water, water, everywhere 2018

Moving from awareness to action

on single-use plastic bottles 

APRIL 2018
 

1. EXEC
CUTIV
VE SU
UMMA
ARY
With B BRITA’s lonngstanding g commitm ment to offfering consumers m ore sustainable
alternaatives to single-use plastic
p and
d supportin ng efforts to protectt the marinne and
wider e environme ent and Keeep Britain Tidy’s asp piration to end wast e for now and
future generations, there was
w a share ed ambitio on to reduce waste ffrom single-use
plastics. In 2016, Keep Britain Tidy an nd BRITA partnered d together to identifyy joint
initiativ
ves to adddress the problem.
p T he first pro
oject, entittled ‘Wate
er, Water
Everyw where’, commmenced in 2017, an nd explore ed the ‘statte of play’ with regards to
businesses servin ng tap watter, the pu
ublic’s attittudes towa ards askingg for tap water
w
in reussable water bottles and
a the pro
ovision and usage off water disspensers in n
schools. This pro oject, which forms pa art of BRITTA’s widerr #SwapFo orGood
campa aign1, explo
ores the triggers andd barriers tot increasing uptake e of reusabble
water b bottles, an o the worrk undertaken in 2017.
nd builds on

Aim
The aim
m of this research was
w to unde erstand what would support g
greater up
ptake of
reusab
ble water bottles
b by the public
c and retaillers.

Objecttives
The ob
bjectives were
w to:
 Und derstand the personal, social aand enviroonmental trriggers an d barriers to
upttake of reu
usable water bottles
 Identify the excuses
e and narrativ es at play across both audiencces and ho ow to
add
dress these e
 Dev velop a series of practical reco
ommendattions for inncreasing uuptake by both
the public and retailers

Metho odology
The ressearch was carried out
o betwee en Januaryy and February 2018 8 by Keep Britain
Tidy’s Centre forr Social Inn
novation. T The metho odology co onsisted offf:
 Two x 1.5 hoour focus groups wi th 24 cons sumers of bottled w water to explore
th
he triggerss and barriiers to usinng reusablle water bo ottles. The
e focus grooups
in
ncluded a mix
m of those who ha ad never used a reus sable wate er bottle annd
th
hose who occasiona
o lly use a re
eusable wa ater bottle
e and were e split by how
h
environmen ntal minde ed the partticipants were.
w
 Four x 45 minute
m semmi-structurred telephone depth h interview ws with sennior
re
epresentattives from high-proffile busines sses that sell bottledd water. Thhese
in
ncluded a major
m supe ermarket, a food on the go rettailer, a co ompany
m
managing transport
t hubs
h and a large leis
sure centree company y. The interviews
w
were structtured to ga ather insig
ghts about the opera ational andd business
                                                            
1
 BRITA’s #SwapForGo ood campaign aims to help e eradicate the use of single-use plastic bo
ottles by encou
uraging
o make small changes
people to c to the
eir lifestyle tha
at can have a big impact onn the environmment. 

2
 
 

barriers, bo
oth internally and extternally, to
o increasin
ng uptake o of reusable
water bottles and too
w ok place inn March 20 018.
 N
Nationally representa
r ative onlinee perceptions survey y2 with 2,13
38 adults aged
a
18
8+ in the United
U King
gdom. The e survey was
w designe ed to enabble us to verify
and quantiffy the insig
ghts gathe ered from the
t focus groups
g an d telephonne
in
nterviews.

Key Fi ndings

Public perceptio ons and behaviourss regarding reusable water b ottles and d
consummption off bottled water
w
 The vast ma ajority of responden
r nts (65%) said
s that they generrally drink tap
w
water, whilsst 17% drin nk bottled water (17% %).
 W
When away y from hom me, 29% drrink tap water in a re eusable wa ater bottlee
brought fro om home that they r efill as req quired. 27%% drink botttled wate er
purchased from a sho op, café orr restaurannt whilst 16
6% drink ta ap water from
places like cafes
c and restaurantts. Just 9% % typically drink from m public water
w
fo
ountains, dispensers
d or taps w
while out an nd about.
 A
Around eight in 10 (78%) peoplle think that there sh hould be g greater
avvailability of free tapp water, suuch as morre water fo ountains a nd buildings
offering freee tap wate er.
 M
More than six s in 10 do on’t buy bo ottled watter if tap water
w is avaailable (644%),
although 59 9% would worry abo out the cleanliness of public wa ater taps,
fo
ountains and dispens ses and a tthird (31%) worry ab bout the clleanliness of tap
w
water, be itt in the hom me or in p ublic place es.
 A
Around 1 in 2 people are willing g to put in extra effoort and timme into find ding
alternativess to bottled water (4 48%).
 There are social norm ms evident around th he usage ofo reusable e water bottles;
M
More than a quarter of o people ((27%) wou uld use a reusable bo ottled if otthers
did too.
 There was evidence
e that
t conceern about the
t impactt of plasticc bottles ono the
environmen nt was gro owing as th he proporttion of peoople feeling g guilty when
purchasing bottled water
w had rrisen by six
x percentaage points from 25% % in
2017, to 31% % in 2018. Feelings
F o
of guilt werre higher among
a woomen than men.
 There were e occasions s when reg gular reusaable bottle
e users we ere still like
ely to
purchase bottled watter. Travel was a key y factor. Att the airpoort (42%), when
att service stations and travellin ng long dis stances by car (36%)), when tra avelling
by train or bus, but not commu uting (29%) and with h a lunch ‘mmeal deal’ (28%)
w
were the most
m comm mon occasio ons when they migh ht be likelyy to buy bo ottled
w
water. Forg getfulness (53%), thi nking thatt there wouldn’t be a anywhere to fill
up the reussable bottle (29%) an nd that thee bottle woould be tooo

                                                            
2
The surv
vey was undertaken by You
uGov, 28-29 M
March 2018.

3
 
 

heavy/inconvenient to t carry arround (26% %) were als so commo on reasons s given

by regular reusable
r bottle
b userss for purchhasing botttled wate r.
 There is strong evidence that g greater avaailability off tap/filterred drinkinng
w
water facilitties would d increase uptake of reusable waterw botttles acrosss the
U
UK, with 69 9% of respondents in ndicating that
t this would make e them ‘a bit
b
more’ or ‘a lot more’ likely to usse a reusable water bottle whe
m en out and d
about; this is an incre ease of 14 ppercentage points since the p revious su urvey
w
was conduc cted in 20117, which p perhaps de emonstrattes a substtantial incrrease in
awwareness levels of alternativess to bottle ed water.
 There is a strong
s perc ception th at businessses have a role to p play in the
provision of drinking water faciilities. 67% % would be e more like ely to use a
reeusable bo ottle if they y knew tha at businesses would willingly ffill it up – ana
in
ncrease fro om 55% las owever being able to
st year. Ho o help them mselves to o
drinking wa ater withou ut needingg to ask the staff was more like ely to aid uptake
of reusable bottles (7 73%). The ssafety of the
t water was
w an imp portant factor
fo
or 61% who o once surre that the water wo ould safe to o drink wo ould use a
reeusable bo ottle.
 R
Responden nts were ty ypically co mfortable when mak king a requ uest for a free
glass of tap p water fro om a busin ness that thhey have made
m a pu rchase or plan to
m
make a purchase from m (72%), th hough this s decrease ed when assking for their
reeusable bo ottle to be refilled, ev ven when they had made m a puurchase or
planned to make a pu urchase fro om the business (49 9%). Howev ver, this haad
in
ncreased from 39% in 2017. Re espondents were typ pically unc comfortable
assking for either
e a freee glass off tap waterr or their reusable bo ottle to bee
reefilled from
m a busine ess that theey had nott made/did dn’t plan tto make a
purchase frrom.
 M
More than seven
s in 10
0 of all res pondents would view a busine ess more
fa
avourably if it gave them t or so
omeone th hey knew free tap wa ater. When n
3
presented withw the co oncept of the Refill Scheme
S two thirds (66%) said d that
if local businesses in their
t area were participating theyt would d be more likely
too use a reuusable bottle when o out and abbout, would d be likelyy to make a
purchase frrom one off these bussinesses whilstw getting a refill (65%), wo ould be
lik
kely to retturn to make future p purchases (64%) and would ch hoose to make
m a
purchase frrom a participating b business over its com mpetitors tthat are no ot part
of the scheme.
 In
n general the
t public were in su upport of a levy on drinks
d soldd in plastic
bottles (68% were supportive).. However,, when the e concept w was explored in
depth in the e focus groups, therre were a number
n of practicalitties to con nsider
thhat could affect
a the intended iimpact. Re espondents felt that five pence e
w
wouldn’t be e enough to t alter puurchasing behaviour.
b Similarly, how any levy
l
w
was presented to the e public wa as also perrceived to be likely tto affect th he
                                                            
3
Refill is a national, pra
actical tap water campaign that aims to make
m refilling a reusable botttle as easy, convenient
and cheap as possible by introducing refill points on every streeet. Refill Statio
ons display a ssticker in theirr window
to show tthat they are part
p of the sch
heme and can also be foundd on the free Refill
R App.
 

4
 
 

uccess; pe
su eople will need
n to be
e aware tha at a levy is
s in place a
and it’s no
ot just
an increase
e in the pric
ce of bottlled water.

Insightts from bu usinesses that sell b bottled wa ater

 R
Reducing th heir enviroonmental i mpact is very
v much part of th eir business
sttrategies.
 There is rec cognition that
t there is heightened public c awarenesss and con ncern
about the specific
s issue of plas tics and single-use plastics
p an
nd that dem mand
(ffor tap water on the go) well m may follow w. Public demand is//will be a key k
driver for change for these bussinesses.
 There is currrently som me provisi on for cus stomers to get tap w water, but this
t
caan be incoonsistent across sitess/outlets and/or
a is not
n actively y promote ed.
 In
n terms of increasing g opportun nities for customers
c to access tap waterr,
barriers include:
o how to o offer watter (install water fou untains or taps)
t
o the cossts of insta allation an d upkeep
o how to o ensure co onsistency y in the offfer across sites/outle ets
o health and safety y concernss and where respons sibility for this lies
o how to o offer this
s at the samme time as s maintaining curren nt level andd
speed of service
o potenttial impact on sales o of bottled water so wider
w beneefit needs to be
seen.
 W
With regard d to overcoming the ese barriers, it was deemed he elpful to lea
arn
about exam mples of ho ow others have done e it, particularly whe ere they ha ave
tu
urned this into an op pportunity for their business.
b Public
P demmand and/or the
wider benefits would need to b
w be significa
ant to mak ke the prov vision, effo
ort and
nvestment worthwhile.
in

Recom mmendatio ons for inc

creasing u uptake of reusable waterw botttles
Researrch shows that there e is an incrreased awa areness of the issuess surround ding
single--use plastic c bottles and
a as a re
esult businesses are feeling gre eater pressure
from th heir custom mers to take action. However, the reality y is that be ehaviour remains
r
relativeely unchan nged. Using insights from this research, a number of
recommendation w usage of reusable bottles
ns for how b cou
uld be incrreased is
outlineed below.
 A large pro oportion off the public c stated thhat they would
w be mmore likely to use
a reusable water
w botttle if there was greatter availab bility of driinking watter
fa here are also positive
acilities. Th e perceptiions of tho ose busine sses that offer
o
acccess to water
w and suggested
s d positive impacts on n their bussiness.
Consideratiion should be given to how ne
C ew provisioon can be created an nd
exxisting proovision ma ade more v ough greatter promo tion. Schemes
visible thro
lik
ke Refill annd GiveMe eTap! (with h the assoc ciated #MindTheTap p
caampaign) present an n opportun nity to usee existing premises
p a
and
in
nfrastructu ure to offer free drin king water without the t need ffor installattion
and maintenance of new n waterr fountains s or taps. We
W suggesst that a qu uick

5
 
 

method of mainstreaming prov

m vision could be throu ugh making g sure all
ac ccessible public
p builldings, e.g . council contact
c cenntres, are iinvolved inn such
scchemes. The development of p policies which enable this to h happen sho ould
also be con nsidered.
 W
We recomm mend that communic cations abbout new or o existing public wa ater
taaps, founta ains and dispensers, seek to ad ddress the e concern e expressed d by
thhe public around
a saffety and clleanliness of the provision. Wh here new
innstallationss are beingg planned,, actual and perceive ed cleanlinness should d be
co onsidered as part off the desig gn.
 W
Work needs to be do one to furth her increasse the pub blic’s perceeption of tap
t
w
water in public places s as a clea an and healthy resource and off why they y
shhould use a reusable e water bo ottle. This will
w be imp perative too any further
innitiatives to
o increasee uptake.
 G
Given the environmen
e ntal conce erns, we reecommend d that messsaging and d
ca ampaigns to promotte scheme es and/or tot encoura age people e to reduce
co onsumptio on of bottled water iincludes values-base ed messag ging aboutt the
environmen ntal benefits which c can be derrived and environme
e ental impac cts
w
which can be b avoided d by partic cipating.
 It may be helpful to prioritise
p in
ntervention ns and cam mpaigns w which enco ourage
thhe 19% of people
p whho already own a reu usable water bottle b but don’t use
u it
reegularly orr never use e it, to usee their botttles more regularly,
r oover the thhird of
people who o don’t currrently ow n a reusab ble water bottle.
b
 W
We recomm mend that interventi ons which h focus on normalisin ng drinking g non-
bottled watter, use of reusable w water botttles and as sking for taap or refills on
thhe go are likely
l to bee helpful inn encourag ging more people to o change their
behaviour.
 Existing cam mpaigns, for
f examp le, those whichw enco
ourage peo ople to carrry
w
water durin ng hot spells or for h health reasons, could d be adaptted to feature
people carrrying reusa able bottle es. Equally y, promotion of the ffact that free
w
water and refills
r are available
a in
n particulaar buildings or from p particular
businesses could help p to create e and stren ngthen a social norm m around asking
a
foor water on the go.
 Forgetfulne ess and the e inconven nience of carrying
c re
eusable bo ottles were e cited
ass key reasons why re egular use ers of reusaable waterr bottles m might still buy
b
bottled watter. Interve entions tha at demons strate perssonal respo onsibility for
f the
isssue and/o or how to build
b reusa able waterr bottles innto the daiily routine,
m
making usa age more ofo a habit, will help to increase e usage of reusable bottles.
b
 A
Around half of people e would no ot feel commfortable asking
a for a refill of their
reeusable wa ater bottle
e in a shop p or café, even
e if mak
king a purc chase.
Inntervention ns which address
a th is are strongly recom mmended.. Again, this
co ould includde better promotion
p ns of schem mes, but other simplle actions like
putting outt jugs of water to wh hich people e can help p themselv ves, rather than
reequiring pe eople to ask staff fo r a refill, are likely to
o be effecttive given that
thhree-quartters of peo ople felt th hat the opttion to help themselv ves would make
thhem more likely to useu a reusa able water bottle.

6
 
 

 G
Given that the
t occasions when those who o regularlyy used a re
eusable wa ater
bottle some etimes purrchased bo ottled watter were travel-relate ed and tha at this
w
was driven by a feelin ng that theere was limmited acce ess to top- up their reeusable
bottles in airports, service stati ons, transport hubs, etc. we re ecommend d
ra
aising awareness of any waterr fountains s or dispennsers proviided in the ese
lo
ocations, particularly
p y in airportts, where the
t public is not neceessarily awware
th
hat water fountains
f are
a availab ble after Airport
A Sec
curity. Link
ked with th his, we
re
ecommend d that interventions which enc courage pe eople to re
emember to t take
th
heir reusabble water bottle
b withh them wh hen going out
o and ab bout, particularly
w
when travelling could d be effecttive. For ex xample, airports cou uld promotte the
fa
act that em
mpty reusa able bottle es can be taken
t through Airpo ort Security y,
ticketing an
nd travel companies
c could pro
ompt peop ple to packk their reus sable
w
water bottle at the saame time a as reminding them via v email o r apps to print
p
boarding ca ards or collect ticketts. Remind ders could also be se ent via sim
milar
chhannels duuring hot weather
w pe
eriods or when
w omers are being given
custo
other travel informatiion.
 For those companies
c producing g or supplying reusa able waterr bottles, itt may
be helpful to
t consider public pe erception of issues around
a hyggiene and taste
and the dessign, look and
a feel off the desig
gn as well as the pra acticality.
 C
Consideratiion should be given to increas sing publicc awarenesss of their rights
w
when it commes to the provision of free wa ater given current leevels of
awwareness are quite low.
 W
We recomm mend that decision-m makers, bu usinesses and
a other stakeholders
coome togetther to discuss the re ecommendations made in thiss report. Efforts
are needed to have meaningful
m l discussio
on about ho ow to ove rcome the e
operationall barriers which
w curr ently existt for those that may be in a po osition
to
o help devvelop a nettwork of p laces where the pub blic can ac cess free, safe,
drinking waater whilst on the go o.

7
 
 

2. INTR
RODU
UCTIO
ON
With B BRITA’s lonngstanding g commitm ment to offfering consumers m ore sustainable
alternaatives to single-use plastic
p and
d supportin ng efforts to protectt the marinne and
wider e environme ent and Keeep Britain Tidy’s asp piration to end wast e for now and
future generations, there was
w a share ed ambitio on to reduce waste ffrom single-use
plastics. In 2016, Keep Britain Tidy an nd BRITA partnered d together to identifyy joint
initiativ
ves to adddress the problem.
p T he first pro
oject, entittled ‘Wate
er, Water
Everyw where’, commmenced in 2017, an nd explore ed the ‘statte of play’ with regards to
businesses servin ng tap watter, the pu
ublic’s attittudes towa ards askingg for tap water
w
in reussable water bottles and
a the pro
ovision and usage off water disspensers in n
schools. This pro oject, which forms pa art of BRITTA’s widerr #SwapFo orGood
campa aign4, explo
ores the trriggers andd barriers to increasing uptake e of reusabble
water b bottles, an o the worrk undertaken in 2017.
nd builds on

Aim
The aim
m of this research was
w to unde erstand what would support g
greater up
ptake of
reusab
ble water bottles
b by the public
c and retaillers.

Objecttives
The ob
bjectives were
w to:
 Und derstand the personal, social aand enviroonmental trriggers an d barriers to
upttake of reu
usable water bottles
 Identify the excuses
e and narrativ es at play across both audiencces and ho ow to
add
dress these e
 Dev velop a series of practical reco
ommendattions for inncreasing uuptake by both
the public and retailers

                                                            
4
BRITA’ss #SwapForGo ood campaignn aims to help eradicate the use of single--use plastic bo
ottles by encouraging
people to
o make small changes
c to the
eir lifestyle tha
at can have a big impact on
n the environmment.
 

8
 
 

3. METH
HODO
OLOG
GY
The ressearch was carried out
o betwee en Januaryy and February 2018 8 by Keep Britain
Tidy’s Centre forr Social Inn
novation a and involveed:
 Two x 1.5 hoour focus groups wi th 24 cons sumers of bottled w water to explore
th
he triggerss and barriiers to usinng reusablle water bo ottles. Thee focus grooups
in
ncluded a mix
m of those who ha ad never used a reus sable wate er bottle annd
th
hose who occasiona
o lly use a re
eusable wa ater bottle
e and were e split by how
h
environmen ntal minde ed the partticipants were.
w
 Four x 45 minute
m semmi-structurred telephone depth h interview ws with sen nior
re
epresentattives from high-proffile busines sses that sell bottledd water. Th hese
in
ncluded a major
m supe ermarket, a food on the go rettailer, a co ompany
m
managing transport
t hubs
h and a large leis
sure centree company y. The interviews
w
were structtured to ga ather insig
ghts about the opera ational andd business
barriers, bo
oth internally and extternally, too increasin
ng uptake o of reusable
water bottles and too
w ok place inn March 20 018.
 N
Nationally representa
r ative onlinee perceptions survey y5 with 2,1338 adults aged
18
8+ in the United
U Kinggdom. The e survey was
w designe ed to enab ble us to verify
and quantiffy the insigghts gathe ered from the
t focus groups
g an d telephonne
in
nterviews.

                                                            
5
The surv
vey was undertaken by You
uGov, 28-29 M
March 2018.

9
 
 

4. FEED
DBAC
CK FR
ROM THE
T PUBL
P LIC
We co
onducted both qua alitative a nd quantitative ressearch wi th the pu
ublic to
undersstand the
e triggers and barriiers to inc creasing their
t usag
ge of reusable
water bottles. The
T resultts are out lined belo
ow:

4.1 Drinking water

w sources at ho
ome and away
a from
m home

4.1.1 Type of water

w geneerally con sumed
Responndents weere asked to
t indicate
e which typ
pe of wate
er they mo
ost typically drink
on a re
egular basiis.

Figure 1 : Type of water mostly consumed by responde

ents

70% 65%
Percentage of respondents

60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 17%
1
12%
10% 6%

0%
Ta
ap water Filtered ttap Bottle
ed water Not applicab ble
water - I don't drin
nk
water

Base: All respondentts = 2,138

The va
ast majority
y of respondents (655%) said that they generally ddrink tap water
w as
opposeed to bottled water (17%) and filtered ta
ap water (112%). Just 6% said th
hat
on’t drink water on a regular b
they do basis.

4.1.2 Source ofo water consumed

c when aw
way from home
h
Responndents weere then as
sked to thi nk about drinking
d water
w when
n away from the
home aand to indicate whic
ch way theey consumed water when
w out a
and aboutt.

10
 
 

Figure 2
2: Source of water mosttly consume
ed when awa
ay from hom
me
40
0%
Percentage of respondents

33%
%
31%
29%
30
0% 27%

19% 18
8%
20
0% 16%
11%
9%
10
0% 7%

0
0%
Tap w water in a Tap
T water fro
om Tap watter from Bottled waterr None of these
reusabble bottle water
w fountaiins, places lik
ke a café th
hat you havee
broug ght from dispensers o
or or resttaurant purchased fromm
hom me and taps in publ ic a shop,
s café orr
refiilled as places restaurant
req
quired

2017 20
018

Base: All respondentts, 2018 = 2,1138, 2017 = 2

2,119

When away from m home, th

he largest pproportionn of respon
ndents (29
9%) reportted
that thhey drink taap water in a reusab
ble water bottle
b brou
ught from home that they
refill ass required.. Women (33%)
( m (25%) to do this.
wer e more likely than men

27% saaid that the

ey drink boottled watter purchased from a shop, caffé or resta
aurant
whilst 116% drink tap water from placces like caffes and res
staurants. Just 9% of
responndents indicated that they sou urce their drinking
d water from public water
fountains, dispennsers or taps while o
out and about.

Resultss remain similar to th eved in 2017, with minor chang

hose achie ges across
s all
indicattors.

4.2 ons of tap and bottlled water in the UK

Perceptio K

Respon ndents weere shown a list of st atements made by other

o peop
ple regarding
different percepttions of tap and bot tled waterr in the UK
K. Respond
dents were
e asked
to whaat extent th
hey agreed d or disag reed with each state
ement. Co mparisons
s are
made w with 2017, where 2017 data ex xists.

11
 
 

e 3: Percen
Figure ntage of responden
nts agreeing with sttatementss about wa
ater

There
e should be ggreater availability of free ttap 69%
%
water across the U
UK (e.g. more water founta ains,… 78%
I am willing to puut in extra effo
ort and time into 31%
3
nding alternattives to using
fin g bottled wateer 48%
%

d water is no better for you than tap wa

Bottled ater
67%
I can't ta
aste the diffe
erence betweeen bottled wa
ater
andd tap water 47%
%
I carrry a reusable bottle but I also
a buy bottlled
water because I can't always fin nd somewhere e to… 26%
%
If m
more people u
used reusable
e water bottle
es, I
woould use one too 27%
I worry a eanliness of public water ta
about the cle aps, 5
53%
fountainns and dispensers 59%
I worry about th
he cleanliness
s of tap waterr (in 28
8%
homes and public places) in the UK 31%
3

I don't buy bottled w

water if tap water
w is availa
able 63%
64%

I feel guillty if I purchase bottled wa

ater 25%
%
31%
3
If I buy bo
ottled water I feel bad for the
ment
environm 44%

0% 20% 40% 6
60% 80
0%
Percen
ntage of re
espondents
s answering y agree' or 'slightly
g 'strongly
20
017 2018
agree'
Base: A
All respond
dents, 2018 = 2,138, 2
2017 = 2,1119

Around d eight in 10
1 (78%) people
p agrreed that there
t should be grea ater availability
of free tap waterr, such as more
m wate er fountain
ns and buildings offe ering free tap
t
water. Around tw wo thirds agreed
a thaat bottled water is no better foor you than tap
water ((67%) and d around half (47%) c e the differrence. Morre than six in 10
can’t taste
said th
hat they doon’t buy boottled watter if tap water
w is avaailable (64
4%), althouugh
59% would worry y about thhe cleanline
ess of pubblic water taps,
t founttains and
dispenses and a third (31%%) worry ab bout the cleanliness of tap watter, be it in
n the
home o or in public places.

Aroundd 1 in 2 peo
ople are willing
w to p ut in extra
a effort and
d time into
o finding
alterna
atives to bottled watter (48%).

The foc
cus groups revealed d that there cial norms at play w ith regards to
e were soc
usage of reusable water bo pondents would be more likely
ottles; resp y to use a
reusab
ble bottle iff others did so too.

12
 
 

“((I would be
e more com
mfortable using a reusable botttle) if they
y were mo
ore
acceepted, morre culturallly recognis
sed.”

“If m
more people carried them arou
und (I wouuld be more likely to use a reus
sable
b
bottle too.))”

oncept was tested in

This co n the quan titative survey. More
e than a quuarter of
responndents (27%) agreed
d that if mo
ore people e used a re
eusable boottle they would
w
too.

It was apparent in the focuus groups that respo

ondents we much aware of
ere very m
the envvironmenttal issues surroundin
s ng single-use plastics
s.

“The
e environm
mental thing
g is very b
big at the moment.
m Itt does mak
ke me stop
p and
thin
nk (about buying bo ottled wate
er.)”

“If I use bottled water I ffeel very bad

b for the environm
ment.”

The quuantitative survey sh howed thatt when purchasing bottled

b waater 44% feelt bad
for the
e environmment and 31% felt guiilty about it. The pro
oportion off people fe
eeling
guilty h
had risen by
b six perc centage po
oints from
m 25%. Guilt was high
her among g
women n, 35% feltt guilty, compared wwith 27% off men.

4.3 Reusable bottles

4.3.1 Ownershi p and usa age of reu sable watter bottles s

Responndents we ere asked about
a thei r usage off reusable bottles. Ju
ust over a third
of people (36%) owned an nd regularl y used a reusable water bottle e, whilst 17
7%
ownedd one but didn’t
d use it regularly
y and 2% owned
o onee but had nnever usedd it.
Aroundd a third (3
34%) did not
n own a reusable water w botttle.

13
 
 

Figure 4
4: Ownership and usage
e of reusable
e water bottles
50
0%
Percentage of respondents

40
0% 36%
% 34%
30
0%

20
0% 17%

10
0% 6%
2% 3% 1%
0
0%
I own and
a I own a I own a I used to I don't own
o None o
of Don't kn
now
regularly reusabble reusabble own a a reusable these
e
use a wate
er wate
er reusab ble water
reusabble bottle, but bottle bbut water e
bottle
wate
er don't us
se it have neever bottle, but
b
bottle regularly used it lost it and
a
have not
n
replaced it

Base: All respondentts = 2,138

Wome en are more likely tha

an men to own and regularly use
u a reusa able waterr
bottle, with 40%
% doing so compared d to 31% off men. You
unger peopple were more
m
likely to own and
d regularly y use one, w
with 49% of 25-34 year
y olds a
and 45% off 18-24
year ollds doing so,
s compared with 2 27% of those aged 55 and ove r.

4.3.2 Occasions and reassons when n regular reusable bottle

b useers might buy
bottled
d water
Those respondennts who sa
aid that theey regularrly use a re
eusable waater bottle
e were
asked about the occasions
s when the ey might beb likely buuy bottled water, alo
ong
with re
easons why
y they may purchase e it. The re
esults are shown
s bel ow.

14
 
 

Figure 5: Occasio
ons when re
espondent s might be
e likely to buy
b bottled
d water

At the
t airport 42%
Whe en travelling
g by train or
o bus (not… … 29%
At service stations when travelling… … 36%
At
A the gym 10%
When co ommuting 12%
At work 9%
9
At a sporting /entertainm
/ ment event… … 21%
Witth a lunch 'meal deal' 28%
Wh hen eating ooutdoors (e e.g. picnic,…
… 21%
When eating out (e.g g. at a bar,…
… 16%
When shopping 24%
To drink at home 14%
Other 4%
Don't
D know 3%
I would never purchase botttled water 14%
0
0% 10%
% 20% 30% 40% 50%
5

Per centage off respondents buying

g bottled water
w

Base: All respondentts who regullarly use a re

eusable bottlle = 762

Travel was a key y factor forr why thosse who reggularly use
e a reusabl e water bo ottle
would be likely to buy bottled waterr. ‘At the airport’ was s the mostt common
occasioon when they would d purchasee bottled water
w (42%%). This is n
not surpris
sing
given tthe restricttions around liquids in hand lu
uggage and perhapss a lack of
awarenness (or maybe
m forw
ward plann ing) that you
y can take an emp pty bottle
througgh Airport Security and refill it once you are throug gh. When at service
station
ns and travvelling longg distance
es by car (3
36%), whe en travellin
ng by train or
bus, bu
ut not com mmuting (2 29%) and w with a lunc
ch ‘meal deeal’ (28%) were alsoo cited
as the most com mmon occa asions wheen those who
w regularrly use a re
eusable wa ater
bottle might be likely to bu uy bottled
d water.

The foc cus groups found th hat the perrceived lac

ck of accesss to tap w
water whils
st
travelliing, especially long distances,
d was a keyy driver of the decisio
on to purc
chase
bottledd water.

“Travelling, say on a car

c journey
y, it’s a go
ood time to
o have botttled waterr.”

15
 
 

Figure 6: Reasonss why respondents m

might still be
b likely to buy bottle
ed water

Becausse I forgot to
o take my reusable bottle e
53%
w
with me
Because I thought there wouldn't be
B e
29%
a
anywhere to fill up my reusable bottle e
Beecause my re eusable botttle will be tooo
26%
2
h
heavy/inconvenient to ca arry around
Bec
cause my reu
usable bottle wasn't clean
n 9%

I prefer tthe taste of bottled

b wateer
13%
sometime es
Being
g embarrasse ed to ask forr my reusablee
%
8%
bottlee to be refille
ed
Think
king that I will be the onlyy one using a
3%
reussable bottle
Don't know
w 2%

None
N of these
e 18%

0% 10%
% 20% 30%
3 40% 50% 60
0%

Percentage of res
spondents citing reas
son

Base: All respondentts who regullarly use a re

eusable bottlle = 769

Regard ding the re

easons why those wh ho regularrly use a re
eusable waater bottle
e might
be likely to have purchased bottled wwater, forg
getfulness s was the m
most comm mon
reasonn given andd was cited
d by the m
majority (53%) of reg gular reusa
able bottle
e users.
Thinkinng that the
ere wouldnn’t be anyw
where to fill
f up the reusable
r b ottle (29%
%) and
that th
he reusablee bottle wo
ould be to
oo heavy/innconvenient to carry y around (26%)
(
were aalso common reasons given.

4.3.3 Increasing g uptake of

o reusablle water bottles
b
Respon ndents weere shown a list of ci rcumstancces and we ere asked to state whether
w
one would make them
each o m more lik kely or less
s likely to use
u a reusa able waterr bottle
or whe
ether it woould make no differe nce. The results are shown be elow, along
gside
those ffrom the 2017
2 survey
y, where c comparativ ve data exists6.

                                                            
6
The survvey used in 20017 was updatted to reflect iinsights from the
t public focus groups and
d consultation with
retailers. Not all questions from 2017
7 were asked i n 2018.

16
 
 

Table 1 : Factors affecting

a lik
kelihood to
o use a reusable wate
er bottle
Would eeach of the following circumstance es make youu Proportion of Proportion of
more orr less likely to
t use a reusable waterr bottle whe
en respondents respond dents
out and about, or would
w it mak
ke no differe
ence? (‘a bit more’ (‘a bit more’
m
and ‘a lot more’ and ‘a lot more’
likely) likely
y)
2017 20188
If I coulld help mysself to drink
king water i n shops, ca afes, - 73%
%
etc. andd not need to ask the staff
s for it
If there was greate er availability of tap/fi ltered wate er 55% 69%
%
If I knew
w that busin nesses wou uld willinglyy fill up my 55% 67%
%
water b bottle
If I coulld be sure that
t water is safe to drrink for refillling 49% 61%
%
my bottle when ou ut and abou ut
If there were more e public water fountain ns availablee - 58%
%
If I knew
w my rightss as a consu umer to req quest 41% 52%
%
tap/filteered water
Base: All respondentts, 2017 = 2,119, 2018 = 2,,138

There is strong evidence

e that greateer availability of tap/
/filtered drrinking water
facilitie
es would in
ncrease upptake of re
eusable wa ater bottlees across thhe UK, witth 69%
of resppondents indicating that this wwould mak ke them ‘a bit more’ o or ‘a lot more’
m
likely to use a reusable water bottle when out and aboutt; this is an n increase of 14
percen ntage points since th
he previou s survey was
w conducted in 20 017, which
perhap ubstantial increase in awarene
ps demonsstrates a su of alternatives to
ess levels o
bottled d water.

The pe erception that

t busine
esses have e a role to play in the n of drinking
e provision
water ffacilities also increassed this ye
ear, with 67% agreeing that the ey would be
b
more likely to usse a reusab ble bottle iif they kne
ew that businesses w would willin
ngly fill
it up – up from 55%
5 ear. Betterr still, would be if pe
last ye eople couldd help
themse elves to drrinking water withou ut needing g to ask the
e staff; aro
ound threee-
quarters (73%) agreed
a that this wouuld increase uptake of o reusable e bottles. This
T
was ev videnced in n the focus groups, w where peo ople felt th
hat being aable to ‘help
yourseelf’ to drinkking waterr would tak ke away th he feelingss of awkwa ardness in asking
for refiills and wo
ould aid be ehaviour ch hange.

“(I wo
ould be mo
ore likely to
o use a reu
usable botttle) if watter was mo
ore availab
ble and
morre organis
sed.”

For half of peoplle (52%) knowing th eir rights as

a a consuumer to reqquest
tap/filttered wate
er would make
m themm more like ely to use a reusable bottle.

A largee proportio
on of respondents (6 61%) indicated that being sure e that wateer is
safe to
o drink wouuld encourrage them m to use a reusable
r water
w bottl e; this also
o
increassed from 49%
4 last ye
ear. There efore it is imperative that interrventions aimed
a
at incre
easing acc
cess to tap p/filtered w
water to th he public should
s enssure that health
and safety conce erns are adddressed.

17
 
 

Style and design of reusable water bottles

4.3.4 S
Similarrly, respondents werre shown c circumstannces regarding the sttyle and design
of reussable wateer bottles and
a were a
asked to sttate wheth
her each oone would make
them mmore likelyy or less lik
kely to use
e a reusable water bo
ottle or wh
hether it would
w
make n no differen
nce.

Table 2
2: Style andd design feeatures affe
ecting likelihood to use a reusab ble water bottle
b
Would each of the following g circumstaances mak ke you Propportion of
more oor less likely
y to use a reusable w
water bottle e when resp
pondents
out and
d about, orr would it make
m no di fference? (‘a bit moore’ and ‘a lo
ot
morre’ likely)
2
2018
If I knew
w my reusa
able bottle was
w hygien ic 58%
If more reusable bottles
b weree designed to filter the
e tap 47%
water
Better ddesigned re
eusable watter bottles e.g. lighter,, more 44%
stylish, more durable
Base: All respondentts = 2,138

The deesign and style

s of reu
usable watter bottles
s was discu ussed in d epth in the
e
public focus groups. This included th he aesthettics of the reusable bbottles, alo
ong
with de esign featu
ures that would
w imp rove the experience
e e for the usser. Respo
ondents
in the ffocus grouup outlined
d concernss about hyygiene stan ndards (avvoiding bacteria
and mo ould), the shape andd weight o
of the bottlles, along with
w worriies about them
t
leaking
g.

“My re ne at work got mould

eusable on d in it, I de
ecided to lo
ook and op
pen up the
e straw
and it w
was green all a over.”

“I’m
m afraid my
y water bo
ottle is goiing to leak
k everywhe
ere.”

The quuantitative survey found that h hygiene wa as a factorr influencin

ng the like
elihood
to use a reusablee bottle. More
M than hhalf (58%) would be more likelly to use a
reusabble bottle iff they knew that it wwas hygien nic. Ensurin
ng that gu idance forr
maintaaining hygiiene standards is sup pplied to those
t purc
chasing/ussing reusab ble
bottless is an imp
portant facctor in any efforts to maximise uptake off reusable bottles
on a large scale. Almost ha alf of respoondents (447%) stateed that theey would beb
more likely to usse a reusabble bottle iif they werre designeed to filter the tap water
and 444% would be b more likely to use e them if they
t were designed better, e.g g.
lighter, more stylish and more
m durabble.

18
 
 

4.4 What’s th
he perceiv
ved role fo
or businesses in increasing up
ptake of
reusable water
w botttles?

4.4.1 Current state of pla ay for pubblic accessing water from loc cal businesses
Respon ndents we ere asked how
h comfoortable or uncomforrtable theyy would feel if
they wwere to req e glass of tap water and a free
quest a free e top up fo
or their reu
usable
water bbottle in businesses
b that they had madee purchase es from/plaan to and those
that th
hey had no ot made/pllanned to make a pu urchase froom. The reesults are shown
s
in Figu
ure 7.

Figure 7: Level off comfort asking

a for g
glass of wa
ater or top up for reu sable bottle

Ask
k for a free gla
ass of tap wa
ater from a ca
afé,
71%
7
shop or other type of businesss that you ha
ave
made/plan tto make a purrchase from 72%

Ask forr your reusabble water botttle to be refillled

with ffree drinking water from a café, shop o or 39%
other tyype of busineess that you have
h made/p plan 4
49%
to makee a purchse frrom

Ask
k for a free gla
ass of tap wa
ater from a ca
afé,
13%
shop or other type of businesss that you ha
ave
ot made/plan
no n to make a purchase
p from
m 15%

Ask forr your reusab

ble water botttle to be refillled
with ffree drinking water from a café, shop o or 10%
1
oth
her type of bu usiness that you
y have not 14%
made/a and do not plan to make a purchase fro om

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Percentage of resp
pondents answering
a 'very' com fortable orr 'fairly
coomfortable'
2017 2018

Base: All respondentts = 2,138

Genera ally, there were no changes in how comffortable pe eople felt a

asking for a free
glass o
of tap wate er from buusiness tha
at they hadd/had not made/inte ended to make
m a
purchaase from between
b 20
017 and 20018 data. However,
H there was a noticeab ble
change e in the proportion of
o people tthat felt co
omfortable e asking fo
or a free to
op up
in theirr reusable bottle from businessses that thhey had made/inten ded to ma ake a
purchaase from; the
t percenntage of re
espondents s indicating that theey were
comfortable incrreased by 10 percenttage pointts from 39% in 2017 to 49% in 2018.

Responndents we ere typicallly comforttable when

n making a request ffor a free glass
g of
tap wa
ater from a business that they have made a purcha n to make a
ase or plan
purcha
ase from (772%). Resp pondents w weren’t as
s comfortable askingg for their
reusab
ble bottle to
t be refille when they had made
ed, even w e a purchasse or plann ned to
make a purchase e from the business ((49%).

19
 
 

Responndents we ere typicallly uncomfo ortable asking for either a free e glass of tap
t
water o
or their reusable botttle to be rrefilled fro
om a business that th hey had noot
made//didn’t plann to make a purchasse from. Th his was evidenced in n the focus
s
groupss, where reespondentts describe ed feelings s of awkwa ardness an nd self-
conscio
ousness if they were e to ask fo r their reusable botttle to be re
efilled whic
ch was
deemeed to affec elihood to purchase bottled wa
ct their like ater.

“If I hadn’t pu
urchased (something
(s g), I would
d have felt bad aboutt it, really self-
s
conscious.”
c

“If we hadn’t bo ething we would fee

ought some el uncomfo out asking to get
ortable abo
our watter bottle refilled.”
r

4.4.2 Businesse es providing tap wa ater

Around d two third
ds of respoondents ag greed withh the stateement thatt businesse es that
serve ffood and/oor drinks should
s be rrequired to
o provide free tap o or filtered water
w
to people on reqquest, rega ardless of w
whether th hey are a customer
c o
or not (63%).
Agreem ment was slightly higgher amon ng those that regularly used a reusable waterw
bottle. Just a quaarter of pe
eople agreeed that thhey knew their rightss when it comes
c
to pub
blic buildinggs and bus sinesses p
providing free tap wa ater. Thosee who regularly
use reuusable botttles did no
ot have a ggreater awwareness of o their righ
hts; similarrly only
a quartter of people agreed d that theyy knew theeir rights.

More than sevenn in 10 of all respond ents agree

ed that the
ey would vview a business
more ffavourably
y if it gave them or so
omeone th hey knew free
f water. Again,
tap w
agreemment was slightly
s hig
gher amonng those who
w regularly used a reusable water
w
bottle.

20
 
 

Figure 8: Level off agreemen

nt with stattements ab
bout busine
esses prov
viding tap water
w

Businessses that serv

ve food and/o or drinks sho uld
be requ
uired to provvide free tap or
o filtered waater 55
5%
to pe
eople on requ uest, regardle
ess of whetheer 63%
67%
they are a customer oro not
I know my rights when it co
omes to publlic 22%
uildings and businesses
bu b providing free ttap 24%
water 25%

If a business ga
ave freetap water
w or filtere
ed 73%
%
watter on request to me or someone I know w, I 73%
%
would vieww them more favourably
f 79%
7

0% 20% 40%
4 60
0% 80%
%

Perc entage of responden ts answering 'strongly agree' o r 'slightly

agree''
All respondents (2017
7)
All respondents (2018
8)
Those regularly using
g reusable b
bottles (20118)

Base: All respondentts = 2,138, those regularly

y using reusable bottles = 769

4.4.3 Perceptio ons of a na

ational tap
p water ca ampaign encouragi
e ng usage of
reusabble bottless
Responndents we ere informe Refill Scheme7 currently opera
ed of the R ating in cerrtain
parts o
of the UK. They weree then aske
ed a seriess of questions aboutt the schem
me and
the potential imp
pact on their behavio
our.

Two th
hirds (66%) of respondents saiid knowingg that loca
al businessses in theirr area
were p
participatin
ng in the Refill
R Schem
me would make themm more likkely to useea
reusab
ble bottle when
w out and
a about..

Aroundd two third ated that t hey would

ds also sta d be likely to make a purchase from a
business involved in the sc
cheme if thhey were getting
g a refill (65%)) and that they
would be likely to return to
o a particip
pating bus siness to make
m futurre purchases
(64%). A similar proportionn (62%) wwould also be likely to o choose tto make a
purchaase from a participatting busineess over its competitors that a are not parrt of
the sch
heme.

                                                            
7
Refill is a national, pra
actical tap water campaign that aims to makem refilling a reusable botttle as easy, convenient
and cheap as possible by introducing refill points on every stree et. Responden nts were askedd to imagine that there
was a free tap water sc cheme availabble in their are a, where local businesses ha ave signed up
p to be a Refill Station,
allowing passers-by to ‘pop in to top p up’ their reussable bottle frree of charge. Refill Stationss would displaay a
sticker in their window w to show that they are part of the scheme and can also o be found on the free Refill App.

21
 
 

Figure 9: Impact of the sche

eme on buy
ying behav
viour

Make a purchase
e from this business
b if I
65
5%
was ge
etting a refill

Returrn to make ffuture purcchases from

m
64%
thiss business

Choosse to purchase from th his businesss

over its competiitors that are not part 62%
%
of th
he scheme

0% 10% 20% 30%

% 40% 50%
% 60% 70
0%

ge of respo
Percentag nswering 'a bit more l ikely' or 'a lot
ondents an
morre likely'
Base: All respondentts = 2,138

4.5 Level of support/o

s pposition n for levy ono plastic bottles
The ide ea of a lev
vy on drink plastic bottles was te
ks sold in p ested in thhe quantita ative
survey y. Respond dents weree asked if tthey would d support oro oppose e the introdduction
of a fiv
ve pence le evy on plastic bottlees, similar to
t the charge curren ntly in plac
ce for
plastic bags. In general
g thee public we ere in supp port of the
e levy (68% % were
supporrtive). How wever, whe en the con ncept was explored in depth in n the focuss
groupss, there we ere a numb ber of prac cticalities to
t conside er that couuld affect the
t
intende ed impact. Respondents deba ated the level of the levy and ffelt that fiv ve
pence wouldn’t be b enough h to alter p
purchasing g behaviou ur. Similarly
y, how any y levy
was fra amed whe en presenteed to the p public was s also percceived to bbe likely too affect
the suc ccess. There was a fe eeling thatt people will
w need to o be aware e that a lev
vy is in
place aand it’s not just an in
ncrease in the price of o bottled water.

“I don’t think 5p
p would ma
ake a diffe
erence.”

“It’s d
different. When
W you are shopp ing, you arre adding 5p (for a pplastic bagg), but
unless you are e telling pe
eople they are payingg (a levy), they just tthink that’’s the
price
e of the wa
ater.”

22
 
 

Figure 10: Level of

o support or opposittion for levy on drinks
s sold in pl astic bottles

Strong
gly supportt 44%
4

Sligh
htly supportt 24%
%

Neithe
er support n
nor oppose
e 14%

Sligh
htly oppose
e 7%

Strongly oppose
e 8%
%

D
Don't know
w 2%

N
Net supportt 68%

N
Net oppose
e 16%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80

0%
Percenttage of respondents

Base: All respondentts = 2,138

Respon ndents weere also asked if a lev vy of 5p on single-us se plastic b

bottles wo ould
make tthem more e likely or less likely to use a re
eusable wa ater bottle
e when outt and
ould make no differe nce. Two fifths
about, or if it wo f espondentss (42%) stated
of re
that it would make them morem likely (a bit more likely orr a lot morre likely) to
o use a
reusabble water bottle.
b

23
 
 

5. FEED
DBACCK FR
ROM BUSINESS
SES
THAT
T SEL
LL BO
OTTLED WATE
W ER
As part of the research wee consultedd with senior represe entatives ffrom four
businesses that sell
s bottled d water to
o understan ggers and barriers to
nd the trig o
increassing uptak
ke of reusable water bottles annd how businesses c can play a role in
enablin
ng this. Their feedba
ack is outli ned below
w.

5.1 Reducing environm mental imp pacts of thhe busines ss

All four respondeents agreeed that redducing env vironmenta al impactss of their
business operations was a priority fo ganisation. This inclu
or their org uded reducing
different types of
o waste/w waste sent to landfill,, increasingg recyclingg and reduucing
energyy. To somee extent, fo
or all four rresponden nts, this wa
as, to somee extent, driven
d
by their customeers’ concerrns (or thee wider public’s) for environme ental issue
es.

“We w
want to red
duce the en
nvironmen have the greatest
ntal impactt of the thiings that h
environm
mental imp
pact first.”

“We a
are very much influennced by th
he public, although
a we eady quite tuned
w are alre
in to custom
mer thoughht processees.”

5.2 Current provisions

p made forr customers to drink k water
Each re on of drink
etailer difffered in their provisio king waterr, whilst al l sold botttled
water a and three out of fou ur providin g tap wateer, the pro
ovision difffered fromm one
retailerr to anothe er and the
ere was a pperceptionn that this was
w perha aps inconsistent
across sites/outlets across s the UK. N
None of thee retailers actively p
promote ac ccess
to tap water for customers s.

“We ssell bottled d water as part of ou ur range…R Regarding tap water,

r, people can ask
for it, it’ss very inforrmal, but tthat’s the process
p be used.”
that should b

The exxtent to wh hich drinking water ooptions we ere taken upu by custtomers als so
differed between n retailers. The prov ision of fre
ee tap watter was no ot promote ed by
any of the retaile ers and theere was a ssense thatt take-up ofo tap wate er (whethe er in a
glass o
or refill of a reusable bottle) w as low, but requests s were not specifically
monitoored and there was a likelihood d that requests were e honoured d to both
custommers and non-custom
n mers, altho
ough the definition
d of
o a custom mer variedd. For
two respondentss, a custom mer was an nyone in th outlets, forr the other two it
heir sites/o
was soomeone wh ho was spe ending mo oney.

“We d
don’t prom
mote it (acc
cess to fre
ee tap wate o sense of level of de
er). I’ve no emand
for peoplle asking for
f refills.”

24
 
 

Respon ndents we
ere asked what
w they thought were
w the most
m imporrtant qualities for
their cu
ustomers when
w it ca
ame to the eir busines ses. Respo
e water serrved in the onses
were wwide-ranging and forr tap wate r included:
 Clean
 Safe to drrink
 Source/where it com mes from
 Cleanlinesss of the water
w dispe
enser, inclu
uding free from calc ification
 Taste

“If it’s cleann and safe (a water d

dispenser/f
/fountain) then
t I think od
k it’s a goo
ind
dication tha
at people would be happy
h to drink
d from
m it.”

For bo
ottled, it inc
cluded:
 Cost
 Availabilitty/convenience
 Quality
 Mineral co ontent
 Brand influence
 Temperature
 Taste
 Perceived d health be
enefits

5.3 Plans to change

c provision off water for custome ers
All four organisa sulted had intentions
ations cons s to improve the pro ovision of tap
t
water tto their cu
ustomers, albeit
a theirr intentionns for whatt the impro oved provisions
would look like differed
d an
nd were no ot set in stone. Trialliing new prrovisions and
a
monitooring succe ess beside
es identifyiing lessons s learnt beefore large
e scale
implemmentation was key to o the decission-makin ng process s. One org anisation was
8
keen too get involved with the
t Refill sscheme , butb had a number
n off operation
nal
issues to addresss before siigning up aall their UKK outlets.

“We
e are active
ely looking
g into it, buut we have
en’t got a clear
c plan o
of what we
w are
g
going to do
o.”

“We w
will need to before we
o do tests and trials b e implemen
nt anything
g more bro
oadly.”

5.4 Level of priority

p for providin
ng more convenientt options ffor custom mers
to access free wate er
There w
were mixeed views around how provide more
w much of a priority it was to p

                                                            
8
Refill is a national, pra
actical tap water campaign that aims to make
m refilling a reusable botttle as easy, convenient
and cheap as possible by introducing refill points on every stree et. Local businnesses sign upp to be a Refill Station,
allowing passers-by to ‘pop in to top p up’ their reussable bottle frree of charge. Refill Stationss display a stic
cker in
their winddow to show that
t they are part
p of the sch
heme and can also be found d on the free R
Refill App.

25
 
 

conven nient optioons for cusstomers too access free water. However, all four
responndents reco ognised th hat public awareness s and conc
cern for sin
ngle-use plastics
p
is curre g and envisaged tha t custome
ently rising er demand for accesss to free water
w
could iincrease ass a result, therefore there wouuld be a ne
eed for the
em to mee et this
deman nd and cusstomers’ ex xpectationns.

“It’s a relativ
vely high priority bec
cause of th
he custome
er percepttion of plas
stic
bottles.”

“It’s n
not a top p
priority. We
e are startting to look
k at it and anticipate
e a demand
d…We
will eve
entually neeed to do something
s g more.”

5.5 Barriers to increasing opporrtunities fo or custom mers to acc cess free water
w
and / or reusable
r bottles
b
Barrierrs to increa
asing the provision
p o
of free watter for cus stomers we ere
predom minantly operationa
o l barriers ffor the individual org ganisationss consulteed.
There wwas a general feeling that wha atever proovision was s delivered d would neeed to
be fairly consisteent across all their siites/outletts in the UK
K, whilst itt wouldn’t
necesssarily be a ‘one size fits
f all’ app proach, the e general process
p wo ould need to be
the samme, so that custome ers would h have the correct
c exppectation o of the prov
vision
wherev ver they are in the country.

need a process and that

“We n t processs must be e the mostt appropria
ate way fo or us to
provide itt (tap wate
er). It musst be a process that works
w conssistently.”

Specifiic barriers included:

 Understan nding the best
b way ffor the bus siness to provide
p waater i.e. cho
osen
method an nd how they can ma ake it work k for the business/fitt into the
‘customerr experienc ce’
 Identifying g how to offer
o tap wwater/refills at the sa
ame time a as maintain ning
current lev
vel and sppeed of serrvice
 Cost of insstallation/ /set up
 Cost and process
p off servicing /maintena ance of thee provisionn
 Ensuring consistenc
c cy across a all of their sites/outle
ets
 Ensuring thatt the water provid ded is cleaan and safe and iden ntifying wh here
responsibility for this lies
 Location of o where to site the provision/ /space ava ailable for the provis sion
 Ensuring accessibilit
a ty to all peeople
 Raising aw wareness that
t the prrovision is available
 Understan nding the potential
p im
mpact on sales of bo ottled watter and how to
generate wider
w benefits for th he business.

“Can
n we still serve custo omers as q
quickly andd effectively, even in peak time
es? It
could negativelyy impact our
o service.. It is anoth
her processs that wouuld need putting
p
in place and
a it’s a process
p tha
at wouldn’t be generating any y income.”

26
 
 

“WWater fountains make e a mess a

and are better placed
d on tiled ffloors so th
hat
spillag
ges can be
e easily cle They also need
eaned up. T n mainntaining an
nd that cre eates a
jo
ob for staff
ff.”

In termms of how these barrriers could d be overco ome, respo onses were e differentt from
each o of the four organisatiions. For o one, increaased demand from th he public,
politicaal pressure
e for busin nesses to t ake actionn, and exam mples of h how other
businesses had made
m it wo
ork for theem, including examples of how w they had turned
it into a benefit for
f their bu usiness woould help to
t address the barrie ers. For an nother,
it was important to consult with the local communities, including c customers s, staff
and cle eaning conntractors to enable a any provision to take e into theirr input, cooncerns
and ide eas. For th
he third, it was essen ntial to tak
ke learnings from the e trials to help
h
overco ome barrie ers. For thee final orgaanisation, legislation was deem med to help
overco ome barrie ers, for exaample if thee provision of tap water was w written into
buildinng regulations then forf any new w premises that werre to be bu uilt, the loc
cation
of the water disp pensers/fo ountains/pprovision would
w architects from
be built in by a
the beg ginning ennsuring tha at the typee of provis ocation of tthe provision,
sion, the lo
how th he provisioon accesse es the wate er supply and
a how itt is cleanedd and
mainta ained ran more
m smoo othly and w worked mo ore effectively than if it was an
afterthhought, being added d to an exissting build
ding. Publicc demand and/or wiider
benefitts for the organisatio
o on would n need to be e significan
nt to make e the provision,
effort aand investtment worthwhile.

5.6 Level of support

s fo
or a depossit return scheme fo or plastic water botttles
Respon ndents we ere asked whether
w th
heir busineess would support orr oppose a
deposiit return sc cheme for plastic wa ater bottlees9 and to what
w exte nt, if at all, they
though ht it could have a sim milar impac ct to that achieved for
f the lev vy on plastic
bags. FFor one, thhe business already rrecycles plastic
p botttles and reecycling is a key
part off their strategy and isi written iinto their contract
c or the conttractors to
fo o sift
out reccyclable iteems that have
h been placed in the general waste b bin. The
introduuction of a deposit return sche eme would d not impa act this. Thhe issue wo ould be
around d how their outlets would
w admministrate and
a manag ge the sche eme. For the
t
second d responde ent, it was a case of if the gov vernment decides
d to go ahead; they
will collaborate in a way th hat best suuits their organisation. For the third, therre was
a keen interest in n the on-going work k around deposit retu urn schem mes in Scottland
and the e finer dettail of how
w it would w work. Depending on what the model loo oked
like and
d the level of contro ol that reta
ailers couldd have, the
ere was a ffeeling tha at it
could hhelp to redduce both plastics a nd litter, but
b not nec cessarily a s strongly as is
intendeed. The finnal respond dent was u unsure of the
t corporrate respo onse to the e
scheme.

                                                            
9
Three oof the four inte
erviews took place
p before th
he governmen
nt announced that there wou
uld be a consu
ultation
th
h
on the inttroduction of a deposit retu
urn scheme in England (28 March 2018).

27
 
 

We have disscussed this quite a b

“W bit. If the governmen
g nt decidess on it, we will
collaaborate in a way thaat works be est operattionally forr us.”

There wwas a general feeling that the issue was s different to that of plastic bags,
and thaat the twoo issues weere too diffferent to compare.
c For
F examp ple with the 5p
chargee for a plasstic bag ty
ypically beiing a muchh lower proportion o of the overall
spend, than wou uld be the case
c he deposit on a bottle of wate r, plus the effort
for th
require
ed to returrn the botttle and gett the depoosit back. A question n was raise
ed
regarding how th he scheme e would ap pply to botttled water purchase ed in multi-
packs, in terms of
o the level of depossit required d being qu
uite signific
cant.

28
 
 

6. RECO
OMMENDA
ATIO
ONS
Recom mmendatio ons for inccreasing u uptake of reusable water
w botttles
Researrch shows that there e is an incrreased awa areness of the issuess surround ding
single--use plastic c bottles and
a as a reesult businesses are feeling gre eater pressure
from th heir custom mers to take action. However, the reality y is that beehaviour remains
r
relativeely unchan nged. Using insights from this research, a number of
recommendation w usage of reusable bottles
ns for how b cou
uld be incrreased is
outlineed below.
 A large pro oportion off the public c stated th
hat they would
w more likely to use
be m
a reusable water
w botttle if there was greatter availab bility of driinking watter
fa here are also positive
acilities. Th e perceptiions of thoose busine sses that offer
o
acccess to water
w and suggested
s d positive impacts on n their bussiness. ,
Consideratiion should be given to how ne
C ew provisioon can be created an nd
exxisting proovision ma ade more v ough greatter promo tion. Schemes
visible thro
lik
ke Refill annd GiveMe eTap! (with h the assoc ciated #MindTheTap p
caampaign) present an n opportun nity to use
e existing premises
p a
and
in
nfrastructu ure to offer free drin king water without the t need ffor installattion
and maintenance of new n waterr fountains s or taps. We
W suggesst that a qu uick
method of mainstreaming prov
m vision could be throu ugh making g sure all
acccessible public
p builldings, e.g . council contact
c ntres, are iinvolved in
cen n such
scchemes. The development of p policies which enable this to h happen sho ould
also be con nsidered.
 W
We recomm mend that communic cations abbout new oro existing public wa ater
taaps, founta ains and dispensers, seek to ad ddress thee concern e expressed d by
thhe public around
a saffety and clleanliness of the provision. Wh here new
in
nstallationss are being g planned,, actual and perceive ed cleanlin ness should d be
coonsidered as part off the desig gn.
 W
Work needs to be do one to furth her increasse the pubblic’s perceeption of tap
t
w
water in public places s as a clea an and healthy resource and off why they y
shhould use a reusable e water botttle. This will
w be impe erative to any furthe er
in
nitiatives too increasee uptake.
 G
Given the environmen
e ntal conce erns, we reecommend d that messsaging and d
caampaigns to promotte scheme es and/or tot encoura age people e to reduce
coonsumptio on of bottled water iincludes values-base ed messag ging aboutt the
environmen ntal benefits which c can be derrived and environme
e ental impac cts
w
which can be b avoided d by partic cipating.
 It may be helpful to prioritise
p in
ntervention ns and cammpaigns w which enco ourage
thhe 19% of people
p whho already own a reu usable water bottle b but don’t use
u it
reegularly orr never use e it, to use e their botttles more regularly,
r o
over the thhird of
people who o don’t currrently ow n a reusab ble water bottle.
b

29
 
 

 W
We recomm mend that interventi ons which h focus on normalisin ng drinking g non-
bottled watter, use of reusable w water botttles and as sking for taap or refills on
thhe go are likely
l to bee helpful in
n encourag ging more people to o change their
behaviour.
 Existing cam mpaigns, for
f examp le, those which w encoourage peo ople to carrry
w
water durin ng hot spells or for h
health reasons, could d be adaptted to feature
people carrrying reusa able bottlees. Equally y, promotion of the ffact that free
w
water and refills
r are available
a in
n particula ar buildings or from p particular
businesses could help p to createe and stren ngthen a social norm m around asking
a
foor water on the go.
 Forgetfulne ess and thee inconven nience of carrying
c re
eusable bo ottles were e cited
ass key reasons why re egular use ers of reusa able waterr bottles m might still buy
b
bottled watter. Interve entions tha at demons strate pers sonal respo onsibility for
f the
isssue and/o or how to build
b reusaable waterr bottles in nto the daiily routine,
m
making usa age more ofo a habit, will help to increase e usage of reusable bottles.
b
 A
Around half of people e would no ot feel com mfortable asking
a for a refill of their
reeusable wa ater bottle
e in a shopp or café, even
e if makking a purc chase.
Inntervention ns which address
a th is are strongly recom mmended.. Again, this
co ould includ
de better promotion
p ns of schem mes, but other simplle actions like
putting outt jugs of water to wh hich people e can help p themselv ves, rather than
reequiring pe eople to ask staff fo r a refill, are likely too be effecttive given that
thhree-quartters of peoople felt thhat the opttion to help themselv ves would make
thhem more likely to use
u a reusa able water bottle.
 G
Given that thet occasions when those who o regularly y used a reeusable wa ater
bottle some etimes purrchased bo ottled watter were travel-relate ed and tha at this
w
was driven by a feelin ng that theere was lim mited acce ess to top- up their re eusable
bottles in airports, service stati ons, transport hubs, etc. we re ecommend d
raaising awareness of any waterr fountains s or dispen nsers proviided in the ese
loocations, particularly
p y in airportts, where thet public is not nece essarily aw ware
thhat water fountains
f are
a availab ble after Airport
A Seccurity. Link
ked with th his, we
reecommend d that interventions which enc courage pe eople to re emember to t take
thheir reusabble water bottle
b withh them wh hen going out o and ab bout, particularly
w
when travelling could d be effecttive. For ex xample, airports cou uld promotte the
faact that emmpty reusaable bottle es can be taken
t through Airpo ort Security y,
ticketing an nd travel companies
c could pro ompt peop ple to packk their reus sable
w
water bottle at the sa ame time a as reminding them via v email o r apps to print
p
boarding ca ards or collect ticketts. Remind ders could also be se ent via sim milar
ch hannels duuring hot weather
w peeriods or when
w custoomers are being given
other travel informatiion.
 For those companies
c producing g or supplying reusa able waterr bottles, itt may
be helpful tot consider public pe erception of issues arounda hyggiene and taste
and the dessign, look and
a feel off the desig gn as well as the pra acticality.

30
 
 

 Consideratiion should be given to increas

C sing publicc awarenesss of their rights
w
when it com
mes to the provision of free wa ater given current leevels of
wareness are quite low.
aw
 W
We recomm mend that decision-m makers, bu usinesses and
a other stakeholders
co
ome togetther to discuss the reecommendations made in thiss report. Efforts
are needed to have meaningful
m l discussio
on about ho ow to ove rcome the e
operationall barriers which
w curr ently existt for those that may be in a poosition
to
o help dev
velop a nettwork of p laces where the pub blic can ac cess free, safe,
ater whilst on the go
drinking wa o.

31
 
 

Appe endix A – Publlic Perc

ceptions
s Surve
ey Resp
pondentt
Profiile

Gendeer
Female
e 1101
Male 10
037
Grand Total 2
2138

Age grroup
18-24 241
25-34 311
35-44 3
399
45-54 334
3
55+ 8
854
Grand Total 2
2138

Nationn
Englan
nd 11796
Northeern Ireland 59
Scotlan
nd 180
Wales 103
Grand Total 2
2138

Regionn
East Midlands 177
East off England 190
London 281
North East 86
North WWest 223
Northeern Ireland 59
Scotlannd 180
South East 255
South West 230
Wales 103
West MMidlands 165
Yorkshhire and the 189
Humbe er
Grand Total 2
2138

32
 
 

Emplo oyment sta atus

Full tim
me studentt 110
Not wo orking 22
25
Retiredd 54
45
Unemp ployed 94
9
Workin ng full time
e (30 or more
m hourss per 82
23
week)
Workin ng part timme (8-29 hours a we ek) 34
42
Grand Total 2138

Numbe er of child
dren in household
No children 159
96
1 child 23
32
2 children 19
99
3 + children 71
7
Don't kknow/preffer not to say
s 41
4
Grand Total

Social grade
ABC1 12119
C2DE 9119
Grand Total 213
38

33
 
 

Prin
nted on 100%
% recycled material
m

No part of this reporrt may be reproduced in any form whatsoever

without prior permisssion in writing from the publisher. Permission
will norm en free of charge to charritable and other
mally be give
non-proofit making organisations.

Keep Brritain Tidy is a registered charity. No. 1071737.

Keep B
Britain Tidy

Elizabe
eth House 9-13 Kean Street enquiries
s@keepbritaintidy.org
The Pie
er London www.kee epbritaintidy.org
Wigan WN3 4EX WC2B 4A AY
facebook.com/keepbritaintid
dy
T 0194
42 612621 T 020 74
420 4400 epbritaintidy
@kee y

34