Personas describe who people are. This page describes which levers move them. For each of five intervention types we measure the responsive audience per cluster, the strongly-responsive core, and the genuinely incremental audience once people already doing the target behaviour are excluded. These numbers are the sizing layer behind the challenge briefs — and the basis for any claim we make about London at scale.
Each cell shows the responsive % for that intervention within that persona. Rank badges (top-right) indicate where the intervention ranks within the persona's five options. Cell shading intensity scales with responsive %, coloured by persona accent.
Overlap is where a single venture can cover more of London than any intervention alone. The three-way intersection identifies the core addressable audience for a layered venture; the pairwise cards below show the strategically significant two-way combinations.
| Persona | n in 3-way | % of cluster | % of total |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Accumulator | 153 | 86% | 15.1% |
| The Pragmatic Replacer | 72 | 17% | 7.1% |
| The Ethical Keeper | 69 | 53% | 6.8% |
| The Seasonal Clearer | 115 | 40% | 11.3% |
Only one — Habit × Peer × Tech — clears 40% of London. The drop to the next combination is nearly half.
Ranked by combined audience size. Circle size is proportional to each intervention's total responsive audience; visible overlap reflects the shared-audience n.
People who respond to an intervention type outside of their "expected" cluster. These subgroups are why a well-designed intervention can be bigger than its primary persona suggests — and where a secondary cluster can be reached without changing the core design.
Distinct from the intervention score above. The intervention score measures responsiveness to digital nudges; reachability asks the simpler prior question — does this audience sit on platforms where paid or organic broadcast reach is achievable? Share of each cluster on at least one of TikTok, Instagram, X, Facebook or Snapchat.
Each brief merges intervention-stack sizing with qualitative anchors and a HMW question. The full brief document links the analysis on this page to the story in the synthesis.
Each intervention type has a composite score built from 6–7 binary conditions drawn from the survey: disposal methods already in use, stated barriers, factor scores (RC1–RC7) from the Varimax-rotated PCA, and attitudinal signals. A respondent scores one point for each condition they satisfy.
Responsive is defined as a score of ≥2 (≥3 for habit-building, where the threshold is higher because the intervention specifically targets dormancy). This is the broad addressable audience. Strongly responsive is the core audience — ≥4 for tech, values and peer; ≥3 for physical; ≥5 for habit-building. Both figures are reported so the reader can see the difference between "potentially movable" and "obvious target".
Additionality is the test that matters most for venture design. For each intervention, we separate respondents who are already doing the target behaviour (selling online, using a collection bank, donating to charity, disposing at high frequency, passing clothes to friends/family) from those who are not. The incremental figure is the genuine new-behaviour audience — what the intervention would actually unlock. Where this number is small relative to the headline responsive count, the intervention is largely a capture play rather than a behaviour-change play.
Thresholds are deliberate and conservative. The responsive threshold is intentionally inclusive so total opportunity is visible; the strongly-responsive threshold narrows to the core. Both matter, and the gap between them — particularly inside the Pragmatic Replacer — carries real design information.
| Intervention | Conditions (1 pt each) | Responsive | Strongly | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Tech / Digital
|
|
≥ 2 | ≥ 4 | 6 |
|
Physical / Proximity
|
|
≥ 2 | ≥ 3 | 7 |
|
Values / Identity
|
|
≥ 2 | ≥ 4 | 6 |
|
Habit-Building
|
|
≥ 3 | ≥ 5 | 7 |
|
Peer / Social
|
|
≥ 2 | ≥ 4 | 6 |