Case Study: The Plastics Industry vs.

Conservationists
The Situation
The plastics industry is facing increasing pressure from environmental activists about various types of plastic due to claims about marine debris, under the banner of sustainability. There is an effort to ban certain types of plastic, which creates uncertainty in the market and provides no real environmental benefit. These claims make it difficult for users to reliably plan for using different kinds of plastics and it also creates problems for a lot of groups within the industry, including food-service. During the past decade, marine debris has become a hot-button issue in California, with blame focused on the entire plastics industry. Polystyrene foam in particular has become the scapegoat for modern consumer waste and a target for environmental groups who promote banning foam as an effective policy tool for protecting the environment. Most of these policies have focused on banning foam in take-out restaurants and requiring the use of biodegradable materials, which are significantly more expensive. Restaurant owners carefully evaluate the materials they use for takeout. They choose polystyrene foam because it is the only product that insulates to keep cold food cold, and hot food hot. Many small restaurants operate on a very small margin and this type of legislation could cause significant financial burdens. These bans have been unsuccessful thus far because many local restaurant owners have communicated their concerns to their representatives. Polystyrene foam, often referred to by its Dow Trademark name Styrofoam, is the material used to make items like coffee cups, disposable coolers or cushioning material in packaging. Virtually all plastic food and beverage containers are labeled with a resin code (1-7, ABS) identifying the type of polymer the container is made of. Recently, many recycling facilities in Los Angeles and the surrounding areas have begun to accept all plastics with #1-#7 for recycling, including polystyrene foam.

The Problem
The plastic industry opposes polystyrene bans because they are weak policy tools. The result is simply switching one form of litter for a more expensive form of litter. Because of the widespread misperceptions of plastic and foam, the industry must respond with positive solutions when responding directly to these threats. As a result, the solutions should work indirectly to reframe the issue. Because of the misperceptions about plastic/foam, the industry must be very careful to respond with positive solutions when responding directly to threats. The solution is to work indirectly through grassroots efforts and public engagement.

Past Projects
Interns have been hired each summer for several years, with the task of encouraging and collecting letters from restaurant owners asking their representatives to oppose ban legislation. Every year our supervisors challenge the interns to create a lasting project or program to promote a similar cause. Past interns developed a Rinse and Recycle Your Foam at Home program, in which restaurants encourage their customers to recycle. This program currently has more than 800 member restaurants. Last year, the interns created a testimonial video from restaurant owners explaining their need for foam. Nearly every legislative year brings new foam legislation. This years bill, SB529, was tabled in early June 2013, so the industry had a unique opportunity to go on the offensive and promote proactive solutions for the issue of marine debris, rather than continually defending against potential bans.

The Opportunity
What many people dont know is that foam is now recyclable in Los Angeles and the surrounding area. There is actually a high demand for the recycled polystyrene from companies using it as an alternative for wood in consumer products. Increasing the use of recycled polystyrene is a win win for conservationists as well as the plastics industry. Without direct opposition, the foam industry has an opportunity to promote ideas that support the environment without demonizing plastic. If we do not capitalize on this opportunity, the industry will remain on the defensive until a foam ban inevitably passes. Unlike typical PR campaigns, the ACC doesnt benefit from a public profile with regard to this issue, so they prefer to remain outwardly silent. Their ultimate goal is to discredit bans as effective policy tools and promote recycling efforts and real solutions to the marine debris issue. As Richard Edelman said, We can have a major impact in getting our clients engaged in solving societal problems while generating a better bottom line for shareholders. [1] With the ban tabled, we decided to approach the issue from a different perspective by using public engagement to call the youth of California to action. In researching alternative solutions, we decided the best course of action was to develop a recycling and litter abatement education program for elementary-age children to promote green lifestyles. We chose this demographic because their opinions are malleable and they are not already set in habits and lifestyles. Our education program needed to fulfill two objectives: We wanted to create solutions: According to the Journal of Environmental Education, Solid waste curricula focus mainly on knowledge and include, to a lesser extent, attitude change and action strategies."[2] There is a lot of talk about problems in the environment but very few

solutions discussed or attempted. Recycling curriculum needs to focus more on solutions and action to fix the problem. We wanted to provide a sense of responsibility: Data shows that if given the education and instruction, children feel connected to the environment take responsibility for its cleanliness. "Children who feel they have control over and responsibility for their own actions and behaviors have strong proenvironmental attitudes."[3] We want to foster these attitudes. We want to harness the power of the next generation. "Teaching kids and teenagers about recycling and familiarizing them with the process of setting up recycling infrastructure will ensure that the next generation can double or even triple current recycling rates."[4][5] The future generation is more likely to keep the environment clean if they recognize their impact on the planet.

An Education Program
We had the unique opportunity to partner with Friends of the Los Angeles River (FoLAR), a local nonprofit organization, in the early stages of our program development. After working with them on the LA River cleanup, we brought the idea of a recycling education program to the education director. She was excited to have us team up with FoLAR at their river field trips. One of FoLARs objectives is to teach kids about how they are connected to the river and its watershed. We developed a mutual relationship because much of our curriculum is focused on teaching kids to be conscious of the garbage they create and to dispose of it properly so it doesnt end up in the storm drains and eventually the rivers and ocean. We developed five lesson plans of varying lengths, geared toward teaching elementary school children about the importance of recycling and properly disposing of waste. In the lessons, we talk specifically about the recyclability of polystyrene, which many people do not know. We met our goal of educating 500 children within two months. More than 20 of the children we educated even took matters into their own hands by writing letters to the Los Angeles River Rangers asking for recycling bins in Marsh Park.

Clean Up California
The main focus of Clean Up California is on summer education programs taught by interns. Our key method of measuring the success of our program is through the amount of students taught every summer. Future interns will conduct Clean Up California presentations to various summer camps and schools. We already have connections with FoLARs river trips, Arroyo Seco's summer camps and Kids Reading To Succeed, which are projected to reach more than three thousand students. We plan to expand the program once Clean Up California has a new partner. In order to be effective on a large scale, we needed to expand our curriculum beyond FoLAR. We wanted to reach out to teachers in classrooms in other settings and other environmental groups. We created Clean Up California: a full education program that teaches about the importance of properly disposing of waste, including cleaning and recycling foam. We created a website (cleanupcalifornia.com) that included lesson plans,

instructional videos and information about recycling. With this site, we hope to see our curriculum adopted by educators in the Los Angeles area. To encourage teachers to use our lessons, we formatted the plans in a way that is familiar to them. We also researched how our lessons meet state curriculum requirements and included this information with each lesson plan. Because of financial concerns, the ACC only hires interns during the summer. However, we did not want to put the program on hold during the school year so we made it possible to teachers to request handouts/assignments, a Clean Up California presenter, or to ask any questions about the program on our contact form. One of the questions in the contact form, asks teachers to report how many students they plan to teach. We explain that unless we can demonstrate the number of students we reach, we will be unable to provide these services to educators in the future. By appealing to their self-interest, we hope to gain accurate data illustrating our reach. We will then create a database to show policymakers that promoting positive and proactive solutions is more effective than promoting bans.

A New Face
For Clean Up California to continue, we must find a host organization to adopt the program. Future interns will be able to implement the program and market it to organizations during the summer, but having an owner with environmental interests is the most genuine way to market the education program throughout the year. This education program fulfills several goals and objectives. It promotes recycling as a positive solution to the marine debris issue and helps broaden the education materials of our key stakeholders. 2. Getting another program within the City of LA trash and stormwater network also reinforces our goal of public engagement by affecting a more diverse group of people. 3. Finally, the program serves as an example of what the plastics industry is doing to solve the problem of marine debris. We hope that city staff and elected officials will also be engaged and encouraged to promote proactive solutions rather than the traditional legislation bans, as Clean Up California is adopted by more groups, The solution lies in the principle of shared value, which involves creating economic value in a way that also creates value for society by addressing its needs and challenges. Businesses must reconnect company success with social progress.[6]
[1] Richard Edelman, 6 a.m. Blog , The New Mandate For The Communicator June 23, 2013. [2] The Journal of Environmental Education Volume 24, Issue 3, 1993. [3] Amy Malkus & Lynn Musser, Environmental Concern in School-Age Children, 1997 [4] 1800recycling.org, http://1800recycling.com/2011/05/reduce-reuse-reteach-necessity-recycling-education/ [5] Urbanmining.org, http://urbanmining.org/2011/06/17/reduce-reuse-reteach-the-necessity-of-recyclingeducation/login_auth.asp [6] Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb 2011, Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer

1.