Appendix 1
County Council
Carlow
2013 Anti-Litter & Anti-Graffiti Awareness Grant Schedule
2013
Allocations
20,000
Cavan
20,000
Clare
24,000
Cork
35,000
Donegal
27,000
35,000
Dun Laoghaire/ Rathdown
Fingal
35,000
Galway
27,000
Kerry
27,000
Kildare
24,000
Kilkenny
24,000
Laois
20,000
Leitrim
18,000
Limerick
27,000
Longford
18,000
Louth
24,000
Mayo
24,000
Meath
27,000
Monaghan
20,000
Offaly
20,000
Roscommon
20,000
Sligo
20,000
South County Dublin
35,000
South Tipperary
20,000
North Tipperary
20,000
Waterford
18,000
Westmeath
20,000
Wexford
27,000
Wicklow
24,000
City Council
Cork
35,000
Dublin
70,000
Galway
35,000
Limerick
30,000
Waterford
Total
30,000
€900,000
NOTE: Allocations to city councils reflect the significant transient population in these areas (tourists / students).
Appendix 2
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
Figure 2.1 Comparison of Litter Pollution Indices (LPI) 2011 – 2012
Figure 2.1 compares 2011 and 2012 litter pollution survey results. From this we can see:

10.4 % of areas surveyed were litter free (LPI 1), an increase of 0.5 % on 2011.
This represents the highest level achieved since monitoring began in 2002.

63.2% of all areas surveyed were slightly littered (LPI 2), a 3.8% decrease on 2011.

The percentage of moderately polluted areas (LPI 3) has increased by 2.6% on the
2011 results to 22.9%.

The percentage of significantly polluted areas (LPI 4) has increased by 0.8% on the
2011 results to 3.2%.

The percentage of grossly polluted areas (LPI 5) has decreased by 0.1% 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; 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:

Passing pedestrians continue to constitute the greatest single causative factor of litter,
accounting for 39.3% across all local authorities, an increase of 1.1% on 2011.

Passing Motorists decreased as a causative factor by 0.3% to 18.6% in 2012.

Causative factors which increased from 2011 to 2012 include fast food outlets, places of
leisure/entertainment and fly tipping/dumping.

Causative factors which decreased from 2011 to 2012 include retail outlets, gathering points,
schools/school children and bus stops.
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:
Figure 3.1 Composition of Litter in 2012 Broken Down into Main Categories
From this data it can be seen that:

Cigarette related litter, continues to constitute the highest percentage (52.7%) of litter
nationally, an increase of 2.2% on 2011 figures – this is comprised mainly of cigarette ends
which constitute 48.6% of all litter items;

Food related litter, at 19.1%, a decrease of 3.6% is the second largest category of litter
pollution recorded.

Chewing gum is the single largest litter component in the food related litter category, and also
the second largest component nationally, comprising 17.6% of all litter recorded in the litter
quantification surveys carried out in 2012, this represents a decrease of 3.3% on the 2011
figure

Packaging litter at 13.2%, an increase of 1.7% on 2011 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 2012 System Results Report will be made available on the Department’s
website www.environ.ie and on www.litter.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:

identify / map the potential sources of litter in their areas,

use this data to identify the locations for surveys to determine the
composition and extent of litter pollution in their areas,

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 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:

reports back to each local authority with its assessment of that
authority’s survey data, and

collates the survey results in a national overview and presents it to the
Department.
4. There are two types of surveys required –
o Litter Pollution surveys to determine the extent and severity of litter
pollution.
o 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 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 self-assessment by local
authorities