|
ISWR Home
Evaluation
|
|
Evaluation of Non-structural Measures for Stormwater Quality Improvement
The purpose of this research work was to
trial
recently developed guidelines for monitoring and evaluating
non-structural
stormwater quality best management practices on an anti-litter
education /
participation campaign that operated within the small commercial
district of
Snell Grove in Oak Park, Melbourne, Victoria.
The
research involved:
- Trialling and refining
guidelines developed by
institute staff titled “Non-structural
Stormwater
Quality Best Management Practices: Guidelines for Monitoring and
Evaluation”
(Taylor and Wong, 2003; available at www.catchment.crc.org.au).
- Determining
whether the anti-litter
education / participation campaign that was run within the commercial
district
of Snell Grove in 2003 was fully implemented as set out in the project
plan
that was current immediately prior to the commencement of the campaign
(and if
not, determine why not).
- Determining
whether levels of awareness,
knowledge, attitudes and behaviour with respect to littering and
stormwater
management changed as a result of the campaign.
- Determining
whether loads of litter in
stormwater draining from the commercial district of Snell Grove
significantly
decreased during and/or after the anti-litter education / participation
campaign compared to pre-campaign litter loads (and if so, quantify the
magnitude of change).
- Evaluating the
overall success of the
campaign, its strengths and weaknesses, and providing recommendations for
future
projects of a similar nature.
- Preparing a
monitoring and evaluation report
that is consistent with the Taylor and Wong (2003)
guidelines.
Research
Team
André Taylor, Tim Fletcher, Justin Lewis
Industry
Partners
Victorian EPA, Moreland City Council
Relevant
Guidelines and Reports
Outcomes
This project is now complete. The report
by Taylor et al. (2005) presents the final
evaluation results. Note that the education / participation campaign
was
implemented by Moreland City Council staff, while the evaluation was
undertaken
by Institute / CRC-CH staff in cooperation with specialist social
science
consultants (Community Change Pty Ltd: www.communitychange.com.au).
The
monitoring involved the following six styles of evaluation:
- monitoring
whether the campaign had been implemented as planned, and the quality
of the campaign;
- monitoring
changes in awareness of traders and the general public in the vicinity
of Snell
Grove (as well as a control site) before, during and after the campaign;
- monitoring
changes in the attitudes of traders and the general public;
- monitoring
changes in the self-reported behaviour of traders and the general
public;
- monitoring
changes in actual behaviour of traders and the general public; and
- monitoring
changes in litter loads in stormwater draining from Snell Grove and a
control
site (i.e. Gaffney Street,
Pascoe Vale), before, during and after the campaign.
The education / participation
campaign focused on 26
traders and to a lesser extent the general public using Snell Grove.
Trader-related elements of the campaign
included a
brochure, one-to-one site visits / meetings with traders, a clean-up
event, a
newsletter / fact sheet, maintenance of infrastructure in the street
(including
bin-related infrastructure), posters in shop windows, windproof
ash-trays and
drain stencilling. Public-related elements
of
the campaign included posters in shop windows and the railway station,
drain
stencilling, brochures distributed by traders, and maintenance of the
local
environment (e.g. clean-up of dumped rubbish and improvement to local
Council-managed infrastructure).
Over-all, the study found that
the education /
participation campaign produced generally positive but modest results
against
its objectives.
With respect to testing the
draft monitoring
guidelines, the Snell Grove project proved to be a valuable trial. It allowed the evaluation team to improve the
draft guidelines before they were finalised (e.g. by adding elements
such as
the need for a detailed project plan to coordinate activities run by
the
education and evaluation teams) and to examine the strengths and
weaknesses of
six of the seven different ‘evaluation styles’ covered by the
guidelines. The
seventh evaluation style was not trialled, as it would not have been
practical
given the nature of the education /
participation campaign.
It is hoped that the evaluation report will help others who are involved
with the design, delivery and evaluation of education-based initiatives
to
minimise littering and stormwater pollution in commercial districts. The evaluation report summarises the key
lessons learnt. Several of these are effectively ‘design guidelines’
for future
education / participation campaigns of a similar nature.
Litter around trading
premises, Snell Grove, Oak Park,
Melbourne
|
