E[Text Missing]
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
HOME INTELLIGENCE SPECIAL REPORT NO. 27
SALVAGE
(with special reference to rubber)
A further enquiry into the habits and reactions of housewives made by the Wartime Social Survey.
Interviewing was carried out during the period 24th June to 11th July, 1942. A national sample of 2,530 housewives was interviewed.
I.
General attitude to salvage collection
Q: “Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way in which salvage is collected in this district?”
Result:
%
Satisfied
77.77
Dissatisfied
15.8
Indifferent
6.5
Sample
2,530
In the enquiry made by the Wartime Social Survey in March 1942 into the housewives' salvage habits, the question, “How do you feel about salvage in your town?” was asked. This question allowed a wider variety of answers than the present one; adding the percentages giving various specific replies, the following result is obtained:-
%
Satisfied or approve
54.2
Criticism or implied disapproval
35.3
Vague, don't know, no answer
10.5
Sample
3,078
It will be seen that the present results show a more favourable attitude. This may be due to an improvement in the collection of salvage since March. But the possibility of an alteration due to the phrasing of the question cannot entirely be excluded.
Geographical differences
Scotland
North of England
Midlands & Wales
South, S.W. & E. Anglia
London
Total
%
%
%
%
%
%
Satisfied
79.6
80.4
74.5
77.6
76.9
77.7
Dissatisfied
9.5 ± 4.7
14.6
21.1
15.9
13.8
15.8
Indifferent
10.9 ± 5
5.0
4.4
6.5
9.3
6.5
Sample
157
577
503
852
441
It will be seen that, in the Midlands, a relatively high proportion were dissatisfied. Scotland and London show less dissatisfaction, and both these regions have a rather high proportion expressing indifference. Scotland and the North of England show the highest proportions satisfied. However, it should be noted that the sample figure for Scotland is small and the margin of error should be considered.
There is a tendency for country housewives to be more often dissatisfied than town housewives.
Urban
Rural
Total
%
%
%
Satisfied
79.0
70.4
77.7
Dissatisfied
15.0
21.7 ± 3.6
15.8
Indifferent
6.0
7.9
6.5
Sample
2,199
331
Income group differences
Class
A
B
C
D
Total
%
%
%
%
%
Satisfied
74.8
74.7
79.2
78.0
77.7
Dissatisfied
22.2
18.3
15.2
14.4
15.8
Indifferent
3.0
7.0
5.6
7.6
6.5
Sample
131
476
968
950
The higher income groups - Classes A and B - tend to show a higher proportion dissatisfied than the lower income groups. Classes C and D have rather a higher proportion satisfied. It should be noted that the sample figure for Class A is small.
Breakdown into housewives in different age groups shows no statistically significant differences.
2.
Reasons for dissatisfaction
Those housewives who said they were dissatisfied were asked the reason for this.
In the table given below replies are shown as percentages of those dissatisfied, and as percentages of the whole sample.
Reason
% of those dissatisfied
% sample
Salvage is not collected
34.1
5.4
Salvage is not collected regularly
35.8
5.7
Dustmen throw things together after housewife has separated them.
13.5
2.1
No bins or containers are provided
6.5
1.0
Miscellaneous
8.3
1.3
No answer
1.8
0.3
100
15.8
Number dissatisfied
399 sample 2,530
It will be seen that 70% of those dissatisfied, and 11% of all housewives interviewed, complained that salvage was not collected, or that it was not collected regularly.
In the March survey 7.1% said that salvage should be collected more regularly, and 4.1% that all sorts of salvage should be collected regularly and not only certain kinds. A further 1.2% complained that salvage was not
collected at all. Thus in March altogether 12.4% of housewives interviewed complained of the irregularity or infrequency of salvage collection as against 11.1% in the present inquiry.
It may be noted in this connection that, as will be seen below, 7.8% of the sample had in their possession rubber waste which they could give, but had not yet given to salvage. It is possible that but for lack of collection this rubber might already have been given to salvage.
Income group differences
Class
A & B
C & D
% of those dissatisfied
% of those dissatisfied
Salvage is not collected
22.4
38.8
Salvage is not collected regularly
47.4 ± 9.2
31.1
Dustmen throw it all together
19.8
11.0
No bins or containers provided
4.3
7.4
Miscellaneous
5.2
9.5
No Answer
0.9
2.2
Number dissatisfied
116
283
Whereas among middle-class housewives the chief complaint is that salvage is not collected “regularly”, the working-class housewives tend to complain more that it is not collected at all. Since the total volume of complaints about collection is approximately the same in both groups, it may be that middle-class housewives discriminate more clearly than working-class housewives between irregular collection and failure to collect. Or it may be that there is in fact a difference in the frequency with which salvage is collected in middle class and working-class districts.
3.
Rubber Salvage
Q: “Have you ever given rubber to salvage?”
Result:
%
Yes
26.0
No
74.0
Sample
2,530
In the March survey, only 11.1% said they had given any rubber to salvage. There is, thus, a substantial improvement in this situation.
Income group differences
Class
A
B
C
D
Total
%
%
%
%
%
Yes
26.0 ± 7.7
37.2
27.5
17.3
26.0
No
74.0
62.8
72.5
82.7
74.0
Sample
131
476
968
950
In the poorest group a smaller proportion had given rubber to salvage than in any other income group. Relatively more housewives in Class B had given rubber than in other classes.
Geographical differences
Scotland
North of England
Midlands & Wales
South, S.W. & E. Anglia
London
Total
%
%
%
%
%
%
Yes
17.2
19.4
22.5
37.0
20.9
26.0
No
82.8
80.6
77.5
63.0
79.1
74.0
Sample
157
577
503
852
441
It will be seen that a much higher proportion had given rubber to salvage in the Southern area than elsewhere.
A rather higher proportion of country housewives than of town housewives had given rubber to salvage.
Urban
Rural
Total
%
%
%
Yes
25.4
30.5
26.0
No
74.6
69.5
74.0
Sample
2,199
331
Age differences
Age
Under 35
35 - 50
Over 50
%
%
%
Yes
23.2
30.6
22.1
No
76.8
69.4
77.9
Sample
646
1,084
800
The middle age group shows a higher proportion giving rubber than other groups. It will be seen later that a considerable proportion of rubber salvage is accounted for by Wellington boots, plimsolls, rubber clothing (including mackintoshes) and toys. The housewives in the age group 35 - 50 may be expected to have children of school age more than those in other groups. These children would be constantly growing out of their shoes and mackintoshes and throwing away their worn out toys, and this may possibly account for the difference.
Rubber still available for salvage
Housewives who had not given any rubber to salvage were asked whether they had any that they could give.
In the tables below, answers to this question are expressed as percentages of the whole sample or the total in the different groups, and the proportions that had already given rubber to salvage are also shown again.
%
Could give some
7.8
Has already given some
26.1
Has none to give
66.1
Sample
2,530
Income group differences
Breakdown by income groups shows no significant differences in the case of classes C and D. If replies from classes A and B are added together a result is obtained of 9.9% able to give rubber to salvage but not having given any, so far. This figure is subject to a possible error of ± 2.2%, which if applied could bring it down to the same proportion as shown in the whole sample. It is thus probable, but not certain, that a higher proportion of households in the upper income groups have uncollected rubber waste than in the lower income groups.
Geographical differences
Scotland
North of England
Midlands & Wales
South, S.W. & E. Anglia
London
Total
%
%
%
%
%
%
Could give some
7.6
6.4
7.4
10.4
5.2 ± 2.1
7.8
Has already given some
17.2
19.4
22.5
37.0
20.9
26.1
Has none to give
75.2
74.2
70.1
52.6
73.9
66.1
Sample
157
577
503
852
441
It will be seen that a relatively high proportion in the Southern area have rubber that could be given to salvage, but has not yet been given. Here, nearly half the housewives interviewed either had given or were able to give rubber to salvage.
It should be noted that this area contains most of the housewives in country districts with whom contact was made, and the high proportion having rubber salvage in the south may be in part due to differences between town and country.
Urban
Rural
Total
%
%
%
Could give some
6.8
14.8
7.8
Has already given some
25.4
30.5
26.1
Has none to give
67.8
54.7
66.1
Sample
2,099
331
Age differences
Breakdown by age shows that a slightly higher proportion in the middle age group; 8.9%, as against 7.4% in the younger and 6.8% in the older, have rubber which they could give to salvage.
Nature of rubber given or available
Both those housewives who had given rubber to salvage and those who had not given any but said that they had some which they could give, were asked what this rubber was.
Results are tabulated below for both groups and replies are shown as percentages of those concerned and of the whole sample.
Several housewives named more than one sort of rubber that they had given, or could give, to salvage. The percentages shown above therefore add up to more than 100 in the columns based on the number giving or able to give, and more than the percentage concerned in the columns based on the sample. It would therefore, be misleading to group together such items as rubber boots and rubber shoes, as the same housewife may mention both these items, and the percentages given are based on the number of people mentioning, and not on the number of items concerned.
It will be seen that a large proportion[Text Missing] of rubber given, or available, is made up of old footwear and clothes. Apart from these, tubes and tyres are mentioned by a higher proportion than any other item, hot-water bottles being next in importance.
