Daniel Finkelstein
Win a fitness package worth more than £3,000
Jeremy Paxman has been encouraging people to throw rubbish out of their car windows. He didn’t mean to. He didn’t want to. But he did.
Yesterday morning the Newsnight presenter produced an article in The Guardian bemoaning the “uglification” of Britain. He rejected the assertion of the Keep Britain Tidy campaign that “litter levels in England have fallen to a five-year low”. “How can they claim the country is so clean,” asks Paxman “when the evidence of our eyes suggests quite the reverse?”
The TV man conducted an informal survey on a quiet stretch of country road. He hadn’t gone 500 yards before counting 100 pieces of rubbish. “Most — sandwich wrappers, McDonald’s bags, crisp packets and endless plastic bottles — had been deliberately jettisoned.”
How can I argue that this passionate and in many ways highly admirable attack on littering encourages people to litter? Let me tell you a story.

Actually it’s not my story. It was told to the Prime Minister’s advisers by the social psychologist Professor Robert Cialdini when he went to 10 Downing Street recently to discuss environmental issues.
One of the professor’s students visited the Petrified Forest National Park in Arizona with his fiancée, a notably honest woman, someone who wouldn’t borrow a paperclip without returning it. As they entered, the couple encountered a sign cautioning against stealing petrified wood. “Our heritage is being vandalised by the theft of 14 tons of wood every year.” The fiancée’s reaction was quite unexpected. “We’d better get ours now,” she whispered.
Unwittingly the sign provided visitors with two pieces of information that made them more likely to steal wood. The first was that the forest was being depleted rapidly, wood was running out, you better get a move on. They may as well have put up a sign reading: “Hurry now, while stocks last.” Nothing moves goods quite as rapidly as the idea that the product is scarce, as any retailer will tell you.
The other information provided by the sign was that it was quite normal to steal wood. Lots of people steal wood, it’s commonplace, go on, you’ll not be different from the rest.
Information about social norms — how other people behave — is an extremely powerful influence on behaviour. It’s the reason why bandwagons get going in by-elections. And the information need not be accurate to alter people’s conduct. Less than 3 per cent of the park’s visitors had ever stolen wood, contrary to the impression given by the sign.
So when the Paxman article appeared, he doubtless hoped that we would be shamed into tidier ways. But, sad to report, the attitude of many of his readers will be to open their windows and toss out some more rubbish. I’ve always been a tidy person, they’ll think, but I read a piece in the paper by that clever bloke off of University Challenge that says that these days no one else is bothered much with tidiness. I don’t see why I should go all the way to the bin, I’ll just drop my Twix wrapper on the pavement like all the rest do.
The Keep Britain Tidy campaign leads its website with this claim: “Half of us boast impeccable habits.” This may be impossibly optimistic for your tastes, but it certainly demonstrates a solid grasp of the principles of social psychology.
Almost every day in the media there is a Paxman-type story — an attempt to persuade people to behave differently by telling us all how bad things are getting. Over the past fortnight, for example, there have been countless articles about the decline in marriage. And every one of them encourages a further decline. If you wanted to increase marriage rates you would be emphasising how usual it is to get married, how despite all you’ve heard it’s still the norm. People like you get married and stay together, that’s the message you want people to hear. If you make deserting your children seem like a normal thing to do, more will do it. Same with drink-driving, shoplifting, drug-taking, gang membership, whatever.
Last week I called myself a social responsibility militant, picking up a phrase of David Cameron’s that describes his policy of altering behaviour through persuasion rather than the law. I argued that laws are often ineffective. There is a wealth of data showing that if you, say, make wearing a seat belt compulsory, drivers buckle up before speeding up and killing others. Persuade drivers to take safety seriously and you may get somewhere.
The petrified forest story and the example of Jeremy Paxman’s article show why, despite all the data on the clumsiness of the law, politicians continue to prefer legislative initiatives. It’s because legislating is so much easier.
There is a correct criticism of Mr Cameron’s idea of using the bully pulpit provided by political office to encourage responsible behaviour. But it is not the common one — that it is the soft option, the policy of a man with no policy. The correct criticism is that it is an incredibly difficult path to tread. And the correct question is whether Cameron’s Conservatives are really going to be able to tread it.
It’s hard to craft a message that succeeds in altering behaviour in the direction you want. It’s easy to go wrong. A message that works (announcing that everyone seems to be getting married these days, for instance) may seem complacent to your supporters and you will get little credit for any success.
And it is not just crafting the message that is hard — it is finding the right messengers. The social responsibility agenda requires a Tory party sufficiently diverse that when it says “people like us behave responsibly” it is talking about more than a narrow group. And it requires ministers to behave responsibly themselves, to avoid the charge of hypocrisy.
David Cameron’s bully pulpit idea will be a hard taskmaster. Too hard? I wonder.

Daniel Finkelstein is a weekly columnist and Comment Editor of The Times. His blog, Comment Central, is a personal round up of the best political opinion on the web. Before joining the paper in 2001, he was adviser to both Prime Minister John Major and Conservative leader William Hague
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
05/2005
£13,500
08/2008
£109,950
2006
£10,750
Great car insurance deals online
£Excellent+ executive benefits
Torres and Partners
London
£49,229 - £62,035 pro rata
Charity Commission
London/Liverpool/Taunton
Alstom Power
Europe
Six Figure
Rolls Royce
Midlands/Europe
From £89,950
Great Investment, River Views
Special Offers now available
At the new sophisticated
Encore Las Vegas Resort!
Cruise the Islands of Hawaii - Pride of America
List your property with two leading travel websites
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths
News International associated websites: Globrix | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
jano taylor before you sign up to petitions you should know the
facts long term plastic bags are more enviroment friendly
than paper ,if you think I AM KIDDING CHECK OUT PENN AND TELLER ON YOU TUBE, amazing how we the public are
quick to blame before knowing the facts first.
george william taylor , hull, uk
The Petrified Forest tale however fails to tell the whole story. I was there last month and the guard at the entry toll asked if I had any peices of petrified forest on my person or in my vehicle. "Of course not" I replied. "Then make sure you don't have any when you leave!" He backed this up by giving me leaflets explaning the severity of the punishments for anyone caught stealing or damaging the ancient artefacts. And Park Rangers cruised the roads continuously to enforce the rules.
I think most people would have felt that stealing from the Petrified Forest was too high-risk; perhaps littering would become less prevalent if the punishments were grave, the enforcement consistent and the bins available.
Dennis Passingham, Norwich, UK
Paxman is right. Towns are now public spaces without ownership add to that the off-hand disavowal of the litter-dropper, 'it gives somebody a job' and you have...Britain. In my local town, every night a hoard of people pour in, a hoard of police wait for them. The town is just an arena whereas, once, it was a theatre. No one cares for the cities. There is something quite Freudian in our response to meaninglessness of social architecture - people instinctively want to make it even more foul. The great success of previous generations was at creating countryside, in greenery and in buildings, that was the creation of imagination. Perhaps mock is not twee done well, replica housing is not bad. Queen Anne is elegant and curvy; the Georgians had a handle on proportion and the drama and detail in Victorian Gothic is a thrill. Place this against High Streets that take their profits worldwide and see the ugly spectre of functional. Planning today is awful reflecting well a decaying society.
Malcolm Turner, Alsager, e
First and last it is the fault of the person dropping the litter - not that of the local council for not providing enough bins or emptying them regularly, or that of the food manufacturers for overpackaging. It would be nice if councils and manufacturers did their bit in this regard but their is NO excuse for the dropping of litter at any time. The duty of councils and police ( I believe it is still an offence to drop litter in this country) is to prosecute heavily and mercilessly when an offence is committed and to broadcast it in the local media so all are aware of the consequences. However, litter offences are very rarely brought to court in this country, are even more rarely prosecuted and even then the offender is never financially penalised. Finkelstein is right to believe that drawing the public's attention to litter will only change their behaviour for the worse. The people of Britain become ever more swinish are quite happy to live in their takeaway/throwaway little world.
steve, Birmingham,
Littering is disgusting, and the one thing that comes close to provoking road rage in me is when people throw things out of their car windows! I wish I knew why so many people are so disrespectful of public places; I mean, the inside of my house is not a pretty picture sometimes but WHY would you throw something on the floor outside? Show some consideration for your fellow man, not to mention the birds and beasts.
Sadly it's way beyond a national malaise though - go to practically any beauty spot in the world and some cretin will have left a drinks can, plastic bag or such lying around.
Adam Neilson, Birmingham,
Spot on.
This could be the reason why services free at the point of delivery which eventually become rationed then become subject to even more demand. And why education and the NHS are now struggling within budgetary constraints.
The solution, regrettably, is an element of personal contribution. Just as the regular group restaurant meal starts to become expensive if the total bill is shared equally regardless of the individual order cost, on account of the tendency to order a more expensive item because others have done so, so paying in a way directly related to each individual order will encourage frugality rather than greed.
dr venables preller, Warminster, UK
"Most other countries tackled this issue decades ago", claims Peter from Edinburgh (above).
Which other countries?
I live in France and drive across the Swiss border into Geneva every day. You should see all the litter around here. Or all the litter in Moscow, where I lived for a while. I'd love to know who exactly has tackled it.
Claire, Ain, France
The one thing the article did make me do was sign up for the anti plastic bag petition currently suffering from a distinct lack of popularity on the Downing Street website. Please take your time to sign up and stop the waste being generated in the first place. Visit petitions.pm.gov.uk/FANASTICPLASTIC (sic) Sign up before the 30th May
Jono Taylor, Bristol, UK
Britain is shamefully grubby, and the sooner it gets a decent long term litter reduction campaign the better. To hell with worries about 'nannying', stop filling the country with discarded rubbish. Most other countries tackled this issue decades ago.
Pete, Edinburgh, Scotland
Bad habits don't die easily. "Littering" is not just a social malice, but a reflection of one's personality trait and life style attitudes. Be it Britain, or India or any other part of the globe, we find so called decent and educated people, casting off and throwing away the rubbish like their in born right. We can talk a lot over the pulpit to improve our social etiquettes , but in real life situations more often than not we all behave like hypocrats. Are we not apt in being as 'sofa sophists' , keeping our homes clean and tidy, yet caring a least about our city and neighbourhood. And then we expect our Civic authorities to be well spruced and meticulous in mending our misdoings , and keep the things shipshape. Unfortunately Delhi was recently nominated as an unclean city and earned the sobriquet of a "garbage dump". It hurts and stinks too. To just give a spin off and a twist of the tale, we carry a lot of litter in our ideas and thoughts too. Can't we clean up our mental garbage ???
Sandy, New Delhi, India
maybe we should blame bin unladen?
lou capetown, cape town, south africa (former colony)
In part I agree that the more we are shown how other people misbehave the more acceptable it is for us to justify breaking the rules. With this in mind do you now agree that we should stop discussing homosexuality, race, religion, teaching sex education in school and wife beating. Not discussing issues does not make them go away it simply glosses over the problems. When I was a child my mother would ask if my friend put his hand in the fire would I do so as well whenever I said stupid things like John's mother's lets him do ....
I live in a wonderful area with nice forest paths and clearings to picnic at and was amazed last year when a family dropped litter everywhere during thier picnic and once finished complained that the area was getting very dirty with all the rubbish and someone should do something about it. I did but they were not to impressed on getting a ticking of for being louts.
Joseph Kellie, Edinburgh, Scotland
So by this impecable logic, the best thing that could happen to this country would be to close down the Daily Mail. I couldn't agree more...
Stu, London,
i too read the paxman article and agreed with it. There are far too many dirty people in this country who throw rubbish, spit on the street, drop gum, it's disgusting. why are you denouncing his attempt to shame people not to accept this? i think you're idea about the petrified forest is absolute tosh as well. in fact, your article is complete rubbish in comparison to his. if you want to write about david cameron then do it. and if you want to just read what other people wrote and criticise them for caring then please find another outlet other than this decent paper. thanks.
jamie, london, uk
I think your articles resemble the ostensible subject of this one in following a paperchase of facts to get to the main point - which here is clearly to undermine David Cameron. The problem which this article identifies in terms of the litter law is one of attitude. Excessive conformity may be undesirable, but there is an influence on attitude in this country which is unsettling and undermines the notion of the principle of discipline.
Henry Percy, London, UK
Agree. Agree.
Kong Kek Kuat, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
When I was young, we lived next to a wood. The owner had put up a big sign near the gate: "Danger - Dilithium poisoning." Do I even need to say that there was no litter?
Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK