ESPM 4242
Exercise 3
Szilvia Hosser
October 16, 2007
Plastic bags are polluting to the environment and the cost of discarding them imposes high
costs to society
1) Alternatives viewed with respect to three (3) characteristics selected from p. 230, Patton &
Sawicki.
Voluntary
approach
Supplier levy
Consumer
charge
Ban
No Action
Voluntary
approach
Supplier levy
Consumer
charge
Ban
No Action
Flexibility
Flexibility depends on the scale of participants. Overall consumer behavior
change would only be likely to occur in case of high scale participation.
Targeted toward the suppliers. It is likely that even if the costs would be
transferred to consumers the possible lack of knowledge about where the extra
charge comes from consumer behavior would likely not be highly affected.
This option is likely to achieve more consumer awareness about the use of
plastic bags and the demand for a good biodegradable bag alternative.
This option would likely force consumers to find alternatives to nonbiodegradable plastic bags.
This option can only “serve” adverse purposes (keep collecting and
transporting littler, pollute the environment, and don’t comply with state’s
energy efforts).
Communicability
Communicating that leads to effective results with shareholders can be
difficult.
Communicating and negotiating with suppliers can be tiresome.
Communication with consumers to gain acceptability will likely be difficult.
Communicating with stakeholders in order to gain acceptability will likely be
difficult.
No communication needed (unless our non action is questioned).
Risks
Voluntary
approach
Supplier levy
Consumer
charge
Ban
No Action
Risky whether and what scale would retailers participate.
Risky as far as foreseeing the right amount of charge and its effects towards the
different shareholders. Risky as far as supplier reaction.
Risky in charging the right amount. If charge is too large, it would cause
customer dissatisfaction, and less support in the future.
Risky in terms of customer and retailer reaction / support as this is a drastic
measure.
Heavy risks as far as of litter, energy and environmental issues.
2) How each alternative addresses the problem
The voluntary approach
In terms of addressing the problem, this option would reduce the plastic shopping bag use that
pollutes the environment via reducing the handling out of ‘free’ shopping bags at the
participating stores. However, as I mentioned before the actual reduction of plastic bag use is
highly dependant on the scale of retailer participation. Moreover, the manufacturing would still
continue as well as the purchase of plastic bags. This means that costs to society would still
remain, also the polluting waste going to landfills, and the amount of reduction would depend on
the scale of participants, and the demand for plastic bags.
Supplier Levy
The producers and importers of non-biodegradable plastic bags would be required to pay a tax on
i.e. number or weight of plastic bags imported / manufactured. This option would impose higher
costs on suppliers in the state. Whether this would actually reduce the number of plastic bags
manufactured or this waste transported to landfills is hard to predict. Experience shows that some
suppliers transfer the costs coming from the higher tax to consumers. This means that there
would a higher cost imposed to some actors of the society.
Consumer charge
This regulation would target the reduction of ‘free’ plastic bags handed out, starting at grocery
stores. The purchase of plastic bags would still be allowed therefore the cost to society in terms
of manufacturing of plastic bags would still remain as well as transporting the plastic bag waste
to landfills. Similarly as by the voluntary approach, the reduction in number of polluting plastic
bags highly dependent on the number of purchases of these bags (customer behavior). With
combination of a consumer education programs however the scale of reduction could be
accelerated.
A ban
This regulatory option would eliminate overall plastic bag use, starting at grocery stores. This
would reduce demand for plastic bags drastically and therefore would likely to reduce the
number of plastic bag manufactured or imported to the state as well as the amount of plastic bag
waste brought to landfills.