ACC Studies Curbside Participation

The survey, titled “Curbside Messaging Study: Municipal Officials,” focused on community relationships with recycling facilities, participation in and political support for curbside programs, use of education or communications and commodity-specific issues. According to the ACC, the survey's goal was to identify the most effective ways to encourage materials recovery facilities (MRFs) and municipalities to work together to improve participation in their community curbside recycling programs.

Opinion Research Corp., an independent research and consulting firm headquartered in Princeton, N.J., prepared the survey and conducted it in August 2005.  The overall survey has a 90 percent level of confidence and questioned 200 municipal recycling program decision makers, excluding the 10 states with deposit laws. 

The survey reveals that while many municipal recycling programs are well-established in the community, there is room to increase participation and to explore viable alternatives in collection and contract structures. According to the ACC, many municipal officials also expressed concern over their communications and education programs, and only a minority is satisfied with current results. Revenue sharing in contracts, as well as incentive-based options also surfaced as key priorities for officials looking to re-negotiate contracts.

According to the survey, the typical curbside recycling program is well established, with 86 percent having been in place for more than five years. Additional findings include:

·        Fourty-three percent of curbside programs are funded by taxes, and 41 percent are funded through the resident's garbage bill.

·        Sixty-eight percent of curbside programs pick up materials weekly, with most of the rest picking up every other week.

·        Forty-one percent of recycling programs are single stream and 22 percent are dual stream.

·        Two in 10 communities expect to increase bin size in the near future, while a similar proportion will become either dual stream (from a larger sort) or single stream.

·        Thirty-four percent of municipal officials are proud of the level of participation in their community's curbside programs, yet only one in 10 officials mentions her educational or informational programs as a sign of pride.

·        Nearly two in 10 communities use pay-as-you-throw programs for trash.

The survey claims an average curbside participation rate (measured by set-out rate and reported by those with access to this information) of 58 percent. While missed pickups are the most common causes of residents' complaints (38 percent), many also indicated confusion about what materials are accepted. 

Looking at curbside recycling contracts, the survey found that:

·        Seventy-nine percent of communities contract with one MRF or hauler, and one in four own its own MRF.

·        Most of the communities spend at least some amount on communication to residents, with communities specifying 57 percent of communication spending in their contracts with MRFs and/or haulers.

·        The average MRF contract term is four years, although almost all contracts allow for changes that would increase participation, profitability or efficiency .

·        Just more than one in three contracts specify funding for communication or public education.

·        Seventy-five percent of MRF contracts do not include revenue sharing.

The study also found that only 10 percent of communities receive participation rate data from their MRF/haulers and that only about one in four contracts includes incentives based on either participation or tonnage.

“Even those officials with high participation are seeking ways to re-examine contracts or examine other efficiencies such as pay-as-you-throw or single-stream collections to improve their programs,” Jim Fisher, co-chair of the Aluminum Can Council and vice president of Ball Corp., says. “We plan to utilize what we have learned to continue focusing the efforts of our successful Curbside Value Partnership on better understanding the major issues affecting MRFs and municipalities around the country.  Our goal is to help make their programs even more effective in the future."