Between 8 September and 2 October 2024, research consultant Yonder oversaw a survey of 200 adult residents who were interviewed in person across the wards of Millom and Millom Without.
An overview of the findings of this survey are presented below.
Previous community survey results are available to view within the Community Partnership website News section:
Summary
Findings from the latest survey demonstrate that residents across the electoral wards of Millom and Millom Without remained engaged with the subject matter. 61% of respondents were able to recall seeing or reading or hearing something about nuclear waste or geological disposal over the past year. 28% attributed their awareness to a leaflet or newsletter in the post.
There remained a level of uncertainty in relation to the management of nuclear waste with just 32% aware of the UK’s current storage method for its most hazardous radioactive waste. A greater proportion of respondents (45%) were uncertain of the current approach, and 23% incorrectly assumed the most hazardous radioactive waste was already held in multibarrier vaults deep underground.
Two-thirds (66%) correctly identified the accurate description of a GDF. 7% thought they were deep underground facilities that were currently used for the permanent disposal of nuclear waste. 24% claimed to have heard the term ‘GDF’ but knew nothing of it, whilst just 4% said they had never heard the term.
The majority (93%) claimed to be aware that a Search Area had been identified within South Copeland. Further, 77% claimed to be aware that a Community Partnership had formed locally.
When considering a potential GDF in the Search Area, 22% opposed it and 43% were supportive. A further 35% were neutral.
When asked about what kind of information they would like to receive regarding the subject matter, 18% wanted to know the rationale behind the South Copeland Search Area and the community’s involvement, and 13% wanted to know information about the location of the potential site. A further 12% wanted to know information about the safety approach.
Nearly a third of survey respondents (30%) wanted to receive information via post. 17% wanted information via in-person meetings. 13% wanted information via online sources, such as websites.
Reaction of the Chair of South Copeland GDF Community Partnership, Ged McGrath:
“We asked Yonder to complete three community surveys over the last year in the aim of gaining an accurate picture of local people’s awareness, views and information needs on GDF.
“The findings help to guide our activities, ensuring that people have the information they need on geological disposal and the siting process.
“We’ll continue to adapt and meet the needs of our community, so that everyone can make an informed decision if a suitable site is identified in South Copeland and there’s a Test of Public Support.”
Methodological statement
Yonder is a member of the Market Research Society (MRS) and founding member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. The MRS is the UK professional body for research, insight and analytics. As the regulator, it promotes the highest professional standards throughout the sector via the MRS Code of Conduct.
The research programme conducted by Yonder, is not carried out by the Community Partnership, NWS, or members of the community, which maintains its impartiality.
To ensure the representativeness of the surveying, Yonder utilises random probability sampling. Random probability sampling guards against sample bias. In addition, Yonder uses the latest ONS and Census population data to ensure the sample is representative of the local area’s population (in terms of geographic balance, age and gender). With this information, quotas are employed to ensure the resident sample is representative of the relative populations of the two Search Area wards. Following fieldwork, Yonder then employs weighting to review the interviewed sample, examine any differences between quotas and the achieved interviews and correct any differences by weighting up under-represented groups and weighting down over-represented groups. This ensures the resident samples which inferences are based are representative in terms of the age and sex profile of the population in question. Utilising this approach permits justifiable inferences to be drawn from the sample to the population, at quantified levels of precision. With a sample of 201 and a 95% confidence interval, a margin of error of +/-7% is expected.
Yonder – South Copeland Resident Research Report:
