Litter and flytipping offences - enforcement review: final report

The impact of litter and flytipping

Cases of both litter and flytipping can have a negative impact on the land (and marine environment), causing environmental harm and creating an adverse impact on the quality of the environment. Litter and flytipping can also be unpleasant to see/smell and impede/interfere with public amenities and spaces. Litter and flytipping may also impact on house prices in some areas (via perceived indirect costs), and it has also been found that increased crime rates and reduced mental health is prevalent in areas where instances of litter and flytipping are high^[14]. Litter remains a significant issue of public concern with 67% believing that litter is a problem in their local area, and 87% that it is an issue across Scotland^[15].

According to recent reports, flytippers are escaping penalties. Under a release of data under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, Scottish Councils were notified of 207,960 incidents of flytipping from 2019 to 2022, yet only 2,467 (1.2%) Fixed Penalty Notices (FPN) were issued, and 45 cases (0.02%) passed to the Crown Office for further prosecution^[16].

The data collected by the Scottish Liberal Democrats under the FOI request was kindly shared for this project. The data showed that of the 207,960 incidents of flytipping reported between 2019 and 2022:

• ~ 62,500 were reported in 2019/20
• ~73,000 were reported in 2020/21
• ~72,000 were reported in 2021/22

The increase in 2020/21 may have been linked to behaviour change and access to legitimate disposal options during the COVID-19 pandemic. It should, however, be noted that the data only represents those cases that are recorded and may not reflect all cases of flytipping in Scotland. In addition, of the 32 local authorities in Scotland, 3 did not provide data and 2 provided data by financial year rather than calendar year. As such additional data provided under the FOI request (flytipping incidents, number of FPNs issued and cases passed to the Crown Office) has not been depicted graphically by specific local authority as the data is not complete or verified so does not represent the actual number of incidents or the scale of the problem. Based on stakeholder feedback and our review of existing literature, data and evidence, which suggests many instances of flytipping are unreported or unrecorded, the actual number of incidents in Scotland is likely to be significantly higher than number captured under the FOI release.

Flytipping data is not a well-established official national statistic reported on each year in Scotland, so it is challenging to gather a full picture of flytipping trends and whether incidences are getting better or worse. There is generally a lack of understanding on the trends and patterns of flytipping across Scotland. Data is currently collected via a number of different mechanisms including local authorities’ own internal systems (this is not always published publicly), the Litter Monitoring System (LMS) and reporting via Waste Data Flow. On top of this the public could previously report flytipping incidents through the national reporting service, Dumb Dumpers. This service has now closed. The use of multiple systems across Scotland also means that in some cases, instances are reported more than once as the reporter could be confused as to which system to use so reports to more than one, leading to a lack of representative data.

KSB carry out annual local environmental quality surveys at a random selection of sites across Scotland every year. The audits collect information on litter types and sources. In terms of litter, the 2021/22 Local Environmental Audit and Management System (LEAMS) audit found that since the previous year, the overall Scotland-wide street cleanliness score has gone down by 0.4% and now sits at 89.7% of sites having acceptable levels of litter^[17]. To enable comparison between local authorities, the LEAMS audit groups all 32 local authorities in Scotland into “clubs” based on population and the distribution of population^[18]. The 2021/22 LEAMS audit found that the number of locations with unacceptable amounts of litter had increased since the previous year^[19], highlighting this as a national issue. While littering is seen to be a national issue, generally, there seems to be a correlation between higher levels of littering and higher levels of deprivation in Scotland^[20]. Additional information on litter trends can be found in Appendix 2 – Litter trends.

Making a robust assessment of whether litter and flytipping instances are getting worse is challenging and is made more problematic, especially in the case of flytipping, by a lack of reporting. This is especially true of private land, but also applies to public land. While some local authorities record data, the national picture is incomplete, with varying degrees of reporting, making it challenging to fully understand the issue.

The impact of COVID-19

Recent evidence and stakeholder insights suggest that COVID-19 had an impact on both littering and flytipping in the UK with reduced access to waste disposal services (e.g., Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRCs)) and the diversion of street cleansing staff to other services potentially playing a role. There has also been a greater disparity between rural and urban areas, with rural areas experiencing an increase in the amount of flytipping occurrences, whilst urban areas have seen a slight decline^[21]. This trend was prevalent throughout Scotland and across the UK, with the media reporting a causal link with the COVID-19 pandemic^[22]. At the beginning of the pandemic there was a reported 83% rise in flytipping cases stated by one licensed waste removal company^[23].

It is challenging to assess the full impact that COVID-19 had. There was clearly an impact on key services, however, it is also possible that individuals spending more time in their local area just became more aware of their neighbourhoods and existing environmental issues such as litter and flytipping. It is therefore challenging to assess whether there was an increase in incidents or an increase in the recording of cases.

The impact of the cost-of-living crisis

Recent reports have suggested that the spiralling cost of living in the UK is perpetuating the rate of flytipping^[24]. A leading UK waste carrier reported seeing an increase in the amount of waste being flytipped, which they associate with the rising cost of living. As the cost of basic, essential commodities continue to become more expensive, households (and businesses) are faced with the challenge of strict budgeting. This means that paying for their waste to be disposed of by a legitimate waste carrier is likely to become less of a priority compared to paying for essentials such as food and heating. Therefore, opting for their waste to be removed by an illegitimate waste carrier at a cheaper price or indeed dumping their waste themselves (flytipping) is becoming the more financially attractive option^[25].

Attitudes to enforcement

The Scottish Government published the analysis of responses to the new National Litter and Flytipping Strategy consultation in July 2022^[26]. Overall, there was strong support for changes to the current enforcement model for both litter and flytipping, summarised in Table 1 Summary of responses to enforcement questions and actions in the new National Litter and Flytipping Strategy public consultation (Scottish Government, 2022).

The outcome of the public consultation clearly shows that there is appetite for change when it comes to enforcement, be that via increasing fines or reviewing existing legislative powers, as well as through additional non-monetary measures.

Separately to the Scottish Government’s public consultation, KSB’s Scottish Litter Survey^[27] found that there was majority support for all proposed measures (presented as part of the survey) to deal with littering with 4 in 5 people wanting to see more action taken to both prevent and tackle litter. There was preference for preventative approaches, with 9 in 10 people supporting educational and behavioural campaigns while 97% supported improving waste disposal facilities and 84% supporting strengthening fines and penalties.