Scotland's People Annual report: Results from 2009 Scottish Household Survey

11 Local Services

Introduction and context

Improving local services within communities in Scotland will ensure equitable access to services and amenities, help those who live there have a better quality of life and ensure a sustainable environment, thereby contributing to four of the Scottish Government's Strategic Objectives: ⁶⁵Enabling people to increase their wealth and more people to share fairly in that wealth; Help people to sustain and improve their health, especially in disadvantaged communities, ensuring better, local and faster access to health care; Help local communities to flourish, become stronger, safer places to live, offering improved opportunities and a better quality of life; Improve Scotland's natural and built environment and the sustainable use and enjoyment of it.

The Scottish Household Survey ( SHS) provides evidence that is used to assess progress towards the national outcomes and indicators attached to these objectives and towards the more detailed strategies that underpin them. Specifically, ' improving people's perceptions of the quality of public services delivered', National Indicator 5 in the Scottish Government's performance framework, is monitored using the results from the SHS.

This chapter concentrates on local services and amenities focusing on four distinct elements. It begins by exploring adults' attitudes to their local council and the services it provides, examining differences by their age, income and area deprivation. Further investigation is made on how convenient they find access to a range of local services according to the degree of rurality where they live.

This chapter also examines the levels of recycling of various types of household waste and how this has changed over time. The extent to which recycling differs by access to a car, accommodation, housing tenure, household type and area deprivation is considered.

Finally in this chapter the availability and use of greenspaces is explored, identifying factors which are associated with increased frequency of use, focusing on variation by household type and groups within them, area deprivation and health status.

Perceptions of local services

The Scottish Government argues that achieving public services that are available and accessible to all, and that users find of acceptable standard, will help to attain a wealthier and fairer Scotland. National Indicator 5 on 'improving people's perceptions of the quality of public services delivered' is a composite measure comprising public perceptions of local health services, local schools and public transport, focusing on levels of satisfaction with those services.

Table 11.1: Percentage of people very or fairly satisfied with the quality of public services delivered (local health services, local schools and public transport)

Percentages, 2009 data

Adults		Base
Local health services	86.3	9,388
Local Schools	82.9	5,465
Public Transport	75.0	8,106
% satisfied with all three services*	64.9	9,631

* Percentages reported for all three services combined are of those for which an opinion was given.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Table 11.1 shows that 64.9% of adults said they were very or fairly satisfied with all three local services, which represents an increase of over five percentage point on the 2007/2008 figure of 59.3%. It is important to note however that this figure includes those who expressed 'No opinion' for up to two of the services. These are included because the proportion who expressed 'No opinion' varied according to the service asked about; for example those without children might have no opinion about local schools while being satisfied with all other aspects of local services. The base number quoted therefore also includes people with 'no opinion' for up to two service types.

Looking at the services individually, it can be seen that adults were most satisfied with local health services (86.3%), followed by local schools (82.9%). Adults were least satisfied with public transport; although three-quarters of adults (75.0%) were very or fairly satisfied with that service.

Perceptions of local authority services and performance

One of the National Outcomes sought by the Scottish Government, which is supported by public service providers under the Concordat between central and local government, ⁶⁶ includes an ambition that public services are, 'high quality, continually improving, efficient and responsive to local people's needs'. This section continues to examine perceptions of public services. In this case, the focus is on views of local authority performance as a whole and the desire of individuals to have a say in local decision-making.

Figure 11.1 presents the percentage of adults that agree (strongly or slightly) with a number of statements about their local authority's performance. Agreement with each of the statements, with the exception of the desire to participate in local decision-making, signifies that a local authority is perceived to perform well on that aspect of performance (though not necessarily that the individual attaches importance to good performance on that dimension).

Figure 11.1: Percentage agreeing with various statements about local authority services and performance

2009 data, Adults (minimum base: 9,709)

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Each of the statements found agreement from fewer than half of adults. The highest level of agreement relates to communication; almost half (49%) say the council is good letting people know about the kinds of services it provides, whilst 43% say that it is providing high quality services. There is much less satisfaction amongst adults perceiving their council is good at listening to local people's views before it takes decisions.

The picture is different when considering the ability to, and desire to, influence decisions. Firstly, the percentage of all adults agreeing that they would like to influence local authority decisions (36%) is higher than those who perceive they can have an influence (22%). Table 11.2 shows that those aged 75 and over are the least likely to perceive they can influence decisions (15%) and by far they are also the least likely to express a wish to be more involved in making those decisions (12%).

The strongest desire to participate in local decision-making is shown by those aged 25 to 44; around 45% of them would like to be more involved. The desire to be more involved in decision-making also demonstrates a shift in the pattern of agreement between the youngest and the oldest respondents.

Table 11.2: Percentage agreeing with various statements about local council services by age

Percentages, 2009 data

Adults	16 to 24	25 to 34	35 to 44	45 to 59	60 to 74	75 plus	All
My local council is good at letting people know about the kinds of services it provides	37	43	47	51	59	57	49
My local council provides high quality services	40	37	40	42	48	55	43
My council is good at letting local people know how well it is performing	24	32	39	45	53	52	41
My local council designs its services around the needs of the people who use them	37	32	35	38	43	48	38
My local council does the best it can with the money available	28	28	33	37	44	52	36
My local council is addressing the key issues affecting the quality of life in my local neighbourhood	30	27	31	35	40	42	34
My council is good at listening to local people's views before it takes decisions	24	19	19	23	27	32	23
I can influence decisions affecting my local area	25	20	22	24	21	15	22
I would like to be more involved in the decisions my council makes that affect my local area	37	45	45	38	29	12	36
Base	803	1,337	1,663	2,381	2,263	1,262	9,709

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Generally speaking, older adults are likely to be more satisfied with the performance statements about local government services than younger adults. For example, there is a corresponding increase in satisfaction as age increases with the statements around letting people know about the kinds of services it provides (37% of those aged 16 to 25 are satisfied, increasing to 59% of those aged 60 to 74). There is little difference by age for the statement on how the council designs its services around the needs of the people who use them, though again the older age groups are more likely to be satisfied with this than the younger age groups (48% of those aged 75 plus).

Table 11.3 examines differences in agreement by net annual household income. On the performance statements, there is less variation between income groups and consistent patterns in the data are less obvious. The main pattern is that adults in households with incomes between £6,001 and £15,000 are more likely to agree with all the statements than other income bands.

When it comes to a perception of being able to influence decision-making, those in the lowest income band are least likely and those in the highest income band are most likely to perceive they can influence decisions (around 20%). In terms of a desire to be involved in council decision-making, there is an pattern as agreement with this statement increases with income. Just over a quarter of those with a household income of up to £10,000 would like to be involved in council decision-making, rising from less than a third (31%) of those with an income of £10,001-£15,000 to over two-fifths (43%) of those earning £40,001 or more.

Table 11.3: Percentage agreeing with various statements about local council services by net annual household income

Percentages, 2009 data

Adults	£0 - £6,000	£6,001 - £10,000	£10,001 -£15,000	£15,001 - £20,000	£20,001 - £25,000	£25,001 - £30,000	£30,001 - £40,000	£40,001+	All
My local council is good at letting people know about the kinds of services it provides	49	50	50	49	48	48	46	53	49
My local council provides high quality services	44	45	44	41	43	43	41	45	43
My council is good at letting local people know how well it is performing	41	45	46	44	41	38	36	39	41
My local council designs its services around the needs of the people who use them	38	41	40	39	37	38	37	36	38
My local council does the best it can with the money available	40	40	40	36	35	36	34	33	36
My local council is addressing the key issues affecting the quality of life in my local neighbourhood	33	35	37	33	34	34	32	32	34
My council is good at listening to local people's views before it takes decisions	25	25	26	24	23	21	20	21	23
I can influence decisions affecting my local area	20	19	19	22	21	22	23	28	22
I would like to be more involved in the decisions my council makes that affect my local area	27	26	31	34	39	41	43	43	36
Base	499	1,322	1,895	1,423	1,081	831	1,173	1,139	9,363

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Household income in the SHS is that of the highest income householder and their partner only. Includes all adults for whom household income is known or has been imputed. Excludes refusals/don't know responses.

Figure 11.2 explores differences in agreement with the statements by deprivation levels. ⁶⁷ Not surprisingly, variation in agreement is similar to that seen among different household income groups, although the patterns of answers are, in some cases, more obvious.

There is little variation between areas with different levels of deprivation for five aspects of local authority performance: being good at communicating performance, designing services around local people's needs, doing its best with the money, addressing key issues and being good at listening before taking decisions. For the remainder, perceptions of performance tend to decline as deprivation levels increase (for example 38% in the most deprived areas and 46% in the least deprived areas agree with the statement 'my local council provides high quality services').

Perceptions of being able to influence decisions and the desire to be involved in decision-making do not show a consistent pattern of differences, though those from the least deprived areas are more likely to be higher than others. For example, 32% of adults from the 20% most deprived areas in Scotland want to be more involved in decisions their council makes, compared to 39% from the 20% least deprived.

Figure 11.2: Percentage agreeing with various statements about local council services by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

2009 data, Adults (minimum base: 1,633)

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Convenience of Services

One aspect of a strong community is having access to high quality services and amenities. Within the SHS, adults were asked how convenient or inconvenient they would find it to make use of a selected range of relatively commonplace services during their normal opening hours, assuming they needed to. In this section, the percentage of adults saying they would find access very or fairly convenient is explored, firstly in Scotland as a whole and subsequently within communities in different types of location.

As can be seen in Figure 11.3, at least two-thirds of adults would find all of the services convenient if they needed to use them. Over nine-in-ten (92%) adults would find shopping for small amounts of food convenient, the highest percentage saying this for any of the services. The lowest percentage of adults would find hospital outpatient services convenient, should they need to use them (66%).

Figure 11.3: Percentage who would find various local services very or fairly convenient

2009 data, Adults (minimum base: 9,138)

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

In the context of relatively high perceptions of convenience for all services, Table 11.4 shows that, for most of the services listed, adults who live in rural areas are less likely to say services would be convenient to access than those in small towns and urban areas. This is particularly the case for public transport (for example 58% of adults in rural areas find public transport convenient to access compared with 86% of those in large urban areas). Similarly, convenience of dentists is less for those in rural areas (52% of adults in remote rural areas say dentists are convenient compared with at least 71% in urban areas).

Table 11.4: Percentage finding services very or fairly convenient by Urban Rural Classification

Percentages, 2009 data

Adults	Large urban areas	Other urban areas	Accessible small towns	Remote small towns	Accessible rural	Remote rural	Scotland
Small amount of grocery or food shopping	94	93	95	92	82	86	92
Chemist/pharmacist	90	88	93	88	70	62	85
Cash machine or ATM	82	83	88	87	65	65	80
Post office	80	79	93	86	77	82	81
Doctors surgery	82	82	89	84	73	77	81
Public transport	86	85	79	79	58	58	80
Petrol station	69	74	65	83	59	64	69
Banking services	76	78	83	83	62	62	75
Dentist	71	75	74	73	55	52	70
Hospital outpatient department	67	69	67	79	56	51	66
Base	2,997	2,808	751	535	1,079	957	9,127

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Adults in accessible small towns tend to be more likely to say that services would be convenient to access, if required, than adults in any other areas, other than for petrol stations where 65% say they find these convenient.

In general, hospital outpatient departments are least likely to be seen as convenient across all areas of Scotland. Conversely shopping for small amounts of food or grocery shopping is the most convenient for people regardless of the type of area in which they live.

Recycling

The next section of this chapter discusses the recycling of a range of household waste items, firstly across Scotland as a whole and over time, then in more detail by different types of car access, accommodation, tenure, household type and area deprivation.

Table 11.5 shows the percentage of households that reported recycling waste items in the previous month in 2009 and how this has changed since 2003. Considering current recycling first, recycling services are used by the majority (88%) of households in Scotland. Households are typically more likely to recycle newspapers, magazines, paper and cardboard (84%), though there are still high recycling rates for the other items.

Table 11.5: Percentage recycling items in the past month by year

Percentages, 2003-2009 data

Households	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Newspaper / magazine / paper / cardboard	45	53	69	76	81	83	84
Glass bottles and jars	35	39	50	57	67	70	73
Metal cans	14	20	37	48	59	65	69
Plastic bottles	12	19	36	46	58	65	71
One or more of the above	55	61	75	80	84	87	88
Base	11,185	15,941	15,393	15,616	11,331	10,369	11,039

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

In previous years the questions asked whether or not the household recycled each of four items (yes or no). In 2007 this was changed to how much (all/most/some/none) was recycled. There was also a change to the items 'glass bottles' became 'glass bottles and jars' and 'plastic' became 'plastic bottles'.

The percentage of households recycling at least some of the different types of waste has increased considerably since 2003, and continues to increase year-on-year. These increases may in part be linked, among other things, to the increase in recycling services over that period as well as changing behaviours and attitudes of individuals. All items have seen considerable increases in recycling rates since 2003, with recycling of plastic bottles increasing from 12% in 2003 to 71% in 2009; an increase of six percentage points compared with 2008. Unlike earlier years, in 2009 more households reported recycling plastic bottles than recycling metal cans.

The relationship between recycling and access to a car is explored in Table 11.6. Households with access to at least one car are considerably more likely to recycle one or more of the items compared to households without access to cars (92% and 77% respectively). While the same is true for the individual waste items, the biggest difference between households with and without access to cars relates to the recycling of glass bottles and jars (24 percentage points difference).

Table 11.6: Percentage recycling items in the past month by access to a car

Percentages, 2009 data

Households	Access to a car	No access to a car	All
Newspaper / magazine / paper / cardboard	89	72	84
Glass bottles and jars	81	57	73
Metal cans	75	58	69
Plastic bottles	76	60	71
One or more of the above	92	77	88
Base	7,736	3,303	11,039

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Recycling of the items is clearly related to the type of property in which households live, reflecting the differing availability of recycling services to residents in different types of property (Table 11.7). For example, 94% of households living in a house or bungalow recycle one or more of these items compared with 57% for those living in high rise flats.

The same relationship is true for the individual waste items between accommodation types; households living in houses or bungalows recycle the most followed by flats (other than high rise) and lastly by high rise flats. The relationship between household waste items within accommodation types remains broadly the same regardless of accommodation type; for example newspapers and similar materials are the most recycled household waste items in houses or bungalows and flats of all types.

Table 11.7: Percentage recycling items in the past month by accommodation type

Percentages, 2009 data

Households	House or bungalow	Flat (new or traditional tenement / four-in-a-block or conversion	Flat (in a high-rise block with five or more levels)	All*
Newspaper / magazine / paper / cardboard	92	71	49	84
Glass bottles and jars	82	58	43	73
Metal cans	77	56	35	69
Plastic bottles	78	61	40	71
One or more of the above	94	77	57	88
Base	7,557	3,114	293	11,039

The 'All' category includes households living in caravans or other accommodation

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Table 11.8 shows the percentage of households recycling at least some of each waste item and of at least one of them according to whether they own or rent their accommodation.

Given the relationship between accommodation type and recycling seen previously and the fact that there are links between type of accommodation and tenure, it would be expected that variations in recycling by tenure might reflect variations in type of accommodation. It can be seen from Table 11.8 that owner occupiers, the majority of whom live in houses or bungalows, are more likely to recycle (for example, over nine-in-ten owner occupiers recycle one or more items as opposed to three-quarters of renters). Levels of recycling are similar between renters from the social and private rented sectors.

Table 11.8: Percentage recycling items in the past month by tenure of household

Percentages, 2009 data

Households	Owner occupied	Social rented	Private rented	Other	All
Newspaper / magazine / paper / cardboard	91	72	68	76	84
Glass bottles and jars	81	56	63	65	73
Metal cans	76	58	55	65	69
Plastic bottles	77	60	57	66	71
One or more of the above	93	76	76	82	88
Base	7,377	2,428	1,052	182	11,039

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Recycling also varies according to household type (Table 11.9). A lower percentage of single adult (78%) and single parent households (78%) recycle than does any other household type. This is likely to be linked to the type of tenure and the associated accommodation type of these households.

Table 11.9: Percentage recycling items in the past month by household type

Percentages, 2009 data

Households	Single adult	Small adult	Single parent	Small family	Large family	Large adult	Older smaller	Single pensioner	All
Newspaper / magazine / paper / cardboard	71	85	73	87	89	90	94	86	84
Glass bottles and jars	62	76	60	78	81	80	82	69	73
Metal cans	58	70	58	77	77	78	79	65	69
Plastic bottles	60	72	64	79	79	79	76	67	71
One or more of the above	78	89	78	91	92	93	95	88	88
Base	2,057	2,175	643	1,404	726	1,001	1,524	1,509	11,039

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Older smaller households report the highest levels of recycling overall and for three of the four waste items (other than plastic bottles); for example, over nine-in-ten (95%) recycle at least one item and a similar proportion (94%) recycles newspapers and other pulp products. Once again this is likely to be linked to accommodation type and tenure of such households. Large and small families along with large adult households report the highest levels of recycling plastic bottles (69%), which may be related to usage, although this is not covered in the SHS.

Table 11.10 looks at the percentage of household recycling at least one item of waste by both accommodation type and household type. For each household type, a higher percentage of those living in houses or bungalows recycle compared with those living in flats. Much of the difference between household types shown in Table 11.9 can be explained by the different types of accommodation type they live in. However, for those living in houses or bungalows and in non high-rise flats, older small families are most likely to recycle at least one item (97% and 87% respectively) and, except in single pensioners, households with only one adult are least likely to recycle.

Table 11.10: Percentage of households recycling one or more items in the past month by household type and accommodation type

Percentages, 2009 data

Households	House or bungalow	Flat (new or traditional tenement / four-in-a-block or conversion	Flat (in a high-rise block with five or more levels)	All	Base
Single adult	88	73	58	78	2,057
Small adult	95	77	*	89	2,175
Single parent	89	68	*	78	643
Small family	95	76	*	91	1,404
Large family	95	*	*	92	726
Large adult	96	84	*	93	1,001
Older smaller	97	87	*	95	1,524
Single pensioner	93	82	*	88	1,509
Total	94	77	57	88
Base	7,557	3,114	293		11,039

The 'All' category includes households living in caravans or other accommodation

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed for items being recycled.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Table 11.11 shows how recycling varies across accommodation type by area deprivation. The percentage of households recycling at least one waste item increases as the level of area deprivation decreases, from 75% of households living in the 20% most deprived datazones to 95% of households living in the 20% least deprived datazones. For each type of accommodation, the largest differences occur between those living in the 20% most deprived datazones and those living in the second most deprived quintile of datazones.

Table 11.11: Percentage of households recycling one or more items in the past month by accommodation type and Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

Percentages, 2009 data

Households	1 - 20% most deprived	2	3	4	5 - 20% least deprived	Scotland	Base
House or bungalow	88	94	95	95	97	94	7,551
Flat (new or traditional tenement / four-in-a-block conversion)	68	76	80	86	88	77	3,112
Flat (in a high-rise block with five or more levels)	47	*	*	*	*	57	292
All	75	86	90	93	95	88
Base	2,213	2,282	2,326	2,295	1,913		11,029

The 'All' category includes households living in caravans or other accommodation

Columns add to more than 100% since multiple responses allowed for items being recycled.

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Greenspace

Access to good quality greenspace is associated with higher levels of physical activity and improved quality of life, including better health and wellbeing. ⁶⁸ Other research has also shown that being very satisfied with the quality of your local greenspace is associated with higher life satisfaction, greater social trust and a higher sense of community cohesion. ⁶⁹ The impacts of greenspace and the wider neighbourhood physical environment on health are recognized in 'Equally Well', ⁷⁰ the Scottish Government's strategic framework on health inequalities, and in 'Good Places, Better Health' ⁷¹ which seeks to improve evidence based policy-making in relation to physical environments and health.

This section starts by looking at the key factors and characteristics associated with greenspace use. Firstly, consideration of how availability of local greenspace and people's satisfaction with council greenspace differs by area deprivation as well as issues such health of individuals. This section then looks at the perceptions of council run parks and open spaces, for both frequency of use and peoples satisfaction with them.

Please note that caution should be used with regard to comparing 2009 results on greenspace with data from previous years. This relates to issues around the likely interpretation of the survey question by respondents; the question covers three separate cognitive issues namely the availability, safety and pleasantness of greenspace. How respondents interpret each of these individually and collectively may have been affected by a change in question order from the start of 2009.

Availability of open spaces

Almost seven in ten adults in Scotland have access to a park, greenspace or other area of grass in their neighbourhood that they and their family can use that is safe and pleasant (Figure 11.4). Availability of local greenspace differs significantly by area deprivation levels; just over half (53%) of those living in the 20% most deprived areas of Scotland have access to greenspace which is safe and pleasant, compared to over three-quarters (77%) of those in the least deprived.

Figure 11.4: Whether any safe and pleasant parks or greenspace available in the area by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation and rating of neighbourhood as a place to live

2009 data, Adults (minimum base: 189)

This question is only asked of half of the sample.

It can also be seen that there is an association between access to grenspace and how people rate their neighbourhood as a place to live. Seventy four percent of adults who rate their neighbourhood as a very good place to live say they have access to an open space in their neighbourhood, compared to just over a third (35%) from those rating their neighbourhood as poor.

Table 11.12 shows that those adults who say their health in general has been very good, good or fair are much more likely to say they have access to safe and pleasant greenspace in their neighbourhood (71% and 63%) respectively. There is very little difference for those who say their health is bad or very bad. It is not clear whether those with poor health simply do not have access to open spaces in their neighbourhood, or whether they are just not aware of having such spaces in the first place.

Table 11.12: Whether any safe and pleasant parks or greenspace available in the area by self perception of health

Column percentages, 2009 data

Adults	Very good / Good	Fair	Very bad / Bad	Scotland
Local open space available	71	63	53	68
Local open space not available	29	37	47	32
Base	6,795	2,016	778	9,589

This question is only asked of half of the sample.

Perceptions of council run parks and open spaces

Table 11.13 shows that the frequency of use of council run parks and open spaces over the past 12 months varies considerably. Typically, adults are either more likely to have used such open spaces at least once a week or about once a month (both 22%) in the past 12 months, or never used at all (19%). Nearly one-in-ten of all adults use such open spaces most days, whilst one-in-five of all adults have never used council run parks or open spaces.

There are a number of variations in use of council run parks and open spaces by age, especially for the older age groups where just over a third (34%) of those aged 75 and over have never used council run park or open spaces. Those from the younger age groups, 16 to 44, are the most frequent users of greenspace.

Table 11.13: Frequency of using and satisfaction with council run parks and open spaces by age

Column percentages, 2009 data

Adults	16-24	25-34	35-44	45-59	60-74	75+	All
Frequency of use
Most days	8	10	11	10	9	4	9
At least once a week	26	29	29	19	16	8	22
About once a month	26	28	28	22	16	10	22
Once or twice a year	13	12	13	14	14	12	13
Not used in the past year	11	8	9	13	18	31	14
Never used	16	12	11	21	27	34	19
Don't Know	1	0	1	1	1	1	1
Total	100	100	100	100	100	100	100
Base	803	1,337	1,663	2,381	2,263	1,262	9,709
Satisfaction
Satisfied	66	73	71	65	64	50	66
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	8	7	7	8	6	7	7
Dissatisfied	8	8	10	6	5	4	7
No opinion	18	12	12	21	25	40	20
Total	100	100	100	100	100	100	100
Base	803	1,337	1,662	2,381	2,263	1,262	9,708

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Two-thirds of adults are satisfied with council run parks and open spaces, with less than one in ten (7%) being dissatisfied. There are a number of differences in satisfaction with open spaces also, though these are more likely associated with the frequency of use. Seventy three percent of those aged 25 to 34 are satisfied, whilst the highest levels of dissatisfaction are from within the 35 to 44 age group (10%).

There is little variation in use of and satisfaction with council run parks and open spaces when looking at deprivation (Table 11.14). Just over one-in-six (17%) of adults living in the 20% most deprived areas of Scotland use such open spaces at least once a week, increasing to one quarter (26%) of those from the least deprived areas. Conversely, the proportion of adults who have never used open spaces decreases as level of deprivation decreases (from 24% in the most deprived to 12% in the least deprived).

There is quite a marked difference in level of satisfaction with council run parks and open spaces by deprivation. Three quarters of those in the 20% least deprived areas are satisfied with such services, decreasing to six in ten (58%) in the most deprived areas.

Table 11.14: Frequency of using and satisfaction with council run parks and open spaces by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation

Column percentages, 2009 data

Adults	20% most deprived	2	3	4	20% least deprived	Scotland
Frequency of use
Most days	9	9	9	10	10	9
At least once a week	17	21	22	23	26	22
About once a month	21	21	21	22	27	22
Once or twice a year	12	14	13	13	13	13
Not used in the past year	17	15	13	12	11	14
Never used	24	20	21	20	12	19
Don't Know	1	0	1	1	1	1
Total	100	100	100	100	100	100
Base	1,952	2,015	2,071	2,031	1,633	9,702
Satisfaction
Satisfied	58	65	65	67	75	66
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	8	8	7	8	6	7
Dissatisfied	9	8	7	5	5	7
No opinion	25	20	21	20	14	20
Total	100	100	100	100	100	100
Base	1,952	2,015	2,071	2,031	1,632	9,701

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

Table 11.15: Frequency of using and satisfaction with council run parks and open spaces by Urban Rural Classification

Column percentages, 2009 data

Adults	Large urban areas	Other urban areas	Accessible small towns	Remote small towns	Accessible rural	Remote rural	Scotland
Frequency of use
Most days	8	11	8	10	8	10	9
At least once a week	23	21	22	23	20	15	22
About once a month	24	23	22	20	21	17	22
Once or twice a year	13	13	15	13	13	12	13
Not used in the past year	14	13	13	12	13	19	14
Never used	17	19	19	23	23	26	19
Don't Know	1	1	0	0	1	1	1
Total	100	100	100	100	100	100	100
Base	3,567	2,832	778	520	1,043	962	9,702
Satisfaction
Satisfied	67	66	67	66	62	61	66
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	7	7	6	11	8	6	7
Dissatisfied	7	7	8	7	7	5	7
No opinion	19	19	18	16	23	28	20
Total	100	100	100	100	100	100	100
Base	3,567	2,832	777	520	1,043	962	9,701

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.

As with deprivation, there are also a number of apparent differences when considering differences by concept of rurality (Table 11.15). Those living in remote rural areas are more likely to have either not used council run parks and open spaces in the past year (26%) or never used at all (26%) than other areas.

There are more obvious differences when looking at satisfaction with services. Within urban areas and other towns, typically over two-thirds are satisfied with council run parks and open spaces. This decreases to just over three-fifths of those living in rural areas.

Table 11.16 examines differences in people's use of and satisfaction with council run parks and open spaces by how they rate their neighbourhood as a place to live. Although the majority of people across all neighbourhood rating levels are satisfied with such open spaces, the percentage of those satisfied decreases steadily from seven in ten (69%) for those rating their neighbourhood as a very good place to live to under half (44%) of those saying it is very poor.

Table 11.16: Frequency of using and satisfaction with council run parks and open spaces by rating of neighbourhood as a place to live

Column percentages, 2009 data

Adults	Very good	Fairly good	Fairly poor	Very poor	All
Frequency of use
Most days	9	9	10	8	9
At least once a week	22	22	18	16	22
About once a month	23	22	22	15	22
Once or twice a year	12	14	12	13	13
Not used in the past year	13	14	15	16	14
Never used	20	18	22	31	19
Don't Know	1	1	0	0	1
Total	100	100	100	100	100
Base	5,562	3,528	401	191	9,709
Satisfaction
Satisfied	69	63	58	44	66
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	6	9	7	6	7
Dissatisfied	5	8	13	19	7
No opinion	20	20	22	30	20
Total	100	100	100	100	100
Base	5,561	3,528	401	191	9,708

This question is only asked of three-quarters of the sample.