10120140503003

International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 - 6510(Online),
Volume 5, Issue 3, March (2014), pp. 28-35 © IAEME
28
ERADICATION OF PLASTIC CARRY BAGS – PERCEPTION OF THE
PUBLIC
Dr. P.S.Valarmathy
Professor, Galaxy Institute of Management, Chennai.
ABSTRACT
The public who are responsible for littering the landscape with plastic carry bags could be
grouped into three clusters based on their behaviour as to the mode of disposal of plastic carry bags,
their willingness to carry own bags, awareness level on the hazards of littering and their perception
on the measures to eradicate the use of plastic carry bags as – environment cautious public, cost
conscious public and irresponsible public With suitable strategies, the hazards caused by plastic carry
bags could be eradicated.
Keywords: Environmental Hazards, Littering the Landscape, Disposal of Plastic Carry Bags.
INTRODUCTION
Plastic carry bags were introduced in early 1950. Initial days the plastic carry bags were thick
with handles fixed to it. During 1960, Swedish Engineer Sten Gustaf Thulin developed the modern
plastic carry bags which are light weight and made of single piece with high load carrying capacity.
From then onwards plastic carry bags are used as a primary packaging material. It is widely used to
pack all varieties of food stuffs. It is also used as secondary packing material by retailers to enable its
customers to carry daily groceries and other food items from shops to vehicles and their homes.
Apart from being light with high load carrying capacity, they are claimed to be non toxic and resist
chemical reaction. Also, they are transparent and water proof. These attributes of plastic carry bags
make it very popular that people shun the habit of carrying their own bags while shopping.
Though plastic carry bags are claimed to be cheap and hygienic by the users i.e
manufacturers of plastic carry bags, retailers and public making use of it in daily routine, the real
cost of using plastic carry bags on the environment is very high in terms of loss of bio diversity,
littering of the landscape, filling the air with toxic fumes, strangling marine animals and disturbing
the purity of water bodies. All these costs are borne by the society not by the producers or users. As
claimed it is neither economic nor eco friendly.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT (IJM)
ISSN 0976-6502 (Print)
ISSN 0976-6510 (Online)
Volume 5, Issue 3, March (2014), pp. 28-35
© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijm.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2014): 7.2230 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com
IJM
© I A E M E

29
There has been growing awareness among the world community of the ill effects of using
plastic carry bags and efforts taken to protect the environment. Use of plastic carry bags have been
totally banned in parts of America, UK, France, BanglaDesh, Bhutan and China. Instead of banning
plastics, to reduce the usage, a levy has been imposed in many parts of the world like New Zealand,
Ireland, Israel, Germany, Australia. In HongKong the first Tuesday of each month is celebrated as
NO Plastic bags Day. In certain countries like India and Taiwan, as per government rules customers
are charged by retailers like super markets, restaurants for plastic carry bags. Lot of measures have
been undertaken throughout the world in bits and pieces to reduce the hazards of plastic carry bags.
Research studies undertaken on the impact of plastic carry bags invariably suggests to educate public
on the ill effects of plastic carry bags and insist on using eco friendly alternatives. As rightly pointed
out by these studies, littering of the carry bags by the public is the root cause of the problem and
hence a research study was undertaken to study the use of plastic carry bags by public, their
awareness and perception on the measures to eradicate the use of plastic carry bags.
OBJECTIVES
• To group the public into clusters on the basis of their usage, awareness and perception
regarding eradication of plastic carry bags and to suggest measures for effective banning of
plastic carry bags.
METHODOLOGY
The present study is an empirical research focussing on the current state of affairs on usage of
plastic carry bags by the public and their perception on the eradication of the same. Primary data is
collected with the help of structured interview schedule from 2250 sample selected on the basis of
convenient sampling method from the inmates of Chennai. After editing 2215 questionnaires are
analysed with the help of SPSS package. K means clustering is used to group the public.
Data Analysis
Analysis of the data with the help of percentages and weighted average method revealed that
100% of the sample uses plastic carry bags. Plastic carry bags reach the hands of the public through
super markets followed by vegetable and fruit vendors. Buying plastic carry bags is least sought after
by the public.
Modes of disposal of Plastic carry bags
After using the carry bags supplied freely by the super markets or vegetable vendors it is
disposed by just throwing on the road or at the garbage corners in the street. Some are hygienic that
they put it in the dust bin and hand it over to the garbage collection employees. Few who are cautious
about the environment, segregate waste at home, use separate dust bin for plastic waste and properly
hand over it to corporation employees on Wednesday. Data analysis reveals that only 12% of the
public are responsible citizens and 88% of the public are responsible for littering the plastic carry
bags.
Carrying own bags
The free distribution of plastic carry bags by super markets, vegetable & fruits vendor,
grocery stores and bakery for more than two decades has almost eliminated the habit of carrying own
bags for shopping. Though 79.5% of the respondents have carried their own bags, only 19.5% carries
regularly and the rest carries occasionally. Of those who are carrying their own bags while going for

30
shopping only 17% are comfortable in carrying own bag. 42% of the respondents forget to carry own
bags while 28% of the public feels it is a burden on hand.
Awareness on the hazards of Littering Plastic Carry bags
Awareness about the hazards of plastic carry bags is very high among the public. 94.58% of
the public is aware that plastic carry bags blocks sewage, 92.64% knows that it reduces rain water
percolation, 91.5% are aware that it reduces soil fertility, 90.79% that it affects the mortality of
animals and awareness is only 89.9% with regard to burning of plastic carry bags causing cancer.
Measures to contain the hazards of Plastic carry bags
Four types of measures could be taken to eradicate the use of plastic carry bags. Creating
awareness of the hazards of plastic carry bags, encouraging public to bring their own bags and reuse
the plastic carry bags will reduce the consumption of plastic carry bags. Effective waste
management through collection of plastic carry bags by local bodies, segregation of waste at home
itself as bio degradable and non bio degradable and setting up recycling plant by govt, local
authorities will help in recycling the plastic waste and thus contribute to the reduction of
environmental hazards. Charging the customer at shops for plastic carry bags that it becomes costly
for customer, levying the traders using plastic carry bags for packaging and heavily taxing the plastic
carry bag manufacturers – all the above measures will make the plastic carry bags costlier and
discourage free distribution of the same.
The measures to be taken under each head are given in Table No.1. The perceptions of the
public on these measures are assessed with the help of likerts 5 point scale and analysed using
weighted average.
Table No.1
Perception on the Measures to eradicate the use of Plastic Carry Bags
Measure Mean SD
REDUCE
Create Awareness 4.48 .67
Carrying Own Bags by Public 4.33 .69
Reuse Plastic Carry Bags 3.91 1.09
RECYCLE
Collection of Plastic Carry Bags by
Local Bodies
4.09 .89
Segregation of Waste at home 4.08 .85
Setting up Recycling Plant 4.19 .87
LEVY
Levy the Traders 4.18 .90
Tax Plastic Carry bag Manufacturers 4.37 .85
BAN
Ban the use of Plastic carry bags 4.65 .72
Source: Primary data

31
Perception of the public on the four type of measure – reduce, recycle, levy and ban is given
in Table No.2.
Table No.2
Mean SD
Reduce the use of plastic carry bags 4.24 1.72
Recycle the plastic carry bags 4.12 1.92
Levy 4.19 2.14
Ban the use of plastic carry bags 4.65 .72
Overall opinion about reduce the environmental hazards 4.23 4.46
Source: Primary data
Banning the use of plastic carry bags stands first with highest mean score. Due to awareness
of the health hazards of re using plastic carry bags, reuse has the least mean score followed by
charging customers by retailers. This makes crystal clear that though people are still using plastic
carry bags inspite of awareness, once strict measures are taken by the government to ban the use of
plastic carry bags, it would be welcome by the public.
Clustering of the Public
Public who are mainly responsible for littering of plastic carry bags are clustered into three
groups on the basis of five variables / attributes using K means Clustering–
1. Mode of disposal of plastic carry bags –
o Just throw away the plastic carry bags on the Road
o Dispose the plastic carry bags at the garbage corners on the road
o Put it in the dust bin and dispose it properly to the garbage collection employees
o Use separate dust bin for plastic carry bags and handover the waste to Corporation
employees on Wednesday
2. Carry their own bag while going for shopping to buy grocery, vegetables, fruits & bakery
products
3. Degree of comfort in carrying own bag to the shop
4. Awareness on the hazards of littering Plastic carry bags
o Blocks sewage lines & leads to outburst of epidemics
o Reduce rain water percolation
o Deteriorates soil fertility
o Mortality of cows, goats, & marine animals
o Burning of Plastic carry bags causes cancer
5. Perception on the measures to eradicate the plastic carry bags

32
The final cluster centres given below gives the mean value of each variable for each of the
three clusters.
Table No.3
Final cluster centres
Variable
Cluster
1 2 3
Just throw away the plastic carry bags on the Road 0 0 0
Dispose the plastic carry bags at the garbage corners on the
road
1 1 1
Put it in the dust bin and dispose it properly to the garbage
collection employees
1 1 0
Use separate dust bin for plastic carry bags and handover the
waste to Corporation employees on wednesday
0 0 0
Frequency of Carrying own bag while going for shopping 2 1 2
Rate the comfortablity in carrying own bag to the shop 4 3 4
Difficulty faced in carrying own bag 2 2 2
Make use of free plastic bags given by shops to manage carry
bags requirement
1 1 1
Pay for plastic bags to manage carry bags requirement 1 1 1
Avoid going to shops charging for carry bags 0 0 0
Awareness on littering of plastic carry bags blocks sewage
lines & leads to outburst of epidemics 1 1 1
Awareness on littering of plastic carry bags reduce rain water
percolation
1 1 1
Awareness on littering of plastic carry bags deteriorates soil
fertility
1 1 1
Awareness on littering of plastic carry bags affects the
mortality of cows, goats, & marine animals 1 1 1
Burning of Plastic carry bags causes cancer 1 1 1
Reduce the use of plastic carry bags by Creating awareness 5 4 5
Encourage public to bring their own bags 4 4 4
Reuse the plastic carry bags 3 4 4
Effective waste management through collection of plastic
carry bags by Local Bodies
3 4 4
Segregation of waste at home itself as bio degradable and non
bio degradable
4 4 4
Setting up recycling plant by govt, local authorities 4 4 5
Charging the customer at shops for plastic carry bags that it
becomes costly for customer
4 3 4
Levy the traders using plastic carry bags for packaging 4 3 5
Heavily tax the plastic carry bag manufacturers 4 3 5
Ban the use of plastic carry bags 5 4 5
Source: Primary Data

33
Table No.4
Distance between Final Cluster Centres
Cluster 1 2 3
1 2.417 2.776
2 2.417 2.728
3 2.776 2.728
A brief description of the clusters is given below:
Cluster 1: (Fairly Environment Cautious Public) This group of people either dispose the plastic
carry bags at the garbage corners on the road or put it in the dust bin and dispose it properly to the
garbage collection employee They do not maintain separate dust bin for plastic carry bags and hand
over the waste to corporation employees on Wednesday or throw away the carry bags on the road.
This reveals that they are neither reckless in disposing the waste nor very cautious of the
environment.
They do not carry own bags regularly while going for shopping and feel uncomfortable and
often forget to carry their own shops. They visit shops charging customers for plastic carry bags and
are willing to pay for the same. If free bags are given they are ready to use the same.
They are fully aware of the hazards of plastic carry bags and strongly agree that plastic carry
bags usage to be reduced through creating awareness and also strongly favours ban on plastic carry
bags. They do not want to re use plastic carry bags and are not confident of the local bodies for
collection of plastic carry bags. They are not only aware of the hazards but also alert to the hazards
when their personal health is concerned.
With regard to the measures to be taken to eradicate the usage of plastic carry bags, they
favour charging customers, levying the traders as well as taxing the manufacturers to make the carry
bags costlier. They are ready to segregate waste at home and favour setting up of recycling plant by
govt. and local authorities. They could be referred as fairly cautious group of public.
Cluster 2: (Cost Conscious Public) They are cost conscious public who neither throw the plastic
carry bags on the road or do segregation of plastic waste at home for proper disposal of the same.
They dispose the plastic carry bags at the garbage corners on the road or put it in the dust bin along
with other waste and dispose it properly to the garbage collection employee.
They always carry own bags while shopping and are indifferent (neither comfortable nor
uncomfortable) to carry own bags though they forget to carry own bags at times. Like cautious
public they visit shops charging customers for plastic carry bags when there is a need and are willing
to pay for the same. If free bags are given they are ready to use the same also.
They are aware of all hazards but are not alert like cautious public. They agree for all
measures proposed for reducing the hazards except charging the customers, levying the traders and
taxing the manufacturers. All three measures aim at inflating the price of carry bags. Hence they
could be rightly referred as cost conscious public.
Cluster 3: (Irresponsible Public) Though they do not throw away the plastic carry bags on the road,
they do not put it in dust bin. They just throw it on the garbage corners. They don’t maintain separate
dust bins for plastic carry bags.
They rarely carry their own carry bags for shopping and feel uncomfortable to carry own
bags and often forget also. To manage carry bags requirement, they make use of free carry bags
given by the retailers and also ready to pay for it if shops are charging. They don’t avoid going to
shops charging for plastic carry bags.

34
They are fully aware of the hazards of plastic carry bag and agree for all measures to be taken
to reduce the environmental hazards of plastic carry bags. Hence though the people belonging to this
cluster are irresponsible, once strict implementation of the measures are carried out, they will abide
by the same.
The details of the respondents falling under each cluster are given below:
Table No.5
Cluster No. of Respondents Percentage
Fairly Environment Cautious
Public
502 23
Cost Cautious Public 464 21
Irresponsible Public 1249 56
Total 2215 100
Source: Primary Data
Only 23% of the public are cautious about the environment (though not fully to some extent)
that they do not throw the plastic carry bags on the road. But they throw it at the garbage corners.
Hence could not be called as fully cautious about the environment. The second cluster i.e. 21% cost
cautious public behave like environment cautious public when it comes to disposal of the waste but
do not agree for any measures which result in increasing the cost of the plastic carry bags. Balance
56% is irresponsible that they do not care for the environment. They hold the major responsibility for
littering of plastic carry bags though the first two clusters are also responsible to some extent.
The cost cautious public are willing to carry their own bags for shopping whereas the other two
clusters feel uncomfortable and often forget to carry own bags. Thus almost all are responsible in a
way for the hazards caused due to littering of plastic carry bags. But awareness on the hazards is high
among all clusters and everyone agrees for banning of the plastic carry bags.
CONCLUSION
It is very clear from the above discussion that in spite of the differences and disagreements
between clusters entire public is aware of the hazards of plastic carry bags and all favours banning of
the plastic carry bags. Hence banning of plastic carry bags and strict adherence of the same will fetch
fruitful results.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
(Paper published based on the project sanctioned by AICTE under Research Promotion
Scheme (RPS) 8023/BOR/RID/RPS – 158).
REFERENCES
1. Plastic Shopping Bag, Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Plastic shopping bag on 28
June 2012.
2. Phasing out single use plastic bags, retrieved from http://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/
2010/09/phasing-out-single-use-plastic-bags/ viewed on 22nd Sep. 2012 .
3. Rajat R. (2011) Eradicating plastics not so easy, accessed on May 26, 2011,
http://www.mangalorean.net/browsearticles.php?arttype=Feature&articleid=1781. 26.5.11.

35
4. Remigios V.Mangizvo (2012), The incidence of plastic waste in Alice, South Africa, accessed
on http://www.onlineresearchjournals.org /JSS/ pdf/ 2012/ apr/ Mangizvo.pdf
5. VelappaGoundar Ramaswamy and Hardeep Rai Sharma, Plastic Bags – Threat to environment
and cattle health:A retrospective study from Gondar city of Ethiopia, accessed on
http://www.iioab.org/SPI-1(EBT)/Ramaswamy-IIOABJ-2%20(1)-(SP1)-7-12p.pdf
6. Legesse Adane and Diriba Muleta, Survey on the usage of plastic bags, their disposal and
adverse impacts on environment: A case study in jimma city, south western Ethiopia, accessed
on http://www.academic journals. org/ jtehs/ PDF/ Pdf2011/ August/ Adane %20 and
%20Muleta.pdf
7. Jennifer Clapp and Linda Swanston, Doing away with plastic shopping bags: International
patterns of norm emergence and policy interpretation, accessed on
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09644010902823717
8. Plastic waste: will the new rules clear up the clogged mess? Accessed on October 29, 2012,
http://Cseindia.org.
9. Cátia M.L. Machado, Dr. Liane Mahlmann Kipper and Dr. Rejane Frozza, “A Proposal for a
Computational Tool with the Lean Approach to Support Minimization of Waste Production
Process”, International Journal of Management (IJM), Volume 4, Issue 5, 2013, pp. 78 - 91,
ISSN Print: 0976-6502, ISSN Online: 0976-6510.

10120140503003

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (14)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to 10120140503003

Similar to 10120140503003 (20)

More from IAEME Publication

More from IAEME Publication (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

10120140503003