Plastic bag bans

There is some evidence that plastic bag bans reduce the use and availability of single-use plastic bags covered by the ban^{2, 4, 5, 8}. Well-designed bans can increase use of reusable cloth and paper bags, and instances of shoppers not taking a bag^{4, 5}. Bans that prohibit only lightweight plastic bags can have unintended consequences increasing availability and use of thicker plastic bags^{1, 2, 4, 8}. Experts suggest bans are the most effective way to manage the growing crisis of plastic bag litter^{1, 4}. Additional evidence is needed to confirm effects, especially in the U.S. context.

In a Philadelphia-based study, a plastic bag ban reduced plastic bag use, increased paper bag use, and overall reduced use of disposable bags⁵. In a Chicago-based study, a ban decreased lightweight plastic bag use; however, many stores instead offered free, thicker plastic bags containing five times more plastic than standard grocery bags, undermining any environmental benefits⁸. Multicomponent regulations including comprehensive bans and disposable bag taxes or fees are more effective at reducing the use and environmental impact of disposable bags than narrow bans⁸.

Bans in Africa, Asia, and Europe have reduced use of plastic bags covered by the legislation; however, reductions vary from 20% to 90% and more research is needed to confirm effects^{1, 6, 9}. Regulation design, capacity to monitor and enforce implementation, and substitution options influence effectiveness and vary substantially between countries^{1, 6, 9, 10}. Some substitutions for single-use plastic bags are not environmentally friendly, especially alternative plastics such as thicker plastic bags, trash bags, or plastic wrapping products together^{1, 6, 10}. The effectiveness of bans is undermined by the power of the plastic industry, which lobbies for self-regulation, emphasizes consumer responsibility, and urges business solutions rather than government regulation¹. Bans are also undermined by thriving black markets and retailer resistance, especially in developing countries^{1, 9}.

Well-designed bans can reduce air and water pollution from the production, use, and disposal of plastic bags⁴. Bans can reduce waste and litter¹¹. Plastic bags disposed of on land can be blown into lakes, rivers, or oceans and become plastic pollution which has devastating effects, including strangulation from entanglement and fatal digestive complications, on marine mammals, sea turtles, sea birds⁴, fish, and endangered wildlife^{1, 3}. After animals eat plastic, toxic chemicals are found in their tissues, which then can enter the human food chain². Plastic bag litter clogs sewer drains and waterways, which increases flooding and standing unclean water that can breed bugs and harmful bacteria^{1, 2, 3}. Plastic bags and single-use plastics use fossil fuels for energy and production materials, generating greenhouse gas emissions that exacerbate climate change^{12, 13}.

Successful bans include education to help consumers understand reasons and benefits of reducing one-time plastic bag use, which improves consumer attitudes, motivation, and behaviors^{3, 6, 7, 10}. Educational components can include school instruction to teach students about oceans, waste management, and pollution; children can be influential in changing behaviors among their peers, their families, and their communities⁷. Governments should engage as many stakeholders as possible when designing legislation and policies to curb plastic pollution². Legislation can be part of comprehensive initiatives that include financial incentives for consumers, retailers, and manufacturers supporting awareness, innovation, and research and development of sustainable, recyclable alternatives that fit within a circular model of production, consumption, and recycling². Plastic bag bans that include fees charged for paper bags may be more successful in encouraging consumers to bring their own reusable bags⁴. Plastic bag bans, taxes, or recycling requirements need to be enforced to have environmental benefits^{3, 10, 11}. Experts suggest a global treaty and multi-component, comprehensive efforts are needed to address the transient nature of plastic bag litter and to support a circular economy that recovers and recycles existing plastic bags and limits the creation of new plastic waste¹.

Plastic bag litter imposes large costs on society¹. Plastic bags cannot be recycled with standard equipment; bags clog and damage recycling machines and repairs are expensive^{3, 5}. An Ohio-based study estimates that dealing with discarded plastic bags at the local level costs taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars every year¹⁴. California’s plastic bag and litter clean-up costs are estimated at over $400 million annually³. International reports estimate aquatic ecosystem damages from plastic litter and microplastic pollution to be approximately $13 billion in U.S. dollars each year^{1, 15}. Tourism around the world has lost significant revenue because plastic bag litter reduces the recreational value and visual appeal of landscapes and the seashore^{1, 7}. Critics of plastic bag bans note that they increase inconvenience for shoppers, increase costs for alternative bags, create an enforcement burden for governments, and may cause job losses and disinvestment in the plastic industry^{1, 9}. Alternative disposable bags have their own environmental costs; for example, paper bags are easy to recycle, but require more energy to produce than plastic bags⁵. Manufacturers of plastic bags suggest plastic bags can be cost-effective if used within a comprehensive recycling program; however, many environmentalists disagree, noting the extremely low recycling rates for plastic bags³.

An Ohio-based study suggests most consumers support reducing access to single-use plastic bags with legislative bans and store policies because voluntary actions are not sufficient¹⁴. Across the U.S., plastic bag legislation varies by geography and depends on political party control of state legislatures. State-wide legislation is more likely to be adopted in states where local legislation already exists, in areas with more green, sustainable efforts underway, and in states with more shoreline area¹⁶. State preemption laws limit plastic bag legislation adoption in eighteen states, mostly in the Midwest and the South^{16, 17}.

As of January 1, 2024, statewide plastic bag bans in the U.S. have been implemented in twelve states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington^{17, 18}. Hawaii’s ban on plastic bags covers the state but was implemented on a county-by-county basis¹⁷. As of 2021, plastic bag legislation has been implemented in more than 500 cities and towns across 28 states¹⁸. The National Conference of State Legislatures highlights Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle as notable cities with plastic bag bans¹⁷. Internationally, 172 countries have some form of legislation regulating single-use plastics, which in many cases include bans on single-use plastic bags⁶.

As of 2021, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin are the 18 states with preemption laws that prohibit local governments from adopting plastic bag bans¹⁷.