It was recently announced that the rigorously imposed ban on the use and sale of plastic bags, interrupted by April 25th quake and its aftershocks, is to soon resume. The way the ban had taken effect up until the earthquake was impressive; from supermarkets to local grocers, the government's strict monitoring seemed to have compelled everyone to give up on plastic bags. However, in the aftermath of the earthquake, the ban seems to have been thwarted, if not reversed. In this context, re-launching the campaign against the sale and use of plastic bags can have significant impact in the reconstruction of a better Nepal.The growing use of plastic in our everyday life can have irreversible environmental impact owing to its non-biodegradable nature. Also, plastic pollution in urban and semi-urban areas of Kathmandu is expanding alarmingly, disposable single-use plastic bags being the greatest source of such pollution. Apart from being unpleasant to the eye, plastic breaks down into small particles that attract toxic chemicals. These particles are ingested by both terrestrial and aquatic animals, contaminating the food chain. Equally alarming is the direct harm plastic can do to human health. The constituent toxins in plastic have been linked with severe respiratory, reproductive, dermatological and other diseases. Research suggests that harmful chemicals leached by plastic are present in bloodstreams and tissues of almost everyone, including newborns.
Despite this, many argue that banning plastic bags can hit the country's economy and increase the cost of consumption for general people. While the impact of increased paper use, highly likely after the ban, has been questioned by some, some others seem troubled by the thought of having to buy expensive paper and cloth bags every time they purchase something. More importantly, the effect the ban can have on the country's many flourishing plastic industries and their workers has been a concern.
Amidst the debate, the fact that the ban in force is only applicable to the use and sale of plastic bags that measure below 40 and 30 microns in thickness inside and outside the valley respectively, calls for consideration. This means that the ban is aimed primarily at polythene bags and other thin plastic pouches used ubiquitously on a daily basis for carrying grocery and clothing. The sale and use of plastic for the production, packaging and transportation of goods at an industrial scale remains unaffected, thus negating the worry over complete closure of plastic industries.
As for daily personal usage, abandoning plastic bags is not just possible but also beneficial over time. Contrary to popular belief, the use of reusable and durable alternatives to single-use plastic bags—like cloth, jute and paper bags—can be cost-efficient. In any case, sparing a little money to buy some of these bags would also be an investment on better health and better surroundings for our own sake. Campaigns and adverts to encourage people to carry their own cloth, jute or paper bags to the market would help promote the cause.
We must understand that the sale and use of plastic bags would never have been sustainable. Hence state intervention was essential. Moreover, much of the criticism directed against this move is indicative of problems relating to habit and preference and as such no substantive issue. As a matter of fact, the ban can also serve as an opportunity to introduce new and better alternative products in the market. The success of the government's efforts to get rid of plastic can have implications beyond aesthetics and environmental enhancement.
The ban should be received as a step in the right direction. Even as many of us feel uneasy to give up the convenience and costlessness of plastic bags, we must welcome the ban as an attempt to protect our environment. As we become cognizant of the graveness of the issue, this will also make us aware of our other unsocial acts—like littering, improper garbage disposal and vandalism of natural heritage—that degrade the environment. Thus the government decision of working towards a 'Poly-free' Nepal is laudable. Its successful implementation will pave the way for future interventions on other important environmental issues.
The author is a law student and a freelance writer
thapa.sudeshna@gmail.com
Related story
From math to mud: How pottery became Mark Nafziger’s true calli...
