Unless you are Sherlock Holmes or Derren Brown, you’ll need to do market research to know what people think. For years, surveys and polls have been used as a means of gauging public opinion, on everything from how many times a day we lie, to whether we have ever put recycling in a black sack or even what makes us happy.

Harvard University, for instance, has taken this to the technical extreme with a survey of 15,000 people in 83 countries, all of whom report on their ‘emotional states’ using their smartphones. Having sex makes us happy. Commuting to work doesn’t. David Cameron might take note, having spent a reported £2 million researching the wellbeing of Brits.

Indeed, you might say that’s a lot of effort to discover something we already know. But whether you are the Prime Minister or part of the waste department in a local authority, it pays to know what your public thinks – especially when it comes to campaigning.

“You need to understand, as best you can, why some people are not recycling, or not recycling certain materials, and what the factors are that will motivate personal action”, says LRS Consultancy Managing Director Dee Moloney. “There are many motivating factors and it’s about identifying which are the most integral to your [residents] and then working out what messages you can use to get a positive reaction.”

Of course, with budgets tight, there is a temptation to cut corners. This is a risky strategy, warns Moloney: “You could end up spending small fortunes marketing the wrong type of messages to the wrong people and not get the results you want.” Knowing who your audience is and what your audience needs to hear is key.

So, data is king. But what’s the best way to collect this data? How can you find out what your public thinks, and then be sure it’s an accurate reflection? And how do you do it all on a budget? This isn’t the commercial sector, after all, with its super-sized marketing allowances. Yet, in the same way that the likes of McDonald’s will research its market in detail before a new product launch, local authorities need to gather an extensive range of background information: firstly, demographics to help build a picture of the area and the people who live there, then how they are using – or not using – the services in place.

Jane Stephenson is CEO at consultancy Resource Futures: “Commercial companies will spend big on campaign research, but in the waste sector this still isn’t seen as important as providing boxes or bins and recycling services. But a great service is no good if you don’t back it up with focused marketing based on information about how the public is using the services provided. If you don’t have this information, you need to go out and get it.”

There are a number of ways to do this, some of which are readily available and free, and some of which require a little bit more thought, and a little extra budget. Zero Waste Scotland says that research for its campaigns normally starts with data from previous activity, relevant operational research already undertaken (for example participation rates), case studies from other organisations and feedback from frontline staff.

“Typically, councils will also already hold information on current collection tonnages, and these can be valuable in establishing a baseline, and prioritising interventions”, says a spokeswoman. “Beyond this, we make use of a wide range of techniques – surveys, focus groups, in-depth qualitative work, and observed behaviour can all be great ways of determining current behaviour, attitudes and motivations and identifying barriers to behaviour change. More waste-specific techniques such as participation analysis and compositional studies are also well developed, and can be invaluable.”

There is no one size fits all, though. For instance, focus groups made up of local householders are more beneficial when considering amendments to kerbside recycling collections, says Perth and Kinross Waste Minimisation Officer Yvonne Bell. Meanwhile, consultation exercises provide opportunities for the public, other local authorities, the waste industry, environmental organisations and key individuals to express their opinions, with the added benefit of being able to supply written responses.

“The method of engagement will vary depending on the location and the waste issue”, Bell adds. “For example, when we introduced a kerbside textile recycling service to 6,000 households last year, the trial included a doorstep survey of a selection of householders to find out whether this expansion of the materials collected at the kerbside was beneficial. However, for a larger number of households, across a greater area, an online survey is more successful.”

Some suggest that online surveys generally rule out certain demographics and provide skewed results given that responses often come from people who are either happy with the service or who want to complain about it. A ‘thank-you fee’ can encourage wider engagement, but a less expensive incentive can simply be to communicate why people’s views are important and how they will be used going forward.

DIY market research tools can allow users to carefully select the demographic they want to reach and deploy online surveys in a matter of minutes. This approach could be viewed as more convenient for respondents compared to more traditional face-to-face methods, especially with the option of surveying ‘on the go’ through smartphone apps like the one used by Harvard University.

Anonymity is the other big advantage of online surveys. Face-to-face, the pressure of wanting to be seen to be doing the right thing is heightened; in fact, AEA discovered an instance where claimed participation and actual participation in recycling were very different – the consultancy found ‘over-reporting’ rates to be around 20 per cent.

A computer screen might not quite be a magic mirror to the best and worst recyclers of them all, but online surveys can help to identify those bending the truth.

“Questions of a similar nature can be posed at various points in the survey to help to identify areas in which answers are vague or contradictory”, explains Stephen Hughes, Managing Director at global market research experts Cint.

Hughes believes that authorities could better use DIY online market research tools, not only to understand the opinions of those living in their own catchment area but also those in other boroughs or counties. For example, by polling people who already have weekly collections for food waste, an authority could use the results to help determine whether to roll out a similar service and the successful ways in which the service was communicated to similar demographics and households.

Access to data from other councils – especially those with similar demographics, problems or planned services – can be part of the attraction in using consultancies for market research. Like Bell in Perth, some authorities prefer to keep their campaigning work in-house because it cuts costs and the staff are often acquainted with the area. Consultants, naturally, argue that their experience is worth the cost.

Robert Pocock, MEL Research CEO, says that external consultancies can also help to ‘get to the truth’, given that there is no vested interest in the data showing certain public traits. They can also bring an insight into the life of rubbish in the mind of the consumer, he says.

“It’s not always the same demographics that you need to target. Some of the worst contaminators of recycling streams can be the environmentally conscious. They chuck things in the boxes that they want you to collect; they have good intentions but they need very different messaging to those that aren’t recycling at all, or don’t understand what to recycle. You can’t know who to target with what unless you know what they are thinking.”

In other words, don’t simply try to read people’s minds. As Sherlock Holmes once said: “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”