Environmental activism has increasingly made plastic grocery bags a subject of focus for consumers, corporations, and governments. Plastic bag regulations are increasing dramatically, but issues of whether and how to regulate plastic bags are continually debated. The physical nature of plastic bags has shaped this debate, just as the debate has reshaped the physical nature of plastic bags. As with many environmental issues, power relationships are deeply entwined with discussions surrounding plastic bags. Such power relationships impact consumer opinions and usage of plastic bags, revealing that the social life of plastic bags is dynamic.
Individually, social lives of plastic bags are fairly short. That is, consumers use plastic bags for an average of twelve minutes before disposal (Wagner, 4). Hence, immediate bag disposal has become a custom of American grocery shopping. As a result, this practice came to be viewed as natural and static by participants. In recent years, environmental activists have challenged this custom. Short usage periods especially concern environmentalists, because individual plastic bags exist in the environment for over 1000 years (Warner, 649). Now, as the custom of quick disposal is changing, it may be easier for participants to understand how power relationships have shaped the practices that so recently seemed to feel so natural.
Historically, plastic bags have had a dynamic social life. Polyethylene, the plastic bag polymer, was created in the 1930s and first incorporated into grocery bags in 1977, with plastic bags outnumbering paper bags four to five by 1996 (Warner, 647). This grocery bag shift in material occurred fairly rapidly, as consumers within a single generation saw plastic bags’ introduction and spread. The plastic bag’s physical nature made it desirable for both corporations and consumers. The plastic bag is thinner and lighter than the paper bag, making for easier and cheaper production and transportation. Its handles and stretchy texture make gripping easier and breaking less likely. Its functionality is prioritized over its aesthetics. A single consumer can carry several plastic bags while they can likely only carry two paper bags at the most. As capitalism and consumerism have shaped American culture, convenience has been increasingly valued. Consumers’ lives seem to be improved by the plastic bag’s convenience, but power relations reveal that the biggest benefits are not towards individuals.
Corporations benefit most from the social norm of single-use plastics. Plastic bags are significantly cheaper for retailers than paper bags. Moreover, plastic bags’ disposable nature makes them the perfect product for capitalist manufacturers. As plastic bags are constantly disposed, they are always in high demand, assuring manufacturers of their eventual profits. This is important, because it reveals that, whether they act on them or not, powerful groups may have interests in continuing social norms.
Power has shaped plastic bags in other ways, too, even physically. Thinning bags’ material makes production cheaper and bags’ reuse less likely, as holes occur more frequently. Therefore, plastic companies’ desire for economic power has changed plastic bags’ physical form. Furthermore, retailers’ and plastic manufacturers’ economic power has allowed them to lobby against legislative restrictions on plastic bags, attempting to prolong the social norm of quick disposal. Economic power has influenced the social life of plastic bags, affecting their physicality and usage.
However, economically-based power has also transformed plastic bags’ social life in ways that align with environmentalists. For instance, manufacturers have found new markets through biodegradable plastic bags (Campbell). Though these efforts are often celebrated, such companies have been pushed this way by the economic power of the steadily decreasing market for regular plastic bags, as governments increase restrictions. Additionally, while biodegradable bags are much better for the environment than plastic bags, their single-use nature still mean their production must continue. This reveals how economic power often drives corporations more than true environmental concern, as removing single-use plastics altogether is better for the environment, but ensuring continual demand is better for profits.
Power relationships among consumers also impact the social life of plastic bags. Lower-income consumers are less likely to purchase reusable bags (Muralidharan and Sheehan, 202). Furthermore, as goods’ prices increase, plastic bag usage tends to decrease (Wagner, 4). This means that plastic bags are found more commonly in poorer areas than wealthier areas. In fact, in general, income has one of the highest correlations with acting for environmental causes (Newman and Fernades, 155). This does not mean that lower-income communities necessarily value the environment less than higher income communities. Rather, it is likely that lower-incomes mean economic considerations must be prioritized. Down to the individual level, economic power shapes plastic bag usage.
Increasingly, reusable bags have become symbolic of morality in higher-income communities. Reusable bags are often associated with environmental concern, and stigma is even sometimes associated with plastic bag usage (Muralidharan and Sheehan, 201). Though it could be argued that such stigma places positive pressure on consumers to lessen their environmental impacts, lower-income consumers face a heavier burden, as purchasing reusable bags may not be economically feasible. Thus, stigmas around plastic bags may intensify socioeconomic divisions.
Overall, plastic bags’ social lives are complicated by their brief use and lengthy physical existence. Additionally, economic power is deeply entwined with social relationships surrounding plastic bags. As the American middle class has expanded, commodities like plastic bags have increased convenience for consumers. The manner in which constant disposal keeps plastic bags in constant demand makes them incredibly attractive to corporations. As a result, corporations often use their large economic power to attempt to prevent restrictions on plastic bag usage. Potential for economic power through environmentalism has caused new corporations to develop and has reshaped the physical nature of plastic bags themselves. Economic power even affects plastic bags’ social life on the consumer level, as reusable bags are not affordable for all, furthering socioeconomic divisions. Part of American consumer culture, plastic bag usage has at times seemed like a natural part of life. However, current environmental concerns have caused many consumers to reconsider this practice and reflect on economic power’s large impacts on the plastic bag.