Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Review of 2016 courses
Adelaide trial
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 1 of 28
Contents
1. Executive summary ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Improvements in environmental behaviours .......................................................................................................... 2
Social benefits ................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Dunning-Kruger effect ................................................................................................................................................... 4
Future considerations ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
2. Background ......................................................................................................................................................... 5
Living Smart in South Australia ................................................................................................................................... 6
3. Review methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 7
Participant surveys ........................................................................................................................................................... 7
Emails, phone interviews, face-to-face conversations ......................................................................................... 7
Facilitator feedback ......................................................................................................................................................... 7
Local government feedback ......................................................................................................................................... 7
4. Results .................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Participant information .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Environmental outcomes .............................................................................................................................................. 9
Social benefits ................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Course satisfaction .......................................................................................................................................................... 15
Favourite elements of Living Smart ........................................................................................................................... 16
Least-favourite elements of Living Smart ................................................................................................................ 19
Facilitator feedback ......................................................................................................................................................... 19
Local government feedback ......................................................................................................................................... 19
Case studies ....................................................................................................................................................................... 21
5. Data limitations .................................................................................................................................................. 24
Lack of control group ..................................................................................................................................................... 24
Short timeframe ............................................................................................................................................................... 25
Self-reporting .................................................................................................................................................................... 25
7. Discussion ............................................................................................................................................................ 26
Environmental and social outcomes.......................................................................................................................... 26
Improved sense of community.................................................................................................................................... 26
Increased motivation and confidence ....................................................................................................................... 26
8. Future considerations ........................................................................................................................................ 27
Adjusting the course and session format ................................................................................................................ 27
Increasing the diversity of participants ..................................................................................................................... 27
Supporting participants to become group coordinators ................................................................................... 27
Strengthening the validity of the data ...................................................................................................................... 28
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 2 of 28
1. Executive summary
Living Smart is a seven-week sustainability and wellbeing course that encourages participants to reduce their
environmental impact and improve their quality of life. In mid-2016, the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges
Natural Resources Management Board initiated a partnership with the Western Australian developers of Living
Smart, Be Living Smart Inc., and trained 20 community champions as Living Smart facilitators. During October
and November 2016, the board partnered with the cities of Unley, Onkaparinga, Holdfast Bay and Marion to
deliver the first three Living Smart courses in South Australia, to a total of 70 participants.
The three courses were held as part of a year-long trial period, and another five courses have since been
delivered between February and July 2017. An interim review was held to look at the impacts of the first three
Living Smart courses and identify opportunities for improvement.
This report summarises the results of the interim review. Results indicate that Living Smart is an effective
capacity building program that supports participants to make lifestyle changes and improve their
environmental behaviours. The course also provides social benefits such as enhancing participants’ relationship
with nature, building their skills and knowledge, increasing community connections and building their sense of
personal resilience.
Participant feedback on the course was extremely positive, and the course received a satisfaction rate of 88.5%
(6.2 out of 7). Participants enjoyed the social aspects of the course, such as meeting like-minded people and
having the opportunity to connect with their community, as well as learning practical solutions and approaches
to sustainability. They appreciated the diversity of themes, especially waste, gardening, and electricity, and the
quality of facilitators, question and answer time, and hands-on activities.
Improvements in environmental behaviours
More than half of participants reported that as a result of the Living Smart course, they had taken positive
actions relating to water, energy and waste efficiency at home. On average:
84% of participants felt they had reduced their household waste
76% of participants improved their water use
64% made efforts to reduce their energy consumption.
Modest improvements in household waste management included a 6% reduction in the volume of waste
being sent to landfill, and an 8% decrease in the volume of material being disposed in recycling bins.
Participants reduced the use of their landfill bin for organic kitchen scraps, while increasing their use of a home
organic waste system (such as compost bins, worm farm or chickens) by 10%.
Participation levels involving a number of simple living sustainability actions were also measured, with results
showing participants improved most where there was the most room for improvement. For example, the
frequency that participants:
sourced food from a local garden increased by 11%
used homemade cleaning and personal care products increased by 9%.
Behaviours that participants already undertook often (such as using their own shopping bag, and adjusting
curtains and windows to manage indoor temperatures) showed a comparatively small increase.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 3 of 28
Significant improvements were made in relation to transport. On average, participants reported:
33% decrease in car trips
40% increase in bus trips
10% increase in walking and cycling trips.
Other examples of actions that participants reported undertaking since the course include:
connecting with one of the course’s guest speakers to organise a working bee and install a verge
garden at the front of their house – changing a wasteland of grey dolomite into two thriving gardens
and a space for neighbours to have a chat and connect
planning to build an eco-house
volunteering for the local council as well as joining a gardening group
building and installing compost bays
making beeswax wraps and homemade personal care products
sharing newfound knowledge with friends and family
changing dietary habits, including reducing meat consumption and adopting vegetarian and vegan
diets
taking 3-minute showers
buying bulk
cycling more.
Social benefits
Results indicate that Living Smart also provides a number of social benefits. When exploring their relationship
with nature, results show that since taking part in Living Smart:
participants strengthened their sense of connection with nature by 29%
participants increased their sense that nature is special and should be protected by 30%
the number of participants who had direct and positive contact with nature on a daily basis increased
by 19%.
The frequency that people felt they took action to develop their knowledge and skills to care for the
environment increased over the duration of the course. After the course, almost everyone (92% of participants)
felt they now did this either daily, weekly or monthly (an increase of 21%). The number of people who felt they
built their knowledge and skills daily increased by 67%, and those who believed they did this at least weekly
increased by 24%.
Community resilience
Participants also increased how often they interact and share information with other people in their
community. The number of participants who:
interacted daily with others in their community increased by 41%
shared with or learned from others in the community daily increased by 20%
interacted either never or once or twice a year decreased by 63%.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 4 of 28
Personal resilience
Participants also strengthened their sense of personal resilience. They increased their sense of being able to:
think of and create solutions to problems by 31%
be well informed and prepared for changes by 31%
respond constructively to different sorts of challenges by 26%.
Living Smart increased participants’ confidence and motivation to take actions in their home and community.
Many participants reported that the course provided them with the ‘extra kick’ to get started on many
sustainability-related activities they had been planning to undertake for a long time.
Dunning-Kruger effect
A phenomenon called the Dunning-Kruger effect1 may have impacted the results of this review, meaning the
true impact of Living Smart has been understated across all behaviours (the impact may actually be more
beneficial than what has been reported). The Dunning-Kruger effect describes the tendency of people to hold
overinflated ideas of their skills at the beginning of courses, and overrate their initial performance in a pre-
course survey. Over the course duration, participants tend to become more aware of their own behaviours,
and may therefore judge themselves more critically in a post-course survey.
There are two behaviours that were measured as part of the review, where we actually saw participants report
a decline in environmental action, which the Dunning-Kruger effect may explain:
a minor decline in washing machine use efficiency in both Holdfast Bay/Marion and Unley courses
a slight decline in the frequency that people reported to take environmental action to support their
community.
These two findings are at odds with the rest of the results, and may reflect the fact that through undertaking
the Living Smart course, participants have a slightly different view of what these behaviours mean.
Future considerations
Future delivery of Living Smart will consider:
adjusting the course and session format to ease pressure on content coverage and goal-setting
increasing the diversity of participants
supporting participants to become group coordinators
strengthening the validity of the data, for example through using a control group and/or undertaking
empirical measurements of environmental outcomes.
1 Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., Kruger, J. (2003) Why people fail to recognise their own incompetence. Current
Directions in Psychological Science
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 5 of 28
2. Background
Living Smart is a behaviour change program that applies adult learning principles and an evidence-based
approach to sustainability education. It upskills and empowers participants to take action in their homes to
reduce their environmental impact and improve their quality of life.
In 2003, recognising the need for a program that helps people embrace more sustainable and rewarding
lifestyles, a partnership between The Meeting Place Community Centre, the City of Fremantle, Murdoch
University and the Southern Metropolitan Regional Council developed Living Smart. The program is now
managed by Western Australian not-for-profit Be Living Smart Inc., and undergoes continual improvement by
practitioners and researchers. In South Australia, it is coordinated by the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges
Natural Resources Management Board.
During the seven week course, participants are assisted to achieve personal goals through connections with
like-minded people and local experts who share their skills and stories. The course recognises the role of
governments and organisations, as well as issues of global equity, but focusses on local people finding local
solutions to local problems.
The course is centred on 10 key modules, which can be adapted to suit the needs of the audience. Each of the
modules are listed below with some example topics:
Living simply – decluttering, minimalist living principles
Energy – renewable energy, power supply options
Waste – refuse-reduce-reuse-recycle principles, garden waste, plastics
Water – water sensitive urban design, reduction tips
Transport – alternative travel options, peak oil
Gardening for biodiversity – going native, localised urban cooling
Gardening for productivity – organic gardening, self-sufficiency
Healthy home – indoor air quality, sustainable cleaning
Healthy you – mental health, body products
Community – linking with or starting a local group, knowing where to go for help.
The course is delivered by trained facilitators, and guest speakers are invited to present on their topics of
expertise. Each session includes a diverse range of group activities and personal, reflective goal-setting time.
‘This course inspires you to do better. It gives you things to think about, but more importantly, it is full of
information and ideas. I valued group discussions because we could always help and motivate each other.
Nothing was impossible and the future is full of possibilities.’
– City of Onkaparinga Living Smart participant
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 6 of 28
Living Smart in South Australia
In July 2016, the board initiated a partnership with Be Living Smart Inc. to deliver Living Smart courses across
the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges region. Living Smart was chosen because of its:
Focus on behaviour change
Information fatigue is a real barrier to change. To tackle this, Living Smart uses personal goal-setting
and action-sharing in each session to motivate and connect participants.
Ability to be tailor-made
Although the proven model remains unchanged, the content and schedule can be made locally
relevant, depending on the priorities and needs of the participants and council/organisation host.
Broad coverage of sustainability
The 10 Living Smart topics are comprehensive and holistic, covering a range of sustainability elements
from waste reduction to self-care.
Prioritising of local network links
Living Smart facilitators are well-networked, and can therefore share events and actions currently
happening in their local area, as well as encourage community participation.
Commitment to evaluation
Living Smart captures both quantitative and qualitative data for each course. Unlike a one-off event or
workshop, this course provides an opportunity to track behaviour change and community participation
over time.
In May 2016, 20 community members representing 12 metropolitan council areas were trained as Living Smart
facilitators by Be Living Smart Inc. Facilitators were chosen because of their local knowledge and connections,
motivation and interest in sustainability, and networking and facilitation skills.
A trial period commenced, in which the board encouraged councils and organisations to host a Living Smart
course in their area. The board committed a contribution of $2,000 per trial course, with $1,500 sought from
the partner council or organisation. This cost covered the estimated 100 hours of course preparation and
delivery work by the facilitator(s).
Three councils agreed to proceed with the trial, each commencing a Living Smart course on 18 October 2016
for seven evening sessions and a field trip.
Table 1: Living Smart 2016 trial courses
Councils Location Date and time Facilitators
City of Unley Clarence Park
Community Centre
18 October – 6 December 2016
Tuesdays
6.30pm – 9.00pm
Wendy Sutton
Rachel Eckermann
City of Onkaparinga McLaren Vale Visitors
Centre
18 October – 29 November 2016
Tuesdays
6.30pm – 8.30pm
Dani Austin
Linda Curtis
Cities of Marion and
Holdfast Bay
Glenelg Community
Centre
18 October – 29 November 2016
Tuesdays
6.45pm – 9.00pm
Charmaine
Thredgold
Emma Sandery
A second round of Living Smart courses has also recently completed, co-funded by the board and the Gawler
Natural Resource Centre and the cities of Unley, Charles Sturt, Mitcham, Holdfast Bay and Marion.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 7 of 28
These courses complete the 12 month trial of Living Smart. Results from these courses will also be analysed
and reported on to contribute to ongoing assessment of Living Smart’s impacts.
3. Review methodology
The interim review sought participants’ views through pre and post course surveys, follow-up emails, phone
interviews and informal face-to-face conversations. Facilitator feedback was provided through end-of-course
evaluation reports, and a post-course debrief, facilitated by Natural Resources Adelaide and Mount Lofty
Ranges and Be Living Smart Inc. Local government feedback was provided through ongoing conversations,
end-of-course debrief meetings and direct testimonials.
Participant surveys
Participants were asked to complete a pre course survey online before the course began, and were given
paper surveys to complete the post course survey during the final session. Participants who did not attend the
final session were emailed a copy of the survey and encouraged to complete it.
Both pre and post course surveys included environmental behaviour questions (such as transport and waste
practices), which are currently asked of all Living Smart participants Australia wide, to assess the course’s
impact on daily environmental habits. Both surveys also asked a series of socially related questions, to
understand participants’ perceptions on their connection to nature, environmental knowledge and skills,
community connectivity, and ability to respond to problems.
The pre course survey also included questions on demographics, reasons for participating, and whether the
participant had any skills or knowledge they may have been willing to share with the group. This assisted
facilitators to understand the group and appropriately customise the course.
The post course survey also asked participants to reflect on their favourite course aspects, most memorable
learnings, and proudest achievements, and allowed participants to provide open feedback on the course.
Emails, phone interviews, face-to-face conversations
In March 2017, approximately four months after the completion of the first three Living Smart trial courses, an
email was sent to all participants (10 responses were received) asking the following:
Are there any personal goals you have reached or set after the course?
Is there any way we can support or help you to achieve community project ideas/goals?
Is there anything else you need to keep motivated or that you would like to share?
Eight participants were then interviewed (six via phone and two face-to-face).
Facilitator feedback
Feedback from course facilitators was provided through:
End-of-course evaluation reports produced by facilitators
End-of-course course debrief and skype professional development session facilitated by Natural
Resources Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges and Be Living Smart Inc.
Ongoing casual conversations (through email, phone and face-to-face).
Local government feedback
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 8 of 28
Feedback from local government partners was provided through:
Ongoing conversations with allocated officers to monitor course uptake and participation
End-of-course debrief meetings with course facilitators
Request for direct testimonials for video contact and story-building
‘It has something for everyone. It is a non-intimidating, engaging, fun and insightful way of increasing your
awareness to some very big issues. Yet, instead of walking away with a sense of doom and gloom, you feel
uplifted and encouraged to make changes – with the support of brilliant facilitators and participants.’
– Cities of Holdfast and Marion Living Smart participant
4. Results
Participant information
Between 22 and 29 people enrolled in each course, and all courses had a high weekly attendance rate, with
absentees due to health reasons or prior commitments. All 25 and 22 enrolled participants completed the
course at the City of Onkaparinga (Onkaparinga) and the City of Unley (Unley) respectively, whereas 23
participants completed the cities of Holdfast Bay and Marion (Holdfast Bay/Marion) course after 29 enrolled.
Withdrawals were due to health or family complications, or without reason.
Females comprised 85% of participants. The average age of Holdfast Bay/Marion and Onkaparinga
participants was 45 to 54 years. The average age of Unley participants was 35 to 44 years. Of all courses, 83%
of participants were over 35 years, and only one participant was under 25 years.
When asked why they enrolled in the course (multiple answers possible), across all courses, 90% of participants
reported that they wanted to learn about living more sustainably. Almost 70% said it was because they were
interested in the environment, 54% stated they would like to meet people in their local community and 33%
were interested in saving on household costs.
There were some differences in why people chose to take the course, across councils (see Figure ). Unley
participants were the most interested to meet people in their local community, and their interest in
environmental issues was a lower driver compared with other councils. Holdfast Bay/Marion participants were
driven by environmental and sustainability factors, and less by community and economic reasons. Onkaparinga
respondents rated comparatively high on all reasons for enrolment.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Learn more aboutliving sustainably
Interested inenvironmental issues
Meet people in mylocal community
Save on my householdcosts
Pe
rce
nta
ge o
f p
art
icip
an
ts
Onkaparinga Holdfast Bay/Marion Unley
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 9 of 28
Figure 1. Reasons participants enrolled in Living Smart (multiple answers possible)
Participants reported they had a diverse range of knowledge and skills that they were willing to share in the
group, ranging from sustainable crafts, eco-housing design, permaculture, gardening, bee-keeping, and
woodwork.
Participants mostly heard about the course through word of mouth (40%), council email (26%) or Facebook
(10%), see Figure 2. Not one participant heard about the course through the board website or Living Smart
website.
Figure 2. Methods by which Living Smart participants heard about the course
Environmental outcomes
The following section outlines results from survey questions relating to environmental sustainability.
Water, energy and waste management
The post course survey asked participants if they had taken action relating to water, energy or waste efficiency
as a result of Living Smart. More than half had taken action in all three areas. On average, 84% of participants
felt they had reduced their household waste, 76% improved their water use and 64% improved their energy
use. All (100%) of Unley participants believed they had reduced their household waste (Figure 3). Onkaparinga
had the greatest proportion of participants taking action to improve energy efficiency or reduce power use
(75%).
Figure 3. Percentage of participants who believed they improved their water, energy or waste management as a result of taking part in
Living Smart
Council email Council website
Email from the board Adelaide Sustainability Centre
Word of mouth Facebook
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Improved water efficiency orreduced water use
Improved energy efficiency orreduced power use
Reduced household waste
Per
cen
tage
of
par
tici
pan
ts
Onkaparinga Holdfast Bay/Marion Unley
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 10 of 28
In both the pre and post course surveys, participants were asked to estimate how full their bins were when
they placed them out for emptying. Small yet encouraging improvements were made, including an 8% and 6%
decrease in recycling and landfill waste volumes respectively, and a 2% decrease in their organics volume
(Figure 4).
Figure 4. Average volume of contents in Living Smart participants’ bins
Participants were asked about their organic waste management. Results show that since taking part in Living
Smart, participants improved the sustainability of their kitchen organics disposal. Participants recorded a
decline in landfill bin use and an increase in the use of a compost bin, worm farm or chicken run, or council
organics bin (Table 2).
Table 2. Living Smart participants’ disposal methods for organic waste
Organic waste disposal method Change from pre to post course
Council landfill bin 7% decrease in use
Council green bin 4% increase in use
Compost/bokashi/worm farm/chook run 10% increase in use
Simple living sustainable actions
In both pre and post course surveys, participants were asked how often they undertook a range of sustainable
activities. Results show all behaviours, except one, were practiced more often after participants had taken part
in Living Smart (Figure 5). The largest increases were made where there was room for improvement. For
example, sourcing food from a local garden increased by 11%, and using homemade cleaning and personal
care products increased by 9%.
Behaviours that participants already undertook often (such as using their own shopping bag, and adjusting
curtains and windows for indoor temperature management) showed a comparatively small increase.
1
2
3
4
Recycling Landfill Organics
Full
1/2 full
1/4 full
>1/4 full
Pre course Post course
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 11 of 28
Figure 5. Average Living Smart participants change in frequency of selected sustainability activities
Participants reported a decline in washing machine use efficiency in both Holdfast Bay/Marion and Unley
courses. This may be due to a phenomenon called the Dunning-Kruger effect2, which describes the tendency
of people to hold overinflated ideas of their skills at the beginning of courses, and overrate their initial
performance. Over the course duration, participants tend to become more aware of their own behaviours, and
may therefore judge themselves more critically in the post course survey as compared to the pre course
survey.
This effect may equally apply to the rest of the results, meaning that the actual impact of Living Smart courses
has been understated across all behaviours.
Transport
In pre and post course surveys, participants were asked to record their main mode of transport used for each
trip taken during the previous week.
Across all Living Smart courses, participants reported:
33% decrease in car trips
40% increase in bus trips
10% increase in walking and cycling trips.
Figure 6. Modes of transport used by Living Smart participants over a one week period, at the beginning and end of the course
2 Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., Kruger, J. (2003) Why people fail to recognise their own incompetence. Current
Directions in Psychological Science
1
2
3
4
5
I use my ownhomemade
cleaning and/orpersonal care
products
I use my ownshopping bagwhen I shop
I open/closecurtains andwindows to
manage indoortemperature
I run my washingappliances only
when full
I get some foodfrom my gardenor a community
garden
5 = Almost always
1= Almost never
Pre course Post course
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
On foot Bicycle Public transport Car
Pre course
Post course
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 12 of 28
Responses from pre and post course surveys were analysed to reveal differences between councils, see Figure
7. Participants from Onkaparinga reported the lowest use of bicycles and public transport, and the highest use
of cars. Unley participants had the lowest percentage car trips and the highest percentage of trips using
alternative transport. Despite these differences, participants from all councils increased their use of sustainable
transport options and decreased their car use, which suggests that Living Smart’s approach is effective across
different types of council areas.
Figure 7. Modes of transport used by Living Smart participants across councils
Social benefits
The following section outlines some of the social benefits delivered by the course.
Connection with nature
Participants were asked to rate how strongly they either agreed or disagreed with a number of statements, in
an effort to quantify their relationship with nature, before and after taking part in Living Smart. Results show
that, on average, participants moderately agreed with the statements ‘I feel I have a connection with nature’
and ‘I sense that nature is special and something to be protected’ before the course, which shifted to ‘strongly
agree’ after the course.
When quantified, results show that participants strengthened their sense of connection with nature by 29%,
and their sense that nature is special and should be protected by 30%, see Figure 8.
Figure 8. Average Living Smart participant agreeance with statements on their relationship with nature
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
On foot Bicycle Public transport Car
Per
cen
tage
of
all t
rip
s
Onkaparinga Holdfast Bay/Marion Unley
0
1
2
3
4
5
I feel I have a connection with nature I sense that nature is special andsomething to be protected
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Pre course Post course
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 13 of 28
Participants were also asked how often they had direct and positive contact with nature. After the course, the
number of people who had direct and positive contact with nature on a daily basis increased by 19%, from 30
to 37 (Figure ).
Figure 9. How often Living Smart participants had direct and positive contact with nature
Knowledge and skills to care for the environment
After taking part in Living Smart, almost everyone (92% of participants) felt they built their knowledge and skills
to care for the environment daily, weekly or monthly. The number of people who felt they did this daily
increased by 67% from the pre course survey, and those who believed they did this at least weekly increased
by 24% (see Figure 1).
Figure 10. How often Living Smart participants built their knowledge and skills around caring for the environment
0 10 20 30 40 50
Post course
Pre course
Number of participants
Never Once or twice a year Every couple of months Monthly At least weekly Daily
0 10 20 30 40 50
Post course
Pre course
Number of participants
Never Once or twice a year Every couple of months Monthly At least weekly Daily
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 14 of 28
Community connections and collaboration
Participants were asked how often they interact with others in their community. There was a 41% increase in
the number of people who interacted daily with others in their community, and a 63% decrease in participants
who interacted either never or once or twice a year (see Figure 10).
Figure 11. Frequency of Living Smart participants interacting with others in their community
Results also showed an increase in participants sharing knowledge with or learning from others in their
community, with four more people doing this daily (an increase of 20%) after taking part in Living Smart (see
Figure 11).
Figure 12. Frequency that Living Smart participants shared with or learned from others in their community
The pre and post course surveys also asked participants how often they took action that supports their
community in some way. Results for this question show a slight decline in the frequency that people undertook
action (see Figure 13), which is inconsistent with the vast majority of findings that show participants increased
their community connections and environmental actions.
There are a number of possible reasons for this. One reason is the previously mentioned Dunning-Kruger
phenomenon where over a course’s duration, participants become more aware of their behaviours and may
judge themselves more critically post course, as compared to pre course.
Other explanations include:
These types of community-connectivity changes would be expected to occur over a longer time frame
than seven weeks, and may require additional support.
Participants only focussed on community in the final Living Smart session, just before the post-course
survey was circulated.
0 10 20 30 40 50
Post course
Pre course
Number of participants
Never Once or twice a year Every couple of months Monthly At least weekly Daily
0 10 20 30 40 50
Post course
Pre course
Number of participants
Never Once or twice a year Every couple of months Monthly At least weekly Daily
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 15 of 28
Figure 13. Frequency that Living Smart participants believed they took action to support their community
Ability to respond to problems, societal changes and challenges
Participants scored how strongly they agreed or disagreed with a number of statements that related to their
personal resilience, see Figure 14.
Results show that after taking part in Living Smart, participants increased their sense of being able to:
think of and create solutions to problems by 31%
be well informed and prepared for changes by 31%
respond constructively to different sorts of challenges by 26%.
Figure 14. Average Living Smart participant agreeance with statements relating to personal resilience
Course satisfaction
Post course surveys provided the opportunity for participants to give feedback on their satisfaction of the
course. Overall participants were extremely satisfied and rated the course 6.2 out of 7. Holdfast Bay/Marion
participants experienced the most satisfaction overall (96% of participants being satisfied or very satisfied)
whereas Unley participants reported slightly lower satisfaction with the course (79%), see Figure 15.
0 10 20 30 40 50
Post course
Pre course
Number of participants
Never Once or twice a year Every couple of months Monthly At least weekly Daily
0
1
2
3
4
5
I am able to think of andcreate solutions to problems
I am well informed andprepared for changes (e.g.
environmental and societal)
I am able to respondconstructively to different
sorts of challenges
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Pre course Post course
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 16 of 28
Figure 15. Average Living Smart participant reported course usefulness and satisfaction
Many participants discussed the course with other people, see Figure 16. All Holdfast Bay/Marion participants,
and most of Unley and Onkaparinga participants, told friends and family about Living Smart. On average, more
than half of the participants spoke to work colleagues about the course, and more than a quarter of
participants mentioned it to neighbours.
Figure 16. Living Smart participants discussing the course with others
Favourite elements of Living Smart
When asked what their favourite aspect of the program was, participants overwhelmingly responded with
answers relating to the other participants, such as meeting like-minded people and having the opportunity to
connect with their community, see Figure 17. The emphasis on practical solutions and approaches to
sustainability were also favoured, as was the opportunity to share challenges and successes with the group.
Also popular was the diversity of themes, especially waste, gardening, and electricity. Participants noted that
the quality of facilitators, provision of question and answer time, and hands-on activities strongly contributed
to their enjoyment of the course.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Onkaparinga Holdfast & Marion Unley
Very
Not at all
How useful did you find this Living Smart course? Overall, how satisfied are you with this course?
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Family Friends Neighbours Work colleagues
Per
cen
tage
of
par
tici
pan
rs
Onkaparinga Holdfast Bay/Marion Unley
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 17 of 28
Figure 17. Living Smart participants’ favourite aspects of the course
Participants were asked to share their three proudest actions taken as a result of the course (see Figure 18).
Again, responses were highly varied, but gardening was mentioned with the highest frequency. Generally
those actions that participants were most proud of were personal or in-home actions such as:
making homemade body products
taking 3-minute showers
decreasing food waste to landfill
buying bulk
cycling more.
There were a few participants that responded with more community-related actions such as:
talking to people about recycling
sharing information via a local newsletter.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 18 of 28
Figure 18. Living Smart participants’ proudest actions
Participants were asked to list the three most significant things they learned during the course, see Figure 15.
Results were extremely varied, however recycling tips, water, energy and waste saving ideas were the most
frequently mentioned.
Figure 15. Living Smart participants’ most significant (useful/memorable/inspiring) learnings
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 19 of 28
Least-favourite elements of Living Smart
When asked if there were any aspects that participants would like to change about Living Smart, the majority
responded that the course felt rushed, with too much information. Some participants noted that they would
have liked more ‘in-class’ time for reflection, and more time between classes to reflect on and achieve set
goals. Some examples of comments from participants were as follows:
Should be a longer course; too much info too quickly.
Tried to cram in too many details.
Need time for more discussion to allow deeper discussion.
Pace was very fast.
Too structured and concerned with time keeping.
Each week felt very full and at times ran out of time. Perhaps less is more.
Other participants responded that they would have liked:
More guest speakers.
More hands-on activities.
Strategies to influence government.
Less group work.
Facilitator feedback
The following section outlines feedback provided by Living Smart facilitators regarding their experiences of the
course, from a debrief meeting facilitated by Natural Resources Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges.
Course strengths
Interactive elements, especially the group work, was productive.
Individual agency was clearly created, sparking personal action beyond the course.
The goal setting aspect of each session was important as it allowed people to reflect on what they had
learned.
Weekly emails were a great resource and participants found them useful.
Course weaknesses
A feeling of being rushed each week was prevalent, and keeping to time was a challenge.
The interactive group work was not suitable for every participant’s learning style.
There were some dilemmas regarding goal-setting: often this process felt forced, with insufficient time
to properly reflect.
Guest speakers were not always appropriate.
Arising opportunities
The development of an Advanced Living Smart course for those participants who want to go deeper
into the content. It was noted that an outcome of this advanced course could be a group project
coordinated by participants.
Local government feedback
All of the local governments who participated in their first trial course, based on the evaluation and change
captured are committed to running another in partnership with the Adelaide and Mount Lofty Ranges Natural
Resources Management Board.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 20 of 28
City of Onkaparinga
“When Living Smart was brought to our attention we pounced on the opportunity because we already have
those community members who are really passionate about the environment. We have a great program of
workshops as part of our Sustainable Onkaparinga initiative but this course is about giving people a space to
take their learnings to the next level. Through the skilled facilitators Dani and Lynda participants learnt and
achieved goals as they went along.
We now have some very motivated and informed environmental champions in our community. They are
meeting together regularly at a local farmer’s market and we look forward to hearing more of what they’ve
achieved in their backyards and in the community. We are committed to another annual course in our
northern area.” - Tracy Fulton, City of Onkaparinga
City of Unley
“We are proud partners with the NRM Board and Living Smart getting started in SA, hosting 2 course in 16/17
financial year. The course aligns perfectly with the saying “think global, act local”. It teaches participants what is
happening, why it is important and positive, practical options to make change themselves.
Living Smart is a great way to set aside some regular time to celebrate your own successes, update your
knowledge, set new goals and meet like-minded local people. For topics you may already be well across you
can value add to the group, so it suits novice through to expert levels.
Councils promote and educate residents on how to live more sustainably which is important, but I believe that
hearing stories from other friends, family and colleagues actually applying it can have more power to change
behaviours on a large scale. So aside from our first two rounds of graduates, having them talk to their
networks and encourage change can have a big ripple effect.” – Kat Ryan, City of Unley
City of Marion
“The Living Smart program fills a gap in our environmental engagement activities in relation to initiatives that
support sustained behaviour change. Not only does this course show evidence that participants are changing
their behaviour, we are seeing that it cultivates a sense of community connectedness and resilience.
Living Smart is a perfect compliment to our sustainability series of events, Common Thread, with both
programs supporting community members on their sustainability journey.
Going forward, there is a great opportunity for Living Smart to be delivered in sectors of the community that
would really benefit from increased community connectedness and the financial savings presented by
sustainable living concepts. Schools could also get involved and act as hubs to host courses for the local
community and potentially benefit from projects that may emerge from the program.
A movement of environmentally aware citizens who want to bring about change is growing and Living Smart is
a fantastic pathway to support and empower these people.” - Jessica Mitchell, City of Marion
City of Holdfast Bay
“We undertook two courses as a trial of Living Smart with Marion as it complimented the councils Green Living
workshop program (a series of standalone sustainability themed workshops presented throughout the year)
and we were interested in seeing what flow on effects could result in sponsoring a group of “champions” to
undertake the course.
It was pleasing to see that over 60% of Holdfast Bay/Marion participants felt that they had reduced their
household waste, improved their water use, improved their energy use and felt like they had a stronger
connection to nature on completion of the course.” - Shani Wood, City of Holdfast Bay
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 21 of 28
Case studies
Four months after course completion, a small number of participants were contacted directly to obtain in-
depth stories on their experiences with Living Smart. Each of these participants had taken further, positive
sustainable actions, showing that Living Smart was successful in encouraging action beyond course
completion. This follow-up contact also revealed that different Living Smart course elements were relevant and
useful to different people. The participants each reported that one or more of the following course elements
were important in motivating them to make changes in their lives:
goal-setting
participatory format
open discussions
diversity of information provided
connection with local contacts.
Case studies of participants contacted by phone follow.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 22 of 28
Trish, City of Unley
The Living Smart course provided Trish with a connection to local contacts who were instrumental in getting her
community verge garden project off the ground.
Trish took the Unley Living Smart course in late 2016, and especially enjoyed the connection with like-minded
people in her local community. During the ‘Gardening for food’ session, a guest speaker from local community
gardening group Grow, Grow, Grow Your Own (Sustainable Communities SA) mentioned some funding had
recently become available for verge gardens in the City of Unley.
Thinking the verge gardens would be a great way for people to connect to each other and to nature, Trish was
keen to have some out the front of her house. That night she sent an email to the guest speaker, and with an
almost immediate response from the group, they set an installation date.
It was important to Trish that the verge gardens belonged to the whole community, so she encouraged people
to be involved in the process from the beginning. Trish’s 12-year old son made invitations and placed them in
letter boxes ahead of the installation day, and 32 people turned up to help, including a local councillor. A team
effort established two wicking-bed-style, corrugated iron verge gardens with many types of herbs and
vegetables. Everyone who attended painted their hand and placed their palm print on a nearby stobey pole as
a lasting reminder of the community coming together to establish something of benefit to all.
Since the verge gardens have been established, Trish has noticed some real changes in the street. There’s an
obvious, visible change – a wasteland of grey dolomite has now become two thriving and abundant gardens.
But there’s also been a less-obvious change – Trish has noticed a genuine element of happiness around the
garden, especially from neighbours in nearby apartments who don’t have the space or light for a garden. The
verge is now a place for people from all walks of life to pause, have a chat and connect.
Trish has encountered some minor barriers; on a few occasions people have stolen entire plants from the
verge boxes, but the young son of a neighbour helped to make signs asking people to only take leaves and
vegetables instead of whole plants. On the whole, however, the establishment has been a major success and
has given Trish opportunities to teach others about sustainability, self-sufficiency and healthy eating. The verge
garden is truly a community garden, the occasional note pushed under the front door to let her know a
neighbour has planted something new, shows that community ownership has really taken hold.
The Living Smart course provided Trish with a connection with others in the community, and to the
representative from the community gardening group, without which, the verge garden project may not have
occurred. Support from her family, the community, the City of Unley, and members from the council and local
gardening group have aided the verge garden’s continued success. Trish has since joined Grow, Grow, Grow
Your Own, so together with her family she will soon be able to help install other verge gardens in the City of
Unley and keep spreading the messages of sustainability, healthy eating and local food security for all.
Nicky, City of Onkaparinga
Living Smart armed Nicky with facts, statistics and sustainability information needed to make better-informed
choices about her diet and consumption.
For Nicky, the most significant change since completing the Onkaparinga Living Smart course in 2016 has been
in drastically cutting back meat consumption with the view of becoming vegetarian in the near future and
possibly vegan – if she can let go of her love of cheese!
‘I was really shocked to learn the environmental impact of meat consumption, especially how much water is
used to get a steak on a plate. About 18 months ago I made a decision to only eat free range and locally
sourced meat after learning about the treatment of animals when [meat is] mass-produced.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 23 of 28
‘I felt comfortable with this until I did the Living Smart course. Now that I have more of an understanding, I’ve
done a lot more research for myself and have felt the need to cut down on my own consumption initially as I
learn to phase it out altogether,’ Nicky said.
Before she took the Living Smart course, Nicky felt she knew a lot about sustainability, but the course really
opened her mind to things she hadn’t considered. Now she feels more conscious of everything she does and,
as a result of the course, is constantly asking herself things like ‘Is this making an impact? Could I be doing
something differently that makes less of a negative environmental impact?’ Living Smart armed Nicky with
facts, statistics and sustainability information needed to make better-informed decisions.
‘I loved the course and got so much out of it. I’m actually really missing it! It’s so nice to be around like-minded
people and it makes it much easier to adapt change into your life when you have that encouragement and
support, rather than resistance of people that are less aware,’ said Nicky.
Nicky also noted the importance of connecting with people who may be less aware. ‘It’s my opportunity to
educate them and help them become aware [of their impacts],’ she said.
Linda, Cities of Holdfast Bay and Marion
After achieving smaller goals through the goal-setting element of Living Smart, Linda had the courage to set a
bigger goal – to build an eco-home.
When Linda first enrolled in the Living Smart course, she had plans to eventually live off the land, in a shipping
container. The connections, knowledge and skills afforded by Living Smart have now encouraged Linda to take
her shipping container dream one step further, and build an eco-house, off the grid.
Linda says the goal-setting element of the course really motivated her, and gave her the courage to aim higher
after succeeding with smaller goals. Living Smart also connected Linda with people who are keen to help
design and build the house, and will help to equip the property with sustainable technology needed to live a
low-impact life.
On taking her knowledge further, Linda said, ‘You can’t change the world, but maybe you can change one
person.’
Andrew, City of Onkaparinga
Living Smart’s group support and skilled facilitators gave Andrew both the courage to start working towards
personal goals and the motivation to actually achieve them.
Andrew, an environmental scientist, enrolled in the Onkaparinga Living Smart course to meet people in his
local community. Since taking the course, Andrew has:
started volunteering for the local council to better-connect with his local area
drawn up a plan on a whiteboard to share food shopping and car journeys with his housemates to
reduce petrol and food waste
gone vegan to reduce his carbon footprint
joined a local community gardening group to learn valuable skills
contacted his landlord for permission to install compost bays and then built them
shared his newfound knowledge with friends and family.
Andrew says that the group format and skilled Living Smart facilitators gave him the courage to start working
towards these achievements and the motivation to actually do them.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 24 of 28
‘Motivation was the most important thing, because [before the course] I had the information, I had the ability
to look up the information, but I wasn’t motivated to do that. So encouragement was the best part of the
course,’ said Andrew.
This encouragement is now maintained through Onkaparinga participants’ continued monthly catch-ups at a
local farmer’s market.
Cathy, City of Onkaparinga
The productive open discussions encouraged by Living Smart, as well as the hands-on aspect of the course, gave
Cathy the confidence to try some activities she’d not attempted before.
Cathy, who has been a ‘green person all her life’, took the Living Smart course because she thought it would
align well with her interests. She says the productive open discussions, as well as the hands-on aspect of Living
Smart, gave her the confidence to try some things she’d never attempted before, such as making beeswax
wraps and homemade personal care products.
Cathy says the organisation of topics into themes meant that conversations were focussed and fruitful,
sparking motivation to attempt new tasks.
‘If I hadn’t gone [to the course], I still would have made the changes, but I wouldn’t have done it as well [as I
did],’ said Cathy.
Cathy has a strong social media presence and has been using these platforms to share the messages she
learned at Living Smart. ‘I have a voice and I can make that voice heard,’ she said.
Sharing her newfound knowledge has led to connections all over the world with individuals making similar
sustainable changes in their lives.
5. Data limitations
Data limitations are summarised below.
Lack of control group
‘It changed all aspects of
my life. I can’t un-know
what I know now. [I can
take] small steps forward
with a team around [me]. It
has been amazing how
many people I have met
that share a common goal
– just by sharing what I
have been up to on a
Tuesday night.’
– City of Unley Living
Smart participant
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 25 of 28
No control group was used for this evaluation. It is therefore not possible to attribute any reported changes to
the Living Smart course alone. There is a broad range of external factors that may have contributed to the
observed change, for example, participants may have watched a relevant TV documentary, or met an inspiring
new friend, that motivated them to act more sustainably.
Short timeframe
Seven weeks (the duration of the course) is not long enough to trace lasting behaviour change. Some
participants may have reported improvements in their post course survey, however we do not know whether
these changes were temporary or will be sustained. Whilst a small number of participants were contacted four
months after course completion, they were only asked general questions incomparable with the original survey
questions.
Self-reporting
Data was collected through participant self-reporting, which has accuracy limitations. For example, some
participants may have incorrectly believed that their bin was half-full when placed on the kerb, when it was
actually only a quarter full. Or, some participants may have reported that they use a shopping bag with low
frequency, but by comparison to others, the frequency may have actually been relatively high.
The other limitation of self-reporting that is based on participant perceptions is the Dunning-Kruger effect,
where people tend to hold overinflated ideas of their skills at the beginning of courses, and overrate their
initial performance. This is then followed by participants becoming more aware of their own behaviour during
the course, and judging themselves more critically at the end of the course, which results in impacts being
understated.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 26 of 28
7. Discussion
Environmental and social outcomes
Results indicate that Living Smart is an effective capacity building program that supports participants to
improve their environmental impact while also experiencing a range of social benefits.
Improvements across a wide range of environmental areas was evident, including:
water and energy efficiency
waste management
transport
simple living sustainable actions.
Participants reported the following social benefits:
a deepened connection with nature
strengthened community connections
more frequently sharing with and learning from others in their community
increased knowledge and skills to care for the environment
strengthened sense of personal resilience.
Participant satisfaction was very high, with participants scoring Living Smart an average of 6.2 out of 7.
Participants enjoyed the social aspects of the course, such as meeting like-minded people and having the
opportunity to connect with their community, as well as learning practical solutions and approaches to
sustainability. They appreciated the diversity of themes, especially waste, gardening, and electricity, and the
quality of facilitators, question and answer time, and hands-on activities.
Improved sense of community
Living Smart has provided participants with a real sense of community. The vast majority of participants
reported that feeling connected to like-minded people was their favourite element of the course. Feelings of
camaraderie was frequently mentioned in the post-course surveys and follow-up responses, and an increased
frequency was seen in participants’ interacting and sharing with or learning from others in their community.
This connectedness was also evident through Onkaparinga participants’ continued monthly catch-up at a local
farmers’ market.
Increased motivation and confidence
Living Smart increased participants’ confidence and motivation to take actions in their home and community.
Many participants stated that the course provided them with the ‘extra kick’ to get started on many
sustainability-related activities they had been planning to undertake for a long time. This is evident in the fact
that many participants were able to implement a wide variety of changes over the duration of the course.
These feelings of heightened motivation may be attributed to a combination of the following factors:
being surrounded by supportive people
beginning with small, achievable activities to build confidence
having assistance to find information and solve problems.
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 27 of 28
8. Future considerations
Four key considerations for future delivery of Living Smart are provided below.
Adjusting the course and session format
Some participants and facilitators felt there was too much information provided in too short a timeframe, and
most facilitators felt rushed and under pressure to include all activities. Some participants reported feeling
especially under pressure in the final session, where the post-course survey was completed. Additionally, whilst
participants said that they found goal-setting useful, many noted that insufficient time was allocated to allow
for proper consideration and reflection.
To address these issues, the following will be considered:
reducing the number of planned activities for each session
making the final survey available online so participants can complete anonymously in their own time if
they wish
sending out emails prior to each session (instead of after), and encouraging pre-reading and pre-
watching of content to free up more time in class
allocating sufficient time to the weekly goal-setting activities, and ensuring this occurs consistently
stretching the intervals between sessions to fortnightly or more (instead of weekly) to allow for more
time to accomplish set goals.
Increasing the diversity of participants
The vast majority of Living Smart participants to date have been women over the age of 35 and were already
very interested in sustainable living and environmental issues. This means there is a large portion of the
community underrepresented in Living Smart courses.
To capture males, younger people, and those without an existing interest in the environment, the following will
be considered:
adapting the course to suit specific audience needs
promoting the course through a wider variety of channels
developing other programs / projects that suit a wider audience.
Supporting participants to become group coordinators
Many participants enjoyed connecting with others from their community, and hoped the connections would
continue beyond the course. Other participants mentioned they would benefit from a second course, or by
having some extra support to continue sustainability and wellbeing-related activities after the course.
To further foster participants’ relationships and sustainability efforts, the following will be considered:
encouraging a small group of participants to be delegated as group coordinators, to retain the
community spirit and momentum of the course independently of the facilitators or council/partner host
representative.
giving interested post-course groups concrete pathways and resources to assist with project and group
activation (i.e. Transition Towns, Sustainable communities and other evolving or new models)
Living Smart Review of 2016 Courses | Adelaide trial Page 28 of 28
Strengthening the validity of the data
Data limitations included the lack of a control group, a short review timeframe, and the dependence on self-
reporting. It is important to balance the need for gathering reliable data with the investment required for
collection and analysis, as well as the usefulness of that data. With this in mind, the following will be
considered:
using a control group to measure behaviours of people not taking part in a Living Smart course
assessing longer term trends by repeating survey questions at 12 month intervals following course
completion
undertaking empirical measurements of environmental behaviours and impacts
adding detailed explanations alongside each survey question to help with question ambiguity and
improve accuracy.