Complaints about dog faeces as a symbolic representation of incivility in London, UK: a qualitative study

Abstract

During a ‘Well London’ study, residents were asked about their neighbourhood and its environment. Above all other complaints, ‘dog poo’ was mentioned as a key concern. Despite low rates of infection and disease among the human population resulting from contact with canine faecal matter, the concerns of the public continue to rate it as a serious public health issue. Most public health studies, therefore, seek to identify processes of transmission and disease pathology as a method of addressing the problem. This study approaches the issue through a contextualised analysis of residents’ complaints, using anthropological theory to examine the symbolic representation of ‘dog poo’. Analysis of the interviews shows that these specific complaints were located among less easily defined or articulated experiences of social and environmental neglect, where neighbours were estranged from one another and local authorities seen as negligent. This approach has important implications for public health, as it provides not only a strong indicator of the level of dissatisfaction within some of London's more disadvantaged neighbourhoods, but also identifies a need for policies that are grounded in cross-disciplinary research into the relationship between health, ‘wellbeing’ and experiences of marginalisation among urban populations.

Keywords:

• public health
• canine faeces
• symbolism
• anthropology

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our project director, Prof. Adrian Renton and colleagues at the University of Westminster, University of East London and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The ‘Well London’ CRT was funded by the Wellcome Trust, grant number 083679/Z/07/Z and the Big Lottery. We are also grateful to the reviewers for the comments.

Notes

Notes

1. For more details, see report by Wall et al. (2009).

2. This is preliminary data, further development of the measure is required.

3. All names and locations have been anonymised.