Talking China’s policy of banning free plastic bags

The overuse of plastic bags is always a major problem of China. According to Yingling Liu’ report, there are estimates that “China disposes of three billion plastic bags each and every day, suggesting that each of the 1.3 billion people in China use up to 3 billion plastic bags daily.” On the other hand, plastic bags consume a huge quantity of oil; Expert estimates that “the production of three billion plastic bags takes 37 million barrels of crude oil annually.” Yingling Liu reports that “Most of the carriers end up in unofficial dumping sites, landfills, or the environment. Urban dumping centers and open fields alongside railways and expressways are littered with the discarded bags, mostly whitish ultra-thin varieties. Such scenes have generated a special term in China: ‘the white pollution.’”
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5808

Based on both the internal desire to reduce the plastic pollution in China and the external pressure that comes from China’s role in the international community in building up the image of “Green Country” for the 2008 Olympic Games as well as reducing the global carbon dioxide emission, State Council of China’s Cabinet launched the environmental policy that prohibits shops, supermarkets, and sales outlets from handing out free plastic bags and bans the production, sale, and use of ultra-thin plastic bags under 0.025 millimeters thick nationwide at the end of 2007, with effect from 1st June 2008.
http://english.gov.cn/2008-01/09/content_853755.htm

It has been more than one year since the ban came into effect. In this research study, I focus on two issues. The first is to see how such an environmental policy can help to protect the environment and does it work or not; and second, is to investigate consumers’ reactions in this policy.

Based on the research, I found that government implements this environmental policy through the economy leverage. First of all, according to the article “ASIA: Plastic Bags Sacked”, “the ban will prohibit supermarkets and shops from providing consumers with free plastic bags. The sale and uses of bags less than 0.25 mm thick will also be prohibited. Those companies that do not adhere to the new regulation will face the possibility of heavy fines and confiscation of profits and goods.” According to JIYAO XUN, for retailer, a violation of this policy by not correctly pricing the thicker plastic bags or giving plastic bags at a discount attracts a fine of up to RMB2,000.(US$ 286). Retails that fail to create a special account for the sales of plastic bags for audit purposes will be charged up to 20,000 RMB. (US$2857). I think the reinforcement of the environmental policy through the fine punishment somehow help to protect the environment and decrease the use of plastic bags, which is good. Since the retails has been getting used to offer the free plastic bags to the consumer since 1980s, without such a punishment rule, it is impossible to ensure the supermarkets and retails onto the right track. However, in my opinion, I believe the way of punishment with fine can help to prevent the retailing providing free plastic to consumers, but this rule of fine is not proportionate. For example, for those big supermarkets such as Wal-Mart and Jusco, the penalty are just a small amount, but for those small retailers, it will cost them a lot and make them hard for earn the profit. I think this rule of the policy is kind of unfair for the small retails and do harm for their development.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eih&AN=31443986&site=ehost-live
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=43385627&site=ehost-live

On the other hand, this environmental policy was initiated by the State Council of China’s Cabinet and it is supported by four sub-division, namely, Reform Commission(NDRC); the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine(AQSIQ); the Ministry of Commerce and the State Administration for industry and Commerce(SAIC). JIYAO XUAN writes that “it is worth mentioning that the engagement of NDRC sends a strong message about the nation’s attempt in moving its economic structure, illustrated by its aim of “adjustment of industrial structure.” I think the ban on plastic bags indicates the Chinese government is making efforts to change the economic model from the low environmental valued-added manufacturing economy to a greener and more sustainable-based one.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=43385627&site=ehost-live
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5808

However, I discovered that this policy does not communicate the important of banning ultra-thin bags, which makes the measurement of 0.025mm appear arbitrary to general public. Actually, these kind of ultra-thin bags are often used for packaging hot food and drinks on street market in China. People who do not follow the rule are able to argue that they don’t know the plastic they are using is less than 0.025 or not. Now in Guangdong Province, especially some rural areas, it is easy to find those street market use this kind of ultra-thin plastic for the food. Since the cost of the ultra-thin plastic is really cheap-1000 bags cost only 5 RMB. (Less than one dollor), the retailers are willing to use it. This kind of unclear message illustrates the drawback of this environmental policy, which may decrease its effect.

With the ban of free plastics bags, the Chinese government is now encourage more people turn to use environmental friendly bags such as cloth or the traditional baskets that people used in more than two decades age. Based on the research, I found that most of the consumers support this policy, but one thing most consumers complain is that the ban of free plastic bags brings them some inconvenience. I found some responds from the consumers’ opinions online. According to the GOV.cn “I think (the ban) will help improve the environment. When I go shopping, I would prefer taking a fabric bag with me rather than buying a plastic one from the shop," said Jing Ruihong, a 46-year-old accountant in Beijing. ‘‘If we can reduce waste and save resources, then it’s good both for us and the whole world,’’ said college student Xu Lixian; Xu, the college student, said “the move showed China was serious about joining global efforts to stem environmental deterioration.” ‘‘I think this really shows that China is being a responsible country,’’ said the 21-year-old. These responds show the positive voices of consumers. However, according to JIYAO XUN, based on the online survey that conducted by the ‘China Environmental Awareness Program’, some consumer reported that they are appreciated and supported the spirit of the policy but they are still uncomfortable with the inconvenience caused, while some suggest manufacture should offer better alternative forms of carrier bags instead of emphasizing the pay for the thick plastic bags. In the survey, many consumers also critique the media only present the information of this policy in a top-down manner, which turned consumers into information receivers, while concerns and confusions remained unanswered.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=43385627&site=ehost-live
http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2008-01/08/content_852879.htm

Generally, I insist that this environmental policy is in some degree beneficial for the environment. According to Yingling Lu, “Reports note that use of plastic bags in supermarkets in southern Guangzou City has dropped by nearly half since June 1 2008, and some supermarkets in Beijing use as few as one-tenth the numbers of bags as before the ban.” From the CCTV news report on TV, the manager of one of the supermarket in Xian said that there was 82% decrease of the use of plastic one week after the ban of this policy. Besides, according to the GOV.cn, Dong Jinshi, vice chairman of the Waste Plastics Recycling Committee of China Plastics Processing Industry Association (WPRC-CPPIA) said the ban would cut use of plastics bags by more than 60 percent and raise the recycling rate of one-time plastic bags. As Yingling Lu reports, “As pressures on the environment and natural resources continue to rise, it is better to have smart government policies that guide consumer habits, rather than waiting for the market to force these changes. Simply relying on the market and on individual behavior may bring too little too late”. I tend to agree with this opinion, I would say especially for China which have such a huge population and most Chinese are addicted using plastic bags and have less awareness of the serious of the plastic pollution, it is indeed very necessary to have a policy to help guide and even reinforce the consumers to change their behaviors.

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5808

http://english.gov.cn/2008-01/09/content_853755.htm


However, as I just mentioned, this environmental policy has some misinterpretations that still needed to be improved. On the other hand, I would like to say that the government can not only rely on the policy gestures or punishments excessively rather than public education. According to Duncan, “Chinese press reports in early June highlighted one case in which a pregnant woman who wished not to use a plastic bag had been physically accosted by a shop owner demanding that she buy one to carry her goods.” As the action of the shop owner, I will say this environmental policy lacks of communicating the important goal of reducing the needless waste buy over-underlying the “polluter must pay”. Duncan points out that “In general, China’s public education on environmental principles remains rudimentary.” Personally, I agree with this opinion. I would say it is not enough to just focus on the policy, the government also need provide the environmental knowledge with a more detailed explanation, further education to the public with more interactive means of media communication, such as internet, blogger and mobile services. In addition, the government should come out with the guidance on green bag manufacturing and encourage the companies to change the plastic industry structure with the use of advanced technology. Government should also encourage the retails to be more initiative, rewarding consumers for their green behavior with indirect financial incentives. “According to JIYAO XUN, green clubcard points in Tesco, UK, this can gradually change people’s attitude from “I was asked to be green’ or “I was made to be green’ to ‘I want to be green.’” With the increase of the public consciousness of environmental friendly, consumers will change their behavior and perception of using the bags. I believe that only by winning people’s hearts and minds can we see the full power of this environmental policy.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=32779729&site=ehost-live
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=43385627&site=ehost-live

References:
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5808

http://english.gov.cn/2008-01/09/content_853755.htm
http://www.gov.cn/zwgk/2008-01/08/content_852879.htm

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=32779729&site=ehost-l ive
http://www.seattlebagtax.org/china.html



JIYAO, XUN. "BAG BAN: CHINA'S GREEN REVOLUTION?." Retail Digest (2009): 16-19. Business Source Premier. EBSCO. Web. 10 May 2010.
Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=43385627&site=ehost-live
"ASIA: Plastic Bags Sacked." Earth Island Journal 23.1 (2008): 6. Environment Complete. EBSCO. Web. 10 May 2010.
Additional Information:
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eih&AN=31443986&site=ehost-live


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgTXgPtJiQg

The Dasani Plant Bottled Water: Can you feel more environmental friendly when drinking bottled water?

Here is the new print green advertisement of Dasani Plant Bottle Water, and it is taking place in the March issue 2010 of some magazines like Glamour and wired.

http://dasani.com/

http://dasani.com/greencap/

This green advertising of Dasani is created to promote Coca cola’s new revolution of using the Plant Bottled instead of the traditional Pet plastic bottles, which indicates that Coca-Cola is making an effort to reduce their contribution to the negative environmental impacts of using plastic bottles. The item of this advertisement is the “plant bottled water”. I think the use of bottle water is one of the serious environmental problems in America. It is said that only about 20 percent of the 34.6 billion single-serving plastic water bottles bought in the US every year actually make it to the recycling plant. So, the reason why Coco Cola Company comes out with this new green idea is they are trying to improve the bottled water industry in US. My first impression of this advertising is nature, green and simply. But when I look deeply into the written messages, I feel kind of doubt about the green information of this “Plant Bottle”.

I think the main target audience of this green print advertisement is more likely for those people who are following a sustainable and ecologically friendly lifestyle And people who are caring about the environment as well as having the motivation to protect the environment; especially those who liking trying new things and having the sense of fashionable staffs, since this advertisement is put in the fashionable magazine like Glamour. On the other hand, according to Maslow’s hierarchy of need, I think this advertisement is also used to target the self-actualization need of consumers, because this advertisement only use the product image with a dewy leaf of the green plant instead of using a image of person or other situations. So, it is like consumer who buys this product is because they believe this product is good for the environment and believe what they do is right, but not because of their social needs or physological needs.
The general ambience of this advertisement is pretty simple and clear. It uses the method of simply putting the new Dasani Plant Bottle product into the centre of the natural green leaf with clear water drops on it and topped off with a bright green plastic cap with the natural white background. This only image is clearly representing theme of this advertisement, which means what the company is promoting is the plant bottle, is an attitude of protecting the environment but not the water itself. I think this advertisement use the good combination of color white, blue and green. These three colors are all popular terms can be all associated with the environmental theme as well. The color of the background is white color, which represents purified, clean, simple and nature. I think the associations with these three colors are sufficient for creating consumers’ likeliness towards the plant bottle. The use of the recycle symbol vividly represents this plant bottle is still 100% recycle, which emphasizes the benefit and innovation of this new bottled water.

About the written messages of this green advertisement, at the up corner, the advertiser is highlighting the words “Better by design”, which means the DASANI is taking steps to reduce impact on the planet with a major innovation in bottle change. I think “Better by design” is the message of this product that the company would like consumer to remember. The language of written messages at the button of the corner provides information as well try to generate some kind of emotional response. For example “The pure, crisp, taste of DASANI now comes in a better bottle. Made from up to 30% plant based materials and still a 100% recyclable bottle”; “Available now in the Western US”; as well as the website address of DASANI. These should be considered as information message. Providing the website address on this green advertisement can motivate people to go to the company home page to see more detailed information about the product and, and it is also a way of promoting the brand. “Plant Bottle packaging brings you fresh-tasting water in a bottle designed with a planet in mind.” This one is using the emotional appeal to persuade people that the design of this plant bottle is based on the concern of the environment. What’s more, I also think the copywriter use the technique of “respect to the nature”. Since the company knows the target audiences have the attitude of protecting the environment, they are trying to claim that they are trying best to come out with this plant bottle to reduce the harm of environment in order to gain the preference from the consumers. On the other hand, the copy writer also uses the “control empowerment of technology” technique, trying to claim that with the use of advanced technology, the DASANI now is able to save the environment.

However, looking closer for the written messages, I found there are some green washing indexes. Based on the consideration of the written messages, I feel like the company of DASANI is trying to promote the idea that drinking bottled water out of a plant bottle is environmentally friendly, but the reality is that putting a stop to purchasing and using bottled water would be the most effective “green” method. It seems like this advertisement is trying to encourage more and more consumers to buy bottle water. But for new consumer who did not buy bottle water before, this shift of perception will increase the harm to the environment, since more plastic will be made. The second tricking message I would like to point out is “up to 30%” made from plant”, which could differ from 1%-30%; it could be 10%. 5% or 1%. We don’t really know.

In the DASANI website, I found that after this plant bottle product, Dasani start running campaigns and promotional efforts like “Green Cap”; “Ocean Conversation event” in order to increase the public awareness of protecting the environment. So, I would say although the product is not entirely eco-friendly, but the company still encouraging efforts that can substantially reduce the bad impacts on the environment.

EnvironmentalNews Analysis----- "Climate’ fix’ could poison sea life”

News link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8569351.stm


Reporter information link: http://www.gmfus.org/brusselsforum/template/bio_detail.cfm?id=140


"The scientific team deployed their instruments in open water"



This piece of environmental news was published on 16 March 2010 by Richard Black who is the environment correspondent of BBC News. First of all, when I read the headline of this news, I felt like the news article talks about how fixing the environment may actually be toxic to sea life. Since the author adds the single quote of the fix, I feel that the way of fixing the climate had the bad influence of the sea life. It also helps to set the tone for the piece by making the reader feel that there is a struggle going on. The word “could” express the undetermined nature of this issue.

Personally, I think the structure of the article is well-organized and logical. The news is separated into two main parts with the highlighted words. In the first part, at the beginning of the article, the author summary the main idea of this piece of story, that is, a story has found that “fertilizing the ocean with iron to absorb carbon dioxide could lead to the increase of concentration of a chemical that can kill marine mammals.” I think it is reasonable and clear to point out the theme of the news at the very beginning, which can give the reader general idea of what is the environmental problem of this article in the short time and may help them easier to understand in the following explanation. After that the author indicates the conflict of the news, that is ,some people hold the belief that adding tonners of iron to the oceans can reduce the atmospheric greenhouse gas carbon dioxide to lesson global warming, which has been touted as a “climate fix”. While there is a study found that adding the ocean with iron to absorb carbon dioxide could increase concentrations of toxic chemical that can kill marine mammals.I think the conflict of these two views is clear, but there is no additional information of what the "study"is , which is not that credible.

Then the authors explain the background of the toxin-domic, which first came to noticed in the late 1980s as the cause of amnesica shellfish poisoning, as well as the introduction of how this kind of toxic produced by the algae of the genus pseudonitzschia, which make reader better understand the issue. However, the second part of the news is “Carbon focus”. Personally, I think the sub-headline is not closely related to the main content of the second part. Because in the second part, the report is more likely to focus on the factual information and example about the relationship among iron, pseudonitzschia algae and domic acid to explain how these chemical process have different degrees of influences on the different kinds of sea life animals, like seals, pelicans, harbour porpoises and sea lion, rather than focus on the carbon.

Personally, as a whole, I think this news is objectivity; there are news sources from “National Academy of Sciences”;“experiment result from the studies conducted around Ocean Station Papa”;“Ailsa Hall, deputy director of the Sea Mammal Research Institute at St Andrews University in Scotland”; “Major investigation”;“Spokesman of company-Climos” as well as “Scientist William Cochalan from San Francisco State University”. Almost all the sources are factual without the reporter’s own personal idea and as you can see, the sources are from different groups of people, which make the newspaper more objective and reality. Although in the last third paragraph, the reporter is sought of saying his point of view to call for scientist and regulators to pay attention to the impact on sea life when deciding whether to allow further studies of deployment, it is not over personal. Besides, at the second part of the news, he also reports the voice of the company-Climos that would like to deploy the chemical objectively. I believe the reporter does a good job to maintain the objectivity of the conflict in this environmental news.

In conclusion, I feel like the reporter is slightly weight towards the negative effect of the chemical and kind of representing the scientist-Williom Cochlan’s voice. Because at the end of the story, the author use the quote from the scientist, William Cochlan,, that “If the end goal is to use it to fight climate warming, then we have to understand the consequences for marine life.” Actually, this quote is also used around the beginning paragraphs within the “frame”. Moreover, the reporter put the picture of “the scientific team deployed their instruments in open water” of Willam Cochlan. I feel like the author is tending to agree the view of William, trying to claim that text before take action, as well as, in the future on other project, it is necessary to make sure that no harmful for marine sea life as well.

Media and globalization confict

Hi~I am kiki zheng. I am taking the media and globalization confict in Hamline University.

I would like to share what I learn from the class with u.....