Anda di halaman 1dari 54

A STUDY ON THE PRELIMINARY IMPACTS OF CITY ORDINANCE 2009-370 BANNING/REGULATING THE USE OF PLASTIC BAGS IN ANTIPOLO CITY

March 2012

By Grace P. Sapuay

DEDICATION This paper is dedicated to the people of Antipolo City. May their

awareness on environmental issues and the protection of their city increase more so that they will leave a legacy of a clean and orderly city, with properly managed waste; so that the next generations will be able to inherit a city which is sustainably managed by environmentally and

socially conscious waste.

populace who cling

to

a

concept of

a world

free

of

ABSTRACT

Among the prevalent local and national issues on solid waste management is the burgeoning problem of plastic litter all over the country. Local governments as well as national legislative bodies are seeking ways to minimize if not to eliminate plastics in solid waste. Recently, Antipolo City implemented a local ordinance regulating/banning the use of plastic bags in the commercial sector. In order to find out the effectiveness of such ordinance in bringing about desired behavioural change a survey was undertaken in the main wet and dry public market of Antipolo City. The survey hoped to determine the initial effects of the ban on the solid waste situation in the city and on the attitudes of the citizens in the community towards the ban and towards the environment. The data gathered survey was analyzed using the Predictive Analysis Software (PASW) Statistics (SPSS version 18). The results indicated positive impact of the ban on the use of plastic bags on solid waste situation of the city as well as on the attitude and behaviour of the constituency as proven by higher percentage of those favouring the ordinance and the bringing of reusable bags when shopping. This was due to strict implementation of the ban amidst the difficulty of gaining its acceptance to those primarily affected. This goes to show that strict implementation can serve as a key to minimization of plastics and perhaps consequently effective management of solid waste.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author is forever grateful to the following people invaluable contribution to this research:

who have made

  • 1. Hon. Nilo Leyble, Mayor of Antipolo City

  • 2. Mr. Melvin A. Cruz, City Administrator of Antipolo (and his staff)

  • 3. Ms. Jocelyn Masangkay, Head of the City Ecological Solid Waste Management Office (and her staff)

  • 4. Mr. Cecilio Panganiban, Public Market Administrator

  • 5. Mr. Jun Gamat of the City Market Office (and his staff)

  • 6. Ms. Maricel G. Rodriguez, Enumerator

  • 7. Ms. Erna E. Canale, Enumerator

  • 8. Mr. Rodel Camonas, Enumerator

  • 9. All participants in the survey

    • 10. Ms. Cora Jose

    • 11. Engr. Samuel Sapuay

    • 12. Prof. Mayu Munarriz (class adviser, Plan 299)

    • 13. Prof. Kevin Carl Santos (U.P. School of Statisitics)

    • 14. Prof. Mark Anthony Javelosa (U.P. School of Statistics)

    • 15. Mr. Tony Gangan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

1

  • 1.1 Introduction

1

  • 1.2 Objectives/Aims Of The Study

2

  • 1.3 Significance Of The Study

2

  • 1.4 Scope and Limitations

3

CHAPTER II : REVIEW OF LITERATURE

4

CHAPTER III : FRAMEWORK AND CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM

9

CHAPTER IV : METHODOLOGY

12

  • 4.1 Significance of the Survey

12

  • 4.2 Survey Area

12

  • 4.3 Research Design

12

  • 4.3.1. Data Collection Methodology

12

  • 4.3.2. Survey Description

13

  • 4.3.3. Statistical Design

14

CHAPTER V : FINDINGS

16

  • 5.1 Description of the Study Area

16

  • 5.2 Results of the survey

18

  • 5.2.1 Profile of Participants

19

  • 5.2.2 Knowledge and Awareness

22

  • 5.2.3 Attitudes/Behaviour towards the Ban

24

  • 5.2.4 Practices

29

  • 5.2.5 Waste Segregation Practices

33

  • 5.2.6 Statistical Analysis

35

CHAPTER VI : CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

41

REFERENCES

AUTHOR’S BIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

List of Figure

Figure 1: Framework and Conceptual Diagram of the Study

11

Figure 2: Areal Map of Antipolo Public Market (Google Earth)

17

Figure 3: Close up View of Antipolo Public Market (Google

17

Figure 4: Campaign Posters Displayed in Public Places in Antipolo City

24

Figure 5: Responses on Bringing Reusable Bags to Shopping

25

Figure 6: Preferrence for Current Ordinance and Willingness of Shoppers

to Buy Ecobags or Reusable Bags

26

Figure 7: Response on Preference to Reusable Bag Over Disposable Containers/Bags

27

33

Level of Awareness in Urban Environment Management

34

Figure 10: Shop-owners’ Practice of Waste Segregation at Home

34

List of Tables

 

19

Table 1 : Profile of Shop-owners Participants in the Survey Table 2 : Profile of Shoppers Participants in the Survey

21

23

Table 4 : Shoppers’ Comments on Buying their Own Reusable Bags

28

Table 5 : Shop-owners’ Opinions Regarding the Banning of Plastic Bags

29

Table 6 : Frequency and Percentage of Shoppers and Shop-owners Still

Using Plastic Bags

30

Table 7 : Responses of Shop-owners to Whether Customers were Reduced

after the Implementation of the Ordinance

31

Table 8 : Responses on the Reduction of Littering after the

Implementation of the Ban on Plastic Bags

32

36

Table 10 : Age Group Vs. Satisfaction with Ordinance

37

38

Table 12 : Educational Attainment vs. Satisfaction with Ordinance

38

Table 13 : Income Category Vs. Choice of Carryout Container

39

40

CHAPTER I :

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

1.1 Introduction

Solid waste is among the major issues facing the Philippine society

today. More than ten (10) years after RA 9003 (The Ecological Solid

Waste Management Act 2001) has been signed into law, littering of solid

waste, most notably plastic bags, remain unabated. People’s behaviour

towards solid waste has not changed. Most local government units have

not complied with the required engineered sanitary landfill (ESLF)

mandated by law and waste segregation is being done minimally all over

the country.

It is said that there is an on-going plastic bags pandemic 1 , and the

following are some of the facts about plastic bags:

1) Over 1 trillion plastic bags are used annually all over the world;

2) About 1 million plastic bags are used every minute;

3) A single plastic bag can take 2,000 years to degrade;

4) More than 3.5 million tons of plastic bags, sacks, and wraps

were discarded in 2008.

In the Philippines local initiatives had been launched to find

solutions to these issues. One of these initiatives was undertaken by the

City of Antipolo when it promulgated a local ordinance banning the use of

1 Facts about plastic bags pandemic, http://www.reuseit.com/learn-more/top-facts/plastic-bag-facts (Accessed Nov. 23, 2011)

plastic bags in commercial establishments. This research was done to

determine in general if the ban on the use of plastic bags was successful

in bringing about the desired change.

  • 1.2 Objectives/Aims Of The Study

The proposed study has the following objectives:

  • a) To determine the initial impacts of the plastic bags ban in terms of:

    • i) Improvement of the solid waste situation in

ii)

Antipolo City;

The reactions of people on the implementation of

the ban.

  • b) To determine the effects of the ban in terms of:

    • i) Changes in the behaviour of the people towards management of solid waste;

ii)

Changes in the behaviour of the citizens towards

environmental awareness.

  • 1.3 Significance Of The Study

While a few Local Government Units (LGUs) have made a move to

impose a ban on the use of plastic carryout bags, there is still an on-going

deliberation in the

Congress as well

as

in

the

Senate

regarding the

banning of plastic bags. Currently, the process is moving towards

regulation of plastic bags (production and use) instead of ban on their

use. The results of this study will help determine whether a ban is

effective in the improvement of solid waste situation in the country as

might be exemplified by Antipolo City.

  • 1.4 Scope and Limitations

This research aims to study only the initial impacts of the

implementation of the plastic bags ban. As such, it will be limited only to

the preliminary determination of its effects for three months starting

November 2011 until February 2012. It will not be concerned with waste

segregation policies but will be limited only to the initial effects of the ban

on the solid waste situation in the city and on the attitudes of the citizens

in the community towards the ban and towards the environment.

Since the time to study the initial impact period is very short (one

month only); hence, the survey area will be limited to the main wet and

dry public market of Antipolo, which is located in the Poblacion.

CHAPTER II :

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Legislation banning the use of plastic is a fairly recent development

in the Philippines. No research has yet been conducted in the country as

regards to its success, behavioural changes of the citizens or

improvement in solid waste management. With the dearth of material in

the library, literatures for this study were sourced from the internet,

which can be easily accessed within less than a second through the search

engine Google 2 . It has been known that the convenience of using plastic

bags has its accompanying detrimental effects to the environment, which

is the main reason for the creation of policies regulating such use. Begum

I (undated) extensively tackled the lifecycle of plastics and the ecological

2 The key words “plastic bags ban ordinance” yielded 218,000 results within 0.08 seconds. The selection was scanned and only those materials pertinent to this study, which focus primarily on researches regarding banning of plastic bags and its effects on the state of solid waste management as well as the behaviour of people towards the ban and towards solid waste particularly plastic bags, were selected and downloaded for review. Over seventeen (17) articles were chosen and these were further screened to come down with a total of five (5) pertinent literatures, three (3) of which are published in international journals, while two (2) are discussion papers. Of the five (5) papers selected, three (3) papers directly deal with the results of the ban and its effect on the behaviour of consumers as well as on the environment while two (2) papers deal with the adverse effects of plastics on the environment. The papers were chosen for their relevance to the proposed research as well as their importance in providing some insights on how such a research might be conducted. They also provided some ideas on the rates of success as well as sustainability in terms of the reduction of plastic usage and waste production in relation to such policies.

consequences of its disposal on the environment particularly in India. The

author has also included in her discussion some policy instruments which

are being used all over the world especially the developing world, limiting

the use of plastic bags in order to manage plastic wastes. Ireland and

Australia, in particular have used these policy instruments with much

success. A levy on plastic bags at 0.15 Euro per bag in retail outlets

except fresh produce (which levies bags at 0.70 euro) resulted in a 90%

decrease in the use of disposable plastic bags in Ireland. Awareness

campaigns backing a Voluntary Code of Practice (which serves as warning

to retailers in Australia that a 25-cent levy will be enforced by 2005 if the

50% reduction target was not met) was able to reduce plastic bag

consumption by 22% in 2002.

A survey was conducted by Legese Adane and Diriba Muleta (2011)

particularly concerning the use, disposal and impacts of plastic bags on

the environment in Jimma City, Southwestern Ethiopia in order to assess

the impacts of plastic bags on the environment of the aforementioned

city. The study consisted of a survey on who uses the plastic bags and

how many of the respondents use plastic bags, how they dispose of such

bags after use and determined the impacts of plastic bags waste on the

surroundings around Jimma City. The results indicated a high proportion

of population using plastic bags because of affordability (cheap) and easy

availability. The study also found that open dumping is the manner of

disposal practiced widely by the respondents in the survey and that such

practices resulted in blockage of sewers and deterioration of the natural

beauty of the environment in their area. The authors found that a city

level legislation is necessary in curbing the use of plastic bags and end

the practice of distribution of free plastic bags by retailers as well as

manage plastic waste littering the streets of the City of Jimma.

Such legislations against the free use of plastic bags aim to manage

production and the rampant utilization of plastic bags in order to reduce

plastic bags waste, which were found littering the streets, canals, and all

other bodies of water. After a policy in China was implemented limiting

the use of free plastic bags from retailers to consumers in 2008 Xiufeng

Xing (2009) studied the trend consumer behaviour towards the use of

plastic bags as well as the environmental awareness of the public with

regards to the use of plastics and the impact of the ban, putting emphasis

on the results following imposition of the ban. The author noted that after

the policy took effect, it was seen that there has been a decrease in the

use of plastic bags in the supermarkets and that the total use of plastic

bags was reduced to roughly two-thirds of its previous use. However, this

policy seems difficult to implement in markets wherein traders were found

to use national standard plastic bags for inspection while using the

flimsier (illegal) type for regular use. In another study on the same policy

conducted by Chan-Halbrendt, et al, (2009) who measured the

preferences of residents in Tianjin, China between non-degradable plastic

bags and degradable non-plastic materials through a Conjoint Choice

Experiment (CCE), which is based on the idea that any good can be

described in terms of its attributes or characteristics and level of these

attributes. This was also used to explore the willingness of consumers to

pay for plastic carryout bags. Results of the study showed a preference

for bags which are made from materials other than non-degradable

plastic bags if such are sold cheaper. However, the experiment showed

that there are preference distinctions among age groups, which can be

exploited to devise strategies in promoting the effective implementation

of the policy. The researchers found that the policy has been carried for

over a year with some success, reducing the consumption of plastic bags

by as much as 66%.

Joining the growing number of countries creating tax levies as a

policy instrument to regulate the use of plastic bags is Botswana. In

assessing the effect of such legislation on the environment Johane

Dikgang and Martine Visser (2010) studied the behavioural responses of

people in Botswana towards plastic bags tax to curb demand on the use

of plastic bags. By analysing the sensitivity of consumers to the plastic

bags charges, the authors found out that the increase in the plastic bags

levy resulted in a sharp decline of consumption of plastic bags in shopping

per 1,000 BWP (Botswana Pulas) of retail purchases and the use of plastic

bags dropped to 24% weeks after the policy was implemented. The low-

income retailers experienced the steepest decline in consumption at 42%

followed by the high-income retailer at 39%. In comparing the effects of

such legislations in Ireland and South Africa, the authors found that

higher levies on plastic bags sustains the decrease in plastic shopping

bags demand and predicted that a high levy on plastic shopping bags in

Botswana will sustain such environmental effect.

In summary, the findings of the researchers have shown that

policies banning the use of free plastic bags as well as putting a levy on

plastic bags can help in limiting the use of plastic bags, consequently

reducing plastic waste in the areas of study. The studies, however, were

generally confined to consumer purchases in big supermarkets and did

not include those in the countryside, which was noted to have bigger use

of disposable plastic bags.

CHAPTER III :

FRAMEWORK AND CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM

During the height of typhoon Ondoy, Metro Manila and the outlying

provinces were submerged in the flood for many days. Plastic bags were

the most noticeable solid waste found floating in the flood and clogging

the waterways. The plastic bags were, therefore, blamed as the cause of

the sluggishness of the flow of floodwaters in moving towards the

watercourses, which took so long to recede, inundating many

communities for several days. In view of this, some LGUs have made the

move to legislate ordinances banning the use of plastic bags in their

localities. Among them was Antipolo City, which promulgated City

Ordinance 2009-370. After a two-year moratorium, the ordinance is now

being implemented starting November 2011.

The study expects to find positive impacts of the imposition of the

ban, which is meant to improve the solid waste situation in the city,

similar to the findings of the studies conducted as mentioned in the

literature reviewed.

In compliance with the ordinance, it is expected that supermarkets

and public markets in the city will be using paper bags instead of plastic

bags and that there will be a decrease in the use of plastic bags in public

markets as well as in the supermarkets where the dry goods are no

longer allowed to be carried in plastic bags. Instead, paper bags are to be

used for this purpose. Due to this, the consumers are expected to use

plastic bags less frequently and that, since traders in the city will no

longer use plastic bags. Hence, whatever plastic bags the consumers use

might be sourced outside Antipolo, where for example they are given

plastic bags from supermarkets in places where there is no such

ordinance.

As an initial reaction to the ban, it is expected to find a part of the

population still using plastic bags, though less frequently since IEC may

not yet be that thorough, or that some who shop from neighbouring

localities without such a ban would be carrying their goods in plastic

carryout bags. Others will have opted to use reusable bags that are sold

in the markets. Still others will be found no longer using plastic bags since

reusable bags area available and that these consumers might have

agreed that the ban is good so they tend to follow not just the ordinance

but their environmental conscience as well. These preliminary impacts are

expected to cause environmental awareness among the consumer

population such that they will also start to segregate their solid waste at

home since it has already been declared (through RA 9003) that they

must segregate their waste. At this point people will start to realize that

the ban on plastics is another step to better solid waste management.

Hence, most of them might start disposing their plastic bags and other

waste properly. The resulting effect will be a reduction in the volume of

plastic waste in the city. Therefore, it is highly expected that the solid

waste situation in the city has been greatly improved. This can be better

expressed in the following diagram, and which was used as framework of

the study:

PLASTIC BAGS WASTE ORDINANCE BANNING THE USE OF PLASTIC BAGS IMPLEMENTATION Methods of Implementation (Fines/penalties) PRELIMINARY
PLASTIC BAGS WASTE
ORDINANCE BANNING THE USE OF PLASTIC BAGS
IMPLEMENTATION
Methods of Implementation (Fines/penalties)
PRELIMINARY IMPACTS
CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR
On
1.
STILL USE PLASTIC
BAGS
IN PUBLIC
Sources
2.
MARKETS
of plastic
NO LONGER USE
PLASTIC BAGS
3.
USE OF REUSABLE BAGS
DECREASE IN THE
USE OF PLASTIC
BAGS IN PUBLIC
MARKETS
ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS OF CONSUMERS
WASTE SEGREGATION AT HOME and PROPER DISPOSAL OF PLASTIC BAGS AND
OTHER WASTE IN PUBLIC MARKETS
REDUCED PLASTIC WASTE

Figure 1: Framework and Conceptual Diagram of the Study

CHAPTER IV :

METHODOLOGY

  • 4.1 Significance of the Survey

Surveys are significant in that they can be used to determine the

beliefs, attitude and behaviours towards prevailing trends, laws, and other

aspects in the community.

The results of the survey present the preliminary evaluation of a

policy (in this case the ban on plastic bags) which will give a glimpse at

how well the implementation is being carried out at the beginning of

implementation.

  • 4.2 Survey Area

Due to time and budgetary constraints, the survey was conducted in

one place, which is the major wet and dry public market along the main

thoroughfare of Antipolo City. Since this is the main public market, this a

one of places where most people come to do their shopping for their daily

needs and is where the ordinance is mostly implemented, also since the

office of the public market administrator holds office in the vicinity.

  • 4.3 Research Design

    • 4.3.1. Data Collection Methodology

Gathering of primary data was done through a survey and key

informant interviews with an actual ocular observation of the

surroundings. Secondary data, such as monitoring and accomplishment

reports, were gathered from the Environmental Services Office of Antipolo

City. Photo-documentation was conducted as part of the data or evidence

of outcome of the implementation of the legislation. Face-to-face and self-

administered interviews were done with the aid of semi-structured

questionnaires.

  • 4.3.2. Survey Description

An ocular inspection of the streets of the city as well as its

waterways was conducted to present a situational analysis and determine

the prevailing solid waste situation in the city. This was followed by

interviews at the chosen site.

Three groups or sectors will be surveyed for this study. The first

group was the implementers, the second group consisted of the vendors

or shopkeepers, and the third group consisted of the consumers.

Survey was done through either a face-to-face interview as well as

by distributing questionnaires to the selected respondents. A focused

interview was done for the 1 st group of respondents. The questionnaires

for the shop-owners were distributed among the market vendors and

retrieved after a few hours. The accomplishment rate of the

questionnaires was sixty per cent (60%). Some of the vendors were busy

with sales work and did not want to answer the questionnaires while some

of them simply did not want to answer the questionnaires and were not

returned.

  • 4.3.3. Statistical Design

A simple random sampling was conducted for interviewing the

shoppers. Sixty (60) samples were taken and interviewed using face-to-

face survey technique. This was done by randomly selecting shoppers.

Samples were selected at random at certain times of the day. For

example, twenty (20) samples were interviewed in the morning until

12:00 noon, twenty (20) samples were interviewed in the afternoon, and

another twenty (20) samples were interviewed early evening. This was

done to determine whether there is a difference among the shoppers at

certain times of the day.

For the shop-owners, convenience sampling was done since they

were busy with their businesses, such that only those willing to answer

the survey forms were interviewed while the others were given the forms

and retrieved after a few hours. Thirty (30) samples were gathered for

this study.

Key informants were also interviewed for this study in order to

determine the extent of implementation and how such implementation is

conducted within the entire LGU. For this purpose, the City Administrator,

the Public Market Administrator, as well as the head of the Ecological

Waste Management Office were interviewed. This was conducted by

visiting their respective offices. Secondary data were also requested from

their offices regarding solid waste as well as the ordinance.

CHAPTER V :

FINDINGS

  • 5.1 Description of the Study Area

The survey was conducted within the confines of Antipolo City’s

main public market, which is located two blocks away from the city hall.

The public market is a two-story establishment which houses dry goods

merchandise (clothing, home decors, cooking paraphernalia, trinkets,

etc.) on its second level. The meat and fish section, fresh fruits and

vegetables and all other ingredients for cooking as well as cooked foods

are located on the first floor of the public market.

Located in Bgy. San Roque, it occupies the entire block in the heart

of Antipolo along ML Quezon Street on the west, J. Sumulong Street on

the north, F. Manalo St. on the east, and J. Simeon Street on the south

(see areal views on the next page). The market is filled with people of all

walks of life during the day. It is busiest during the early morning until

12’o’clock noon and during late afternoon until eight o’clock in the

evening. This place was chosen to be the study site for the survey since

many people from various places in Antipolo come here to buy all sorts of

goods and merchandise and that this is the place most likely to be

impacted by the implementation of the ordinance.

Figure 2: Areal Map of Antipolo Public Market (Google Earth) Figure 3: Close up View of

Figure 2: Areal Map of Antipolo Public Market (Google Earth)

Figure 2: Areal Map of Antipolo Public Market (Google Earth) Figure 3: Close up View of

Figure 3: Close up View of Antipolo Public Market (Google Earth).

5.2

Results of the survey

The survey yielded two (2) types of data, numerical and categorical

(nominal). For such types of data, a Chi-square (X 2 ) statistic was used

here to compare the variables and to find out whether there exists any

relationship or correlation between these variables. The chi-square is used

to investigate whether distributions of categorical variables differ from

one another 3 . After Chi-square, a post test statistical method, Cramer’s V

was calculated to determine the strengths of association between the

variables tested. Cramer’s V coefficient 4 is useful for comparing multiple

X 2 -test statistics and is generalizable across contingency tables of varying

sizes and is mainly used to calculate associations using nominal data. To

describe the strength of association, Cramer’s V is described as having

values from 0 to 1 where >0.5 signifies high association while 0 to 0.1

has little or no association. Calculations for these values were done

through PASW. The software PASW Statistics (SPSS version 18)

(Predictive Analysis Software) is a program that can be used to analyse

data from surveys, tests, observations, and other data gathered. The

software can perform a variety of data analyses and presentation

functions. Features of the software include descriptive statistics such as

frequencies, percentage distribution, t-Test, X 2 -test among others. This

software can perform a variety of statistical computations, thus saving

time for the researcher in analysing the data gathered.

  • 5.2.1 Profile of Participants

The Profile of the participants is shown on Table 1 (shop-owners)

and Table 2 (shoppers) with the corresponding frequency and percentage

distribution of characteristics. The ages of the participants were grouped

into two, since the data was not very significant for those younger than

twenty (20) years old.

Table 1 : Profile of Shop-owners Participants in the Survey

Characteristics

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Age

   

<=20-29 years old

3

10.0

30-39

14

46.7

40 and over

13

43.3

Sex

   

Male

7

23.3

Female

23

76.7

Educational Attainment High School

12

40.0

College

18

60.0

Weekly income

   

P1,000-5999

18

60.0

P6,000-9,999

6

20.0

>P10,000

2

6.7

No answer

4

13.3

N Cases = 30

Thirty (30) shop-owners were interviewed for this study (Table 1),

all owning a stall or stalls inside the public market of Antipolo City. Of the

shop-owners who answered the survey forms, 10% were between the

ages of less than twenty (20) years old to twenty-nine (29) years old.

Most of the participants interviewed were within the age range of 30-39

years old (46.7%) while the rest were over 40 years old (about 43.3%).

Most of the thirty (30) participants interviewed were females, about

76.7%; while a smaller percentage, about 23.3%, were males.

More than half of the shop-owners who answered the survey

questionnaires finished college degree (about 60%), while 40% finished

high school/vocational school.

When asked about their weekly income, most of the shop-owners

(60%), stated they earn between P1,000-P5,999 pesos, while some of

them (20%) earn between P6,000-P9,999.00 and only a few (6.7%) earn

a weekly income of more than 10,000 pesos. About 13.3% did not state

their income in the survey questionnaires.

Table 2 below shows the profile of the shoppers interviewed for this

study. From this Table, it can be seen that 21.7% of the shoppers

interviewed were aged less than or equal to 29 years old, while 31.7%

were between 30-39 years old. It can be seen that the majority of

shoppers surveyed were 40 years old and over, comprising 46.7% of the

sample.

Although the participants were chosen at random, more female

shoppers were interviewed (71.7%), while the male shoppers comprise

only 28.3% of the sample. It cannot be concluded here that more females

do the shopping than males, however, it can be said that at the time of

sampling, more females arrived than males and thus, they were the ones

mostly interviewed for this purpose.

Table 2 : Profile of Shoppers Participants in the Survey

Characteristics

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Age

   

<=29

13

21.7

30-39

19

31.7

>=40

28

46.7

Sex

   

Male

17

28.3

Female

43

71.7

Educational Attainment Elementary

8

13.3

High School/Voc

34

56.6

College

18

30.0

Monthly Family Income

   

<4,999

16

26.7

5,000-9,999

20

33.3

>=P10,000

24

40.0

Occupation

   

Student

3

5.0

Gov’t Employee

1

1.7

Private Employee

10

16.7

Self-employed

10

16.7

Homemaker

24

40.0

Labourer

4

6.7

Others

7

11.7

No answer

1

1.7

N Cases = 60

When asked about their educational attainment, 56.6% of the

sample said they finished high school and/or vocational courses while

about 30% finished a college degree and only 13.3% of the respondents

finished elementary school.

Forty per cent (40%) of the sample belong to families earning an

income of more than Php10,000; 33.3% have a monthly family income of

PhP 5,000-PhP 9,999.00. About 26.7% said they earn a monthly income

of less than Php 4,999.00.

The cases belong to a diverse group of occupation wherein 40% are

mostly homemakers; 16.7% for both private employees and self-

employed/business owners; 5% are students, 1.7% works in a

government institution; 6.7% are labourers, while 11.7% are either

retired or work someplace else. Around 1.7% of the sample did not

specify their employment status.

  • 5.2.2 Knowledge and Awareness

The respondents were primarily asked whether they were aware of

the ordinance banning/regulating the use of plastic carryout bags,

whether they fully understood the reason for such and if they were

satisfied with the implementation of such a policy.

Although all (100%) respondents interviewed were aware of the

ordinance, only 58 or 96.7% of the shoppers and 93.3% of the shop-

owners said that they understood the reason for regulating/banning the

use of plastic carryout bags and some 3.3% among both the shoppers

and the shop-owners said that they did not understand the reason for

such a regulation. Also, 86.7% of the shoppers and 89.7% of the shop-

owners were satisfied with the ordinance, while 13.3% were not satisfied

with the said ordinance. When asked whether they understood the

advantages of not using plastic bags, a majority (96.7%) of both the

shoppers and the shop-owners replied positively, while 3.3% were

negative about it.

The Table

below shows the

frequency and

percentage of the

responses to the questions given.

Table 3 : Awareness, Understanding and Satisfaction with the Ordinance

 

Frequency

Percentage

Variables

Shoppers

Shop-

Shoppers

Shop-

owners

owners

  • 1. of

Awareness

the

Yes

60

30

100%

100%

ordinance

No

0

0

0

0

  • 2. Yes

reason

for

Understand

the

 

58

28

96.7%

93.3%

regulating/banning

         

the

use

of

plastic

No

2

1

3.3%

3.3%

bags

  • 3. Yes

Satisfied

with

the

 

52

26

86.7%

89.7%

ordinance?

No

8

3

13.3%

10.3%

  • 4. Yes

Understand

the

 

58

29

96.7%

96.7%

advantage

of

using

reusable bags

No

2

-

3.3%

3.3%

Public information campaign regarding the plastic bags ordinance

has been going on in the city, as shown by posters hanging in public

places

such

as

the

one shown below, explaining

the

high

level

of

awareness of the people regarding the policy. Also, letters notifying the

business owners regarding the ordinance have been distributed all over

the city 5 .

business owners regarding the ordinance have been distributed all over the city . Figure 4: Campaign

Figure 4: Campaign Posters Displayed in Public Places in Antipolo City

  • 5.2.3 Attitudes/Behaviour towards the Ban

In

trying

to

determine

the

people’s

attitudes

or

behavioural

responses towards the ban, the shoppers were asked whether they bring

their own reusable bag nowadays, their opinions on buying reusable bag

for shopping, choices of carryout bags, their opinions on what type of bag

should be used for shopping in the marketplace, as well as whether they

5 Per interview with some business owners who are far from the city center

wish to change the ordinance and add a P5.00 levy for using plastic bags

or whether they prefer the current ordinance which bans the use of plastic

bags for all dry goods purchases and limits such use for wet goods

purchases. The responses are shown on the following figures below:

wish to change the ordinance and add a P5.00 levy for using plastic bags or whether

Figure 5: Responses on Bringing Reusable Bags to Shopping

The figure above shows that 96.7% of the respondents bring their

own reusable bag nowadays when shopping, while only a few (3.3%)

never bring their own reusable bags. When asked why, the only reason

they gave was that they always forget to bring reusable bags with them

when they go shopping.

Figure 6: Preferrence for Current Ordinance and Willingness of Shoppers to Buy Ecobags or Reusable Bags

Figure 6: Preferrence for Current Ordinance and Willingness of Shoppers to Buy Ecobags or Reusable Bags

This chart above shows that a majority of the respondents (98.3%)

were willing to buy reusable bags and chose the current ordinance over

an amended ordinance which would allow the use of plastic bags but with

a levy of five pesos (Php5.00) for every plastic bag that will be used.

When ask for the choice of carryout container they prefer to use, most of

the respondents said that they prefer using reusable bag as carryout

container (as shown in the figure below) because for them, reusable bags

are sturdy, convenient and comfortable to use, can be washed and used

again many times over, and can contain more goods compared to other

carryout bags/containers, which are disposable. They also said that they

preferred using reusable bags now than plastic bags in order to help in

the protection of the environment as well as help in the prevention of

clogging the waterways and lessen the littering of waste on the streets.

The responses above only showed that a majority of the shoppers

interviewed were willing to compromise against using the free plastic

carryout bags for the sake of helping the campaign for cleanliness and

environmental protection. This awareness and willingness to cooperate

with this new environmental policy is a positive indication that most

people nowadays are environmentally aware and socially conscious of

what is happening to the environment and can understand that such

policies are part of the measures aimed at protecting the environment.

the protection of the environment as well as help in the prevention of clogging the waterways

Figure 7: Response on Preference to Reusable Bag Over Disposable Containers/Bags

The shoppers were also asked for their opinions regarding buying

reusable bags for their groceries. Most of them (65%) said that buying

reusable

bags

is

all

right with

them because they can contribute to

environmental protection (See Table 4 below). About 25% said that it was

fine with them as long as they could carry the things they bought, while a

few of them (10%) said they were annoyed because of the extra

expenses.

Table 4 : Shoppers’ Comments on Buying their Own Reusable Bags

Comment

Frequency

Percent (%)

Annoying, because of additional expenses

6

10.0

Okay, as long as I can carry my groceries

15

25.0

Okay, because I can contribute to environmental protection

39

65.0

Total

60

100.0

The shop-owners were also asked about their opinions regarding

the ordinance. Approximately 43.4% said they should be banned in order

to reduce waste and because paper bags are better since they are

biodegradable. On the other hand, 43.4% said they should not be banned

because the use of plastic bags could help save the trees and that plastic

bags are better for packaging wet merchandise. Most of those who did not

favour the ban were from the wet goods section of the market. They also

complained that they were the ones who receive the ire of customers who

were not used to bringing reusable bags. Around 13.3% of those

interviewed did not answer the question. The Table below shows the

frequencies and percentages of answers given. The percentages of those

who favoured the banning for various reasons as well as those who did

not favour the ban are listed separately to show the precise reason given

by the respondents.

Table 5 : Shop-owners’ Opinions Regarding the Banning of Plastic Bags

Opinions on why plastic bags should or should not be banned

Frequency

Percentage (%)

Plastic bags should not be banned because they are good for wet merchandise such as fish or meat

11

36.7

Plastic bags should not be banned in order to save the trees

2

6.7

Plastic bags should be banned and paper bags used instead because they are biodegradable

11

36.7

Plastic bags should be banned to reduce waste

2

6.7

No answer

4

13.3

Total

30

100.0

5.2.4

Practices

In order to determine the shoppersand shop-ownerspractices in

the use of plastic bags in the light of the ordinance, the following

responses (Table 6) were gathered from the respondents. It should be

noted that the ordinance regulates the use of plastic bags in the wet

goods section and not banned so that those who responded yes to the

question were those who were selling wet goods such as fish, chicken, or

meat. However, those selling wet goods use only a certain type of plastic

bag, called “labo” a thin, single use cellophane, which is quite disposable.

Double bagging is no longer allowed though, and even if their consumers

grumble and demand for plastic bags, they were afraid to pay the penalty

(which is PhP500.00 for the first offense, PhP800.00 for the second time

and revoking of license to sell on the third time of violation).

Table 6 : Frequency and Percentage of Shoppers and Shop-owners Still Using Plastic Bags

Still use plastic

Shop-owners

Shoppers

bags

Frequency

Percentage

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

17

56.7

15

25.0

No

11

36.7

24

40

No answer

2

6.7

   

Sometimes

   

21

35

Total

30

100.0

60

100.0

It was also found that other sellers in the dry goods area use plastic

bags as courtesy to the customers who do not have shopping bags with

them for the convenience of carrying the goods bought. When asked why

they still use such despite the ban, the reason given was that it is only

“banned when caught” and that the customer needs to have the goods

packaged in a sturdy carryout container. From Table 8 above, it can be

seen that more shoppers no longer use plastic bags as carryout container

when shopping because they want to cooperate with the government

policy and that they did not want to get caught and pay the penalty. The

same reasons were given by the vendors who are no longer using plastic

carryout bags.

When the vendors/shop-owners were asked whether their

clients/shoppers were reduced after the implementation of the ordinance,

some of them responded in the positive as shown in Table 7 below.

Table

7

:

Responses

of Shop-owners to Whether Customers were

Reduced after the Implementation of the Ordinance

Shoppers reduced after implementation of the ordinance

 

Frequency

 

Percent (%)

 

Yes

 

6

 

20.0

 

No

 

24

 

80.0

 

Total

   

30

 

100.0

Table

7

above

shows

that

some

20%

of

the

shop-owners

interviewed said that their customers were reduced after implementation

of the ban because they no longer use plastic bags and since their

customers have no carryout containers, they just leave upon learning that

the vendors cannot provide them with a decent packaging 6 . According to

the vendors interviewed, this caused so much frustration to them plus

additional activity of making paper bags. They further explained that

before the implementation of the ordinance, they used to just buy plastic

carryout bags. But after the ban was implemented, what they buy

nowadays are scotch tapes or tubes of paste to make the paper bags

because they do not want to buy the brown paper bags since those are

more expensive and there are not enough supply available.

6 Dry goods vendors make paper bags out of old newspapers or telephone directories and discarded magazines.

With regards to cleanliness, more shop-owners think that solid

waste in the city were reduced after the implementation of the ordinance

(70%), as opposed to just 40% of shoppers who think that garbage has

been reduced. Most of the respondents (48.3%) believed that garbage

was somewhat or just a bit reduced as shown in the following Table:

Table

8

:

Responses

on

the

Reduction

of

Littering

after

the

Implementation of the Ban on Plastic Bags

Trash reduced

Shoppers

Shop-owners

 

Frequency

Percent (%)

Frequency

Percent (%)

Yes

24

40.0

21

70.0

No

7

11.7

9

30.00

Somewhat/a bit

29

48.3

-

 

Total

60

100.0

30

100.0

Inspection of the vicinity of the public market showed that the

streets have indeed been maintained and free from littering, which

indicates an intensive campaign against the use of plastic bags as well as

tougher implementation, imposing penalties to those who violate the

ordinance as shown in the figure below:

Figure 8: Clean Street in Antipolo City 5.2.5 Waste Segregation Practices Waste segregation practices, although has

Figure 8: Clean Street in Antipolo City

  • 5.2.5 Waste Segregation Practices

Waste segregation practices, although has

little

to

do

with the

banning of plastic bags, is also a way of finding out the solid waste

practices of people to see how well they are aware of other environmental

policies and can therefore determine levels of environmental awareness

among the citizenry. RA 9003 mandates that waste must be segregated

at source. People who practice waste segregation at home are more

environmentally aware or more aware of existing environmental policies

than those who do not and are willing to cooperate in urban waste

management interventions of the government, such as the banning of

plastic bags.

With the current implementation of the policy banning the use of

plastic bags, it is possible that such a policy has awakened some level of

awareness among the people in terms of other environmental policies.

This can be seen by the way they manage their solid waste. The Figure

below shows the percentage of respondents who are segregating their

garbage.

awareness among the people in terms of other environmental policies. This can be seen by the

Figure 9: Response on the Segregation of Garbage Indicating a

Good

Level

of

Management

Awareness

in

Urban Environment

awareness among the people in terms of other environmental policies. This can be seen by the

Figure 10: Shop-ownersPractice of Waste Segregation at Home

The figures above show that close to over 70% of respondents

segregate their garbage at home. Various reasons were given, such as,

segregation has become a habit; to separate biodegradable (which emit

bad odour) from non-biodegradable; to keep from littering waste into the

waterways; to help in environmental protection; and to obey the law to

avoid penalties. They also reported that segregated waste were placed in

various types of containers such as plastic bags, jute sacks, broken pails,

garbage drums or barrels, etc.

  • 5.2.6 Statistical Analysis

The results of the survey on the shoppers were subjected to Chi-

square analysis, since this group had a bigger sample size than the shop-

owners. For the survey on shop-owners, only the frequencies and

percentage were considered since the sample size was too small for

statistical treatment using a chi-square analysis. To further test the Chi-

square values, Cramer’s V was also used for nominal values to determine

the generalizability of the samples. The demographical data were

compared with the data on the choice of carryout containers and with

regards to the satisfaction with ordinance.

Table 9 below shows the percentage of respondents who use

reusable containers when shopping as against those who use disposable

containers when shopping. It was found that 92.3% of the respondents

within the age range 29 years and below favoured using reusable bag

while only 7.7% favoured the use of disposable containers. About 78.9%

of those respondents aged 30-39 years old favoured the use of reusable

containers, and only 21.1% among the respondents aged 30-39 years old

favoured using disposable containers for shopping. Among those aged 40

years old and over, 85.7% favoured the use of reusable containers for

shopping, while only 14.3% favoured the use of disposable carryout

containers. From this Table, it can be seen that there is a high percentage

of those who favoured using reusable carryout containers/bags across age

groups, signifying that age had nothing to do with choosing the type of

container. To further test this, Cramer’s V, which is used to test for the

generalizability of the sample within a population, was run in order to

check whether there was any relationship. As it turned out, a Cramer’s V

equal to 0.136 indicates a weak relationship between the variables within

the samples. Similarly, a value of p = 0.576 means that there was no

sufficient data/evidence to generalize this result within the population.

Table 9 : Age Group vs. Choice of Carryout Container

Age group

Choice of Carryout Containers

Total

Disposable

Reusable

<=29

7.7%

92.3%

13

30-39

21.1%

78.9%

19

>=40

14.3%

85.7%

28

Approx. Sig. (p<.05)

 

0.576

Cramer’s V

 

0.136

N cases = 60

 

To check whether age is a determining factor for satisfaction with

the ban on plastic bags, a cross tabulation was done for age against the

responses on the satisfaction with the ordinances. Shown in Table below

are the percentages of positive responses against negative responses

across age groups.

Table 10 : Age Group vs. Satisfaction with Ordinance

 

Satisfied with ordinance

 

Age group

Yes

No

Total

<=29

84.6%

15.4%

100%

30-39

94.7%

5.3%

100%

>=40

82.1%

17.9%

100%

Approx. Sig. (p<.05)

 

.446

Cramer’s V

 

.164

N cases = 60

 

From the table above, it can be said that there was a very high

percentage of those who were satisfied with the ordinance banning the

use of plastic bags compared to those who were not satisfied. Checking

for correlation using age groups to determine the variability of yes

answers among the age groups, the results generated for the age vs.

satisfaction with ordinance indicated that there was no correlation

between these two variables within the sample and that it could not be

generalized for the entire population.

Similarly,

in

trying

to

establish the relationship between the

educational attainment and choice of carryout containers, it was found

that there was a high percentage of respondents who would rather use

reusable containers than disposable ones, across all categories of

educational attainment as can be seen in Table 11 below:

Table 11 : Educational Attainment vs. Choice of Carryout container

Educational

Choice of Carryout Container

Total

Attainment

Disposable

Reusable

Elementary

12.5%

87.5%

100.00%

High School/Voc

8.8%

91.2%

100.0%

 

27.8%

72.2%

100.0%

College Approx. Sig.

 

0.070

 

(p<.05)

 

Cramer’s V

 

0.234

N

cases = 60

 

Based on the results above, a value of p = 0.070 indicated that

there was a an very low correlation between the variables within the

sample but because of its closeness to p<0.05 there might be some

correlation if there were enough samples for the generated data although

within the study, there was not enough evidence to say that it could be

generalized within the entire population

as shown

by

the Cramer’s V

value.

Table 12 : Educational Attainment vs. Satisfaction with Ordinance

Educational

Satisfied with Ordinance

Total

attainment

Yes

No

 
 

75%

25.0%

100%

Elementary High School/Voc

85.3%

14.7%

100%

 

94.4%

5.6%

100%

College Approx. Sig. (p<.05)

 

0.379

Cramer’s V

 

0.180

N cases = 60

 

It can be said from the data gathered that education has nothing to

do with the satisfaction/dissatisfaction of the respondents regarding the

policy implemented. At any educational category, they can be satisfied

when they perceive that the policy is doing good for the environment as

well as to the behaviour of the people. Naturally, as can be seen from

Table 12, not everyone will be pleased with such a policy and will always

resist change, such that some of the shoppers interviewed said that they

were not satisfied with the ordinance banning the use of plastic disposable

bags, because for them, plastic bags offer the most convenient way to

carry the goods they purchased.

Table 13 : Income Category vs. Choice of Carryout Container

Monthly Family Income

Choice of Carryout Container

Total

Disposable

Reusable

<PhP 4,999.00

18.8%

81.3%

100%

PhP 5,000.00 PhP 9,999.00

5.0%

95.0%

100%

>= PhP10,000.00

20.8%

79.2%

100%

Approx. Sig. (p<.05)

 

0.303

Cramer’s V

 

0.199

N cases = 60

 

Table 13 above shows that income has nothing to do with the

choice

of

carry

out

container.

Across

the

income groups, more

respondents preferred the reusable type of carryout container than the

disposable ones. Further relating these variables, it can be said that there

is

no

significant relationship between the

income

and

the

choice of

carryout bags.

Table 14 below also shows that the satisfaction of the respondents

is not related to their income since across all income groups, a high

percentage of the sample is satisfied with the ordinance than being

dissatisfied further proving that basic understanding of such an ordinance

and being satisfied at its implementation has nothing to do with their

social or financial status in life.

Table 14 : Monthly Family Income vs. Satisfaction with Ordinance

Monthly Family

Satisfaction with the Ordinance

Total

Income

Yes

No

<PhP 4,999

81.3%

18.8%

100.0%

PhP 5,000-9,999

90.0%

10.0%

100.0%

>=PhP 10,000

87.5%

12.5%

100.0%

Approx. Sig p<.05

 

0.736

Cramer’s V

 

0.101

N cases = 60

 

CHAPTER VI :

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study was able to provide a bird’s eye view of the preliminary

effects of the ordinance as well as gain some knowledge on how those

who were interviewed felt about it.

The data from the survey was able to prove the hypothesis of the

study, which found a positive impact of the ban on the solid waste

situation of the

city

as

well

as

the

attitude and

behaviour of the

constituency as proven by the high percentage of those who favour the

ordinance and the bringing of their own reusable bags when shopping.

In this study, it was found that, nowadays, vendors/shop-owners in

the dry goods section no longer use plastic bags (except for a few which

try to sneak-in plastic bags at the behest of some consumers, just to

please them), and use paper packaging instead. These paper packaging

are in the form of recycled materials such as old newspapers, magazines

and phone directories and made into “paper bags” because the shop-

owners/vendors find the brown paper bags more expensive. This clearly

shows how people can be creative in order to comply with the policy.

Although there is no baseline data to determine the volume of reduction

in plastic bags waste, the reduction of plastic bags littering the streets has

definitely been achieved. Also, since the people have become aware that

the plastic bags ordinance was implemented to curb the waste littering,

they have also become aware of the ill-effects of improperly disposed

plastic bags on the environment as a whole and perceive that the

ordinance is good at preventing the littering of plastic waste. This reveals

the changing attitudes of the people towards their environment in that

their awareness has been heightened regarding the use of materials that

end up as waste that affect the waterways.

It should be remembered that the primary reason for the move to

ban plastic bags is that oftentimes they end up on the streets which are

carried into drainage canals when it rains. However, in Antipolo, it was

found out that only the use of plastic sandobags was banned but not

the single use thin film plastic they called "labo", which are easily

discarded, unlike the plastic carry-on bags that are oftentimes reused.

This would lead to the question of where these plastic bags go afterwards.

Although the littering of plastic bags seemed to have decreased,

some shop-owners/vendors have reported that it was only replaced by

paper waste since paper bags are being used instead of plastic bags. The

banning of plastic bags seemed to be a solution to this waste littering

problem since the government seems to have been ineffective in

implementing the provisions of RA 9003, or management of solid waste.

In order to prevent the littering of plastic bags waste, these should,

therefore be taken out of the market. Although this ordinance offers a

practical solution to the plastic bags waste problem, this would perhaps

be effective only in the short term. What would be more effective is the

implementation of the solid waste management policy and discipline of

the populace in order to create a long term solution to the problem, which

does not only constitute plastic bags but other waste as well. If

behavioural changes will occur, such that people will learn to manage

their solid waste, and that infrastructure would be available, we will be

closer to solving the garbage woes.

As seen from the study, the strict implementation of the ordinance

to ban/regulate plastic bags use was able to reduce the plastic bags

waste. However, proper waste management is still the best way to

contain all waste so they do not end up where they are not supposed to

be. According to the result of this study, any law that is strictly

implemented is effective. Although many consumers still long for that

lightweight convenient carry-on plastic bag, they now realize that the

rampant use of such has been among the culprits in the clogging of

waterways and causing so much litter on the streets. Although they still

grumble as to the use of recycled newspapers for packaging and

buying/bringing their own reusable carry-on bags/containers, the seeds of

awareness have already been planted and are starting to grow.

In order

to properly resolve the problem on plastic

bags waste,

there has to be a thorough deliberation as to which plastic bags must be

banned since reusable plastic bags can provide a solution too.

While it is true that plastic bags waste can clog waterways because

they are

non-biodegradable, other solid waste can do the same. And

using paper put a huge demand on our trees and water supply. It is

clearly not the

best

solution.

To

put

it

simply,

with

the

strict

implementation of the ordinance, the people are catching on. Perhaps, if

RA 9003 is strictly implemented and violators are penalized, then the

problems on solid waste will finally be contained.

The study was under severe limitations due to time and budgetary

constraints such that it was not possible to include the entire area of

Antipolo City. For this reason, only a small sample was included in the

survey, which covered only those in the market such that the study

cannot be conclusive of the situation of the entire city especially those in

the barangays that are far from the city center.

In order to be able to have a clear picture of the real impacts of the

ordinance and the effects this has on the solid waste situation in the city,

it is recommended that this study be continued one year later. Also, at

this stage, the volume of solid waste, especially of plastic waste must be

properly recorded to form as baseline data for reference. A plastic waste

recovery centre must be set up at strategic areas of the city and that the

garbage collectors must be instructed to separate plastic bags waste upon

collection.

Although economic impactsis not part of this study, the ordinance

clearly has a big impact on the polyethylene industry, from the

manufacturer to the retailers. The ordinance did not seem to have

considered the economic impacts it would have on other vendors since

the suppliers of plastic bags have been hard hit by this ordinance. For

example, the supplier of plastic bags in the market complained of a 50%

reduction in sales and recently penalized (Php500 pesos) for using a

plastic sandobag to package the thin plastic bags bought by a wet

goods vendor who demanded plastic packaging. A study on the economic

impacts of the ban should be conducted in the future.

This study also needs a better statistical design so that responses to

the survey will not be biased in order to reflect the real situation.

Although larger sample can be better, it may be better if the profile of the

community can be adequately represented. This survey can then be used

as fore-runner of succeeding surveys which can be done in the future.

It can be said that although the LGU’s leadership has been trying

hard to make the campaign against the widespread use of plastic bags,

there are some products that require plastic bags for packaging to protect

the products. An Executive Order (E.O.) was therefore released by the

Office of the Mayor to provide some exceptions to the ban. Unfortunately,

this has not been communicated properly to the shop-owners/vendors. As

a result, they have not realized that they can apply for such an exemption

if their reasons are justified.

In

order

to effectively implement the

policy,

a

massive

and

continuous Information and Education Campaign (IEC) is necessary for

the people to better understand the importance of the ordinance. The

policy, if carried out effectively, would have a potential impact on raising

further the level of awareness of the citizens in protecting the

environment. This is important in changing people’s behaviour for the

better and promises long term effects in environmental management.

REFERENCES

Adane, Legese and Diriba Muleta. (2011). Survey on the usage of plastic bags, their disposal and adverse impacts on environment: A case study in Jimma City, Southwestern Ethiopia. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Sciences Vol. 3(8) pp. 234-248, August 2011. ISSN 2006-9820 ©2011 Academic Journals. Available online at http://www. academicjournals.org/JTEHS Accessed Dec. 3, 2011.

Begum I, Zareena. (Undated). Plastics and the Environment. Dissemination Paper 12. Center of Excellence in Environmental Economics (Sponsored by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India), Madras School of Economics. Available online at http://coe. mse.ac.in/dp/Paper%2012.pdf Accessed on Dec. 4, 2011.

Chan-Halbrendt, C, Di Fang, and Fang Yang. (2009). Trade-offs between shopping bags made of non-degradable plastics and other materials, using latent class analysis: the case of Tianjin, China. International Food and Agribusiness management Review, Vol. 12 Issue 4, 2009. Available at http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/nrem/staff/downloads /20091006_Formatted.pdf. Accessed on Dec. 4, 2011.

Dikgang, J and M. Visser. (2010). Behavioral Response to Plastic Bag Legislation in Botswana. Environment for Development discussion paper series May 2010 EfD DP 10-13. Available online at http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/EfD-DP-10-13.pdf Accessed Dec. 7,

2011.

 

Xiufeng Xing. (2009). Study

on

the

ban

on

free plastic

bags

in

China. Journal of Sustainable Development. Vol. 2. No. 1 pp. 156-158.

Available online at www.ccsenet.org/journal.html

Accessed last Dec. 3,

2011.

AUTHOR’S BIOGRAPHY

Ms. Grace Penaflor Sapuay graduated with a Bachelor of Science

degree (major in Marine Science) at the University of the Philippines (Diliman) in 1983. She finished her Master of Science degree in Fisheries major in Fishery Biology at the University of the Philippines in the Visayas in 1987. In 1988 she was granted a Monbusho Scholarship by the

Japanese Government’s Ministry of Education (Monbusho) and pursued a Master’s Degree in Fisheries specializing in fishery resources from

Kagoshima University, Kagoshima City, Japan.

Ms. Sapuay has been working as a freelance consultant in various fields such as environmental management, solid waste management, coastal resources management, coastal planning and other projects requiring her expertise as a fishery and marine biologist, solid waste management and environment specialist.

She is an avid advocate for environmental protection. After one of her stints doing projects on solid waste management in 2004, which took her to many places all over the Philippines, she saw the need to educate the children and youth on environmental protection. Thus, she founded the Kalipunan ng mga Kabataan para sa Kalikasan (KALIKASAN) in order to help raise the awareness of children and youth on various environmental issues affecting the country and the world. She also started participating in international conferences on environment, taking with her children, and all founding members of Kalikasan in order to train them as future environmental leaders and enable them to participate in areas concerning environmental management outside the country. As a result, she has been invited to many activities, either as a speaker or participant and guest at meetings and discussions concerning environmental management.

Currently, Ms. Sapuay is enrolled at the UP School of Urban and Regional Planning (Diploma in Urban and Regional Planning). She is a member of the Board of Directors of the Solid Waste Management Association of the Philippines (SWAPP) where she holds the position of Vice-President for Luzon. She is also a member of the UP Planning and Development Foundation (UP PLANADES); the Philippine Institute of Environmental Planners (PIEP), and currently secretary of the Philippine Association of Japanese Government Scholars (PHILAJAMES). She continues to do her work on environmental advocacy and dreams of being able to hold a National Children’s Congress on Environment sometime.