NEA study shows nonchalant attitudes, launches campaign targeted at S'poreans
Irene Tham Straits Times 6 Jun 10;
Throw my rubbish into a bin? Depends on whether there is one nearby.
At least one in three Singaporeans says he would bin rubbish only when it is convenient to do so, shows a study commissioned by the National Environment Agency (NEA).
And if there is no bin nearby, he would have no qualms littering.
The survey also found that many consider drains, lifts, toilets, areas near lift landings and rubbish chutes, and the side of roads 'legitimate' dumping grounds.
The NEA hopes to change such attitudes and misconceptions with its new anti-littering campaign, which will be launched today.
The campaign is a follow-on to the one targeted at foreign workers from India and China which ran from October last year to March.
This time round, the NEA is tailoring its new campaign for Singaporeans.
The findings from the recent study helped NEA understand why people litter, allowing it to design appropriate advertisements.
The survey polled more than 4,400 Singaporeans in the first quarter of this year.
The sample included heads of households, teenagers and secondary school students, and the study was headed by sociology Associate Professor Paulin Straughan from the National University of Singapore (NUS).
It also found that more than 60 per cent of Singaporeans would not litter regardless of the circumstance, and only about 1.2 per cent are 'hardcore litterbugs'.
From May to August last year, NUS sociology Professor Narayanan Ganapathy also interviewed 90 Singaporeans aged between 15 and 59 for another study.
He found that many people do not give much thought to littering and regard littering as harmless as 'no one is hurt, not like murder or theft'.
Other excuses range from apologetic ones - 'I am too old to change my ways' - to rebuffs like 'What's the fuss about littering anyway?'.
'How they explain away their action is similar for locals and foreigners - akin to how criminals rationalise their behaviour,' said Prof Ganapathy, who specialises in criminology.
Littering is a perennial problem but recent enforcement figures suggest efforts to curb it might be working.
In the first four months of the year, more than 10,500 Singaporeans and foreigners were caught for littering. Of this, about 7,300 were Singaporeans and around 3,100 were foreigners.
In the same period last year, about 14,500 people were caught - 10,000 Singaporeans and close to 4,500 foreigners.
The NEA said the drop was partly a result of education, penalties and more bins, especially in areas foreigners congregate.
For the whole of last year, close to 41,400 litterbugs were caught - 70 per cent of them Singaporeans and the rest foreigners.
First-time adult offenders are fined $300 while students from 12 to below 18 years old can be fined $50.
Repeat offenders must appear in court and could get a Corrective Work Order and a fine of up to $1,000 for the first conviction. They can be fined up to $2,000 for the second conviction and up to $5,000 for subsequent ones.
Foreigners do so in areas that feel like home
Goh Chin Lian Straits Times 6 Jun 10;
You are in Little India. You spot a foreign worker blithely tossing his drink can on the ground.
The reason for his act, according to a study, is that the area feels like home to him. He is among familiar people, no one is going to disapprove, and leaving behind rubbish is not littering anyway, he thinks.
After all, it is normal behaviour back home. Almost everyone does it, and laws against it, if any, are not strictly enforced.
The study of littering behaviour among foreigners and Singaporeans, commissioned by the National Environment Agency (NEA), found such a mindset among foreign workers.
They made up three in 10 litterbugs caught last year.
Of the total, 11,059 were foreigners and 27,572 were Singaporeans.
Sociology professor Narayanan Ganapathy from the National University of Singapore and his team interviewed 30 foreign workers for the survey from May to August last year.
The men and women were from Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam. They included construction workers, cleaners, waiters and mechanics. Some had been caught for littering.
A summary of the findings released to The Sunday Times identified the 'feel at home' factor as unique to foreign workers.
Other reasons given by them, like convenience or unforeseen circumstances such as having to chase the last bus, were no different from those offered by Singaporeans.
Among Indian nationals and Bangladeshis, the crowd, shops and activities in Little India made them feel at home. 'If we see others littering, we won't care because it's normal. We feel comfortable littering as well,' said one interviewee.
The same dynamic is at work in the dormitories and worksites. In the company of fellow countrymen, they feel no embarrassment or guilt when they do not bin their refuse.
At the root of such behaviour is a belief that the act is the norm and a habit that does not need to be changed here.
One worker from China told the interviewers: 'We grew up learning how to litter from adults, and we continue this bad habit when we get older.'
Hence, the foreign workers said they were shocked to be stopped by officials, and told that the fine for a first-time offender was $300.
What constitutes littering is also contested due to a difference in culture here and back home, noted Prof Ganapathy.
To the foreign worker, it is not littering to leave rubbish behind after a gathering. 'Littering, to them, is to drop something on the ground,' he said.
But outside their comfort zone, the majority said they were afraid to litter, say, in shopping centres. They were worried that Singaporeans might stigmatise them as unhygienic.
Mr Jolovan Wham, a social worker with foreign worker advocacy group Humanitarian Organisation for Migration Economics, agreed with the findings.
He has seen foreign workers litter and spit in Little India, and reckoned they felt more comfortable there and had let their guard down.
But they are more likely to curb their impulses in malls, he noted, citing the behaviour of Filipinos in Lucky Plaza and Myanmar nationals in Peninsula Plaza.
Prof Ganapathy said anti-littering outreach programmes could be more targeted at specific groups of foreign workers. Having visible enforcement in places where they feel at home could serve both as a reminder not to litter as well as a deterrent.
The study also found that foreign workers were not aware of the $300 fine for first-time offenders.
Educational efforts need to be sustained for a longer term but getting results remains a challenge, given that many workers are transient, he added.
The NEA said it had acted on some findings. It launched a series of TV commercials against littering and spitting in November last year and February this year, targeted at Chinese and Indian foreign workers. The commercials emphasised the $300 fine.
The NEA has also put in more bins where foreign workers gather.
Dorms: Bins here, there, everywhere
Straits Times 6 Jun 10;
When it comes to licking the littering problem, foreign workers' dormitories have 'bin' here and done that.
Their current modus operandi is the subtle approach: Put more bins in more places, and remove bin covers so that the workers can dispose of their rubbish without soiling their hands.
Foreign workers are known to leave behind plastic bags, drink cans and fliers on their dormitory grounds.
Tough measures like a $100 fine are used as a deterrent but are rarely, if ever, imposed, dormitory operators told The Sunday Times.
'The workers are also our customers,' said Mr Jimmy Wee, property manager of Kaki Bukit Hostel, which houses about 3,000 workers, mostly from India and Bangladesh. 'If we are stringent, no one will want to stay here.'
Employers currently pay an average of $160 to $180 a month to house a worker in a dormitory.
Operators also invite National Environment Agency officials to give anti-littering talks. However, these have at best a temporary effect of a few days, after which the workers forget and slip back to their old ways, said Mr Wee.
What works is the proliferation of bins, placed outside their rooms, in the toilets and at every point of their route between the bunk and the front gate.
Mr Stephen Goh is the general manager of 5 Star Dormitory, which houses 6,000 workers from India, Bangladesh, Thailand, Myanmar, China and Malaysia at its Kaki Bukit premises.
He said a couple of years ago, it doubled the number of bins placed at the corners, staircases and common areas.
It also found a cheaper way to increase the number of bins by installing a metal bracket on a low wall and slipping trashbags over it.
'We made sure the trash bags were right in front of their rooms and within their reach,' said Mr Goh.
Dormitory manager Ramesh Regupathy and his team also introduced uncovered bins a year ago after receiving workers' complaints that litter was being thrown on bin covers.
He runs Murai Lodge II, an 8,000-worker dormitory off Lim Chu Kang Road. The occupants are mainly construction workers from India and Bangladesh.
Twenty-three cleaners work two shifts to keep the dormitory spick and span. About $40,000 was spent on landscaping to beautify the premises.
'When the environment is nice, they will feel bad about littering,' said Mr Ramesh.
Bigger bins are also being used in Little India, where the crowd can swell to more than 50,000 on weekends.
Other measures include evening patrols by auxiliary police officers, and the requirement for telcos that distribute fliers to clean up at the end of the day.
Mr Rajakumar Chandra, chairman of the Little India Shopkeepers and Heritage Association, is satisfied that the cleanliness of the area is better managed these days, with contractors doing a major clean-up on Sunday nights into the wee hours of Monday.
Goh Chin Lian
When is throwing something littering?
Straits Times 6 Jun 10;
# Sweet wrappers, cigarette butts, parking coupon tabs
These are considered 'minor' litter. First-time offenders are fined $300. Repeat offenders must appear in court after which they may be given a Corrective Work Order and a fine of up to $1,000.
# Plastic bags, food wrappers, drink cups, tissue paper
These are 'serious' litter as they can contribute to mosquito breeding or rodent infestation.
First-time offenders go to court where they may be slapped with a Corrective Work Order and a fine of up to $1,000.
# Bulky waste in public places like the void decks of HDB flats
First-time offenders can be fined $500.
# Pet faecal matter
This is an offence under the environmental public health (public cleansing) regulations and not the regulations governing littering. First-, second- and third-time offenders will be fined $150, $200 and $250 respectively.
# Flicking ash from a cigarette
This is not considered littering.
# Rubber band (for tying food boxes), newspapers, pen
You can be fined for leaving the items behind or throwing them onto the floor.
# Brushing off dandruff flakes, cutting finger/toe nails, flicking ear wax, using a pumice stone to rub dead skin on feet in public places
NEA officers who come across these acts will ask people to refrain from such anti-social behaviour.
# Cutting hair in public places
If the cut hair is not collected from the ground, it is littering and considered 'serious' litter.
# Emptying of drinks from drink cans/bottles and soup on the floor or the grass verges outside coffee shops
This is considered 'serious' littering as it will encourage pest infestation.
# Emptying plain water from water bottles and tossing out ice-cubes from cups
This is not considered littering, but the NEA says the public should throw unwanted water and ice-cubes into sinks or toilet bowls.
Irene Tham
Read more!
Posts
visitors since Nov 07