waste / packaging / plastic bag reduction initiatives should be also considered for wider adoption. It was noted that manufacturers may require legislation to be introduced in order to change their products or try to reduce unnecessary packaging.

In response to Question 8, three respondents highlighted the most important possible action is that of industry and producers changing manufacturing design of products and packaging, and one response emphasised that it was important for business and industry to lead the way on this. One respondent felt that education and awareness raising was the most important action.

Nine respondents provided comments on the importance of both possible actions identified in the consultation document. Of those, four respondents expressed a view that both actions were equally important and other responses noted the importance of the role of education and industry, and also facilitating behavioural change. Four respondents noted that a co-ordinated and coherent approach is needed to fully realise this Strategic Direction.

• One respondent commented that it would be useful to more fully understand barriers and facilitators for positive attitudinal and behavioural change that will lead towards a reduction in marine litter.
• One respondent commented that the initiatives could be complemented by enforcement activities.
• One respondent suggested that industry involvement is important but a variety of actions should be used and the solutions implemented are more likely to have a long term effect. The latter point was echoed in a further response.

Seven respondents specifically provided a response to Question 9 and expressed a range of views:

• One respondent commented that actions could be delivered under existing activities but not to the extent needed to achieve the Strategy's vision.
• Two respondents suggested that both possible actions could be delivered under existing activities but it would be unlikely that targets and indicators for Good Environmental Status under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive would be met.

• Two respondents suggested that some of the actions could be addressed by existing schemes which would have resource implications to be considered.
• One respondent suggested that current activities do not tackle all aspects of the marine litter issue and the Strategy should both help improve the effectiveness of current activities and be used to help develop new projects/ideas.
• One respondent suggested that while the actions can be delivered as part of the existing campaigns, it is unlikely there will be significant change without additional resources and direction.