APPENDIX
National Litter Pollution Monitoring System
The national monitoring system measures 3 key indicators of the litter
problem – the extent, main causes and main constituents of litter pollution
nationwide. Measuring changes in these indicators over time enables local
authorities to determine the effectiveness of their litter management
strategies and ensure the optimum allocation of resources to tackle litter.
Thus, the main purpose of the system is to measure trends in the key
indicators, allowing progress in tackling litter pollution at local and national
levels to be measured.
Extent of Litter Pollution
Under the national monitoring system, the extent and severity of litter
pollution is measured by using a Litter Pollution Index (LPI), which is a scale
of 1 to 5 as described below:
1. Unpolluted or litter free
2. Slightly polluted
3. Moderately polluted
4. Significantly polluted
5. Grossly polluted
70%
60%
50%
40%
% of Surveys
30%
20%
10%
0%
LPI 1
LPI 2
LPI 3
LPI 4
LPI 5
2008
6.6%
62.6%
26.6%
3.8%
0.5%
2009
6.8%
63.5%
25.7%
3.7%
0.3%
Litter Pollution Index
Figure 2-1 compares 2008 and 2009 litter pollution survey results

6.8 % of areas surveyed were litter free (LPI 1), an increase of 0.2 %
on 2008.

63.5% of all areas surveyed were only slightly littered (LPI 2), a
0.9% increase on 2008

The percentage of moderately polluted areas (LPI 3) has decreased
by 0.9% on the 2008 results to 25.7%

The percentage of significantly polluted areas (LPI 4) has decreased
by 0.1% on the 2008 results to 3.7%

The percentage of grossly polluted areas (LPI 5) has decreased by
0.2% on the 2008 results to 0.3%
Prescribed standards for each category of LPI have been circulated to all
local authorities to ensure a consistent approach nationwide to measuring
the extent of litter pollution in the surveyed areas.
A key feature of the national monitoring system is its focus on monitoring in
areas that are polluted or are likely to be polluted i.e. where potential
sources of litter are located. To this end, local authorities determine the
locations for their surveys using maps produced by specially designed Litter
GIS software, as follows:

40% in “high risk” locations (e.g. in town or city centres) where the
concentration of potential litter sources is greatest

40% in random potential litter generating areas - chosen by the
Litter GIS software

20% in locations chosen by local authorities, based on local
knowledge of litter pollution.
Accordingly, the national monitoring system is biased towards measuring
the nature and extent of litter pollution in those areas most likely to be
littered i.e. largely in urban areas; it will measure trends in these key
indicators over time.
The System provides a reliable overview from which
trends and conclusions can be drawn.
Causative Factors of Litter Pollution
The main causative factors of litter pollution identified in the litter pollution
surveys were as follows:
o
Passing pedestrians continue to constitute the greatest single
causative factor of litter pollution, accounting for 38.3% across all local
authorities, an increase of 0.7%.
o
Passing Motorists also increased as a causative factor by 0.7% to
18.3% in 2009
o
Other causative factors which increased from 2008 to 2009 include
schools, bus stops and fly tipping.
o
Causative factors which decreased from 2008 to 2009 include
gathering points, fast food outlets, construction sites, places of leisure
and bring banks.
Litter Composition
Local authorities also carried out litter quantification surveys (or item
counts) to determine the composition of litter in their areas.
A breakdown
of the main constituents of litter pollution is highlighted in Figure 3.1 below:
Litter Composition across all Local Authority Types, 2009
Cigarette Related Litter 45.39%
Food Related Litter 29.24%
Packaging Litter 12.02%
Sweet Related Litter 6.92%
Paper Litter 3.87%
Deleterious Litter Items 1.73%
Miscellaneous Litter Items 0.31%
Large Litter Items 0.27%
Plastic Litter (Non-packaging) 0.24%
From this data it can be seen that:
o
Cigarette related litter, despite a slight decrease, continues to
constitute the highest percentage (45.4%) of litter nationally –
this is comprised mainly of cigarette ends which constitute 41%
of all litter items;
o
Food related litter, at 29.2%, is the second largest category of
litter pollution recorded.
o
Chewing gum is the single largest litter component in the food
related litter category, and also the second largest component
nationally, comprising 27.3% of all litter recorded in the litter
quantification surveys carried out in 2009, this represents a
decrease of 3.5% on the 2008 figure
o
Packaging litter at 12% is the third largest component of national
litter pollution recorded.
A more detailed analysis of the litter pollution and quantification surveys data
is available in the Report.
The full 2009 system results report will be made available on the
Department’s website www.environ.ie
NOTE TO EDITORS
1.
Tobin Consulting Engineers were appointed by the Minister for the
Environment, Heritage and Local Government as the Litter Monitoring
Body (LMB) in May 1999 to develop a national litter pollution monitoring
system and oversee local authority implementation of it. The main purpose
of the monitoring system is to generate, by means of surveys, reliable data to
enable each local authority to measure accurately over time changes in the
extent and composition of litter pollution in its area, and so provide for more
effective litter management planning.
2. In essence, the system requires local authorities to:
i. identify / map the potential sources of litter in their areas,
ii. use this data to identify the locations for surveys to determine
the composition and
extent of litter pollution in their areas,
iii. carry out further series of surveys annually thereafter, the results
of which can be compared to the "benchmark" or previous years’
survey results to measure progress in tackling litter, and
iv. complete the appropriate forms for the surveys and forward same
to the LMB for analysis / assessment.
3. The LMB, on receipt of the survey data from local authorities:
i.
reports back to each local authority with its assessment of that
authority’s survey data, and
ii.
collates the survey results in a national overview and presents it
to the Department.
4. There are two types of surveys required –

Litter Pollution surveys to determine the extent and severity of litter
pollution.

Litter Quantification surveys to identify the composition (i.e. the type
and origin) of litter pollution prevailing in a particular area.
5. The litter quantification surveys identify nine broad categories of litter:





cigarette related litter
packaging litter (i.e. takeaway, glass, metal, paper, plastic)
food litter
paper litter (e.g. bank slips, bus tickets, newspapers, magazines
etc.)
plastic litter (i.e. non packaging litter e.g. plastic cutlery, toys etc.)




deleterious litter (e.g. dog fouling, nappies, needles, syringes etc.)
bulky litter (e.g. household appliances, furniture, etc.)
sweet related litter
miscellaneous litter (i.e. items not covered by the other categories
e.g. twine, clothes, fabrics etc.)
6. The initial series of surveys allow local authorities to establish “benchmark”
assessments of the extent and composition of litter pollution in their areas;
comparison of future survey results with the benchmark surveys will allow
progress to be measured. In this way, analysis of survey data will enable
each local authority to assess the effectiveness of its litter management
strategies on an ongoing basis and ensure the optimum allocation of
resources to tackle litter.
7.
The data produced by the national monitoring system surveys allow local
authorities to gauge





the extent and severity of litter pollution in each local authority area,
the types, most likely sources and causes of litter,
the changes in litter levels from location to location and over time,
the location of litter black spots, and
the impact of new anti-litter measures.
8. Thus, the National Litter Pollution Monitoring System is an environmental
management tool that enables local authorities to tackle litter more
effectively, by providing a framework for consistent and accurate selfassessment by local authorities.