Once again, this article shows the gap between the public’s thoughts and actions. In theory, 57% of consumers are in favor of Plastic-bag ban,” but continue to use them out of sheer practicality. While I understand and support the law, I believe it is naive in underestimating consumers’ value of convenience. Especially in New York, time is money and people do not wish to be thrown off schedule or inconvenienced. Although plastic bags may seem petty, they play a functional role in everyday grocery shopping. In my family, groceries are bought in bulk and carrying the bags from the supermarket to the car to the house is already a tedious job. More so, people who stop by the grocery store on their way home from work or school are most probably not carrying spare bags on them. If the law ought to be effective, it must provide official and accessible alternatives. This study focuses more on ways to decrease usage and overlooks replacement options. At the end, it briefly mentions that government should subsidize and reduce or remit taxes on research for degradable shopping bag made out of suitable substitutes material; however, this will take time and is therefore not a concrete option at this point.
On another note, I agreed with the article that “Plastic-bag ban” success is dependent on effective publicity by policy-makers. Like everything these days, the law must be properly marketed. The public must not view it as a repressive policy meant to interfere with their every day lives, but a movement towards healthier lives for all. As of then, many were unaware of the ban’s purpose. Some mistakenly assume it is meant to cut merchant’s packaging costs. The first step is to educate consumers and assist them in gaining environmental literacy, so that they begin to see the large impact the overall policy and even their personal contributions would have on the environment.
