Plastic bags are one of the most obvious sources of pollution and are the subject of national legislation in many countries. In November 2013, the EU Commission published proposals to amend the EU packaging waste directive by requiring member states to reduce consumption of lightweight plastic bags using measures such as taxes, national reduction targets or bans. A number of EU countries such as Italy, as well as China and South Africa, have already banned some types of plastic bags. In 2014 the European Parliament called for a ban on single use plastic bags by 2020.40 Ireland has a plastic bag tax, with Belgium, England, Germany, Spain and Norway following suit. In the United States, more than 17 states have passed ordinances banning plastic bags in several hundred municipalities.41 Similar activity is likely regarding microplastics. These are small plastic particles, either directly used in products such as cosmetics, or broken down from larger plastic pieces which can be swallowed by marine wildlife causing harm and potentially transferring toxins into our own food chain. Mounting concern over this issue is likely to result in more stringent regulations already proposed in New York and passed in California.42,43,44
REPUTATION The risk of damage to corporate and brand reputation is one of the main reasons why companies should take early action on managing their plastic footprint. Brand valuation studies have found than in certain cases, brand accounts for over 70% of the total value of the company.45 Environmental campaign groups often call for consumer boycotts of well-known brands to raise awareness about an issue, such as Greenpeace’s campaign against Coca-Cola’s opposition of container deposit taxes aimed at stimulating recycling in Australia. As part of the campaign, the organisation emphasised the wildlife damage caused by plastic bottles though organised protests outside the company’s headquarters, boycotts of the product, and negative social media campaigns.46 In the past, campaigns portraying a corporation’s negative impact on biodiversity have been known to threaten profitability. A recent example is the high profile 2010 Greenpeace campaign against Nestlé’s palm oil sourcing practices using flagship brand Kit Kat as target, which resulted in Nestle changing its policy and severing contracts with its major palm oil producer Sinar Mas. Greenpeace then campaigned against HSBC who eventually dropped their investment in Sinar Mas.47,48 In the age of social media, images of plastic litter washed up on a beach or linked to the death of whales and dolphins can spread across the world in seconds. Although in many cases brand origin is unidentifiable, the potential for negative publicity on plastic in general could affect companies. Other times, brand origin is identifiable. #Litterati social media photo campaign encourages users to photograph litter before disposing of it and share the image on Instagram. The resulting “digital landfill” is expected to be used to work with communities and large corporations to prevent litter.49 Another example includes the Plastic Soup Foundation’s “Beat the Bead” application which allows the user to know whether there are microplastic within the product they are about to buy.50 By using social media and other communication tools, companies can demonstrate they are part of the solution to these problems. For example, in 2012 a group of California elementary school students gathered more than 90,000 signatures on a petition asking marker pen company Crayola to “make its mark” on recycling its used products. Crayola initially responded that it had no way to do so. The campaign inspired a competitor, Dixon Ticonderoga, to launch its own program for recycling used marker pens. The publicity and potential loss of business led to Crayola to announce its own recycling programme for used plastic markers.51,52
INVESTOR INTEREST There is growing interest among investors in how companies manage environmental risks and opportunities. For instance, the UN’s Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) has some 1,200 signatories among asset owners and investment managers which collectively control almost $35 trillion.53 Its members are committed to incorporating consideration of environmental, social and governance issues into their investment decisions. The investor-led CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) has had enormous success encouraging companies around the world to disclose their carbon emissions and plans to reduce them. Its climate change program is backed by 722 investors with $87tr in assets under management. In 2013, 81% of the world’s 500 largest stock-exchange listed companies reported to the CDP. The CDP has widened its efforts to encourage disclosure on other issues such as water, forests and supply chain impacts.54 A survey commissioned by the Plastic Disclosure Project found strong interest among investors in encouraging companies to disclose their plastic consumption. Almost 90% of those surveyed said they would support the Plastic Disclosure Project including respondents from
21