Skip to main content
Skip main navigation
No Access

Environmental and social impacts of domestic dog waste in the UK: investigating barriers to behavioural change in dog walkers

Published Online:pp 331-347https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEWM.2014.060452

This study sought to investigate the behaviour and attitudes of dog walkers to picking up and disposing of dog foul, with a specific focus on bagged dog waste. Two research methods were utilised. The first explores locational and social factors influencing dog walkers’ behaviour in picking up and disposing of dog faeces. Dog waste audits were conducted on popular dog walking paths in Lancashire. Secondly, the results were used to deliver an online national dog walking survey. Results of the audits suggested that availability of bins, path morphology, visibility, and path location are key factors in determining the occurrence of dog faeces. In the survey a key factor influencing behaviour was the belief that clearing up after dogs is the ‘right thing to do’ and this was associated with an awareness of health risks. Dog walker typologies are also proposed heuristically, ranging from those dog walkers that are ‘proud to pick up’ who will pick up in any location, through those who make contextual judgements about where and when it could be permissible to leave dog waste, to the ‘disengaged’ who will not pick up even if they are aware of the health and environmental consequences. The study advocates active engagement of dog walkers in tackling this contested, potentially environmentally damaging issue.

Keywords

dogs, dog walkers, environment, fouling, pro-environmental behaviour

References

  • 1. Atenstaedt, R.L. , Jones, S. (2011). ‘Interventions to prevent dog fouling: a systematic review of evidence’. Public Health. 125, 2, 90-92 Google Scholar
  • 2. Bamberg, S. , Möser, G. (2007). ‘Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour’. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 27, 1, 14-25 Google Scholar
  • 3. Campbell, F. (2007). People Who Litter: ENCAMS Research Report. Wigan, UK:ENCAMS Google Scholar
  • 4. Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Dog Control Orders: Guidance of Sections 55 to 67 of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005. London:Defra Publications , (n.d.) Google Scholar
  • 5. ENCAMS (2005). Control of Dogs Survey 2005/06. (accessed 5 June 2012), [online] http://www.keepbritaintidy.org/ImgLibrary/dogfouling_control_dogs_survey_639.pdf Google Scholar
  • 6. Goffman, E. (1966). Behavior in Public Places. Cambridge:The Free Press Google Scholar
  • 7. Innes, E.A. , Bartley, P.M. , Maley, S.W. , Wright, S.E. , Buxton, D. (2007). ‘Comparative host-parasite relationships in ovine toxoplasmosis and bovine neosporosis and strategies for vaccination’. Vaccine. 25, 3, 5495-5503 Google Scholar
  • 8. Kollmuss, A. , Agyeman, J. (2002). ‘Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour’. Environmental Education Research. 8, 3, 239-260 Google Scholar
  • 9. Pet Food Manufacturers Association (PFMA) (2012). UK Pet Population Statistics. (accessed 2 July 2012), [online] http://www.pfma.org.uk/pet-population/ Google Scholar
  • 10. Podberscek, A.L. (1994). ‘Dog on a Tightrope: the position of the dog in British Society as influenced by press reports on dog attacks (1988 to 1992)’. Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of the Interactions of People & Animals. 7, 4, 232-241 Google Scholar
  • 11. Sport Industry Research (SIRC) (2008). Assessment of Perceptions, Behaviours and Understanding of Walkers with Dogs in the Countryside. (accessed 5 June 2012), A report prepared for The Kennel Club and Hampshire County Council [online] http://www3.hants.gov.uk/shu-research-paper.pdf Google Scholar
  • 12. Waste Improvement Network (WIN) (2011). WIN Focus 12 Cleaning Up Dog Waste. (accessed 5 June 2012), [online] http://www.win.org.uk/ Google Scholar
  • 13. Webley, P. , Siviter, C. (2000). ‘Why do some owners allows their dogs to foul the pavement? The social psychology of a minor rule infraction’. Journal of Applied Psychology. 30, 7, 1371-1380 Google Scholar
  • 14. Wells, D. (2006). ‘Factors influencing owners’ reactions to their dogs’ fouling’. Environment and Behavior. 38, 5, 707-714 Google Scholar
  • 15. Wells, D.L. (2007). ‘Public understanding of toxocariasis’. Public Health. 121, 3, 187-188 Google Scholar
  • 16. Westgarth, C. , Christley, R.M. , Pinchbeck, G.L. , Gaskell, R.M. , Dawson, S. , Bradshaw, J.W.S. (2010). ‘Dog behaviour on walks and the effect of use of the leash’. Applied Animal Behaviour. 125, 1–2, 38-46 Google Scholar
  • 17. Westgarth, C. , Pinchbeck, G.L. , Bradshaw, J.W.S. , Dawson, S. , Gaskell, R.M. , Christley, R.M. (2008). ‘Dog-human and dog-dog interactions of 260 dog-owning households in a community in Cheshire’. Veterinary Record. 162, 426-442 Google Scholar