Branding in the commercial sector is pervasive and fairly easy to understand and recognize. However, branding in social marketing is not as common but becoming more popular as it is very effective in creating visibility and ensures memorability.
The brand is the marketer’s most advanced emotional tool. It combines and reinforces the functional and emotional benefits of the offering and so adds value, encouraging consumption and loyalty. A good brand facilitates recognition, makes a promise, and, provided the full marketing back-up is in place, delivers satisfaction. Brands can provide very practical benefits. For example for young people, quick and clear brand identification can make both the buying and smoking of forbidden products such as cigarettes much less risky. Over time, brands become a fast powerful way of confirming the synergy between marketer and customer. (Social Marketing: Influencing Behaviors for Good by Philip Kotler, Nancy R. Lee)
There is also evidence that branding may be particularly effective way to reach people in deprived communities. Experts in branding have concluded that the symbolic appeal of brands is particularly effective in targeting those individuals who do not have the time, skills and motivation to evaluate the objective attributes and benefits of a particular campaign. A recent review conducted on behalf of the UK’s National for Health and Clinical Excellence also suggests that brands can be an effective way of reaching information-deprived communities. Branding with these communities seems to hold considerable promise. (Gerald Hastings in Social marketing … why should the devil have all the best tunes? p100).
In Canada and the USA, many government departments are constantly looking for effective ways to best hard to reach groups. This new finding should certainly be explored for “hard to reach” and “deprived communities”.
The following list includes a few of the stronger brands , in these cases names that have been to identify programs and products and are used consistently in an integrated way which is very important for social marketers.
“Participaction”… encouraging physical activity (CANADA)
“VERB” … encouraging physical activity (USA)
“Break Free”… Anti – smoking (Canada)
“Truth” … Anti -smoking (USA)
“McGruff the Crime Dog”… Crime prevention
“Operation Red Nose/Nez Rouge”… Drinking and driving (Canada)
“Road Crew” … Drinking and driving (USA)
“Don’t mess with Texas”… Litter prevention (USA)
“Rock the vote”… Voting
“Back to Sleep”… Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
“Energy Star “… Energy conservation
“One ton Challenge”… Climate change (Canada)
“Smokey Bear”… Wildfire prevention
“5 A Day”… Nutrition
“Fight” … “fight fear,” “fight distress” and “fight chaos,” Military recruiting campaign (Canada)
“Be all you can be”… Military recruiting campaign (USA)
“Yes You Can”…International Competitiveness (Canada)
“Believe in Yourself”… Student Loan (Canada)
Here is an excerpt from a blog from “branding in the field of social marketing “from Nedra Kline Weinreich which provides some further information on this topic.
“Nonprofits and government agencies are generally several steps behind the commercial sector in applying marketing concepts to their health and social issues. Branding is a word that is thrown around a lot by marketers of all stripes without a complete understanding of what it actually means. We know we want to have a strong brand, but to some that just means creating a logo and tagline. A brand is much more than just the product itself, or the visuals you create to promote it.
Your brand is how your audience thinks about your product and connects with it emotionally. It’s the combination of how you market your product and how the audience experiences it. It’s the feeling that by using the product someone becomes part of an elite group, and membership in that group reflects the image of who that person aspires to be.
In the case of social marketing, the product is the health or social behaviour you are promoting — if the audience tries doing what you want them to do but has an awful experience, the brand image suffers. Or the brand may be your organization, with various products that you offer falling within that brand (e.g., if you are at a local health department with initiatives addressing different health topics). So branding involves strategically crafting all the elements of your audience’s interactions with your organization and its products so that they support the right image and evoke the right emotions. Your product or organization may already have a brand image — but is it the one you want?
Jim Mintz is Director of the Centre of Excellence for Public Sector Marketing. The Centre’s mandate is to deliver strategic marketing solutions, designed to meet the unique needs & challenges of governments, associations and non-profit organizations. He is also Program Director of the “Professional Certificate in Public Sector and Non-Profit Marketing” and the “Executive Certificate in Public Sector and Non-Profit Marketing Leadership” at the Sprott School of Business at Carleton University. Jim lectures in the Undergraduate Program at Sprott in his specialty areas of marketing communications and non-profit/public sector marketing and at the University of South Florida, College of Public Health (Tampa). He was formerly Adjunct Professor of Marketing in the School of Management at the University of Ottawa.
terça-feira, 17 de novembro de 2009
20/20 The Way to Clean Air
20/20 The Way to Clean Air involves individuals in the Greater Toronto Area in reducing home energy use and vehicle use by 20%. It asks participants to make a small commitment (some easy-to-do activities done for a period of two weeks) leading to a larger commitment (longer-term, greater cost savings actions) and connects them with programs and services that help them succeed.
Background
In November 1999, Toronto Public Health contracted a social marketing firm Eric Young Enterprise (E.Y.E.) - to develop a strategic framework for its education program on smog and air quality. The goal was to identify a strategy for Toronto Public Health to conduct risk reduction and smog reduction activities and to create a platform for long-term change on air quality. E.Y.E. developed the brand for the 20/20 The Way for Clean Air program in 2000.
The strategic framework, completed in March 2000, outlined the components of a social marketing campaign whose focus was to engage residents, both at the individual and collective level, in taking actions to reduce air pollution. Driving the public to partner programs and services was also key. A planning guide (the 20/20 Planner) was envisaged, with a Connector section to link participants to service providers that would help them achieve their 20% energy reduction goal.
Setting Objectives
20/20 hoped to:
•Involve 20 corporate participants in the GTA to become a 20/20 workplace by 2005.
•Involve 500 schools in the GTA in its EcoSchools partnership program by 2010.
•Deliver 150,000 20/20 Planners to households across the GTA by 2010.
•Achieve 30% home energy use reduction per participating household by 2020.
•Achieve 20% vehicle use reduction per participating household by 2020.
Getting Informed
Toronto Public Health contracted Cullbridge Marketing and Communications to conduct a best practices analysis. This analysis, completed in January 2001, outlined a series of energy reducing activities for the 20/20 program, both for the home energy use and personal vehicle use components. These included: 1) home energy audits, 2) insulation, 3) weatherization, 4) home thermostat, 5) lower-income housing, 6) water heater thermostat, 7) lighting, 8) walking and biking for adults, 9) walking and biking for school children, 10) transit, 11) work-based carpooling and 12) school-based carpooling.
The development of the 20/20 Planner and 20/20 EcoSchools Planner (a student-focused version of the 20/20 Planner) built on these energy-reducing activities, targeting residents and schools respectively.
In 2000, Toronto Public Health worked with E.Y.E. to develop a living lab exercise to test out draft materials with 20 families across the Greater Toronto Area. Participants received incentives and regular telephone support from the five health units in the regions of York, Peel, Halton, Durham and Toronto. To further test and refine the program, Toronto Public Health hired a team led by Lura Consulting to pilot the program with 250 families in Toronto and Peel Region.
The living lab and pilot, completed in May 2002 indicated that a 20% energy goal was achievable. These studies confirmed the barriers and opportunities for behavioral change that were identified in the best practices analysis, including the need for: 1) a comprehensive resource to guide actions, 2) some form of follow-up/reminder to participants of their action, 3) incentives to take action, 4) making a pledge for action, and 5) having measurable results.
The studies also suggested that 20/20 needed to be promoted to a wider audience, enabling a much larger number of people to find out that the program and support was available. Other recommendations included: 1) providing on the ground support to priority neighbourhood, 2) making basic information about home energy-savings opportunities easy to access, 3) the need for a simple information kit for participants, 4) providing easy-to-use tracking tool and incentives for participants, and 5) partnering with local service providers such as Green$aver and Pollution Probe to deliver a work-based initiative.
Targeting the Audience
•20/20 in general residents in the Greater Toronto Area, including those living in multi-unit residences
•20/20 workplace companies in the Greater Toronto Area interested in promoting energy efficiency to their employees
•20/20 EcoSchools predominantly Grade 5 classrooms in elementary schools
•20/20 community pilot selected neighbourhoods whose first language is not English
Delivering the Program
20/20 was officially launched to the general public in June 2002. It introduced its workplace program at the end of 2002 and the schools program in 2003 as a pilot with the Toronto District School Boards EcoSchools initiative. The regional health units contracted the Clean Air Partnership to coordinate the program throughout the GTA at the same time. They also set up a Regional Steering Committee composed of 20/20 staff from the five regional health units to oversee the implementation of the program across the GTA. In 2005, 20/20 partnered with community groups to bring the program to multi-ethnic communities. A small-scale advertising campaign also took place in 2003 and 2004.
The 20/20 Planners went through several revisions to include updated information from program partners, prize draws, activity tracking/feedback forms, and energy saving tips for tenants and condo owners. 20/20 developed a new teachers guide in 2005 to accompany the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner, outlining the program links to curriculum.
By the summer of 2005, the program had reached over 20 workplaces, 70 schools across the Greater Toronto Area and over 14 communities bringing the 20/20 program to residents whose first language is not English. More than 10,000 Planners per year in total were distributed in the Greater Toronto Area and beyond.
Distribution and promotion of the residential 20/20 Planner:
The general public could order a free copy of the 20/20 Planner (Overcoming Specific Barriers) by calling a hotline. 20/20 promoted the hotline through the 20/20 point of contact brochure, advertising in the media electronic bulletin boards, and printed articles in magazines and commuter papers (Mass Media). Participants could also download the Planner from the 20/20 program web site or sign up at 20/20 displays at public events (e.g., Environment Days, Smog Summit Fresh Air Fair, Bike Week, Earth Week, and Clean Air Day).
20/20 encouraged participants to complete and return a feedback form indicating the type of energy use activity they would do , both in a Stage One two-week period and beyond (Building Motivation Over Time) and be entered into a draw for some prizes (Incentives).
On receiving the feedback form, 20/20 sent participants a welcome letter, a window decal, and energy saving plugs/shoelaces/fridge magnet to remind them of their commitment to energy use reduction (Norm Appeals, Prompts).
20/20 workplace program:
20/20 partnered with Green$aver, Pollution Probes S.M.A.R.T. Movement program and the Smart Commute Association to bring energy efficiency to companies across the Greater Toronto Area (Work Programs). Each company that signed up for the program received a welcoming package, filled with information to help the workplace coordinator communicate the program to its employees.
20/20 also worked with the participating workplaces to organize lunch and learn events and education displays where employees could sign up for their free copy of the 20/20 Planner.
20/20 EcoSchools program:
20/20 partnered with the Ontario EcoSchools initiative to bring the 20/20 Planner (revised for student use and called the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner) to teachers and their students. Staff from the regional health units worked with local school boards to invite teachers to participate in the program. 20/20 focused predominantly in Grade 5 classrooms where energy conservation is a curriculum requirement for this grade. 20/20 also encouraged schools in the Greater Toronto Area to tie the 20/20 EcoSchools program to annual environmental events such as Earth Week in April, Clean Air Day in June and International Walk to School month in October.
Incentives for participating schools in the Greater Toronto Area included: 1) monthly pizza lunch prize draw for classroom and, 2) opportunity to win a "clean air" presentation by a Clean Air Champion. Participating classrooms also received a colourful child-focused poster with stickers. Schools that registered a minimum of three classrooms also received an attractive school banner.
Students of the participating classrooms received copies of the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner to take home to their families (School Programs that Involve the Family).A teachers guide was also sent to the teachers outlining instructions for participating, curriculum connections, and additional resources to enhance the 20/20 program in the classroom.
Schools outside of the Greater Toronto Area could also download the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner and the teachers guide from the 20/20 program web site.
20/20 community pilot:
20/20 partnered with local community agencies to deliver the program to selected communities who first language is not English. Participating communities translated 20/20 materials, including part of the 20/20 Planner to different languages, including Spanish, Chinese, Tamil, Punjabi and Arabic. The 20/20 Planner also included energy saving tips for people living in multi-units residences thus expanding the reach of the program (Overcoming Specific Barriers).
Financing the Program
20/20 received funding from the Toronto Atmospheric Fund, the Climate Change Action Fund, Environment Canada Ontario Region, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Ontario Ministry of Energy, TD Friends of the Environment Foundation, and the EcoAction Fund in the development and implementation of the program. Many program partners also provided in kind support throughout the course of the program.
Measuring Achievements
In the spring/summer of 2004, Toronto Public Health conducted a participant survey to assess if program participants used the 20/20 Planner (the programs central resource) to achieve reductions in energy use and to determine the specific actions that they were taking. This information was used to quantify the emissions reductions related to the energy saving activities undertaken by the participants. The study involved two surveys.
Survey #1 targeted program participants who ordered the 20/20 Planner and returned their activity tracking/feedback forms. The main objectives of this survey were to find out whether these individuals had done the longer-term activities to which they committed and, if not, what the barriers to success had been.
Survey #2 targeted program participants who had ordered the 20/20 Planner, but had not sent back their activity forms. The objectives of this survey were to find out why the participants activity tracking/feedback forms were not sent back, and whether they were in fact engaged in the program.
Emissions reductions were calculated based on self-reporting of activities by participants. The amount of emissions reduced for each activity was assigned a value based on models that predicted estimated transportation emissions per passenger per kilometer traveled, and home energy use based on typical housing stock in Canada.
The results of the two surveys were as follow:
•An average of 19% reduction in home energy use per household (20% from participants who returned their feedback forms and 18% from those who did not.)
•An average of 15% reduction in vehicle km traveled per household (13% from participants who returned their feedback forms and 16% from those who did not.)
•An average of 1.2 tonnes emissions reduction (mainly CO2) per household per year (1.3 tonnes from participants who returned their feedback form and 1.1 from those who did not.)
Contacts
Jill McDowell, Health Promotion Consultant
Toronto Public Health
277 Victoria Street, 7th Floor
Toronto, ON M5B 1W2
Phone: 416-392-4882
Fax: 416-392-7418
jmcdowe@toronto.ca
For more information about the 20/20 The Way to Clean Air, call the 20/20 hotline at 416-392-2020 (toll-free 1-866-583-2020) or visit the program web site at www.toronto.ca/health/2020
For step-by step instructions in using each of the tools noted above, to review our FULL collection of over 90 social marketing case studies, or to suggest a new case study, go to www.toolsofchange.com
Notes
Concluding Thoughts
•Partnerships were key to the success of 20/20 The Way to Clean Air. Linking with strong programs in the schools (such as EcoSchools), transportation partners in the workplace (S.M.A.R.T. Movement), and on-the-ground community groups, enabled the campaign to reach a diversity of families with meaningful messages.
•Involvement of neighbouring health units brought credibility to the campaign that helped 20/20 build trust with the communities and residents in the region.
•Offering households the flexibility to choose the level of participation helped the campaign evolve into one that reached a variety of families with difference economic and cultural backgrounds.
•Behaviour change is incremental and happens over time. Contributions (from smallest to largest) of each participating household add up over the years into meaningful emissions reductions on a collective level.
Background
In November 1999, Toronto Public Health contracted a social marketing firm Eric Young Enterprise (E.Y.E.) - to develop a strategic framework for its education program on smog and air quality. The goal was to identify a strategy for Toronto Public Health to conduct risk reduction and smog reduction activities and to create a platform for long-term change on air quality. E.Y.E. developed the brand for the 20/20 The Way for Clean Air program in 2000.
The strategic framework, completed in March 2000, outlined the components of a social marketing campaign whose focus was to engage residents, both at the individual and collective level, in taking actions to reduce air pollution. Driving the public to partner programs and services was also key. A planning guide (the 20/20 Planner) was envisaged, with a Connector section to link participants to service providers that would help them achieve their 20% energy reduction goal.
Setting Objectives
20/20 hoped to:
•Involve 20 corporate participants in the GTA to become a 20/20 workplace by 2005.
•Involve 500 schools in the GTA in its EcoSchools partnership program by 2010.
•Deliver 150,000 20/20 Planners to households across the GTA by 2010.
•Achieve 30% home energy use reduction per participating household by 2020.
•Achieve 20% vehicle use reduction per participating household by 2020.
Getting Informed
Toronto Public Health contracted Cullbridge Marketing and Communications to conduct a best practices analysis. This analysis, completed in January 2001, outlined a series of energy reducing activities for the 20/20 program, both for the home energy use and personal vehicle use components. These included: 1) home energy audits, 2) insulation, 3) weatherization, 4) home thermostat, 5) lower-income housing, 6) water heater thermostat, 7) lighting, 8) walking and biking for adults, 9) walking and biking for school children, 10) transit, 11) work-based carpooling and 12) school-based carpooling.
The development of the 20/20 Planner and 20/20 EcoSchools Planner (a student-focused version of the 20/20 Planner) built on these energy-reducing activities, targeting residents and schools respectively.
In 2000, Toronto Public Health worked with E.Y.E. to develop a living lab exercise to test out draft materials with 20 families across the Greater Toronto Area. Participants received incentives and regular telephone support from the five health units in the regions of York, Peel, Halton, Durham and Toronto. To further test and refine the program, Toronto Public Health hired a team led by Lura Consulting to pilot the program with 250 families in Toronto and Peel Region.
The living lab and pilot, completed in May 2002 indicated that a 20% energy goal was achievable. These studies confirmed the barriers and opportunities for behavioral change that were identified in the best practices analysis, including the need for: 1) a comprehensive resource to guide actions, 2) some form of follow-up/reminder to participants of their action, 3) incentives to take action, 4) making a pledge for action, and 5) having measurable results.
The studies also suggested that 20/20 needed to be promoted to a wider audience, enabling a much larger number of people to find out that the program and support was available. Other recommendations included: 1) providing on the ground support to priority neighbourhood, 2) making basic information about home energy-savings opportunities easy to access, 3) the need for a simple information kit for participants, 4) providing easy-to-use tracking tool and incentives for participants, and 5) partnering with local service providers such as Green$aver and Pollution Probe to deliver a work-based initiative.
Targeting the Audience
•20/20 in general residents in the Greater Toronto Area, including those living in multi-unit residences
•20/20 workplace companies in the Greater Toronto Area interested in promoting energy efficiency to their employees
•20/20 EcoSchools predominantly Grade 5 classrooms in elementary schools
•20/20 community pilot selected neighbourhoods whose first language is not English
Delivering the Program
20/20 was officially launched to the general public in June 2002. It introduced its workplace program at the end of 2002 and the schools program in 2003 as a pilot with the Toronto District School Boards EcoSchools initiative. The regional health units contracted the Clean Air Partnership to coordinate the program throughout the GTA at the same time. They also set up a Regional Steering Committee composed of 20/20 staff from the five regional health units to oversee the implementation of the program across the GTA. In 2005, 20/20 partnered with community groups to bring the program to multi-ethnic communities. A small-scale advertising campaign also took place in 2003 and 2004.
The 20/20 Planners went through several revisions to include updated information from program partners, prize draws, activity tracking/feedback forms, and energy saving tips for tenants and condo owners. 20/20 developed a new teachers guide in 2005 to accompany the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner, outlining the program links to curriculum.
By the summer of 2005, the program had reached over 20 workplaces, 70 schools across the Greater Toronto Area and over 14 communities bringing the 20/20 program to residents whose first language is not English. More than 10,000 Planners per year in total were distributed in the Greater Toronto Area and beyond.
Distribution and promotion of the residential 20/20 Planner:
The general public could order a free copy of the 20/20 Planner (Overcoming Specific Barriers) by calling a hotline. 20/20 promoted the hotline through the 20/20 point of contact brochure, advertising in the media electronic bulletin boards, and printed articles in magazines and commuter papers (Mass Media). Participants could also download the Planner from the 20/20 program web site or sign up at 20/20 displays at public events (e.g., Environment Days, Smog Summit Fresh Air Fair, Bike Week, Earth Week, and Clean Air Day).
20/20 encouraged participants to complete and return a feedback form indicating the type of energy use activity they would do , both in a Stage One two-week period and beyond (Building Motivation Over Time) and be entered into a draw for some prizes (Incentives).
On receiving the feedback form, 20/20 sent participants a welcome letter, a window decal, and energy saving plugs/shoelaces/fridge magnet to remind them of their commitment to energy use reduction (Norm Appeals, Prompts).
20/20 workplace program:
20/20 partnered with Green$aver, Pollution Probes S.M.A.R.T. Movement program and the Smart Commute Association to bring energy efficiency to companies across the Greater Toronto Area (Work Programs). Each company that signed up for the program received a welcoming package, filled with information to help the workplace coordinator communicate the program to its employees.
20/20 also worked with the participating workplaces to organize lunch and learn events and education displays where employees could sign up for their free copy of the 20/20 Planner.
20/20 EcoSchools program:
20/20 partnered with the Ontario EcoSchools initiative to bring the 20/20 Planner (revised for student use and called the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner) to teachers and their students. Staff from the regional health units worked with local school boards to invite teachers to participate in the program. 20/20 focused predominantly in Grade 5 classrooms where energy conservation is a curriculum requirement for this grade. 20/20 also encouraged schools in the Greater Toronto Area to tie the 20/20 EcoSchools program to annual environmental events such as Earth Week in April, Clean Air Day in June and International Walk to School month in October.
Incentives for participating schools in the Greater Toronto Area included: 1) monthly pizza lunch prize draw for classroom and, 2) opportunity to win a "clean air" presentation by a Clean Air Champion. Participating classrooms also received a colourful child-focused poster with stickers. Schools that registered a minimum of three classrooms also received an attractive school banner.
Students of the participating classrooms received copies of the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner to take home to their families (School Programs that Involve the Family).A teachers guide was also sent to the teachers outlining instructions for participating, curriculum connections, and additional resources to enhance the 20/20 program in the classroom.
Schools outside of the Greater Toronto Area could also download the 20/20 EcoSchools Planner and the teachers guide from the 20/20 program web site.
20/20 community pilot:
20/20 partnered with local community agencies to deliver the program to selected communities who first language is not English. Participating communities translated 20/20 materials, including part of the 20/20 Planner to different languages, including Spanish, Chinese, Tamil, Punjabi and Arabic. The 20/20 Planner also included energy saving tips for people living in multi-units residences thus expanding the reach of the program (Overcoming Specific Barriers).
Financing the Program
20/20 received funding from the Toronto Atmospheric Fund, the Climate Change Action Fund, Environment Canada Ontario Region, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Ontario Ministry of Energy, TD Friends of the Environment Foundation, and the EcoAction Fund in the development and implementation of the program. Many program partners also provided in kind support throughout the course of the program.
Measuring Achievements
In the spring/summer of 2004, Toronto Public Health conducted a participant survey to assess if program participants used the 20/20 Planner (the programs central resource) to achieve reductions in energy use and to determine the specific actions that they were taking. This information was used to quantify the emissions reductions related to the energy saving activities undertaken by the participants. The study involved two surveys.
Survey #1 targeted program participants who ordered the 20/20 Planner and returned their activity tracking/feedback forms. The main objectives of this survey were to find out whether these individuals had done the longer-term activities to which they committed and, if not, what the barriers to success had been.
Survey #2 targeted program participants who had ordered the 20/20 Planner, but had not sent back their activity forms. The objectives of this survey were to find out why the participants activity tracking/feedback forms were not sent back, and whether they were in fact engaged in the program.
Emissions reductions were calculated based on self-reporting of activities by participants. The amount of emissions reduced for each activity was assigned a value based on models that predicted estimated transportation emissions per passenger per kilometer traveled, and home energy use based on typical housing stock in Canada.
The results of the two surveys were as follow:
•An average of 19% reduction in home energy use per household (20% from participants who returned their feedback forms and 18% from those who did not.)
•An average of 15% reduction in vehicle km traveled per household (13% from participants who returned their feedback forms and 16% from those who did not.)
•An average of 1.2 tonnes emissions reduction (mainly CO2) per household per year (1.3 tonnes from participants who returned their feedback form and 1.1 from those who did not.)
Contacts
Jill McDowell, Health Promotion Consultant
Toronto Public Health
277 Victoria Street, 7th Floor
Toronto, ON M5B 1W2
Phone: 416-392-4882
Fax: 416-392-7418
jmcdowe@toronto.ca
For more information about the 20/20 The Way to Clean Air, call the 20/20 hotline at 416-392-2020 (toll-free 1-866-583-2020) or visit the program web site at www.toronto.ca/health/2020
For step-by step instructions in using each of the tools noted above, to review our FULL collection of over 90 social marketing case studies, or to suggest a new case study, go to www.toolsofchange.com
Notes
Concluding Thoughts
•Partnerships were key to the success of 20/20 The Way to Clean Air. Linking with strong programs in the schools (such as EcoSchools), transportation partners in the workplace (S.M.A.R.T. Movement), and on-the-ground community groups, enabled the campaign to reach a diversity of families with meaningful messages.
•Involvement of neighbouring health units brought credibility to the campaign that helped 20/20 build trust with the communities and residents in the region.
•Offering households the flexibility to choose the level of participation helped the campaign evolve into one that reached a variety of families with difference economic and cultural backgrounds.
•Behaviour change is incremental and happens over time. Contributions (from smallest to largest) of each participating household add up over the years into meaningful emissions reductions on a collective level.
Action By Canadians / Count Me In
The Action By Canadians (ABC) and Count Me In! programs were designed to communicate the issue of climate change to the Canadian public through workshops delivered to individuals at their place of work. The climate change workshop focused on action by providing participants, at the end of the workshop, an opportunity to make a commitment to reduce greenhouse gases by adopting specific measures in their personal lives. By October 2000, over 3,500 Canadians had participated in these workshops. The Ontario Society of Training and Development awarded the ABC program with the Best External Training Program Award.
Background
In 1997, Enviros RIS carried out initial research on finding the "Blue Box of Climate Change". The goal was to find a simple action which individuals could take which would raise awareness of climate change, and change behaviour in a way which would contribute to the solution. Finding a simple icon like the Blue Box is more challenging for climate change, because the issue is more complex, and more difficult to explain to the public.
The company developed a climate change workshop, designed to be delivered to Canadians at their workplace. The purpose of the workshop was to raise awareness of the climate change issue amongst Canadians, and also to initiate individual action to limit greenhouse gas emissions. A National Pledge Program was envisioned at the time, whereby individuals pledge to make several changes in their own lives (at home and on the road) to decrease greenhouse gases.
In December, 1998, the Office of Energy Efficiency at NRCan, endorsed an Enviros RIS submission made to the Climate Change Action Fund (CCAF) to test the climate change workshop at 30 locations (15 energy innovator companies, 10 government offices, 5 small to medium sized companies), and identify the impacts of the program. A second CCAF funded project initiated by the Energy Council of Canada- the Action By Canadians (ABC) program- also aimed to deliver workshops at the workplace. Companies who participated in the ABC program offered the workshop as one component of a more comprehensive climate change strategy.
Over 175 workshops were delivered to more than 3,500 Canadians across Canada.
Getting Informed
In 1998, Environment Canada funded a feasibility study on the concept of employee based training, incorporating the idea of a National Pledge Program. Enviros RIS staff interviewed 25 senior executives at companies across Canada to test the concept, as it was essential that the program have private sector support. The interviews identified a short, 2-hour workshop as the best method to access Canadians and raise awareness on the climate change issue. The endorsement of the employer was considered an important message to give to employees.
The workshop was pilot tested at Sorema Reinsurance Company in Toronto in October 1998. The feedback was extremely positive and according to the workshop evaluation, 93% of the workshop participants felt their knowledge of the issue was increased. Six months after the first pilot test, a follow-up survey was distributed to participants. Over 70% of survey respondents said they had followed through with some of their climate change pledges. Workshop participants reported that they made a number of changes as a result of the workshop such as turning lights off, driving less, lowering night time temperatures in their homes, installing low flow showerheads and re-insulating their homes, etc.
The feasibility study and pilot workshop both supported the idea that employee based training was an effective way to reach out to Canadians on the climate change issue and promote action. At that time, this was the first program of its kind in North America.
Delivering the Program
Workshop description
The climate change workshop was a one and a half or two- hour interactive workshop focused on developing awareness and understanding of climate change, and the actions which individuals could take to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions. The workshop was designed by professional adult educators and applied the principles of adult education. Some key principles used in the design included: adults learn by doing (as opposed to passively listening or watching) and there are differing learning styles. Lengthy lecture segments were also avoided.
The training program has the following key features:
•An introductory lecture on the science of climate change.
A compelling mini-lecture created a need to know around the issue of climate change. The lecture covered the primary causes and projected impacts of climate change. After the lecture, participants better understood the issue and its importance, and felt compelled to learn what they could do about the issue. (Building Motivation Over Time)
•A group activity that highlights what can be done.
Participants played a game that allowed them to actively evaluate and then choose the most energy saving measures based on the relative ease or difficulty of implementation, and the relative amount of energy savings. This creative learning activity exposed participants to more than 30 energy efficient measures in an enjoyable game format that was much more likely to lead to retention of the information than simply lecturing about energy saving measures.
•A lecture and facilitated discussion about how we can all make a difference.
This section embodied an inspirational message intended to illustrate that it is possible for individuals to collectively make a difference and contribute to adoption of new social norms (Norm Appeals). The facilitated discussion encouraged participants to reflect on their own experience and report examples of issues where they have witnessed changing social norms (drinking & driving, smoking at the workplace, etc).
•An opportunity for participants to commit to energy efficient actions.
Participants were encouraged to undertake small, realistic actions, appropriate for their own circumstances, which would start them on the road to increased energy efficiency. Completing and signing the voluntary pledge (part of a national Pledge Program) was a subtle, yet definite kind of commitment (Obtaining a Commitment) increasing the chance that participants would actually adopt one or more actions.
(See Count Me In! pledge at the end of this report)
•Post workshop monitoring and reinforcement.
To assist participants with retaining the workshop information and motivating action, a follow-up prompt was delivered by fax, mail or email to all workshop participants. The prompt reported the estimated GHG savings for the program to date (Feedback) and reminded the participants of their individual workshop pledges (Prompts). The monitoring program provided the opportunity for participants to report back on their achievements (e.g. "yes I did install a low-flow showerhead) and calculated the estimated GHG savings for the completed actions.
The following list presents top 10 activities that participants reported having achieved after the workshop.
Top 10 Achieved Activities Reported
•Turn off lights when not in use
•Reduce speed
•Recycle more
•Reduce idling
•Install low flow equipment
•Keep tires fully inflated
•Run dishwasher only when full
•Turn off computer at night
•Fix leaky faucet
•Ride bike or walk
Workshop Marketing
The first step in marketing the workshops was to identify the companies and government offices that would agree to have it delivered to their employees. For ABC, the Energy Council of Canada (ECC) approached member companies that were interested in becoming sponsors of the ABC program- both financially and by providing staff support to promote the program internally. Fourteen ECC companies chose to become sponsors. Each of these companies committed to deliver a series of workshops to their employees (from 10 to 20 workshops per company) as part of a broader, more comprehensive strategy on climate change. Each company spent a considerable amount of effort to determine how to best fit the workshops fit in to their own workplace and in promoting / organizing the workshops. (Work Programs that Influence the Home)
The Count Me In! program marketed the workshop to individual companies with the intent of delivering the workshop to 30 different companies and offices. Over 120 companies and government offices were contacted in order to identify 31 Count Me In! work locations.
Workshops were delivered at companies and locations which included Shell, Dofasco, Syncrude, Ontario Power Generation, IBM, Enbridge, Dupont Canada and the City of Toronto. The companies approached were typically those who felt climate change was a serious concern and were willing to take some sort of action. Through the ABC or Count Me In! in-reach programs, companies were able to increase employee awareness, promote action and send a strong message to their staff and customers that they take climate change seriously. ABC has also been piloting the workshop in communities as outreach efforts, to extend the program beyond internal company training.
Workshop Delivery
Between May of 1999 and October 2000, over 175 workshops were delivered to over 45 different companies and government offices across Canada. The target audience was Canadians who did not have an extensive background on climate change. More than 3,500 people participated in the workshop including office employees, CEOs and VPs, plant workers and field crew. Regardless of the audience or the company, the workshop was very well received. The workshop was modified based on comments and feedback received from the pilot phase and early workshop deliveries. The workshop and workshop tools were also modified regionally to take into account each regions circumstances and source of energy (i.e. greenhouse gas generation is dependent on the type of energy source such as hydroelectric, nuclear, coal, etc.)
Measuring Achievements
The following components of the program evaluation strategy were intended to measure the impact of the workshops. Evaluation was ongoing.
•Pre- and post- workshop survey
Participants completed a the same survey immediately prior to and following the workshop. These surveys asked participants basic knowledge and awareness questions about climate change and energy efficiency. These tests were designed to assess the change in participants knowledge and awareness of climate change and energy efficiency as a result workshop attendance.
•Post- workshop evaluation
At the end of the workshop, participants also completed an evaluation form that assessed participants' reaction to the workshop.
•Pledge- and follow up- monitoring
Participants were invited to complete a voluntary pledge form at the workshop, committing themselves to one or several specific actions to reduce their personal energy consumption. The pledge was on NCR (no carbon required) paper to allow participants to keep one copy for themselves, while leaving the other copy with trainers for follow-up purposes. Following the workshop, pledges were entered into a database which tallied the estimated greenhouse gas emissions (kg and tonnes) pledged to be saved or reduced.
Follow-up & Monitoring Program
The ABC program developed and designed a follow-up and monitoring program to track longer term behaviour changes as a result of the workshop and to encourage further action. Data collected during the workshop delivery (e.g. participant name, email, evaluation form and pledges) were entered into a sophisticated program designed using Microsoft Access.
Two and six months after the workshop delivery, each participant was contacted by email. The email message reported the progress of the program and asked the participants to click on a personalized website address where they could report what pledged activities they had completed. The hotlink greeted participants by name and reminded them about what actions they had pledged to do at the workshop. The interactive website urged participants to answer a series of questions relating to their pledged actions and calculated the amount of greenhouse gas emissions saved as a result of their achieved actions to date. This site also included a survey that queried participants on the changes to their attitudes and behaviour as a result of the workshop. Those without email received a letter through mail or fax requesting participants to complete a hard copy of the pledge and fax back, the returned forms were also entered into the database.
The Access database was designed to track the actions that participants pledged to do, the actions they completed, and the estimated GHG savings of those actions. Workshop summary reports were also produced which included data such as the amount of greenhouse gases saved, the follow-up response rate, change in awareness or behaviour, etc. These reports could be produced on a program basis (ABC or Count Me In!), or by company, province or individual workshop. The individual workshop and company reports were provided to the company contact who could communicate the results to employees through newsletters, intranet sites, posters and/or company meetings.
Results
Workshop trainers delivered over 175 workshops to over 3,500 participants between May 1999 and August 2000. Participants pledged to decrease an estimated 5,990 tonnes of greenhouse gases each year, an average of 2 tonnes/per participant that completed a pledge form. The top 5 actions pledged include:
•Keep tires fully inflated (1,302 pledges)
•Turn off lights when not in use (1,188 pledges)
•Recycle more (1,154 pledges)
•Reduce speed (1,006 pledges)
•Reduce idling (879 pledges)
The workshops also proved successful in terms of raising awareness and providing new energy efficient ideas to workshop participants. The workshop duration was considered appropriate.
There was also a change in awareness following the workshop. Participants prior to the workshop scored an average of 81% on the presurvey, but immediately following the workshop, participants scored 89% on the same survey questions.
Two months after the workshop, almost 30% of participants responded to the follow up request, and reported back on the actions they had completed as a result of the workshop. Of those that reported, a total of 1,333 tonnes of greenhouse gases were saved/year, for a total of over 2,300 kgs per person that reported.
A number of participants also completed the awareness survey on the ABC and Count Me In! Websites. Six to eight weeks after the workshop, participants reported the following:
•83% were more aware of climate change;
•90% were more aware of personal energy use;
•44% were more aware of TV programs on climate change;
•62% were more aware of articles in the newspaper and magazines about climate change;
•45% reported that they had attempted to take public transit since they participated in the workshop.
A second follow-up letter was also sent to a sample of participants that had email. Between the two follow-up programs, more than 40% of the workshop participants reported that they took specific action as a result of the workshop.
Contacts
Maria Kelleher
RIS International
Toronto, Ontario
Tel: 416-482-7007
Notes
Last updated: July 2004
Click for Advanced Search »
My Account [ Log Out ]
My Plans
Ivete's Plan
Save Your Project
Help
Terms of Use
This site is brought to you through
the vision and generosity of:
Primary Sponsors
Supporting Sponsors
Background
In 1997, Enviros RIS carried out initial research on finding the "Blue Box of Climate Change". The goal was to find a simple action which individuals could take which would raise awareness of climate change, and change behaviour in a way which would contribute to the solution. Finding a simple icon like the Blue Box is more challenging for climate change, because the issue is more complex, and more difficult to explain to the public.
The company developed a climate change workshop, designed to be delivered to Canadians at their workplace. The purpose of the workshop was to raise awareness of the climate change issue amongst Canadians, and also to initiate individual action to limit greenhouse gas emissions. A National Pledge Program was envisioned at the time, whereby individuals pledge to make several changes in their own lives (at home and on the road) to decrease greenhouse gases.
In December, 1998, the Office of Energy Efficiency at NRCan, endorsed an Enviros RIS submission made to the Climate Change Action Fund (CCAF) to test the climate change workshop at 30 locations (15 energy innovator companies, 10 government offices, 5 small to medium sized companies), and identify the impacts of the program. A second CCAF funded project initiated by the Energy Council of Canada- the Action By Canadians (ABC) program- also aimed to deliver workshops at the workplace. Companies who participated in the ABC program offered the workshop as one component of a more comprehensive climate change strategy.
Over 175 workshops were delivered to more than 3,500 Canadians across Canada.
Getting Informed
In 1998, Environment Canada funded a feasibility study on the concept of employee based training, incorporating the idea of a National Pledge Program. Enviros RIS staff interviewed 25 senior executives at companies across Canada to test the concept, as it was essential that the program have private sector support. The interviews identified a short, 2-hour workshop as the best method to access Canadians and raise awareness on the climate change issue. The endorsement of the employer was considered an important message to give to employees.
The workshop was pilot tested at Sorema Reinsurance Company in Toronto in October 1998. The feedback was extremely positive and according to the workshop evaluation, 93% of the workshop participants felt their knowledge of the issue was increased. Six months after the first pilot test, a follow-up survey was distributed to participants. Over 70% of survey respondents said they had followed through with some of their climate change pledges. Workshop participants reported that they made a number of changes as a result of the workshop such as turning lights off, driving less, lowering night time temperatures in their homes, installing low flow showerheads and re-insulating their homes, etc.
The feasibility study and pilot workshop both supported the idea that employee based training was an effective way to reach out to Canadians on the climate change issue and promote action. At that time, this was the first program of its kind in North America.
Delivering the Program
Workshop description
The climate change workshop was a one and a half or two- hour interactive workshop focused on developing awareness and understanding of climate change, and the actions which individuals could take to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions. The workshop was designed by professional adult educators and applied the principles of adult education. Some key principles used in the design included: adults learn by doing (as opposed to passively listening or watching) and there are differing learning styles. Lengthy lecture segments were also avoided.
The training program has the following key features:
•An introductory lecture on the science of climate change.
A compelling mini-lecture created a need to know around the issue of climate change. The lecture covered the primary causes and projected impacts of climate change. After the lecture, participants better understood the issue and its importance, and felt compelled to learn what they could do about the issue. (Building Motivation Over Time)
•A group activity that highlights what can be done.
Participants played a game that allowed them to actively evaluate and then choose the most energy saving measures based on the relative ease or difficulty of implementation, and the relative amount of energy savings. This creative learning activity exposed participants to more than 30 energy efficient measures in an enjoyable game format that was much more likely to lead to retention of the information than simply lecturing about energy saving measures.
•A lecture and facilitated discussion about how we can all make a difference.
This section embodied an inspirational message intended to illustrate that it is possible for individuals to collectively make a difference and contribute to adoption of new social norms (Norm Appeals). The facilitated discussion encouraged participants to reflect on their own experience and report examples of issues where they have witnessed changing social norms (drinking & driving, smoking at the workplace, etc).
•An opportunity for participants to commit to energy efficient actions.
Participants were encouraged to undertake small, realistic actions, appropriate for their own circumstances, which would start them on the road to increased energy efficiency. Completing and signing the voluntary pledge (part of a national Pledge Program) was a subtle, yet definite kind of commitment (Obtaining a Commitment) increasing the chance that participants would actually adopt one or more actions.
(See Count Me In! pledge at the end of this report)
•Post workshop monitoring and reinforcement.
To assist participants with retaining the workshop information and motivating action, a follow-up prompt was delivered by fax, mail or email to all workshop participants. The prompt reported the estimated GHG savings for the program to date (Feedback) and reminded the participants of their individual workshop pledges (Prompts). The monitoring program provided the opportunity for participants to report back on their achievements (e.g. "yes I did install a low-flow showerhead) and calculated the estimated GHG savings for the completed actions.
The following list presents top 10 activities that participants reported having achieved after the workshop.
Top 10 Achieved Activities Reported
•Turn off lights when not in use
•Reduce speed
•Recycle more
•Reduce idling
•Install low flow equipment
•Keep tires fully inflated
•Run dishwasher only when full
•Turn off computer at night
•Fix leaky faucet
•Ride bike or walk
Workshop Marketing
The first step in marketing the workshops was to identify the companies and government offices that would agree to have it delivered to their employees. For ABC, the Energy Council of Canada (ECC) approached member companies that were interested in becoming sponsors of the ABC program- both financially and by providing staff support to promote the program internally. Fourteen ECC companies chose to become sponsors. Each of these companies committed to deliver a series of workshops to their employees (from 10 to 20 workshops per company) as part of a broader, more comprehensive strategy on climate change. Each company spent a considerable amount of effort to determine how to best fit the workshops fit in to their own workplace and in promoting / organizing the workshops. (Work Programs that Influence the Home)
The Count Me In! program marketed the workshop to individual companies with the intent of delivering the workshop to 30 different companies and offices. Over 120 companies and government offices were contacted in order to identify 31 Count Me In! work locations.
Workshops were delivered at companies and locations which included Shell, Dofasco, Syncrude, Ontario Power Generation, IBM, Enbridge, Dupont Canada and the City of Toronto. The companies approached were typically those who felt climate change was a serious concern and were willing to take some sort of action. Through the ABC or Count Me In! in-reach programs, companies were able to increase employee awareness, promote action and send a strong message to their staff and customers that they take climate change seriously. ABC has also been piloting the workshop in communities as outreach efforts, to extend the program beyond internal company training.
Workshop Delivery
Between May of 1999 and October 2000, over 175 workshops were delivered to over 45 different companies and government offices across Canada. The target audience was Canadians who did not have an extensive background on climate change. More than 3,500 people participated in the workshop including office employees, CEOs and VPs, plant workers and field crew. Regardless of the audience or the company, the workshop was very well received. The workshop was modified based on comments and feedback received from the pilot phase and early workshop deliveries. The workshop and workshop tools were also modified regionally to take into account each regions circumstances and source of energy (i.e. greenhouse gas generation is dependent on the type of energy source such as hydroelectric, nuclear, coal, etc.)
Measuring Achievements
The following components of the program evaluation strategy were intended to measure the impact of the workshops. Evaluation was ongoing.
•Pre- and post- workshop survey
Participants completed a the same survey immediately prior to and following the workshop. These surveys asked participants basic knowledge and awareness questions about climate change and energy efficiency. These tests were designed to assess the change in participants knowledge and awareness of climate change and energy efficiency as a result workshop attendance.
•Post- workshop evaluation
At the end of the workshop, participants also completed an evaluation form that assessed participants' reaction to the workshop.
•Pledge- and follow up- monitoring
Participants were invited to complete a voluntary pledge form at the workshop, committing themselves to one or several specific actions to reduce their personal energy consumption. The pledge was on NCR (no carbon required) paper to allow participants to keep one copy for themselves, while leaving the other copy with trainers for follow-up purposes. Following the workshop, pledges were entered into a database which tallied the estimated greenhouse gas emissions (kg and tonnes) pledged to be saved or reduced.
Follow-up & Monitoring Program
The ABC program developed and designed a follow-up and monitoring program to track longer term behaviour changes as a result of the workshop and to encourage further action. Data collected during the workshop delivery (e.g. participant name, email, evaluation form and pledges) were entered into a sophisticated program designed using Microsoft Access.
Two and six months after the workshop delivery, each participant was contacted by email. The email message reported the progress of the program and asked the participants to click on a personalized website address where they could report what pledged activities they had completed. The hotlink greeted participants by name and reminded them about what actions they had pledged to do at the workshop. The interactive website urged participants to answer a series of questions relating to their pledged actions and calculated the amount of greenhouse gas emissions saved as a result of their achieved actions to date. This site also included a survey that queried participants on the changes to their attitudes and behaviour as a result of the workshop. Those without email received a letter through mail or fax requesting participants to complete a hard copy of the pledge and fax back, the returned forms were also entered into the database.
The Access database was designed to track the actions that participants pledged to do, the actions they completed, and the estimated GHG savings of those actions. Workshop summary reports were also produced which included data such as the amount of greenhouse gases saved, the follow-up response rate, change in awareness or behaviour, etc. These reports could be produced on a program basis (ABC or Count Me In!), or by company, province or individual workshop. The individual workshop and company reports were provided to the company contact who could communicate the results to employees through newsletters, intranet sites, posters and/or company meetings.
Results
Workshop trainers delivered over 175 workshops to over 3,500 participants between May 1999 and August 2000. Participants pledged to decrease an estimated 5,990 tonnes of greenhouse gases each year, an average of 2 tonnes/per participant that completed a pledge form. The top 5 actions pledged include:
•Keep tires fully inflated (1,302 pledges)
•Turn off lights when not in use (1,188 pledges)
•Recycle more (1,154 pledges)
•Reduce speed (1,006 pledges)
•Reduce idling (879 pledges)
The workshops also proved successful in terms of raising awareness and providing new energy efficient ideas to workshop participants. The workshop duration was considered appropriate.
There was also a change in awareness following the workshop. Participants prior to the workshop scored an average of 81% on the presurvey, but immediately following the workshop, participants scored 89% on the same survey questions.
Two months after the workshop, almost 30% of participants responded to the follow up request, and reported back on the actions they had completed as a result of the workshop. Of those that reported, a total of 1,333 tonnes of greenhouse gases were saved/year, for a total of over 2,300 kgs per person that reported.
A number of participants also completed the awareness survey on the ABC and Count Me In! Websites. Six to eight weeks after the workshop, participants reported the following:
•83% were more aware of climate change;
•90% were more aware of personal energy use;
•44% were more aware of TV programs on climate change;
•62% were more aware of articles in the newspaper and magazines about climate change;
•45% reported that they had attempted to take public transit since they participated in the workshop.
A second follow-up letter was also sent to a sample of participants that had email. Between the two follow-up programs, more than 40% of the workshop participants reported that they took specific action as a result of the workshop.
Contacts
Maria Kelleher
RIS International
Toronto, Ontario
Tel: 416-482-7007
Notes
Last updated: July 2004
Click for Advanced Search »
My Account [ Log Out ]
My Plans
Ivete's Plan
Save Your Project
Help
Terms of Use
This site is brought to you through
the vision and generosity of:
Primary Sponsors
Supporting Sponsors
American Legacy Foundation - truth campaign
Launched in February 2000, truth® is a national youth smoking prevention campaign from the American Legacy Foundation®, a national public health foundation based in Washington, DC, devoted to tobacco use prevention and cessation. truth® is the only national campaign in the United States not directed by the tobacco industry. The objective of the campaign is to change social norms and reduce youth smoking. Youth aged 12 to 17 years are the primary focus of the campaign. The campaign is produced by the American Legacy Foundation and its advertising partners, Arnold Worldwide (Boston, MA) and Crispin, Porter + Bogusky (Miami, FL).
Background:
About 80 percent of smokers begin using tobacco before the age of 18. Each day, about 2000 kids try smoking for the first time. For many, it becomes an addiction that can lead to a life of disease and tobacco-related death.
truth® directly counters messages from the tobacco company brands, which spent more than US$15.1 billion in 2003 to market their products in the U.S. alone. When the campaign was created, the American Legacy Foundation and its partners realized truth® could never match that level of spending, so instead they aimed to create a campaign that would stay ahead by breaking through with teens and being more “cutting edge.”
Campaign Philosophy:
The truth® campaign exposes the tactics of the tobacco industry, the truth about addiction, and the health effects and social consequences of smoking - allowing teens to make informed choices about tobacco use by giving them the facts about the industry and its products. It is designed to engage teens by exposing Big Tobacco’s marketing and manufacturing practices, as well as highlighting the toll of tobacco in relevant and innovative ways.
The teenage years are a time of transition into adulthood and a quest for control. For some teens, tobacco use can fulfill some of the innate adolescent needs to rebel; truth® seeks to be an alternative way to meet those needs. The campaign stresses peer-to-peer communication, as teens don’t like to be preached at or talked down to.
The campaign uses research with teen audiences, marketing and social science research, and evidence from the most successful anti-tobacco campaigns to inform its strategies.
The truth® campaign also uses actual tobacco industry documents that were made public after the Master Settlement Agreement. The documents are used to find the facts teens see in truth® ads and on the truth® Web site.
Delivering the Program:
truth® is a multi-dimensional campaign involving:
- advertising (television, radio and print)
- a Web site and interactive communications
- grassroots outreach through summer and winter tours
- “gear” – wearable and cool products like t-shirts, I-Pod socks, and other items reflecting the brand and subtly raising attention to the tobacco issue
- Earned media – an extensive media relations program to place related stories in youth media, and raise attention in adult media to the issue and to the campaign’s award-winning work.
truth® ads are known for being “in-your-face”, hard-hitting and even humorous, because teens respond to up-front and powerful messages that display courage and honesty in a forceful way. In addition, teens are involved in testing all truth® advertising concepts and provide suggestions and feedback through the truth® Web site.
The truth® campaign places its ads in the media teens look at, listen to, and read, including on television networks popular with teens like MTV, BET, Comedy Central, and Spike, and in magazines like Vibe and Cosmogirl. truth® also has a prominent presence on the Internet with a highly interactive and relevant-to-teens Web site, www.thetruth.com, that allows teens to engage with truth® on their own terms.
A summer tour travels across the country, allowing teens to engage first-hand with the campaign. State of the art truth® “trucks” rigged with DJ decks, video monitors and gaming systems allow teens to speak and interact firsthand with truth® “crew members” at popular events where teens gather. Each tour stop features impromptu rap sessions, join-in freestyle demos and giveaways of popular truth® “gear” such as hats, flip flops, wallets and t-shirts.
Results:
Research has found that the truth® campaign accelerated the decline in youth smoking rates between 2000 - 2002.
Twenty-two percent of the overall decline in youth smoking during these years is attributable directly to the truth® campaign, according to research published in the March 2005 issue of the American Journal of Public Health. The study, which was the first to evaluate the behavioral outcomes of the truth® campaign, found that in 2002 there were approximately 300,000 fewer youth smokers as a result of truth®. The study assessed whether there is a “dose-response” relationship between the level of exposure to the campaign and changes in youth smoking rates during the first two years of the campaign, 2000 - 2002. Results showed that youth who were exposed to a greater number of truth® ads - or those who got a “dose” of truth® - were less likely to smoke.
In November 2003, the American Legacy Foundation® released the results of the 2002 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS 2002). This study, conducted by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that smoking had decreased by 18 percent among high school students since the last survey was conducted in 2000. Smoking rates among high school students were at the lowest rate in 28 years and truth® was a factor in the decline.
Results from the 2002 “Monitoring the Future” survey showed declines in smoking rates among 8th, 10th, and 12th graders and cited the truth® campaign as one of the reasons for this public health victory. The Monitoring the Future study, conducted annually, is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and conducted by the University of Michigan.
In addition, the campaign has been lauded by leading Federal and state public health officials, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and former President George Bush. The campaign has won more than 500 awards for advertising efficacy.
Contact:
Patricia McLaughlin
Senior Director of Communications
American Legacy Foundation
2030 M Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
(tel) 202-454-5555
pmclaughlin@americanlegacy.org
Background:
About 80 percent of smokers begin using tobacco before the age of 18. Each day, about 2000 kids try smoking for the first time. For many, it becomes an addiction that can lead to a life of disease and tobacco-related death.
truth® directly counters messages from the tobacco company brands, which spent more than US$15.1 billion in 2003 to market their products in the U.S. alone. When the campaign was created, the American Legacy Foundation and its partners realized truth® could never match that level of spending, so instead they aimed to create a campaign that would stay ahead by breaking through with teens and being more “cutting edge.”
Campaign Philosophy:
The truth® campaign exposes the tactics of the tobacco industry, the truth about addiction, and the health effects and social consequences of smoking - allowing teens to make informed choices about tobacco use by giving them the facts about the industry and its products. It is designed to engage teens by exposing Big Tobacco’s marketing and manufacturing practices, as well as highlighting the toll of tobacco in relevant and innovative ways.
The teenage years are a time of transition into adulthood and a quest for control. For some teens, tobacco use can fulfill some of the innate adolescent needs to rebel; truth® seeks to be an alternative way to meet those needs. The campaign stresses peer-to-peer communication, as teens don’t like to be preached at or talked down to.
The campaign uses research with teen audiences, marketing and social science research, and evidence from the most successful anti-tobacco campaigns to inform its strategies.
The truth® campaign also uses actual tobacco industry documents that were made public after the Master Settlement Agreement. The documents are used to find the facts teens see in truth® ads and on the truth® Web site.
Delivering the Program:
truth® is a multi-dimensional campaign involving:
- advertising (television, radio and print)
- a Web site and interactive communications
- grassroots outreach through summer and winter tours
- “gear” – wearable and cool products like t-shirts, I-Pod socks, and other items reflecting the brand and subtly raising attention to the tobacco issue
- Earned media – an extensive media relations program to place related stories in youth media, and raise attention in adult media to the issue and to the campaign’s award-winning work.
truth® ads are known for being “in-your-face”, hard-hitting and even humorous, because teens respond to up-front and powerful messages that display courage and honesty in a forceful way. In addition, teens are involved in testing all truth® advertising concepts and provide suggestions and feedback through the truth® Web site.
The truth® campaign places its ads in the media teens look at, listen to, and read, including on television networks popular with teens like MTV, BET, Comedy Central, and Spike, and in magazines like Vibe and Cosmogirl. truth® also has a prominent presence on the Internet with a highly interactive and relevant-to-teens Web site, www.thetruth.com, that allows teens to engage with truth® on their own terms.
A summer tour travels across the country, allowing teens to engage first-hand with the campaign. State of the art truth® “trucks” rigged with DJ decks, video monitors and gaming systems allow teens to speak and interact firsthand with truth® “crew members” at popular events where teens gather. Each tour stop features impromptu rap sessions, join-in freestyle demos and giveaways of popular truth® “gear” such as hats, flip flops, wallets and t-shirts.
Results:
Research has found that the truth® campaign accelerated the decline in youth smoking rates between 2000 - 2002.
Twenty-two percent of the overall decline in youth smoking during these years is attributable directly to the truth® campaign, according to research published in the March 2005 issue of the American Journal of Public Health. The study, which was the first to evaluate the behavioral outcomes of the truth® campaign, found that in 2002 there were approximately 300,000 fewer youth smokers as a result of truth®. The study assessed whether there is a “dose-response” relationship between the level of exposure to the campaign and changes in youth smoking rates during the first two years of the campaign, 2000 - 2002. Results showed that youth who were exposed to a greater number of truth® ads - or those who got a “dose” of truth® - were less likely to smoke.
In November 2003, the American Legacy Foundation® released the results of the 2002 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS 2002). This study, conducted by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that smoking had decreased by 18 percent among high school students since the last survey was conducted in 2000. Smoking rates among high school students were at the lowest rate in 28 years and truth® was a factor in the decline.
Results from the 2002 “Monitoring the Future” survey showed declines in smoking rates among 8th, 10th, and 12th graders and cited the truth® campaign as one of the reasons for this public health victory. The Monitoring the Future study, conducted annually, is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and conducted by the University of Michigan.
In addition, the campaign has been lauded by leading Federal and state public health officials, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and former President George Bush. The campaign has won more than 500 awards for advertising efficacy.
Contact:
Patricia McLaughlin
Senior Director of Communications
American Legacy Foundation
2030 M Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
(tel) 202-454-5555
pmclaughlin@americanlegacy.org
Århus Bike Bus'ters
Over a one-year period more than 150 people in the City of Århus, Denmark were actively encouraged to use bicycles or public transit for their daily commute. One of the goals of Bike Busters was to assess the extent to which motorists would switch to sustainable means of transportation.
Background
With a population of 300,000, Århus is Denmark's second largest city. In 1994, the Municipality of Århus adopted a plan to reduce the use of individual motor vehicles and increase the use of sustainable transportation. Part of their plan was the Bike Busters program, which ran from April 1995 to April 1996.
Bike Busters initially focused on the use of bicycles only. Due to the interest and support of Århus's public transit provider, Århus Sporveje, however, the project included both bicycles and public transit. This increased the choice of transportation for participants, and broadened the focus of the program.
The prospects for successfully encouraging the use of sustainable transportation were considered very good since Århus already had a well-developed network of bicycle paths and most residents lived within cycling distance of the city centre. Nevertheless, previous campaigns had not been successful in convincing people to cycle to work. The aim of Bike Busters was to change the general perception of cycling and make it more attractive.
Getting Informed
Two different approaches to changing behaviour were considered before the program was implemented. One would have been to use disincentives, such as high fuel prices or car tolls, as a method of changing behaviour. The other approach was to encourage sustainable transportation using commitments and financial incentives. The latter method was chosen.
Survey results showed that, of 100,000 daily round trips, 10,000 were made by bicycle and 20,000 by public transit. The remaining 70,000 were car trips, indicating a great potential for the increased use of bikes and buses.
Researchers with the Traffic Research Group at Åalborg University selected the participants, and found that, in interviews conducted prior to the start of the program, 93% of participants expected their health to improve as a result of Bike Busters.
Delivering the Program
A recruitment campaign was the first step in delivering the program. Information was distributed through the local media, large work places, libraries and other appropriate institutions. The municipality sent out news releases and advertised in newspapers, which helped gain media coverage (Mass Media).
With the help of local police, pamphlets were handed out to motorists for three days on three major roads. The pamphlets described the program and enticed the public with the headline Would you like a brand new bicycle and a free bus pass? Seventeen hundred drivers who received these pamphlets returned the reply coupon indicating their interest in participating in the program.
Of those 1700 people, Åalborg University's Traffic Research Group selected 175 people to participate. Potential participants were selected based on the following criteria:
•They had to be regular, round trip drivers who worked in central Århus
•They had to live within two to eight kilometres from the city centre (cycling as an alternative to driving was considered suitable within this range).
The selected participants were between 30 and 50 years of age with a household income of between 400,000 and 600,000 Danish Crowns (approximately $96,000 to $144,000 CAD at the time), although income level was not a selection requirement. Because of considerably fewer applications from women, only 38% of the participants were female.
Participants signed a contract, which committed them to reducing their car use as much as possible and using cycling or public transit instead (Obtaining a Commitment). Participants also filled out questionnaires and driving logbooks before, during and after the project.
Participants were given a bicycle for the one-year test period (worth 4,000 Danish Crowns), with the option to purchase it at a reduced rate (1,000 Danish Crowns) at the end of the year. In addition, participants were given a bus pass worth 5,000 Danish Crowns (Financial Incentives). All participants received a free health check testing their weight, blood pressure, cholesterol level and general fitness. The health check was sponsored and performed by the Danish Heart Association. Other sponsors included Aage Kroll A/S, which supplied cycle computers, Basts Lasefabrik, which donated cycle lamps, and Viking Rubber Company, which supplied rain clothes. The cycling equipment and bus passes encouraged the participants to try cycling or public transit (Overcoming Specific Barriers).
An opening ceremony on rhus Town Square was held where participants were given their bicycles. They all rode an inaugural lap of the town, making the project a visible public event (Norm Appeals). A Bike Buster secretariat with two staff members was set up for the period, and every two months they published Cykel & Buster, a magazine that featured encouraging articles, participants observations, and preliminary research findings.
Financing the Program
The overall costs of the project were three million Danish Crowns. The Danish Transport Council financed the Traffic Research Group with one million Crowns, while the Municipality of Århus and the Danish Environmental Protection Agency sponsored the actual project with one million Danish Crowns each. A detailed budget is provided in the table below.
Costs DKK CAD
Research 1,000,000 240,000
Bus tickets 600,000 144,000
Bicycles, equipment 600,000 144,000
Secretariat 300,000 72,000
Marketing 250,000 60,000
Social events, etc. 250,000 60,000
Total 3,000,000 720,000
Revenues DKK CAD
Danish Transport Council 1,000,000 240,000
Danish Environmental Protection Agency 1,000,000 240,000
Municipality of rhus 1,000,000 240,000
Total 3,000,000 720,000
Measuring Achievements
Evaluation was based on four measures:
•During the year each participant filled in a printed kilometre report that recorded the reading of their cars odometer and the cycle computer, as well as the number of trips used on the bus punch tickets on a fixed day of the week. Reporting of the kilometre measuring was done three times over the course of the project.
•Participants filled in a logbook at the end of April, in mid-February, mid-September and finally in May 1997, after the project had finished. The aim was to show changes in the traveling patterns and the choice of transport during the project period. This applied especially to the extent to which car trips were replaced by cycling and bus trips.
•During interviews participants were asked to identify and comment on the importance of a number of obstacles to using a bicycle or bus for commuting.
•Health checks were performed at the beginning of the project, at six months, and again at the end of the one-year period.
Results
On average, participants cycled 30.7 kilometres per week (1,600 kilometres per year), three times the Danish average. The range of kilometres cycled varied among participants. For example, the top cyclist rode over 109 kilometres a week, while the shortest average distance covered by bicycle per week was 2.4 kilometres. The average distance driven by car was 14,000 kilometres a year, still much higher than the average distance covered by bicycle, but lower than the national average. This number is skewed, however, because the car, which had been the participants primary mode of transportation for commuting, was freed up for use by other family members.
More than 70% of commuter trips, and more than half of all trips combined, were made by bicycle. In the winter this dropped to 35% of commuter trips and less than 30% of all trips combined. After the project ended, 56% of commuter trips and more than 40% of all trips were still made by cycling. Prior to Bike Busters, those numbers were eleven and nine percent respectively. In other words, after the one-year test period most participants made their change a permanent one and still cycled to work.
Although the free bus passes were not well used during the summer, over the course of the year, participants used the bus for 1.3 trips per year, which corresponded to the national average. The bus gained popularity during the winter, but only 23% of all trips to and from work and 16% of all trips were made by bus. Research showed that bus use had not increased in the long run. After the projects completion, the proportion of bus trips fell back to its original level before the one-year period. One reason that using the bus did not develop in the same way as the bicycle is that once the project was completed, the bus tickets were no longer free of charge.
The charts below provide further details of the change in behaviour for commuter trips and show traffic habits among participants for trips between home and work before the start of the project in April 1995, in September 1995 (representing the pattern of summer traffic), in March 1996 (indicating winter traffic) and in September 1996 (approximately half a year after the end of the project).
Participants expressed a greater need for snow clearing in the winter and better luggage racks on the bicycles to reduce barriers to cycling. On the other hand, further investments into bicycle paths were considered unlikely to encourage greater use of bicycles in rhus. Participants considered comfort, cost and time as obstacles to using the bus to a greater extent.
Upon completion of the project 65% of participants experienced improved health, while the remaining 35% experienced no change in their health. Most improved their overall fitness, while blood pressure, weight and cholesterol levels remained virtually unchanged. Initially, the proportion of participants with unsatisfactory or poor health sank from 65% to 44% after the summer. After the winter months, when cycling was less frequent, the proportion of participants with poor or unsatisfactory health had risen to 51%.
All but 16 of the 175 participants fulfilled their contract with the municipality.
Contacts
There is no available contact for more information on this program.
This case study was written by Bjrn Surborg. He is a student and freelancer inToronto and can be contacted at bsurborg@acs.ryerson.ca for comments or future writingassignments.
Funding for the addition of this case study was generously provided by the Government of Canadas Climate Change Action Fund, Suncor, Syncrude, Enbridge Consumers Gas and TetraPak Canada.
Notes
Lessons Learned
Cycling can be an attractive alternative to the automobile for commuters. On average participants cycled more than 30 kilometres a week.
Background
With a population of 300,000, Århus is Denmark's second largest city. In 1994, the Municipality of Århus adopted a plan to reduce the use of individual motor vehicles and increase the use of sustainable transportation. Part of their plan was the Bike Busters program, which ran from April 1995 to April 1996.
Bike Busters initially focused on the use of bicycles only. Due to the interest and support of Århus's public transit provider, Århus Sporveje, however, the project included both bicycles and public transit. This increased the choice of transportation for participants, and broadened the focus of the program.
The prospects for successfully encouraging the use of sustainable transportation were considered very good since Århus already had a well-developed network of bicycle paths and most residents lived within cycling distance of the city centre. Nevertheless, previous campaigns had not been successful in convincing people to cycle to work. The aim of Bike Busters was to change the general perception of cycling and make it more attractive.
Getting Informed
Two different approaches to changing behaviour were considered before the program was implemented. One would have been to use disincentives, such as high fuel prices or car tolls, as a method of changing behaviour. The other approach was to encourage sustainable transportation using commitments and financial incentives. The latter method was chosen.
Survey results showed that, of 100,000 daily round trips, 10,000 were made by bicycle and 20,000 by public transit. The remaining 70,000 were car trips, indicating a great potential for the increased use of bikes and buses.
Researchers with the Traffic Research Group at Åalborg University selected the participants, and found that, in interviews conducted prior to the start of the program, 93% of participants expected their health to improve as a result of Bike Busters.
Delivering the Program
A recruitment campaign was the first step in delivering the program. Information was distributed through the local media, large work places, libraries and other appropriate institutions. The municipality sent out news releases and advertised in newspapers, which helped gain media coverage (Mass Media).
With the help of local police, pamphlets were handed out to motorists for three days on three major roads. The pamphlets described the program and enticed the public with the headline Would you like a brand new bicycle and a free bus pass? Seventeen hundred drivers who received these pamphlets returned the reply coupon indicating their interest in participating in the program.
Of those 1700 people, Åalborg University's Traffic Research Group selected 175 people to participate. Potential participants were selected based on the following criteria:
•They had to be regular, round trip drivers who worked in central Århus
•They had to live within two to eight kilometres from the city centre (cycling as an alternative to driving was considered suitable within this range).
The selected participants were between 30 and 50 years of age with a household income of between 400,000 and 600,000 Danish Crowns (approximately $96,000 to $144,000 CAD at the time), although income level was not a selection requirement. Because of considerably fewer applications from women, only 38% of the participants were female.
Participants signed a contract, which committed them to reducing their car use as much as possible and using cycling or public transit instead (Obtaining a Commitment). Participants also filled out questionnaires and driving logbooks before, during and after the project.
Participants were given a bicycle for the one-year test period (worth 4,000 Danish Crowns), with the option to purchase it at a reduced rate (1,000 Danish Crowns) at the end of the year. In addition, participants were given a bus pass worth 5,000 Danish Crowns (Financial Incentives). All participants received a free health check testing their weight, blood pressure, cholesterol level and general fitness. The health check was sponsored and performed by the Danish Heart Association. Other sponsors included Aage Kroll A/S, which supplied cycle computers, Basts Lasefabrik, which donated cycle lamps, and Viking Rubber Company, which supplied rain clothes. The cycling equipment and bus passes encouraged the participants to try cycling or public transit (Overcoming Specific Barriers).
An opening ceremony on rhus Town Square was held where participants were given their bicycles. They all rode an inaugural lap of the town, making the project a visible public event (Norm Appeals). A Bike Buster secretariat with two staff members was set up for the period, and every two months they published Cykel & Buster, a magazine that featured encouraging articles, participants observations, and preliminary research findings.
Financing the Program
The overall costs of the project were three million Danish Crowns. The Danish Transport Council financed the Traffic Research Group with one million Crowns, while the Municipality of Århus and the Danish Environmental Protection Agency sponsored the actual project with one million Danish Crowns each. A detailed budget is provided in the table below.
Costs DKK CAD
Research 1,000,000 240,000
Bus tickets 600,000 144,000
Bicycles, equipment 600,000 144,000
Secretariat 300,000 72,000
Marketing 250,000 60,000
Social events, etc. 250,000 60,000
Total 3,000,000 720,000
Revenues DKK CAD
Danish Transport Council 1,000,000 240,000
Danish Environmental Protection Agency 1,000,000 240,000
Municipality of rhus 1,000,000 240,000
Total 3,000,000 720,000
Measuring Achievements
Evaluation was based on four measures:
•During the year each participant filled in a printed kilometre report that recorded the reading of their cars odometer and the cycle computer, as well as the number of trips used on the bus punch tickets on a fixed day of the week. Reporting of the kilometre measuring was done three times over the course of the project.
•Participants filled in a logbook at the end of April, in mid-February, mid-September and finally in May 1997, after the project had finished. The aim was to show changes in the traveling patterns and the choice of transport during the project period. This applied especially to the extent to which car trips were replaced by cycling and bus trips.
•During interviews participants were asked to identify and comment on the importance of a number of obstacles to using a bicycle or bus for commuting.
•Health checks were performed at the beginning of the project, at six months, and again at the end of the one-year period.
Results
On average, participants cycled 30.7 kilometres per week (1,600 kilometres per year), three times the Danish average. The range of kilometres cycled varied among participants. For example, the top cyclist rode over 109 kilometres a week, while the shortest average distance covered by bicycle per week was 2.4 kilometres. The average distance driven by car was 14,000 kilometres a year, still much higher than the average distance covered by bicycle, but lower than the national average. This number is skewed, however, because the car, which had been the participants primary mode of transportation for commuting, was freed up for use by other family members.
More than 70% of commuter trips, and more than half of all trips combined, were made by bicycle. In the winter this dropped to 35% of commuter trips and less than 30% of all trips combined. After the project ended, 56% of commuter trips and more than 40% of all trips were still made by cycling. Prior to Bike Busters, those numbers were eleven and nine percent respectively. In other words, after the one-year test period most participants made their change a permanent one and still cycled to work.
Although the free bus passes were not well used during the summer, over the course of the year, participants used the bus for 1.3 trips per year, which corresponded to the national average. The bus gained popularity during the winter, but only 23% of all trips to and from work and 16% of all trips were made by bus. Research showed that bus use had not increased in the long run. After the projects completion, the proportion of bus trips fell back to its original level before the one-year period. One reason that using the bus did not develop in the same way as the bicycle is that once the project was completed, the bus tickets were no longer free of charge.
The charts below provide further details of the change in behaviour for commuter trips and show traffic habits among participants for trips between home and work before the start of the project in April 1995, in September 1995 (representing the pattern of summer traffic), in March 1996 (indicating winter traffic) and in September 1996 (approximately half a year after the end of the project).
Participants expressed a greater need for snow clearing in the winter and better luggage racks on the bicycles to reduce barriers to cycling. On the other hand, further investments into bicycle paths were considered unlikely to encourage greater use of bicycles in rhus. Participants considered comfort, cost and time as obstacles to using the bus to a greater extent.
Upon completion of the project 65% of participants experienced improved health, while the remaining 35% experienced no change in their health. Most improved their overall fitness, while blood pressure, weight and cholesterol levels remained virtually unchanged. Initially, the proportion of participants with unsatisfactory or poor health sank from 65% to 44% after the summer. After the winter months, when cycling was less frequent, the proportion of participants with poor or unsatisfactory health had risen to 51%.
All but 16 of the 175 participants fulfilled their contract with the municipality.
Contacts
There is no available contact for more information on this program.
This case study was written by Bjrn Surborg. He is a student and freelancer inToronto and can be contacted at bsurborg@acs.ryerson.ca for comments or future writingassignments.
Funding for the addition of this case study was generously provided by the Government of Canadas Climate Change Action Fund, Suncor, Syncrude, Enbridge Consumers Gas and TetraPak Canada.
Notes
Lessons Learned
Cycling can be an attractive alternative to the automobile for commuters. On average participants cycled more than 30 kilometres a week.
AT&T Employee Telework Initiative
The AT&T Employee Telework Initiative provides information and support to all staff and management, corporate-wide, who would like to telework either part-time or full-time. Since 1992, AT&T has succeeded in developing not only a formal policy and telework program for its employees, but also a telework internet portal that acts as a model and guide for other companies interested in telework. AT&T believes that its telework initiative can be replicated by practically any company.
Background
Note: To minimize site maintenance costs, all case studies on this site are written in the past tense, even if they are ongoing as is the case with this particular program.
Created in 1992, the AT&T Employee Telework Initiative followed closely on the heels of the implementation of the Clean Air Act in the United States. Although AT&T had conducted a few telework pilot projects during the late 1980s, it was really the Clean Air Act which helped to legitimize the concept of telework.
Telework is an umbrella term for a wide range of alternative workplace arrangements includingtelecommuting, virtual/mobile offices, hoteling, satellite offices and telework centres.
The corporate culture of AT&T was considered a good fit with telework. As a telephone company, many employees were used to working over the phone long before 1992, and with the arrival of personal computers, it became that much easier to work with colleagues in other locations, both near and far. Through the leading efforts of a champion from its Public Relations department, AT&T developed a cross-functional team which then designed and implemented the formal telework program and policies.
Setting Objectives
To increase, year over year, the total number of AT&T staff and management who telework.
Compliance with the U.S. Clean Air Act (implemented in 1992.)
It was also hoped that the telework initiative could:
•Help employees balance their work and family life; and
•Provide low-risk solutions for employers that would be appreciated by the employees.
Getting Informed
Beginning in 1994, AT&T conducted annual statistically valid random telephone telework participant surveys.
Delivering the Program
AT&T's Employee Telework Initiative was a corporate-wide program, managed cross-functionally, and intended for all staff and management to participate in. Although Human Resources "owned" the formal telework policy, Property Management oversaw the day-to-day operation of the telework program, while Security, Procurement, Environment, Health & Safety, and Information Technology Services played large, supporting roles.
AT&T took a relatively "grassroots" approach to its telework initiative in that it actively encouraged its employees to contact their local managers and ask whether or not they could try teleworking. Although there was obviously substantial "top-down" support for telework as well, AT&T recognized that for telework to be a successful business model, the employees had to feel that they were an important part of the success of the initiative. In other words, the employees had to feel a sense of "ownership" over the program.
At AT&T, no single manager or department ran the telework initiative; it was very much a networking" effort. Different departments operated different aspects of the program. For example, before an employee could begin teleworking, he or she would have had to have contacted:
•Procurement (for perhaps home office supplies or a computer);
•Security (to ensure that AT&T privacy issues were going to be respected); and
•Environment, Health & Safety (to make certain that the home environment was both safe and healthy for teleworking).
In order to simplify this initial set-up process, AT&T developed a website "portal" to act as a guide for potential participants in how to set themselves up as a teleworker (Overcoming Specific Barriers). For example, some of this information included how to procure a computer and telephone lines, as well as sample telework policies and agreements. The standard teleworking agreement served as a written commitment (Obtaining a Commitment).
AT&T's website portal succeeded in not only simplifying a somewhat complicated process, but it also helped to empower employees at the local level to take up the corporate challenge to try teleworking.
Initial barriers to the employee telework initiative did arise, and these were mostly associated with the overall cost and effort that needed to be invested by AT&T's initial policy development team. AT&T managed to overcome these barriers primarily because the team participants were supportive of the concept, and so they were determined to work towards building consensus so that the initiative could go forward.
Over the years, AT&T employed a number of tools to promote its Employee Telework Initiative. In addditon to internal and external communication packages based on survey results, it also participated in the annual "Telework America Day" (a public-private effort to encourage the adoption and growth of telework arrangements through a nationwide campaign of public awareness and education) (Norm Appeals).
Every year on this day, AT&T used such communication tools as email, all-employee publications, and information booths to educate employees about the benefits of teleworking, such as increased productivity, increased job satisfaction, and decreased commuting time (Building Motivation Over Time).
As the Employee Telework Initiative evolved, AT&T focused upon removing barriers to telework such as improving telecommunications technology available to teleworkers. Furthermore, as employees and their local managers became more comfortable with the idea of teleworking, the insistence on formal work schedules began to decrease, and teleworkers gained much more flexibility regarding when they could work in the office and when they could work remotely (Overcoming Specific Barriers).
Financing the Program
Given the highly localized nature of the initiative (local managers were encouraged to assist employees interested in teleworking, no single corporate-wide budget existed for telework. (It was suggested that it probably cost approximately $500 US to set up one employee for teleworking from home, not including a laptop computer and desk). However, there were some specific costs of the program because each year, AT&T conducted its employee telework survey and AT&T also produced several communication packages on its teleworking initiative for employees and other interested parties.
Measuring Achievements
A few years prior to the development of its formal telework initiative around 1992, AT&T conducted a few, localized telework pilot projects in three regional offices. The lessons learned from these self-contained, pilot projects helped to inform the design of a corporate, cross-functional team and consequently, the formal telework initiative which it developed.
Beginning in 1994, AT&T conducted annual telephone surveys (randomly sampled with a good representation of company employees). From the collected survey results, AT&T compared the overall changes, year over year, in the various aspects of telework (e.g., frequency of telework, overall employee satisfaction, time spent commuting, amount of fuel and energy saved, work productivity).
Results
In 1999, AT&T teleworkers avoided 87 million miles of driving to the office, and as a result, teleworkers saved:
•4.1 million gallons of gasoline;
•41,000 tons of CO2 (carbon dioxide) from being emitted;
•180,000 tons of hydrocarbons from being emitted;
•1.4 million tons of CO (carbon monoxide) from being emitted; and
•93,000 tons of NO (nitrogen oxides) from being emitted.
In 2000, AT&T teleworkers avoided 110 million miles of driving to the office, and similar to 1999, teleworkers saved:
•5.1 million gallons of gasoline;
•50,000 tons of CO2 (carbon dioxide) from being emitted;
•220,000 tons of hydrocarbons from being emitted;
•1.7 million tons of CO (carbon monoxide) from being emitted; and
•110,000 tons of NO (nitrogen oxides) from being emitted.
Telework Survey Results
1999 2000
AT&T teleworkers who telework at least one day per month 49% 56%
Teleworkers who work from home once a week or more 24% 27%
Virtual office (or full-time) teleworkers 10% 11%
Teleworkers that work from home on an unscheduled basis 7% 27%
Teleworkers that work from home on a scheduled basis 40% 25%
Teleworkers who reported higher productivity at home 68% 77%
•On average, $3,000 per teleworker is saved in real estate and related costs (e.g., energy);
•Productivity of teleworking employees has increased from 15 to 20%, and the increases seem to be related to enhanced morale, fewer meetings and fewer interruptions;
•Reduced employee stress and improved morale.
•Since the program began, telework has grown to include 55% (or 36,000) of AT&T staff;
•87% of management telework an average of six days a month
Contacts
For more information on the world of teleworking, please visit the following sites:
AT&T Telework Webguide: www.att.com/telework
International Telework Association and Council: www.telecommute.org
Gil Gordon Associates (Telework Consultants): http://www.gilgordon.com/
This case study was written by Sheryl C. Lusk.
Funding for the addition of this case study was generously provided by the Government of Canadas Climate Change Action Fund, Suncor, Syncrude, Enbridge Consumers Gas and TetraPak Canada.
Notes
Lessons Learned:
AT&T suggested that any company interested in implementing a telework program should, first and foremost, establish a website portal of relevant information.
There are several large Canadian companies and institutions that have already implemented successful teleworking initiatives (e.g. Nortel, Bell Canada, Federal Government).
Different Modes of Telework:
Telecommuting Working from home one or more days a week during normal business hours.
Virtual/mobile office Using communications tools and technology to perform job duties from anywhere, not just the home customer location, airport, hotel, etc.
Hoteling Sharing office space in a company location designed for use on a drop-in basis by employees. Employees either reserve space in advance or drop-in to use a cubicle equipped with standard office technology -- phones, PCs, faxes, printers, copiers, e-mail, Internet access, etc. -- on an as-needed basis.
Satellite office A fully-equipped office location established by the company, normally in suburban locations, where employees can reserve space and work one or more days a week closer to their homes. Satellite offices reduce employee commute times and help ease community traffic congestion.
Telework Centre Similar to a satellite office, but space is shared by employees from numerous public and private employers. Normally operated independently, employers are charged for the space and servicesutilized by each employee per day. These centres are located closer to employees' homes than their regular company locations.
Update
News Release TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2002 AT&T Telework Survey Indicates Productivity is Up; Technology Barriers Force Some Teleworkers to Return to the Office
BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- Telework productivity at AT&T has increased roughly 10 percent in the past year, with employees typically gaining a full hour a day, according to AT&T's eighth annual telework survey of 1,500 employees.
However, the top barrier to telework continues to be a lack of high-speed data access to the home.
Over the last four years, about half of AT&T managers have worked from home at least once a month, about one-quarter at least once a week, and about 10 percent in a full-time "virtual office." About 70 percent of those surveyed cited increased productivity due to teleworking.
This increased productivity is valued at $65 million annually. When real estate and job retention savings are included, AT&T saves more than $100 million every year due to telework.
"Telework is a growing trend that's providing real value to AT&T," said Braden Allenby, Environment, Health & Safety vice president. "This year alone, we have several large units within the company that are moving to a full-time virtual office structure. Telework also has benefits to the environment. In 2001, AT&T teleworkers avoided driving 100 million miles, saving 5 million gallons of gasoline and preventing many thousands of tons of air pollutants."
However, the number of employees who work from home occasionally (less than one day a week) is shrinking because of lost productivity. Thirty six percent of those who stopped teleworking in the last year said they were less productive at home because of a lack of technology.
In fact, five of the top six reasons cited by office employees for not working from home relate to the need for speed. Typically, a teleworker who has a company-paid data line works twice as many days at home per month as one who doesn't. And those who have a high-speed, company-paid connection reported gaining about one additional productive work hour each day spent working from home.
As a result, hundreds of employees are moving out of traditional offices and working primarily or exclusively from their home offices.
Other benefits of telework include the ability to still conduct business in the event of a natural or man-made disaster. The survey also found that:
82 percent of teleworkers said that balancing work and family responsibilities was a significant advantage of telework;About 70 percent of teleworkers are more satisfied with their current job and their personal and family lives; and56 percent of teleworkers who received competing job offers said that they factored telework into their decision to accept or reject the offer.
The full text of the 2001/2002 AT&T employee telework survey is available at AT&T's telework webguide.
Click for Advanced Search »
My Account [ Log Out ]
My Plans
Ivete's Plan
Save Your Project
Help
Terms of Use
This site is brought to you through
the vision and generosity of:
Primary Sponsors
Supporting Sponsors
Background
Note: To minimize site maintenance costs, all case studies on this site are written in the past tense, even if they are ongoing as is the case with this particular program.
Created in 1992, the AT&T Employee Telework Initiative followed closely on the heels of the implementation of the Clean Air Act in the United States. Although AT&T had conducted a few telework pilot projects during the late 1980s, it was really the Clean Air Act which helped to legitimize the concept of telework.
Telework is an umbrella term for a wide range of alternative workplace arrangements includingtelecommuting, virtual/mobile offices, hoteling, satellite offices and telework centres.
The corporate culture of AT&T was considered a good fit with telework. As a telephone company, many employees were used to working over the phone long before 1992, and with the arrival of personal computers, it became that much easier to work with colleagues in other locations, both near and far. Through the leading efforts of a champion from its Public Relations department, AT&T developed a cross-functional team which then designed and implemented the formal telework program and policies.
Setting Objectives
To increase, year over year, the total number of AT&T staff and management who telework.
Compliance with the U.S. Clean Air Act (implemented in 1992.)
It was also hoped that the telework initiative could:
•Help employees balance their work and family life; and
•Provide low-risk solutions for employers that would be appreciated by the employees.
Getting Informed
Beginning in 1994, AT&T conducted annual statistically valid random telephone telework participant surveys.
Delivering the Program
AT&T's Employee Telework Initiative was a corporate-wide program, managed cross-functionally, and intended for all staff and management to participate in. Although Human Resources "owned" the formal telework policy, Property Management oversaw the day-to-day operation of the telework program, while Security, Procurement, Environment, Health & Safety, and Information Technology Services played large, supporting roles.
AT&T took a relatively "grassroots" approach to its telework initiative in that it actively encouraged its employees to contact their local managers and ask whether or not they could try teleworking. Although there was obviously substantial "top-down" support for telework as well, AT&T recognized that for telework to be a successful business model, the employees had to feel that they were an important part of the success of the initiative. In other words, the employees had to feel a sense of "ownership" over the program.
At AT&T, no single manager or department ran the telework initiative; it was very much a networking" effort. Different departments operated different aspects of the program. For example, before an employee could begin teleworking, he or she would have had to have contacted:
•Procurement (for perhaps home office supplies or a computer);
•Security (to ensure that AT&T privacy issues were going to be respected); and
•Environment, Health & Safety (to make certain that the home environment was both safe and healthy for teleworking).
In order to simplify this initial set-up process, AT&T developed a website "portal" to act as a guide for potential participants in how to set themselves up as a teleworker (Overcoming Specific Barriers). For example, some of this information included how to procure a computer and telephone lines, as well as sample telework policies and agreements. The standard teleworking agreement served as a written commitment (Obtaining a Commitment).
AT&T's website portal succeeded in not only simplifying a somewhat complicated process, but it also helped to empower employees at the local level to take up the corporate challenge to try teleworking.
Initial barriers to the employee telework initiative did arise, and these were mostly associated with the overall cost and effort that needed to be invested by AT&T's initial policy development team. AT&T managed to overcome these barriers primarily because the team participants were supportive of the concept, and so they were determined to work towards building consensus so that the initiative could go forward.
Over the years, AT&T employed a number of tools to promote its Employee Telework Initiative. In addditon to internal and external communication packages based on survey results, it also participated in the annual "Telework America Day" (a public-private effort to encourage the adoption and growth of telework arrangements through a nationwide campaign of public awareness and education) (Norm Appeals).
Every year on this day, AT&T used such communication tools as email, all-employee publications, and information booths to educate employees about the benefits of teleworking, such as increased productivity, increased job satisfaction, and decreased commuting time (Building Motivation Over Time).
As the Employee Telework Initiative evolved, AT&T focused upon removing barriers to telework such as improving telecommunications technology available to teleworkers. Furthermore, as employees and their local managers became more comfortable with the idea of teleworking, the insistence on formal work schedules began to decrease, and teleworkers gained much more flexibility regarding when they could work in the office and when they could work remotely (Overcoming Specific Barriers).
Financing the Program
Given the highly localized nature of the initiative (local managers were encouraged to assist employees interested in teleworking, no single corporate-wide budget existed for telework. (It was suggested that it probably cost approximately $500 US to set up one employee for teleworking from home, not including a laptop computer and desk). However, there were some specific costs of the program because each year, AT&T conducted its employee telework survey and AT&T also produced several communication packages on its teleworking initiative for employees and other interested parties.
Measuring Achievements
A few years prior to the development of its formal telework initiative around 1992, AT&T conducted a few, localized telework pilot projects in three regional offices. The lessons learned from these self-contained, pilot projects helped to inform the design of a corporate, cross-functional team and consequently, the formal telework initiative which it developed.
Beginning in 1994, AT&T conducted annual telephone surveys (randomly sampled with a good representation of company employees). From the collected survey results, AT&T compared the overall changes, year over year, in the various aspects of telework (e.g., frequency of telework, overall employee satisfaction, time spent commuting, amount of fuel and energy saved, work productivity).
Results
In 1999, AT&T teleworkers avoided 87 million miles of driving to the office, and as a result, teleworkers saved:
•4.1 million gallons of gasoline;
•41,000 tons of CO2 (carbon dioxide) from being emitted;
•180,000 tons of hydrocarbons from being emitted;
•1.4 million tons of CO (carbon monoxide) from being emitted; and
•93,000 tons of NO (nitrogen oxides) from being emitted.
In 2000, AT&T teleworkers avoided 110 million miles of driving to the office, and similar to 1999, teleworkers saved:
•5.1 million gallons of gasoline;
•50,000 tons of CO2 (carbon dioxide) from being emitted;
•220,000 tons of hydrocarbons from being emitted;
•1.7 million tons of CO (carbon monoxide) from being emitted; and
•110,000 tons of NO (nitrogen oxides) from being emitted.
Telework Survey Results
1999 2000
AT&T teleworkers who telework at least one day per month 49% 56%
Teleworkers who work from home once a week or more 24% 27%
Virtual office (or full-time) teleworkers 10% 11%
Teleworkers that work from home on an unscheduled basis 7% 27%
Teleworkers that work from home on a scheduled basis 40% 25%
Teleworkers who reported higher productivity at home 68% 77%
•On average, $3,000 per teleworker is saved in real estate and related costs (e.g., energy);
•Productivity of teleworking employees has increased from 15 to 20%, and the increases seem to be related to enhanced morale, fewer meetings and fewer interruptions;
•Reduced employee stress and improved morale.
•Since the program began, telework has grown to include 55% (or 36,000) of AT&T staff;
•87% of management telework an average of six days a month
Contacts
For more information on the world of teleworking, please visit the following sites:
AT&T Telework Webguide: www.att.com/telework
International Telework Association and Council: www.telecommute.org
Gil Gordon Associates (Telework Consultants): http://www.gilgordon.com/
This case study was written by Sheryl C. Lusk.
Funding for the addition of this case study was generously provided by the Government of Canadas Climate Change Action Fund, Suncor, Syncrude, Enbridge Consumers Gas and TetraPak Canada.
Notes
Lessons Learned:
AT&T suggested that any company interested in implementing a telework program should, first and foremost, establish a website portal of relevant information.
There are several large Canadian companies and institutions that have already implemented successful teleworking initiatives (e.g. Nortel, Bell Canada, Federal Government).
Different Modes of Telework:
Telecommuting Working from home one or more days a week during normal business hours.
Virtual/mobile office Using communications tools and technology to perform job duties from anywhere, not just the home customer location, airport, hotel, etc.
Hoteling Sharing office space in a company location designed for use on a drop-in basis by employees. Employees either reserve space in advance or drop-in to use a cubicle equipped with standard office technology -- phones, PCs, faxes, printers, copiers, e-mail, Internet access, etc. -- on an as-needed basis.
Satellite office A fully-equipped office location established by the company, normally in suburban locations, where employees can reserve space and work one or more days a week closer to their homes. Satellite offices reduce employee commute times and help ease community traffic congestion.
Telework Centre Similar to a satellite office, but space is shared by employees from numerous public and private employers. Normally operated independently, employers are charged for the space and servicesutilized by each employee per day. These centres are located closer to employees' homes than their regular company locations.
Update
News Release TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2002 AT&T Telework Survey Indicates Productivity is Up; Technology Barriers Force Some Teleworkers to Return to the Office
BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- Telework productivity at AT&T has increased roughly 10 percent in the past year, with employees typically gaining a full hour a day, according to AT&T's eighth annual telework survey of 1,500 employees.
However, the top barrier to telework continues to be a lack of high-speed data access to the home.
Over the last four years, about half of AT&T managers have worked from home at least once a month, about one-quarter at least once a week, and about 10 percent in a full-time "virtual office." About 70 percent of those surveyed cited increased productivity due to teleworking.
This increased productivity is valued at $65 million annually. When real estate and job retention savings are included, AT&T saves more than $100 million every year due to telework.
"Telework is a growing trend that's providing real value to AT&T," said Braden Allenby, Environment, Health & Safety vice president. "This year alone, we have several large units within the company that are moving to a full-time virtual office structure. Telework also has benefits to the environment. In 2001, AT&T teleworkers avoided driving 100 million miles, saving 5 million gallons of gasoline and preventing many thousands of tons of air pollutants."
However, the number of employees who work from home occasionally (less than one day a week) is shrinking because of lost productivity. Thirty six percent of those who stopped teleworking in the last year said they were less productive at home because of a lack of technology.
In fact, five of the top six reasons cited by office employees for not working from home relate to the need for speed. Typically, a teleworker who has a company-paid data line works twice as many days at home per month as one who doesn't. And those who have a high-speed, company-paid connection reported gaining about one additional productive work hour each day spent working from home.
As a result, hundreds of employees are moving out of traditional offices and working primarily or exclusively from their home offices.
Other benefits of telework include the ability to still conduct business in the event of a natural or man-made disaster. The survey also found that:
82 percent of teleworkers said that balancing work and family responsibilities was a significant advantage of telework;About 70 percent of teleworkers are more satisfied with their current job and their personal and family lives; and56 percent of teleworkers who received competing job offers said that they factored telework into their decision to accept or reject the offer.
The full text of the 2001/2002 AT&T employee telework survey is available at AT&T's telework webguide.
Click for Advanced Search »
My Account [ Log Out ]
My Plans
Ivete's Plan
Save Your Project
Help
Terms of Use
This site is brought to you through
the vision and generosity of:
Primary Sponsors
Supporting Sponsors
Back to Sleep - Health Canada SIDS Social Marketing Campaign
Using carefully targeted mass media messaging strategies, Back to Sleep teaches parents and other primary infant caregivers across Canada how to avoid the risk factors associated with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). With promising results in its first two years, Back to Sleep is well underway to achieving its five-year goal of reducing the risk of SIDS in Canada by 10%. (Written in 2001)
Background
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) refers to the sudden and unexpected death of an apparently healthy infant that remains unexplained even after a full investigation. In Canada, SIDS is the leading cause of death for infants over four weeks old, accounting for about one infant death out of every 1,400 live births. Although there has been a recent decrease in reported cases of SIDS in Canada, it remains a significant public health concern.
In 1998, new research indicated that to reduce the risk of SIDS an infant should be placed to sleep on his or her back. These findings updated existing information that suggested that the back or side sleeping position were safest. To reflect this new finding, Health Canadas existing social marketing strategy was re?tooled, revitalized and re?launched under the banner Back to Sleep, with a corporate partner to bolster its impact.
Setting Objectives
Overall Objective:
To reduce the risk of SIDS by 10% in Canada over the five-year period from 2000 to 2004.
Marketing Objectives:
The objectives for the Back to Sleep campaign were as follows:
•Increase awareness/knowledge of the risks of SIDS in Canada over a five-year period.
•Increase awareness/knowledge of the things that parents can do to reduce the risk of SIDS (over five-year period).
•Reduce the risk of SIDS by 10% in Canada over a five-year period.
Getting Informed
Past research has shown that parents and other caregivers have a strong propensity to adopt behaviours that are demonstrated to be in the best interests of their infants. As explained below, this information was used to determine the primary target audience for Back to Sleep (parents and other caregivers), as well as to develop the campaign strategy (mass media-based, awareness raising.)
Prior to the launch of the campaign in 2000, Health Canada had already conducted an awareness and attitude survey of 600 respondents. Based on that survey, it established benchmarks from which to evaluate the impact of the Back to Sleep campaign, as well as print templates for the campaign. The templates were brought to focus groups in three cities, for testing and input.
Delivering the Program
An awareness-raising mass-media strategy (Mass Media) was adopted because the barriers to behaviour change were low, relative to the motivation to participate (i.e. risk of babys death). The campaign, called Back to Sleep, was targeted primarily at mothers, expectant/new mothers, partners and peers aged 20 to 34, grandparents, and other caregivers. Certain campaign components also reached outside the home to target a secondary audience - people directly involved in the provision of infant health care and the dissemination infant health care information (i.e. public health units, hospitals, physicians, and pre- and post-natal educators).
Each media component was developed by Health Canada in conjunction with three NGO partners (The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths (CFSID), The Canadian Institute for Child Health (CICH), and The Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS)).
The Canadian Paediatric Society is a national advocacy group, which helped to add credibility to the campaigns communications. All of the materials provided clear, consistent messages about reducing the risk of SIDS, and emphasized the four precautions associated with SIDS:
•Back sleeping position
•Avoid second-hand smoke
•Avoid over-bundling the baby
•Breastfeeding can help protect against SIDS.
Implementation of the strategy also involved the use of the following media-backed message delivery tactics.
Summary of Media Tactics Used:
1. Joint Statement - Reducing the Risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in Canada
Four partners (Health Canada, The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths, The Canadian Institute for Child Health, and the Canadian Paediatric Society), in consultation with key stakeholders, developed a national statement on reducing the risk of SIDS, in both English and French. The objective of this statement was to provide health professionals with clear, consistent messages on this important issue.
2. Back to Sleep Brochure and Back to Sleep Poster
The poster was packaged with selected Canadian parenting magazines that were bulk shipped directly to healthcare professionals, and to pre- and post-birth newsletters targeted at health professionals. The posters were also displayed in the washrooms at all 176 McDonalds restaurants in Quebec.
3. Back to Sleep Promotional ad
The one-page ad was included in a variety of magazines, including Todays Parents and Expecting. The magazines in which the ad appeared, were selected based on their reach and fit (the majority were given out free at doctor's offices/ public health units, reaching lower socio-economic segments of the population.)
4. Back to Sleep Television Public Service Announcement
A 30?second PSA, describing the four precautions parents can take, was sent out to broadcasters across Canada. This was essential in targeting at?risk parents with lower literacy levels, who might have had trouble reading print materials.
5. Partnership with Procter and Gamble (Pampers)
Procter & Gambles Pampers division included the key Back to Sleep message on their two smallest sized diapers in English, French, and Spanish. They also created a promotional door?hanger, distributed the existing educational pamphlet to new mothers through the majority of hospitals in Canada, and promoted SIDS awareness through their own advertising campaigns.
6. Partnership with The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths
CFSID promoted the campaign through Babys Breath, a newsletter developed by CFSID that is distributed to people wishing to gain information about SIDS. CFSID included copies of the Back to Sleep promotional material with the distribution of the newsletter.
Measuring Achievements
A post-campaign tracking survey (replicating the pre-campaign benchmark survey) was conducted in the spring of 2001, to test awareness and attitude shifts and to suggest any necessary modifications to the campaign. The survey involved 605 respondents.
Results
•An increase in awareness from 44% (in 1999) to 66% (in 2001) that the proper position to place a baby during sleep is on his/her back.
•An increase in the number of professionals (from 21% to 67%) who advised putting the child to sleep on his/her back.
•Among caregivers or parents that have taken action to reduce the risk of SIDS, 69% said that they lay their babies on their backs to sleep, up from 41% in 1999.
Comparisons (From the benchmark survey conducted in 1999):
1999: 47% said side sleeping position reduces risk, 44% said back sleeping position
2001: 45% said side sleeping position reduces risk; 66% said back position reduces risk
1999: 84% were aware that second?hand smoke or smoking in household increases risks of SIDS and 82% said smoking during pregnancy increases risk
2001: 89% said second hand smoking in the household increases risk of SIDS and 81% said smoking during pregnancy increases risk
1999: 71% had seen information on SIDS before
2001: 79% had seen info on SIDS before
1999: 94% top?of?mind awareness about SIDS
2001: 97% top?of?mind awareness about SIDS
1999: 61% of health professionals had given advice to place child on its side to sleep and 21% said put child on back
2001: 21% had advised a side position while 67% of health professionals had advised a back position for the baby to sleep
Contacts
Shelley Cotroneo
Senior Marketing Consultant, Health Canada
Jeanne Mance Building Room 1092D
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0K9
Ph: (613)941-5356
Fax: (613)957-1395
shelley_cotroneo@hc-sc.gc.ca
Notes
PARTNERS:
Non-Governmental Organizations:
The three non-government organizations that Health Canada partnered with include:
1. The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths (CFSID)
CFSID is dedicated to solving the mystery of sudden and unexpected infant deaths, and to the emotional support of those who are affected. Their goals include the promotion and support of high quality and innovative research into the causes of SIDS and its effects on families, the implementation of public education and awareness programs about issues relating to SIDS, and the provision of current and accurate information and emotional support to families who have experienced an infant death due to SIDS.
2. The Canadian Institute for Child Health (CICH)
The role of the CICH in child and family health involves working with the federal government to ensure that relevant childs family policies are developed; working with professionals and educators to equip them with the best in research and programs; and, reaching out to families to help with the crucial task of nurturing, protecting, educating, and empowering our children. The CICH vision is to give all Canadian children the best possible future by making them a top priority.
3. The Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS)
The Canadian Paediatric Society is a national advocacy association committed to the health needs of children and youth. Since 1922, the CPS has worked to advocate for the health and well-being of children and youth; promote quality health care for all Canadian children and youth; provide professional development opportunities for paediatricians; establish Canadian standards and guidelines for paediatric care and practice; and promote the interests of children and youth and their physicians. As a voluntary professional association, the CPS represents more than 2,000 paediatricians, paediatric sub?specialists, paediatric residents, and other child health care.
Private Sector Partner:
Procter & Gamble (Pampers)
The Procter and Gamble company markets over 300 products to more than five billion consumers in 140 countries. Health Canada has entered a partnership specifically with Pampers, which is a product of Proctor and Gamble. The Pampers division has included the key message Back to Sleep on the waistband of their two smallest diapers.
Last updated: July 2004
Background
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) refers to the sudden and unexpected death of an apparently healthy infant that remains unexplained even after a full investigation. In Canada, SIDS is the leading cause of death for infants over four weeks old, accounting for about one infant death out of every 1,400 live births. Although there has been a recent decrease in reported cases of SIDS in Canada, it remains a significant public health concern.
In 1998, new research indicated that to reduce the risk of SIDS an infant should be placed to sleep on his or her back. These findings updated existing information that suggested that the back or side sleeping position were safest. To reflect this new finding, Health Canadas existing social marketing strategy was re?tooled, revitalized and re?launched under the banner Back to Sleep, with a corporate partner to bolster its impact.
Setting Objectives
Overall Objective:
To reduce the risk of SIDS by 10% in Canada over the five-year period from 2000 to 2004.
Marketing Objectives:
The objectives for the Back to Sleep campaign were as follows:
•Increase awareness/knowledge of the risks of SIDS in Canada over a five-year period.
•Increase awareness/knowledge of the things that parents can do to reduce the risk of SIDS (over five-year period).
•Reduce the risk of SIDS by 10% in Canada over a five-year period.
Getting Informed
Past research has shown that parents and other caregivers have a strong propensity to adopt behaviours that are demonstrated to be in the best interests of their infants. As explained below, this information was used to determine the primary target audience for Back to Sleep (parents and other caregivers), as well as to develop the campaign strategy (mass media-based, awareness raising.)
Prior to the launch of the campaign in 2000, Health Canada had already conducted an awareness and attitude survey of 600 respondents. Based on that survey, it established benchmarks from which to evaluate the impact of the Back to Sleep campaign, as well as print templates for the campaign. The templates were brought to focus groups in three cities, for testing and input.
Delivering the Program
An awareness-raising mass-media strategy (Mass Media) was adopted because the barriers to behaviour change were low, relative to the motivation to participate (i.e. risk of babys death). The campaign, called Back to Sleep, was targeted primarily at mothers, expectant/new mothers, partners and peers aged 20 to 34, grandparents, and other caregivers. Certain campaign components also reached outside the home to target a secondary audience - people directly involved in the provision of infant health care and the dissemination infant health care information (i.e. public health units, hospitals, physicians, and pre- and post-natal educators).
Each media component was developed by Health Canada in conjunction with three NGO partners (The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths (CFSID), The Canadian Institute for Child Health (CICH), and The Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS)).
The Canadian Paediatric Society is a national advocacy group, which helped to add credibility to the campaigns communications. All of the materials provided clear, consistent messages about reducing the risk of SIDS, and emphasized the four precautions associated with SIDS:
•Back sleeping position
•Avoid second-hand smoke
•Avoid over-bundling the baby
•Breastfeeding can help protect against SIDS.
Implementation of the strategy also involved the use of the following media-backed message delivery tactics.
Summary of Media Tactics Used:
1. Joint Statement - Reducing the Risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in Canada
Four partners (Health Canada, The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths, The Canadian Institute for Child Health, and the Canadian Paediatric Society), in consultation with key stakeholders, developed a national statement on reducing the risk of SIDS, in both English and French. The objective of this statement was to provide health professionals with clear, consistent messages on this important issue.
2. Back to Sleep Brochure and Back to Sleep Poster
The poster was packaged with selected Canadian parenting magazines that were bulk shipped directly to healthcare professionals, and to pre- and post-birth newsletters targeted at health professionals. The posters were also displayed in the washrooms at all 176 McDonalds restaurants in Quebec.
3. Back to Sleep Promotional ad
The one-page ad was included in a variety of magazines, including Todays Parents and Expecting. The magazines in which the ad appeared, were selected based on their reach and fit (the majority were given out free at doctor's offices/ public health units, reaching lower socio-economic segments of the population.)
4. Back to Sleep Television Public Service Announcement
A 30?second PSA, describing the four precautions parents can take, was sent out to broadcasters across Canada. This was essential in targeting at?risk parents with lower literacy levels, who might have had trouble reading print materials.
5. Partnership with Procter and Gamble (Pampers)
Procter & Gambles Pampers division included the key Back to Sleep message on their two smallest sized diapers in English, French, and Spanish. They also created a promotional door?hanger, distributed the existing educational pamphlet to new mothers through the majority of hospitals in Canada, and promoted SIDS awareness through their own advertising campaigns.
6. Partnership with The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths
CFSID promoted the campaign through Babys Breath, a newsletter developed by CFSID that is distributed to people wishing to gain information about SIDS. CFSID included copies of the Back to Sleep promotional material with the distribution of the newsletter.
Measuring Achievements
A post-campaign tracking survey (replicating the pre-campaign benchmark survey) was conducted in the spring of 2001, to test awareness and attitude shifts and to suggest any necessary modifications to the campaign. The survey involved 605 respondents.
Results
•An increase in awareness from 44% (in 1999) to 66% (in 2001) that the proper position to place a baby during sleep is on his/her back.
•An increase in the number of professionals (from 21% to 67%) who advised putting the child to sleep on his/her back.
•Among caregivers or parents that have taken action to reduce the risk of SIDS, 69% said that they lay their babies on their backs to sleep, up from 41% in 1999.
Comparisons (From the benchmark survey conducted in 1999):
1999: 47% said side sleeping position reduces risk, 44% said back sleeping position
2001: 45% said side sleeping position reduces risk; 66% said back position reduces risk
1999: 84% were aware that second?hand smoke or smoking in household increases risks of SIDS and 82% said smoking during pregnancy increases risk
2001: 89% said second hand smoking in the household increases risk of SIDS and 81% said smoking during pregnancy increases risk
1999: 71% had seen information on SIDS before
2001: 79% had seen info on SIDS before
1999: 94% top?of?mind awareness about SIDS
2001: 97% top?of?mind awareness about SIDS
1999: 61% of health professionals had given advice to place child on its side to sleep and 21% said put child on back
2001: 21% had advised a side position while 67% of health professionals had advised a back position for the baby to sleep
Contacts
Shelley Cotroneo
Senior Marketing Consultant, Health Canada
Jeanne Mance Building Room 1092D
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0K9
Ph: (613)941-5356
Fax: (613)957-1395
shelley_cotroneo@hc-sc.gc.ca
Notes
PARTNERS:
Non-Governmental Organizations:
The three non-government organizations that Health Canada partnered with include:
1. The Canadian Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths (CFSID)
CFSID is dedicated to solving the mystery of sudden and unexpected infant deaths, and to the emotional support of those who are affected. Their goals include the promotion and support of high quality and innovative research into the causes of SIDS and its effects on families, the implementation of public education and awareness programs about issues relating to SIDS, and the provision of current and accurate information and emotional support to families who have experienced an infant death due to SIDS.
2. The Canadian Institute for Child Health (CICH)
The role of the CICH in child and family health involves working with the federal government to ensure that relevant childs family policies are developed; working with professionals and educators to equip them with the best in research and programs; and, reaching out to families to help with the crucial task of nurturing, protecting, educating, and empowering our children. The CICH vision is to give all Canadian children the best possible future by making them a top priority.
3. The Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS)
The Canadian Paediatric Society is a national advocacy association committed to the health needs of children and youth. Since 1922, the CPS has worked to advocate for the health and well-being of children and youth; promote quality health care for all Canadian children and youth; provide professional development opportunities for paediatricians; establish Canadian standards and guidelines for paediatric care and practice; and promote the interests of children and youth and their physicians. As a voluntary professional association, the CPS represents more than 2,000 paediatricians, paediatric sub?specialists, paediatric residents, and other child health care.
Private Sector Partner:
Procter & Gamble (Pampers)
The Procter and Gamble company markets over 300 products to more than five billion consumers in 140 countries. Health Canada has entered a partnership specifically with Pampers, which is a product of Proctor and Gamble. The Pampers division has included the key message Back to Sleep on the waistband of their two smallest diapers.
Last updated: July 2004
Barrie Water Conservation Program
The City of Barrie, Ontario has deferred millions of dollars in waste water and water supply capital expenditures with its retrofit water conservation program. The City supplied subsidized ultra low flow toilets, showerheads and aerators to Barrie residents over a two-year period.
Background
Note: To minimize site maintenance costs, all case studies on this site are written in the past tense, even if they are ongoing as is the case with this particular program.
In the 1990s, Barrie, Ontario, located on Lake Simcoe, 80 kilometres north of Toronto, was one of Canada's fastest growing communities with a population of 90,000 (expected to reach 185,000 by 2021). Consequently, it had a rapidly growing demand for water and wastewater systems. By 1994, average daily wastewater flows had reached 37,300 cubic metres (nearly 80% of the systems capacity) and the City was faced with a $41M facilities upgrade/sewer infrastructure expansion to accommodate future growth.
The Barrie Public Utilities Commission (PUC) provided the entire City's water through groundwater wells. The projected cost of developing a new surface water supply on Kempenfelt Bay to meet the increased demand was approximately $27M, and construction was scheduled to start in 2000. The City was faced with having to spend $68M on water supply and sewerage over the 10 years from 1994, a cost of over $750 per resident.
The Municipal Works Department conducted an environmental assessment of the sewerage and water supply problems and discovered that, by implementing a conservation strategy, they could postpone most of their capital expenditures by 10-25 years and defer interest payments on the necessary borrowings. A plan to install low flow toilets and showerheads to 15,000 homes, to reduce both wastewater flows and water usage, was developed in partnership with the Ontario Clean Water Agency and the Ministry of Environment .
The program proved beneficial, not only to the City but also to residential and industrial water users, as conservation savings were reflected in their metered water charges.
As a result, only one upgrade was required over the 1995 to 2001 period - to handle the increased discharges of solids associated with population growth. That upgrade replaced the existing chlorination system with an ultra violet light disinfection system, which reduced the concentration of chlorine derivatives into Kempenfelt Bay and Lake Simcoe. Although the cost of maintaining the new system was higher than the chlorine system, it was only about 0.5% of the total operating and maintenance costs.
Setting Objectives
The City set a goal to save 50 litres of water per consumer per day in 15,000 households about 55% of Barrie's 1994 housing stock by February 1999. This translated into about a 5.5% reduction in average day flows. It also wanted to defer major capital expenditures for 3-5 years.
Delivering the Program
The program focused on replacing standard showerheads and toilets in existing homes with ultra low flow (ULF) ones. These devices reduced water demand and wastewater flow as there was less water flushed through each homes system. The ULF toilets, approved by the Canadian Standards Association, used 6 litres per flush instead of the typical 20 litres, while the low flow showerheads reduced flow from 16-20 litres per minute to 9.5 litres per minute while still delivering optimal water pressure.
To offset installation costs (Overcoming Specific Barriers), the City developed a list of contractors who agreed to a set price for each installation: $53 for one ULF toilet and $85 for two. Contractors were asked to bid on:
•The cost to install one, two or three toilets in a single family home,
•The cost to install one showerhead and two aerators in a single family home, and
•The cost to install 1-10, 11-25, 26-50 and 50+ toilets and the cost to install the same number of showerheads in multi-residential buildings.
The lowest tender then gave that contractor exclusive rights to a number of multi-residences and/or single-family homes.
Specifications for the materials required were provided, so that householders were given the option of installing the devices themselves or using a qualified plumber, then notifying the City once the work was completed.
Promotion
The program was advertised through newspapers, permanent displays at home shows and shopping malls, and inserts posted to consumers with their water bills (Mass Media). The Green Community Initiative and Environmental Action Barrie (non-profit organisations) also promoted the program.
The promotional material included details of the different models of ULF toilets, shower heads and aerators available, and asked consumers to contact the City for more information about joining the program. It was also explained that if the program did not conserve a sufficient amount of water, the City would be faced with expensive additions to the water pollution control plant and possibly an additional water treatment centre, all of which could raise water rates (Building Motivation Over Time). The program was open to all Barrie residents.
The City sent information kits to those householders and landlords who inquired about the program. The kits included a list of eligible water-saving devices, program guidelines, and a list of plumbing contractors who were successful in the tendering process.
An energy/water/waste audit was conducted on some of the homes to ensure that the ULF toilets and showerheads were needed and to set a baseline for later comparisons.
A rebate program was also developed. The City offered householders a $145 rebate per toilet, which meant that most toilets were free to the homeowner. Any toilet upgrade costs above the $145 rebate were the responsibility of the homeowner. Low flow showerheads were also offered at a rebate cost of $8 each (Financial Incentives). The householder would pay the bill for the toilet(s) and showerhead(s) and then mail the receipt to the City for the rebate. Householders covered the cost of installation.
For a one-time investment of between $53 for one toilet or $85 for two (which could be paid for with interest-free instalments on their water bill Overcoming Specific Barriers) the householder could expect an ongoing reduction in their water charges. The reduction in the bill quickly offset their small investment.
Financing the Program
A partnership including the City, the Ontario Clean Water Agency (OCWA) and the Ministry of Environment covered materials and program administration costs. OCWA provided $1.1 million, the City provided $2 million, and other sources contributed the remaining .6 million. Ontario Hydro, Consumers Gas, Environmental Action Barrie, the PUC, and property owners provided additional support. The breakdown of costs was 22% administration including monitoring and evaluation ($806,825) 62% for fixtures and rebates ($2,305,221) and 16% for residents ($604,137) for installation. The cost per household was $323 total (11,500 households) $270 by government and $53 by residents
From the start of the program in early 1995 to the end of the program in February 1999, $3.7M was spent assisting 11,500 households. Approximately 62% ($2,305,221) of the total costs went to fixtures and rebates for the toilets and showerheads, 22% ($806,825) to program administration and delivery costs (including monitoring and evaluation), and 16% ($604,137) to homeowner costs associated with fixture installations. An average of 1.4 toilets and 1.6 showerheads were installed per household at a total program cost of just under $323 per household. Of this amount, Government agencies contributed $270 of this amount and residents themselves paid the remaining $53.
Measuring Achievements
The success of the program was gauged using five parameters:
•The number of households that joined the program.
•The amount of water consumed before and after the installation of the toilets and showerheads. Water consumption in 1,866 households was compared for six months after the installations with rates prior to installation. A further, more detailed analysis was done on a sample of 15 households using in line water metering to obtain a water use profile for the house from all water using fixtures. This was done for one to two weeks prior to the installation and again for one to two weeks after installation.
•The wastewater flow reductions estimated from water consumption savings.
•The publics reaction to the program. Follow-up interviews with randomly selected households were conducted, and householders were asked about the performance of the toilets, the quality of the installation work, if the program guidelines were easy to follow, and why they participated in the program.
•The cost effectiveness of the program as measured by net deferral of capital expenditure attributable to the program.
Results
By February 1999, a total of 11,500 households (over one third of the 1994 housing stock) had joined the program, and 14,200 ULF toilets had been installed. The follow-up interviews with householders showed exceptionally high approval ratings for both the administration of the program (90% satisfied or better) and the ULF toilets (93% satisfied or better).
Reduction in water consumption was estimated by analysing actual consumption in 1,866 of the recruited households before and after installation of the fixtures. The results showed that water consumption was reduced by an average of 62 litres per day per person, 12 liters (24%) over the goal of 50 litres per day per household, with an estimated total savings of 1,782,500 liters per day or 1,782 cubic meters per day.
The reduction in wastewater flow was more difficult to measure as some of the water reduction was due to the elimination of lawn watering in the colder months. Allowing for this, it was estimated that wastewater flow was reduced by 55 litres per day per household. Of the households involved, it was estimated that wastewater flow was reduced by 1,335 cubic metres per day.
The effluent quality upgrades under way in 1998 at the WPCC were expected to cost about $19.2M of the total projected cost of $41M. The cost of a new UV disinfection system represented about $0.5M of this total, and was expected to cost approximately $15,000 per year in operating costs. In addition, the maintenance costs were higher than with the old chlorine system, requiring 20 person-hours per week compared to 3 person-hours per week for chlorine. These costs, however, represented only about a 0.5% increase in the total operating and maintenance budget.
The projected costs associated with wastewater flow increases were $21.8M. The Citys $3.1M program investment, therefore, translated into a net deferral of $18.7M for 7 years. The projected cost of a new water filtration plant on Kempenfelt Bay, an additional $27M, has also been deferred seven years.
The deferral of site works for both the WPCC and new water filtration plant meant deferral of the disruption to both the aquatic and terrestrial environment that construction would have caused. The program also meant the deferral of a possible disruption to water levels and water flows in Kempenfelt Bay and Lake Simcoe that the water filtration plant may have caused.
The UV disinfection system has eliminated the discharge of chlorine and its derivatives into the bay, and bacteriological treatment of the waste has been improved.
The OCWA calculated that 825 jobs, over and above those that would have been created by the infrastructure program, have and will be created by the labour-intensive nature of the water conservation program.
Contacts
For more information on the program
Green Industry Office
135 St.Clair Avenue West, 5th Floor
Toronto, Ontario, M4V 1P5
Tel: 416-314-7898
Fax: 416-314-7919
E-mail: defoebr@ene.gov.on.ca
Internet: www.ene.gov.on.ca
Mr. Barry Thompson
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street (Box 400)
Barrie, Ontario, L4M 4T5
Tel: 705-739-4220 ext 4557
Fax: 705-739-4247
Email: BaThompson@city.barrie.on.ca
The Writer
This case study was written by Duncan Reilly. Duncan, who is based in Adelaide, South Australia, writes in a variety of styles from commentary to factual, from commercial to technical. Duncan may be contacted at duncanreilly@duncan-reilly.com and samples of his work and CV are available at www.duncanreilly.com.
Funding for the addition of this case study was generously provided by the Government of Canadas Climate Change Action Fund, Suncor, Syncrude, Enbridge Consumers Gas and TetraPak Canada.
Notes
Last updated: July 2004
Background
Note: To minimize site maintenance costs, all case studies on this site are written in the past tense, even if they are ongoing as is the case with this particular program.
In the 1990s, Barrie, Ontario, located on Lake Simcoe, 80 kilometres north of Toronto, was one of Canada's fastest growing communities with a population of 90,000 (expected to reach 185,000 by 2021). Consequently, it had a rapidly growing demand for water and wastewater systems. By 1994, average daily wastewater flows had reached 37,300 cubic metres (nearly 80% of the systems capacity) and the City was faced with a $41M facilities upgrade/sewer infrastructure expansion to accommodate future growth.
The Barrie Public Utilities Commission (PUC) provided the entire City's water through groundwater wells. The projected cost of developing a new surface water supply on Kempenfelt Bay to meet the increased demand was approximately $27M, and construction was scheduled to start in 2000. The City was faced with having to spend $68M on water supply and sewerage over the 10 years from 1994, a cost of over $750 per resident.
The Municipal Works Department conducted an environmental assessment of the sewerage and water supply problems and discovered that, by implementing a conservation strategy, they could postpone most of their capital expenditures by 10-25 years and defer interest payments on the necessary borrowings. A plan to install low flow toilets and showerheads to 15,000 homes, to reduce both wastewater flows and water usage, was developed in partnership with the Ontario Clean Water Agency and the Ministry of Environment .
The program proved beneficial, not only to the City but also to residential and industrial water users, as conservation savings were reflected in their metered water charges.
As a result, only one upgrade was required over the 1995 to 2001 period - to handle the increased discharges of solids associated with population growth. That upgrade replaced the existing chlorination system with an ultra violet light disinfection system, which reduced the concentration of chlorine derivatives into Kempenfelt Bay and Lake Simcoe. Although the cost of maintaining the new system was higher than the chlorine system, it was only about 0.5% of the total operating and maintenance costs.
Setting Objectives
The City set a goal to save 50 litres of water per consumer per day in 15,000 households about 55% of Barrie's 1994 housing stock by February 1999. This translated into about a 5.5% reduction in average day flows. It also wanted to defer major capital expenditures for 3-5 years.
Delivering the Program
The program focused on replacing standard showerheads and toilets in existing homes with ultra low flow (ULF) ones. These devices reduced water demand and wastewater flow as there was less water flushed through each homes system. The ULF toilets, approved by the Canadian Standards Association, used 6 litres per flush instead of the typical 20 litres, while the low flow showerheads reduced flow from 16-20 litres per minute to 9.5 litres per minute while still delivering optimal water pressure.
To offset installation costs (Overcoming Specific Barriers), the City developed a list of contractors who agreed to a set price for each installation: $53 for one ULF toilet and $85 for two. Contractors were asked to bid on:
•The cost to install one, two or three toilets in a single family home,
•The cost to install one showerhead and two aerators in a single family home, and
•The cost to install 1-10, 11-25, 26-50 and 50+ toilets and the cost to install the same number of showerheads in multi-residential buildings.
The lowest tender then gave that contractor exclusive rights to a number of multi-residences and/or single-family homes.
Specifications for the materials required were provided, so that householders were given the option of installing the devices themselves or using a qualified plumber, then notifying the City once the work was completed.
Promotion
The program was advertised through newspapers, permanent displays at home shows and shopping malls, and inserts posted to consumers with their water bills (Mass Media). The Green Community Initiative and Environmental Action Barrie (non-profit organisations) also promoted the program.
The promotional material included details of the different models of ULF toilets, shower heads and aerators available, and asked consumers to contact the City for more information about joining the program. It was also explained that if the program did not conserve a sufficient amount of water, the City would be faced with expensive additions to the water pollution control plant and possibly an additional water treatment centre, all of which could raise water rates (Building Motivation Over Time). The program was open to all Barrie residents.
The City sent information kits to those householders and landlords who inquired about the program. The kits included a list of eligible water-saving devices, program guidelines, and a list of plumbing contractors who were successful in the tendering process.
An energy/water/waste audit was conducted on some of the homes to ensure that the ULF toilets and showerheads were needed and to set a baseline for later comparisons.
A rebate program was also developed. The City offered householders a $145 rebate per toilet, which meant that most toilets were free to the homeowner. Any toilet upgrade costs above the $145 rebate were the responsibility of the homeowner. Low flow showerheads were also offered at a rebate cost of $8 each (Financial Incentives). The householder would pay the bill for the toilet(s) and showerhead(s) and then mail the receipt to the City for the rebate. Householders covered the cost of installation.
For a one-time investment of between $53 for one toilet or $85 for two (which could be paid for with interest-free instalments on their water bill Overcoming Specific Barriers) the householder could expect an ongoing reduction in their water charges. The reduction in the bill quickly offset their small investment.
Financing the Program
A partnership including the City, the Ontario Clean Water Agency (OCWA) and the Ministry of Environment covered materials and program administration costs. OCWA provided $1.1 million, the City provided $2 million, and other sources contributed the remaining .6 million. Ontario Hydro, Consumers Gas, Environmental Action Barrie, the PUC, and property owners provided additional support. The breakdown of costs was 22% administration including monitoring and evaluation ($806,825) 62% for fixtures and rebates ($2,305,221) and 16% for residents ($604,137) for installation. The cost per household was $323 total (11,500 households) $270 by government and $53 by residents
From the start of the program in early 1995 to the end of the program in February 1999, $3.7M was spent assisting 11,500 households. Approximately 62% ($2,305,221) of the total costs went to fixtures and rebates for the toilets and showerheads, 22% ($806,825) to program administration and delivery costs (including monitoring and evaluation), and 16% ($604,137) to homeowner costs associated with fixture installations. An average of 1.4 toilets and 1.6 showerheads were installed per household at a total program cost of just under $323 per household. Of this amount, Government agencies contributed $270 of this amount and residents themselves paid the remaining $53.
Measuring Achievements
The success of the program was gauged using five parameters:
•The number of households that joined the program.
•The amount of water consumed before and after the installation of the toilets and showerheads. Water consumption in 1,866 households was compared for six months after the installations with rates prior to installation. A further, more detailed analysis was done on a sample of 15 households using in line water metering to obtain a water use profile for the house from all water using fixtures. This was done for one to two weeks prior to the installation and again for one to two weeks after installation.
•The wastewater flow reductions estimated from water consumption savings.
•The publics reaction to the program. Follow-up interviews with randomly selected households were conducted, and householders were asked about the performance of the toilets, the quality of the installation work, if the program guidelines were easy to follow, and why they participated in the program.
•The cost effectiveness of the program as measured by net deferral of capital expenditure attributable to the program.
Results
By February 1999, a total of 11,500 households (over one third of the 1994 housing stock) had joined the program, and 14,200 ULF toilets had been installed. The follow-up interviews with householders showed exceptionally high approval ratings for both the administration of the program (90% satisfied or better) and the ULF toilets (93% satisfied or better).
Reduction in water consumption was estimated by analysing actual consumption in 1,866 of the recruited households before and after installation of the fixtures. The results showed that water consumption was reduced by an average of 62 litres per day per person, 12 liters (24%) over the goal of 50 litres per day per household, with an estimated total savings of 1,782,500 liters per day or 1,782 cubic meters per day.
The reduction in wastewater flow was more difficult to measure as some of the water reduction was due to the elimination of lawn watering in the colder months. Allowing for this, it was estimated that wastewater flow was reduced by 55 litres per day per household. Of the households involved, it was estimated that wastewater flow was reduced by 1,335 cubic metres per day.
The effluent quality upgrades under way in 1998 at the WPCC were expected to cost about $19.2M of the total projected cost of $41M. The cost of a new UV disinfection system represented about $0.5M of this total, and was expected to cost approximately $15,000 per year in operating costs. In addition, the maintenance costs were higher than with the old chlorine system, requiring 20 person-hours per week compared to 3 person-hours per week for chlorine. These costs, however, represented only about a 0.5% increase in the total operating and maintenance budget.
The projected costs associated with wastewater flow increases were $21.8M. The Citys $3.1M program investment, therefore, translated into a net deferral of $18.7M for 7 years. The projected cost of a new water filtration plant on Kempenfelt Bay, an additional $27M, has also been deferred seven years.
The deferral of site works for both the WPCC and new water filtration plant meant deferral of the disruption to both the aquatic and terrestrial environment that construction would have caused. The program also meant the deferral of a possible disruption to water levels and water flows in Kempenfelt Bay and Lake Simcoe that the water filtration plant may have caused.
The UV disinfection system has eliminated the discharge of chlorine and its derivatives into the bay, and bacteriological treatment of the waste has been improved.
The OCWA calculated that 825 jobs, over and above those that would have been created by the infrastructure program, have and will be created by the labour-intensive nature of the water conservation program.
Contacts
For more information on the program
Green Industry Office
135 St.Clair Avenue West, 5th Floor
Toronto, Ontario, M4V 1P5
Tel: 416-314-7898
Fax: 416-314-7919
E-mail: defoebr@ene.gov.on.ca
Internet: www.ene.gov.on.ca
Mr. Barry Thompson
City of Barrie
70 Collier Street (Box 400)
Barrie, Ontario, L4M 4T5
Tel: 705-739-4220 ext 4557
Fax: 705-739-4247
Email: BaThompson@city.barrie.on.ca
The Writer
This case study was written by Duncan Reilly. Duncan, who is based in Adelaide, South Australia, writes in a variety of styles from commentary to factual, from commercial to technical. Duncan may be contacted at duncanreilly@duncan-reilly.com and samples of his work and CV are available at www.duncanreilly.com.
Funding for the addition of this case study was generously provided by the Government of Canadas Climate Change Action Fund, Suncor, Syncrude, Enbridge Consumers Gas and TetraPak Canada.
Notes
Last updated: July 2004
Be Water Wise. It Makes Cents
To promote water efficiency and reduce water consumption, residents were offered home visits conducted by trained volunteers and the opportunity to obtain discounts on home water-saving devices.
Background
In April 1996, The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation launched the Be Water Wise ... It Makes Cents program in response to concerns about diminishing supplies of clean water. It was implemented in the three municipalities of Sackville, Bedford (urban) and New Glasgow (rural), with a total population of 55,000.
Getting Informed
To test their assumption that cost and convenience could be barriers to participating in a water conservation program, The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation conducted preliminary research through the Internet to investigate other water conservation programs that had been implemented in Canada and the United States. This research substantiated their assumptions, so the program was designed to minimize or eliminate these barriers.
Originally, the Be Water Wise ... It Makes Cents program was to include kits containing only low-flow shower heads and faucet aerators. The program was modified to include the ultra low-flow toilets when research revealed that water consumption could be reduced by 20 percent in homes which installed these water-saving devices.
Delivering the Program
The campaign began with a news conference on Earth Day, April 22, 1996, during which organizers displayed and described the water saving devices. Local radio and television stations aired news releases, public service announcements, interviews and quizzes. Local newspapers featured stories about "waste-wise" families, and printed much of the same information covered by radio and television. The program was also promoted in the three municipalities' newsletters. Inserts were included in telephone and power bills.
An Internet Web site provided information on the program, and further information was provided at Bedford Days, Arbor Day, Canada Day, as well as at home shows. Community centres, public libraries, museums, and The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation affiliates (Bedford and New Glasgow EnviroTown Programs) were also provided with information.
One hundred households selected from each of the three communities received a 10-minute home visit conducted by trained volunteers (Home Visits). During this visit the program was outlined and an information package on water conservation delivered. The package contained an explanation of the program, a fact sheet on waste reduction, a brochure explaining why and how to conserve water in the home, and a program sign to post in the window (Norm Appeals and Building Motivation Over Time).
Following this, participants were asked to sign a commitment form stating that they would reduce water consumption for one year. The participants were told that all committed water-savers would be publicly recognized in the local newspaper and at a news conference the next year (Obtaining a Commitment).
Ninety-two participants from this group signed commitment forms. People commented that the form was too long and complicated.
A second group of 300 households (100 from each community) were given the opportunity to receive a retrofit kit in addition to a 20-minute home visit and the information package. The retrofit kit offered participants a rebate of $9 per low-flow shower head, $5 per faucet aerator, $177 per ultra low-flow toilet and $30 per toilet installation (Financial Incentives and Disincentives). The total cost per household was estimated to be $219 before the rebate; $75 plus tax after the rebate. Since running the program, The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation decided that it would be more cost effective to pay the rebates through the local water utility bill. This would reduce the administrative and accounting costs of issuing rebates by combining them with an existing billing system.
These rebates were used to overcome the cost barrier identified in the initial research. The convenience barrier was addressed by the home visits and by providing a list of approved plumbers who could install the toilets (Overcoming Specific Barriers). Following the home visit, a public commitment to reduce water consumption for one year was also requested from this group.
Financing the Program
The budget for the Be Water Wise ... It Makes Cents program was $45,000. Operating costs amounted to $30,000, as follows:
Salaries $ 15,000
Printed material $ 600
Advertising $ 4,400
Other $10,000
The cost of subsidies for the water-saving devices was $15,000.
Measuring Achievements
Water consumption levels were measured for two months preceding the program launch, and periodically throughout the program.
Participants were randomly selected from each of the three municipalities. A third group of 300 randomly selected residents served as a control group, who did not receive a home visit and were not asked to make a commitment to the program. Their only source of information about the Be Water Wise program was the public education campaign.
All the participants were asked to complete a telephone survey at the end of the summer of 1996. This survey measured changes in attitudes and water consumption behaviour.
Results
The response to the retrofit kit approach was poor. Apparently, the public education campaign had not adequately prepared residents who were visited to consider purchasing the water-saving devices. When they were later offered to all residents in the three communities through a message printed on their water utility bill, the remaining kits were sold.
The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation felt that a stronger education campaign would result in more interest in water conservation and the installation of water-saving devices. They expressed that, in future, they would like to allocate more money toward education.
At the time of writing, this project was still ongoing. The results to date have not shown any significant reductions in water usage, relative to the control group.
Contacts
Steve Machat
Executive Director
Clean Nova Scotia
126 Portland Street
Dartmouth, NS
B2Y 1H8
(902) 420 3476
Email: CNS@clean.ns.ca
Web Site: www.clean.ns.ca
Notes
Last revised: July, 2004
Background
In April 1996, The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation launched the Be Water Wise ... It Makes Cents program in response to concerns about diminishing supplies of clean water. It was implemented in the three municipalities of Sackville, Bedford (urban) and New Glasgow (rural), with a total population of 55,000.
Getting Informed
To test their assumption that cost and convenience could be barriers to participating in a water conservation program, The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation conducted preliminary research through the Internet to investigate other water conservation programs that had been implemented in Canada and the United States. This research substantiated their assumptions, so the program was designed to minimize or eliminate these barriers.
Originally, the Be Water Wise ... It Makes Cents program was to include kits containing only low-flow shower heads and faucet aerators. The program was modified to include the ultra low-flow toilets when research revealed that water consumption could be reduced by 20 percent in homes which installed these water-saving devices.
Delivering the Program
The campaign began with a news conference on Earth Day, April 22, 1996, during which organizers displayed and described the water saving devices. Local radio and television stations aired news releases, public service announcements, interviews and quizzes. Local newspapers featured stories about "waste-wise" families, and printed much of the same information covered by radio and television. The program was also promoted in the three municipalities' newsletters. Inserts were included in telephone and power bills.
An Internet Web site provided information on the program, and further information was provided at Bedford Days, Arbor Day, Canada Day, as well as at home shows. Community centres, public libraries, museums, and The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation affiliates (Bedford and New Glasgow EnviroTown Programs) were also provided with information.
One hundred households selected from each of the three communities received a 10-minute home visit conducted by trained volunteers (Home Visits). During this visit the program was outlined and an information package on water conservation delivered. The package contained an explanation of the program, a fact sheet on waste reduction, a brochure explaining why and how to conserve water in the home, and a program sign to post in the window (Norm Appeals and Building Motivation Over Time).
Following this, participants were asked to sign a commitment form stating that they would reduce water consumption for one year. The participants were told that all committed water-savers would be publicly recognized in the local newspaper and at a news conference the next year (Obtaining a Commitment).
Ninety-two participants from this group signed commitment forms. People commented that the form was too long and complicated.
A second group of 300 households (100 from each community) were given the opportunity to receive a retrofit kit in addition to a 20-minute home visit and the information package. The retrofit kit offered participants a rebate of $9 per low-flow shower head, $5 per faucet aerator, $177 per ultra low-flow toilet and $30 per toilet installation (Financial Incentives and Disincentives). The total cost per household was estimated to be $219 before the rebate; $75 plus tax after the rebate. Since running the program, The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation decided that it would be more cost effective to pay the rebates through the local water utility bill. This would reduce the administrative and accounting costs of issuing rebates by combining them with an existing billing system.
These rebates were used to overcome the cost barrier identified in the initial research. The convenience barrier was addressed by the home visits and by providing a list of approved plumbers who could install the toilets (Overcoming Specific Barriers). Following the home visit, a public commitment to reduce water consumption for one year was also requested from this group.
Financing the Program
The budget for the Be Water Wise ... It Makes Cents program was $45,000. Operating costs amounted to $30,000, as follows:
Salaries $ 15,000
Printed material $ 600
Advertising $ 4,400
Other $10,000
The cost of subsidies for the water-saving devices was $15,000.
Measuring Achievements
Water consumption levels were measured for two months preceding the program launch, and periodically throughout the program.
Participants were randomly selected from each of the three municipalities. A third group of 300 randomly selected residents served as a control group, who did not receive a home visit and were not asked to make a commitment to the program. Their only source of information about the Be Water Wise program was the public education campaign.
All the participants were asked to complete a telephone survey at the end of the summer of 1996. This survey measured changes in attitudes and water consumption behaviour.
Results
The response to the retrofit kit approach was poor. Apparently, the public education campaign had not adequately prepared residents who were visited to consider purchasing the water-saving devices. When they were later offered to all residents in the three communities through a message printed on their water utility bill, the remaining kits were sold.
The Clean Nova Scotia Foundation felt that a stronger education campaign would result in more interest in water conservation and the installation of water-saving devices. They expressed that, in future, they would like to allocate more money toward education.
At the time of writing, this project was still ongoing. The results to date have not shown any significant reductions in water usage, relative to the control group.
Contacts
Steve Machat
Executive Director
Clean Nova Scotia
126 Portland Street
Dartmouth, NS
B2Y 1H8
(902) 420 3476
Email: CNS@clean.ns.ca
Web Site: www.clean.ns.ca
Notes
Last revised: July, 2004
Bert the Salmon: Promoting Natural Lawn Care in the Seattle Area
An extremely successful, media-based public relations campaign has convinced hundreds of thousands of Seattle-area homeowners to turn their backs on many environmentally harmful lawn care practices and embrace elements of natural lawn care. The campaign also uses a habit change kit that includes a lawn sign.
Background
In the mid-1990s, residents, businesses and government in King County (which includes Puget Sound and the Seattle area, in Washington State, USA) used about 1.1 millionpounds of pesticides a year. Meanwhile, the areas 1.1 million homeowners generated nearly 550,000 tons of grass clippings. The pesticides had a negative impact on water quality, stream health and therefore wildlife habitat, while the grass clippings threatened to push the local composting facility beyond capacity. Furthermore, homeowners used almost twice the amount of water during summer as they did in winter, which threatened to strain the regions water supply. Much of this summer water consumption was for lawn watering and other outdoor use. In 1996 a consortium of public agencies led by Seattle Public Utilities and King County hired PRR, The Frause Group and Brumley Communications to devise and implement a program that would convince as many homeowners in the area as possible to adopt natural lawn care (NLC).
Setting Objectives
The programs overall goal was to change the northwest lawn care ethic so that homeowners would move towards environmental best practices for lawn care. The specific behaviour changes it hoped to achieve were the following:
•to increase the number of people who practice grasscycling
•to decrease the number of people who use weed-n-feed products on their lawns
•to decrease the amount of water used on lawns
No specific targets were set for the objectives.
Getting Informed
The program found its target audience through a poll of 400 Seattle area residents. The poll determined that male homeowners from 25 to 54 years of age with a household income of $30,000 or more were most likely to own a lawn that they cared forthemselves. Subsequent focus group research showed that while the group was interestedin behaving in a responsible way, most were not receptive to learning complex lawn care techniques.
We learned that we had to keep the message as simple as possible, said Julie Colehour, Director of Marketing at PRR. Also, the focus groups showed us that the target audience was more receptive and learned better through an upbeat message rather than a doom and gloom message.
Delivering the Program
The team developed a simple message for the campaign that it could adapt to use in allmedia and at all events. The slogan was: When it comes to your lawn, act naturally. To reinforce the slogan, the team developed a friendly character called Bert the Salmon to act as spokesfish and deliver the NLC message in a humourous way.
According to Colehour, Bert was not your typical salmon. He was developed to appeal to the male target audience in terms of look, style and tone, she said. He wears a baseball cap and jacket and has a sense of humor. The fact that he is a salmon sends an underlying message of why NLC is important.
In the course of its research the communications team determined that an integrated community outreach approach was the best method to reach the target audience. It recognized that NLC was a difficult concept for communities to grasp and therefo reopted for a grassroots approach. The promotional campaign included the following activities:
•television and radio advertising during Seattle Mariners baseball games
•media relations and promotional events at which news media would be present
•support materials, including habit change kits, lawn care information brochuresand a promotional video
•education at special events such as the Garden Show and Home Show. This included distribution of literature and one-on-one education to interested parties.
Advertising
The cornerstone of the campaign was television advertising aired during Seattle Mariners baseball games (Mass Media). Because the target audience was men, the communication steam reasoned that baseball was an excellent venue for getting its message across. A 30-second ad, which cost $25,000 to produce, was aired in 1998 and 2000. The group spent $260,000 in 1998 and $230,000 in 2000 to air the ads.
The two years where we aired the ads on Mariners TV were the two years where we saw the biggest behavior changes, said Colehour. While polling showed continuous improvement in all three behaviour areas over the four years of the campaign, the largest movements happened during the two years where we used Mariners TV advertising.
In 1997 and 1999 the program also advertised NLC during Mariners radio baseball games. It rotated radio spots over nine weeks from April through August, which coincided with the growing season. Ads that focused on grasscycling predominated inApril and June. From June to August the irrigation season in Seattle the programaired ads aimed at water conservation. In 1999, the program again focused on radio advertising. That year the communications team worked with Mariners to produce 19 NLC tips that it broadcast during the games. During the 15-second tips, Bert the Salmon interacted with a Mariners team member. The advertising cost $210,000 in 1997 and $128,000 in 1999.
Engaging the news media
Engaging the news media effectively was another critical aspect of the NLC campaign (Mass Media). We held many media events and got lots of news coverage, said Colehour. Because we used various vehicles to disseminate information, people heard the message several times.
Each year the communications team developed a different media hook to get the public interested.
•In 1997, the team invited the media to the home of a resident who practiced NLC. The media talked with the resident about NLC and showed the result - a great looking lawn. Public officials were on hand to discuss the program with reporters.
•In 1998 a junior high school student wrote to Seattle Mayor Paul Schell to complain he was afraid for his pets because of pesticide spraying in hisneighborhood. Several local newspapers published his letter, which led to a community forum at the teens home. Schell conducted the event and the news media showed up in droves. Every local television station covered the forum and the two leading Seattle newspapers ran front-page feature articles. Community newspapers gave the event extensive coverage and radio stations conducted several interviews. The communications team considered the event one of its most successful public relations events.
•In 1999, the team issued a press release about how an increase in diazinon pesticide use during August and September could harm birds and fish, including the Chinook Salmon. It also pointed out that adult crane flies cannot be controlled with diazinon pesticides. The press release, which got extensive media coverage, asked people to embrace NLC as an alternative. In a second media push that year the communications team recruited all Seattle public libraries to stop using pesticides on their grounds. Mayor Schell announced the change at a library media event and asked citizens to adopt the same practices at home.
•In 2000 the team recruited an entire neighborhood in Renton Hill to dispense with lawn chemicals and embrace grass mulching for the season. The group offered each of the 19 households a free Black and Decker electric mulching lawn mower (Black and Decker donated the mowers to the communication steam), free lawn care consultations and free environmentally friendly lawn care products such as organic fertilizers (Financial Incentives; Overcoming Specific Barriers). In return, the team asked residents to pull weeds by hand, water their lawns sparingly instead of daily and to dispose of all their chemical pesticides for six months (Obtaining a Commitment). The team invited the media to the program launch.
The Renton Hill event was very successful, said Colehour. We had shots of little old ladies wheeling their gas mowers away and people using wheelbarrows to get rid of their pesticides. The media attention we got was very helpful in publicizing NLC. At the endof the summer all but two of the Renton Hill neighbors said they would continue to use NLC. The communications team asked the media back to discuss the experience with residents. Both media events gave substantial coverage to the program and many nearby neighbors asked how they could participate.
What we hope is that with all the media and other exposure the peer pressure to have a perfect lawn will start working the other way around, said Colehour. We want people to feel the pressure to stop using pesticides and to embrace NLC.
Support Materials
Before the campaigns 1997 launch, the communications team developed a basic brochure on how to practice NLC. It distributed the brochure at various seminars and events such as the Home Show, the Garden Show and neighborhood meetings. It also distributed through Seattle Public Utilities, King County and through its toll-free phoneline (Mass Media). The brochure featured Bert the Salmon on virtually every page and listed six steps to using NLC (Overcoming Specific Barriers):
•Mow high, mow often and leave the clippings.
•Fertilize moderately in May and September with natural organic or slowrelease fertilizer.
•Water deeply to moisten the root zone, but infrequently.
•Improve poor lawns with aeration and over-seeding. Consider fixing the soiland replanting.
•Think twice before using weed n feed or other pesticides.
•Consider alternatives to lawns for steep slopes, shady areas, or near streamsand lakes.
In 1999 the communications team identified the need to support the excellent media coverage of NLC with a package of specific instructions about how to get started. To do this it developed a habit change kit that included the NLC brochure and other pamphlets loaded with practical information on how to use alternative pesticides, how to water lawns effectively and minimally and how to care for lawns without pesticides or excessive water use. The kit also included a Bert the Salmon lawn sign so people could show their neighbors they practiced NLC (Norm Appeals). The team distributed the kits at special events and through the NLC hotline.
The program used utility bill inserts to disseminate its message. These inserts focused primarily on water conservation and the impact of excessive water use on lakes and streams and, therefore, on salmon. Over the course of the program, Seattle Public Utilities distributed hundreds of thousands of inserts to its customers (Mass Media;Prompts).
The group produced a nine-and-a-half minute video for use during NLC speaker presentations at community centres and for free distribution to every customer who purchased a mulching lawn mower through a mulch mower rebate program. In addition, it was provided to interested neighborhood groups and streamed free of charge on the King County Web site and the King County Department of Natural Resources Web page. It cost $24,000 to produce.
The reason the campaign worked so well was that we used an integrated approach, said Colehour.
Financing the Program
Campaign Mix 1997 1998 1999 2000
Strategy/Planning 8,544 5,190 25,061 10,000
Creative development and
production of ads, flyers, etc. 70,800 44,668 28,000 40,000
PR/Outreach 17,751 28,005 41,000 40,000
Media planning and purchase
(buying air time) 210,542 260,000 128,000 236,000
Creative testing
(focus groups) 0 11,405 0 0
Neighborhood meetings 0 0 45,000 10,000
Habit change kit 0 0 20,500 5,000
Targeted population outreach
(including promotional video) 0 0 29,500 0
Grasscycling education
(participation at mulch mower
sales events) 0 0 3,000 3,000
Evaluation (polling) 5,992 14,077 33,000 10,000
Project management 0 4,543 12,088 6,000
TOTAL 313,629 367,888 365,149 360,000
Measuring Achievements
Over the four years of the campaign, the communications team conducted eight consumer polls one before the summer season and one in the fall - in which it asked 400 residents about each of the three behaviours the communications team was trying to change. Frequent polling made it possible to assess the effects of each stage of the promotion strategy.
Results
Between 1997 and 2001, periodic polling has documented the following behaviourchanges.
•The percentage of the population that leave their grass clippings on their lawnsmost of the time has increased from 27.7 per cent to 41 per cent (146,300households).
•The percentage of the population that does not use weed-n-feed or a similarpesticide-containing product on their lawns has increased from 46.8 per cent to60 per cent (145,200 households).
•The percentage of the population that does not water their lawns has increasedfrom 18.4 per cent to 34 per cent (171,600 households).
Contacts
Julie Colehour
Colehour+Cohen
1417 Fourth Avenue, Suite 201
Seattle, Washington 98101
Tel: (206) 262-0364
E-mail: jcolehour@colehourcohen.com
Web site: www.colehourcohen.com
Notes
In March 2002, Go for Green, in partnership with Environment Canada, Home Depot and Tools of Change, hosted a Forum on Public Education Strategies to encourage "Gardening for Life" in Toronto to develop an educational model on sustainable lawn and garden practices for homeowners. The result was the release of a Gardening for Life blueprint and the "Bert the Salmon" case study providing municipalities with much needed strategies on how to encourage citizens to become more physically active in lawn and garden care by using non-motorized tools and pesticide-free approaches.
Click here to view the Gardening for Life blueprint and related papers.
Last updated: July 2004
Click for Advanced Search »
My Account [ Log Out ]
My Plans
Ivete's Plan
Save Your Project
Help
Terms of Use
This site is brought to you through
the vision and generosity of:
Primary Sponsors
Supporting Sponsors
Background
In the mid-1990s, residents, businesses and government in King County (which includes Puget Sound and the Seattle area, in Washington State, USA) used about 1.1 millionpounds of pesticides a year. Meanwhile, the areas 1.1 million homeowners generated nearly 550,000 tons of grass clippings. The pesticides had a negative impact on water quality, stream health and therefore wildlife habitat, while the grass clippings threatened to push the local composting facility beyond capacity. Furthermore, homeowners used almost twice the amount of water during summer as they did in winter, which threatened to strain the regions water supply. Much of this summer water consumption was for lawn watering and other outdoor use. In 1996 a consortium of public agencies led by Seattle Public Utilities and King County hired PRR, The Frause Group and Brumley Communications to devise and implement a program that would convince as many homeowners in the area as possible to adopt natural lawn care (NLC).
Setting Objectives
The programs overall goal was to change the northwest lawn care ethic so that homeowners would move towards environmental best practices for lawn care. The specific behaviour changes it hoped to achieve were the following:
•to increase the number of people who practice grasscycling
•to decrease the number of people who use weed-n-feed products on their lawns
•to decrease the amount of water used on lawns
No specific targets were set for the objectives.
Getting Informed
The program found its target audience through a poll of 400 Seattle area residents. The poll determined that male homeowners from 25 to 54 years of age with a household income of $30,000 or more were most likely to own a lawn that they cared forthemselves. Subsequent focus group research showed that while the group was interestedin behaving in a responsible way, most were not receptive to learning complex lawn care techniques.
We learned that we had to keep the message as simple as possible, said Julie Colehour, Director of Marketing at PRR. Also, the focus groups showed us that the target audience was more receptive and learned better through an upbeat message rather than a doom and gloom message.
Delivering the Program
The team developed a simple message for the campaign that it could adapt to use in allmedia and at all events. The slogan was: When it comes to your lawn, act naturally. To reinforce the slogan, the team developed a friendly character called Bert the Salmon to act as spokesfish and deliver the NLC message in a humourous way.
According to Colehour, Bert was not your typical salmon. He was developed to appeal to the male target audience in terms of look, style and tone, she said. He wears a baseball cap and jacket and has a sense of humor. The fact that he is a salmon sends an underlying message of why NLC is important.
In the course of its research the communications team determined that an integrated community outreach approach was the best method to reach the target audience. It recognized that NLC was a difficult concept for communities to grasp and therefo reopted for a grassroots approach. The promotional campaign included the following activities:
•television and radio advertising during Seattle Mariners baseball games
•media relations and promotional events at which news media would be present
•support materials, including habit change kits, lawn care information brochuresand a promotional video
•education at special events such as the Garden Show and Home Show. This included distribution of literature and one-on-one education to interested parties.
Advertising
The cornerstone of the campaign was television advertising aired during Seattle Mariners baseball games (Mass Media). Because the target audience was men, the communication steam reasoned that baseball was an excellent venue for getting its message across. A 30-second ad, which cost $25,000 to produce, was aired in 1998 and 2000. The group spent $260,000 in 1998 and $230,000 in 2000 to air the ads.
The two years where we aired the ads on Mariners TV were the two years where we saw the biggest behavior changes, said Colehour. While polling showed continuous improvement in all three behaviour areas over the four years of the campaign, the largest movements happened during the two years where we used Mariners TV advertising.
In 1997 and 1999 the program also advertised NLC during Mariners radio baseball games. It rotated radio spots over nine weeks from April through August, which coincided with the growing season. Ads that focused on grasscycling predominated inApril and June. From June to August the irrigation season in Seattle the programaired ads aimed at water conservation. In 1999, the program again focused on radio advertising. That year the communications team worked with Mariners to produce 19 NLC tips that it broadcast during the games. During the 15-second tips, Bert the Salmon interacted with a Mariners team member. The advertising cost $210,000 in 1997 and $128,000 in 1999.
Engaging the news media
Engaging the news media effectively was another critical aspect of the NLC campaign (Mass Media). We held many media events and got lots of news coverage, said Colehour. Because we used various vehicles to disseminate information, people heard the message several times.
Each year the communications team developed a different media hook to get the public interested.
•In 1997, the team invited the media to the home of a resident who practiced NLC. The media talked with the resident about NLC and showed the result - a great looking lawn. Public officials were on hand to discuss the program with reporters.
•In 1998 a junior high school student wrote to Seattle Mayor Paul Schell to complain he was afraid for his pets because of pesticide spraying in hisneighborhood. Several local newspapers published his letter, which led to a community forum at the teens home. Schell conducted the event and the news media showed up in droves. Every local television station covered the forum and the two leading Seattle newspapers ran front-page feature articles. Community newspapers gave the event extensive coverage and radio stations conducted several interviews. The communications team considered the event one of its most successful public relations events.
•In 1999, the team issued a press release about how an increase in diazinon pesticide use during August and September could harm birds and fish, including the Chinook Salmon. It also pointed out that adult crane flies cannot be controlled with diazinon pesticides. The press release, which got extensive media coverage, asked people to embrace NLC as an alternative. In a second media push that year the communications team recruited all Seattle public libraries to stop using pesticides on their grounds. Mayor Schell announced the change at a library media event and asked citizens to adopt the same practices at home.
•In 2000 the team recruited an entire neighborhood in Renton Hill to dispense with lawn chemicals and embrace grass mulching for the season. The group offered each of the 19 households a free Black and Decker electric mulching lawn mower (Black and Decker donated the mowers to the communication steam), free lawn care consultations and free environmentally friendly lawn care products such as organic fertilizers (Financial Incentives; Overcoming Specific Barriers). In return, the team asked residents to pull weeds by hand, water their lawns sparingly instead of daily and to dispose of all their chemical pesticides for six months (Obtaining a Commitment). The team invited the media to the program launch.
The Renton Hill event was very successful, said Colehour. We had shots of little old ladies wheeling their gas mowers away and people using wheelbarrows to get rid of their pesticides. The media attention we got was very helpful in publicizing NLC. At the endof the summer all but two of the Renton Hill neighbors said they would continue to use NLC. The communications team asked the media back to discuss the experience with residents. Both media events gave substantial coverage to the program and many nearby neighbors asked how they could participate.
What we hope is that with all the media and other exposure the peer pressure to have a perfect lawn will start working the other way around, said Colehour. We want people to feel the pressure to stop using pesticides and to embrace NLC.
Support Materials
Before the campaigns 1997 launch, the communications team developed a basic brochure on how to practice NLC. It distributed the brochure at various seminars and events such as the Home Show, the Garden Show and neighborhood meetings. It also distributed through Seattle Public Utilities, King County and through its toll-free phoneline (Mass Media). The brochure featured Bert the Salmon on virtually every page and listed six steps to using NLC (Overcoming Specific Barriers):
•Mow high, mow often and leave the clippings.
•Fertilize moderately in May and September with natural organic or slowrelease fertilizer.
•Water deeply to moisten the root zone, but infrequently.
•Improve poor lawns with aeration and over-seeding. Consider fixing the soiland replanting.
•Think twice before using weed n feed or other pesticides.
•Consider alternatives to lawns for steep slopes, shady areas, or near streamsand lakes.
In 1999 the communications team identified the need to support the excellent media coverage of NLC with a package of specific instructions about how to get started. To do this it developed a habit change kit that included the NLC brochure and other pamphlets loaded with practical information on how to use alternative pesticides, how to water lawns effectively and minimally and how to care for lawns without pesticides or excessive water use. The kit also included a Bert the Salmon lawn sign so people could show their neighbors they practiced NLC (Norm Appeals). The team distributed the kits at special events and through the NLC hotline.
The program used utility bill inserts to disseminate its message. These inserts focused primarily on water conservation and the impact of excessive water use on lakes and streams and, therefore, on salmon. Over the course of the program, Seattle Public Utilities distributed hundreds of thousands of inserts to its customers (Mass Media;Prompts).
The group produced a nine-and-a-half minute video for use during NLC speaker presentations at community centres and for free distribution to every customer who purchased a mulching lawn mower through a mulch mower rebate program. In addition, it was provided to interested neighborhood groups and streamed free of charge on the King County Web site and the King County Department of Natural Resources Web page. It cost $24,000 to produce.
The reason the campaign worked so well was that we used an integrated approach, said Colehour.
Financing the Program
Campaign Mix 1997 1998 1999 2000
Strategy/Planning 8,544 5,190 25,061 10,000
Creative development and
production of ads, flyers, etc. 70,800 44,668 28,000 40,000
PR/Outreach 17,751 28,005 41,000 40,000
Media planning and purchase
(buying air time) 210,542 260,000 128,000 236,000
Creative testing
(focus groups) 0 11,405 0 0
Neighborhood meetings 0 0 45,000 10,000
Habit change kit 0 0 20,500 5,000
Targeted population outreach
(including promotional video) 0 0 29,500 0
Grasscycling education
(participation at mulch mower
sales events) 0 0 3,000 3,000
Evaluation (polling) 5,992 14,077 33,000 10,000
Project management 0 4,543 12,088 6,000
TOTAL 313,629 367,888 365,149 360,000
Measuring Achievements
Over the four years of the campaign, the communications team conducted eight consumer polls one before the summer season and one in the fall - in which it asked 400 residents about each of the three behaviours the communications team was trying to change. Frequent polling made it possible to assess the effects of each stage of the promotion strategy.
Results
Between 1997 and 2001, periodic polling has documented the following behaviourchanges.
•The percentage of the population that leave their grass clippings on their lawnsmost of the time has increased from 27.7 per cent to 41 per cent (146,300households).
•The percentage of the population that does not use weed-n-feed or a similarpesticide-containing product on their lawns has increased from 46.8 per cent to60 per cent (145,200 households).
•The percentage of the population that does not water their lawns has increasedfrom 18.4 per cent to 34 per cent (171,600 households).
Contacts
Julie Colehour
Colehour+Cohen
1417 Fourth Avenue, Suite 201
Seattle, Washington 98101
Tel: (206) 262-0364
E-mail: jcolehour@colehourcohen.com
Web site: www.colehourcohen.com
Notes
In March 2002, Go for Green, in partnership with Environment Canada, Home Depot and Tools of Change, hosted a Forum on Public Education Strategies to encourage "Gardening for Life" in Toronto to develop an educational model on sustainable lawn and garden practices for homeowners. The result was the release of a Gardening for Life blueprint and the "Bert the Salmon" case study providing municipalities with much needed strategies on how to encourage citizens to become more physically active in lawn and garden care by using non-motorized tools and pesticide-free approaches.
Click here to view the Gardening for Life blueprint and related papers.
Last updated: July 2004
Click for Advanced Search »
My Account [ Log Out ]
My Plans
Ivete's Plan
Save Your Project
Help
Terms of Use
This site is brought to you through
the vision and generosity of:
Primary Sponsors
Supporting Sponsors
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)