Ditching plastic, one step at a time
MANY people are talking about Hobart City Council’s move to ban single-use plastics by 2020, making it the first city in Australia to do so. The ban is a crucial step towards the positive enforcement of a circular economy in the bid to limit climate change.
Tasmanian Small Business chief executive Robert Mallett told the Mercury many small businesses would be forced to raise prices to compensate for the additional costs. While the added pressure on small businesses is legitimate, it is also a move that needs to happen, sooner rather than later. The environmental costs of continuing plastics use at the current rate are far more significant.
The consequences are dire. Single-use plastics make up 70 per cent of all marine waste. By 2050, scientists estimate there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish. Marine life is ingesting this waste and it is making its way up the food chain. Plastics are made from fossil fuels containing chemicals that are extremely toxic to not only human health, but the health of our environment. October’s International Panel on Climate Change report called for urgent action to phase out fossil fuels over the next 12 years to avoid climate catastrophe.
Plastic use needs the proverbial carrot and stick. During my time as a sustainability consultant I learnt that voluntary change for sustainability in business is not always as effective as it needs to be. Corporate social responsibility research demonstrates that on climate change initiatives, laws and regulations at all levels of government, along with incentives, are more inclined to lead to change than voluntary action. The carrot and stick approach plays an important role in behavioural change.
When it comes to climate change, we simply do not have time to sit and wait for governments to introduce effective laws and for businesses to change their practices. The responsibility of consumers taking immediate action cannot be downplayed. It must not only originate from those in power because consumers too have clout. In the words of Robert Swan OBE, the “greatest threat to our planet is the belief that someone else will save it”.
Of course, widespread behavioural changes are not simple, and are as much the result of education as conscious living, but people can start now by making mindful decisions, for example: approaching businesses and asking for alternatives, taking reusable containers when grocery shopping, and participating in public consultation. The market forces of demand and supply are quite effective in sustainability action.
Sustainability and climate action need co-operation, not finger-pointing or passing the burden of responsibility onto one party. Once the adaption period has come into effect for businesses, it makes sense for there to be some kind of sanction for those who do not comply. But as stated by the Mercury, it is a complex move and implications need to be worked through (Editorial, March 6).
What works best is for all parties to assume their roles mutually. The role of government is to introduce laws and regulations to move society in the right direction, but it is also their role to facilitate that. One way that can be done with such a drastic ban is to provide a combination of penalties and financial incentives for plastics producers and producers of environmentally friendly alternatives, as well as to businesses to help them move to alternative options. Local government can ensure composting and recycling bins and disposal service are available for businesses who provide compostable and reusable packaging to customers. Business and marketers have a responsibility also to encourage lagging consumers to make change.
“Nudge economics” comes to mind. Nudge theory is a behavioural change theory that works on the premise that by introducing changes to the consumption environment, you can nudge people in the right direction from what might otherwise be an unconscious decision to make more environmentally friendly decisions without taking away their freedom of choice. These changes in behaviour eventually become habit. It is a way to start immediate change, with people making mindful decisions rather than unconscious ones.
During the grace period of the plastics ban, businesses could help this along by providing alternatives. Passing the costs to consumers through a gentle nudge is one way. For example, while offering a compostable alternative for takeaway coffee, a levy could be placed on the disposable plastic kind, making the alternative the cheaper option for consumers. Many Australian cafes already do this by providing a discount for customers who bring their own reusable cup.
In the European Union, single-use food and drink containers can no longer be provided free of charge under consumption reduction targets for member states.
Wide-scale behavioural change does not happen overnight. The ban on singleuse plastics is a step in the right direction for our planet, but rather than just imposing penalties and sanctions, any government that goes down this route needs to also facilitate that change. And it is not only a responsibility of government, everyone needs to play a role. Businesses large and small can help change behaviour, and consumers make immediate changes through conscious decisions. Sustainable change is a call for co-operation from all levels of society.