See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/311843486

Managment of Plastic Bags Waste: An Assessment of Scenarios in Jordan

Article · January 2017

CITATIONS READS

13 5,959

3 authors, including:

Motasem Saidan
University of Jordan
60 PUBLICATIONS   311 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Jordan Water Resources View project

Waste Management in MENA Regions, edited by Abdelazim Negm and Noama Elsharif View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Motasem Saidan on 23 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Chemical
Journal Technology
of Chemical and Metallurgy,
Technology 52, 1,52,
and Metallurgy, 2017, 148-154
1, 2017

MANAGEMENT OF PLASTIC BAGS WASTE:

AN ASSESSMENT OF SCENARIOS IN JORDAN

Motasem N. Saidan1,2, Linah M. Ansour3, Hakam Saidan4

1
The University of Jordan, Faculty of Engineering & Technology Received 10 September 2015
Chemical Engineering Department, Amman 11942, Jordan Accepted 10 October 2016
E-mail: m.saidan@gmail.com, m.saidan@ju.edu.jo
2
Water, Energy and Environment Center
The University of Jordan, Amman, 11942, Jordan
3
Princess Sumaya University for Technology,
Environmental Management & Technology Department,
Amman, Jordan
4
The World Islamic Sciences and Education University,
Finance and Management Faculty, Amman, Jordan

ABSTRACT

The plastic bags waste littering problem is significantly increasing in Jordan and becomes a pressing issue. However,
no comprehensive policy has been so far advanced. The main objective of this study is to advance and assess different
scenarios to control the use of plastic bags based on enviro-socio-economic impacts analysis. The results obtained reveal
that a blanket ban may not be the best possible solution for the environment. It is shown as well that the imposition of an
environmental levy on the plastic bags can reduce their consumption by 70 %. Moreover, it has better sustainable impacts
in comparison with other scenarios even though it does not fully eliminate the littering problem. A proper cost-benefit
analysis of reduction of plastic bag consumption is recommended to estimate the social cost of plastic bag consumption
and the actual costs of alternative instruments.
Keywords: plastic bags, solid waste, Jordan, levy, waste, litter.

INTRODUCTION Several campaigns were launched in different coun-

tries to reduce the excessive plastic bags consumption,
Plastic bags are made from non-renewable resourc- protect the ecosystem, and stimulate the consumer be-
es, where a variety of raw materials and technologies havioral changes. Some of these campaigns failed and
are employed to manufacture them. However, petroleum regulations were dropped due to the opposition from
and natural gas [1] are the key ingredients widely used commerce and industry, as well as defiance and protest
for their manufacture. from the retails, groceries and plastic industry [5, 6].
Plastic bags are widely used in shopping because On the other hand, regulatory and voluntary solu-
they are inexpensive, light, and strong enough [1 - 3]. tions are being considered and implemented in many
They are perceived as having no cost as they are offered societies around the world. For instance, imposing of
free of charge. Hence, their environmental damage cost levies in Ireland where the problem has decreased [7],
(externality cost) is not internalized in their true cost as well as, in Malta [8], South Africa [9], and Hong
[4, 5]. Kong [10]; voluntary agreements in Australia [11,

148
 Motasem N. Saidan, Linah M. Ansour, Hakam Saidan

12]; and prohibitions against the use of plastic bags in For example, 330 bags per person were consumed in Ire-
places like Dhaka (Bangladesh), Zanzibar [13], and San land [7] prior to the levy introduction. The total amount
Francisco [14]. Other countries have resorted to a ban of the plastic bags in Jordan refers to ca. 13,750 tons
on the production and use of plastic bags for shopping per year [23]. This large amount has many negative im-
or other purposes [3]. pacts on human health, livestock and natural resources.
Pigou (1920) introduced the concept of environmen- Eventually this causes an economic loss to Jordanians by
tal taxation and focused primarily on producer-generated affecting many vital sectors such as tourism, for instance.
pollution to internalize the external cost of pollution In 2012 Amman’s tunnels and streets were flooded
[15]. The use of plastic bag levy is important from this by rainfall water within few hours. The trashed plastic
aspect. Furthermore, it is a mechanism of changing the bags along the roads and in the drainage ditches were
consumer behavior and which is why it has to be coupled among the major reasons determining the rising up of
with educational and awareness campaigns [5]. the water level in the tunnels. On the agricultural side,
The impact of plastic bag policy on the consumer it is estimated that about 2.5 % of 2.5 million sheep, as
behavior has been investigated identifying issues related well as goats and cattle, have lost weight due to block-
to plastic bag consumption decline [6], inconvenience age of their digestion system by plastic [24]. This is an
[7] and anti-consumption behavior and attitude [16]. economic loss to farmers that could be reduced if the
The life cycle assessment (LCA) of plastic bags has number of littered plastic bags in the environment is
been investigated in many studies [1, 17 - 21]. Policy reduced. The latter are also affecting the marine envi-
makers need to consider several criteria (environmental ronment in Aqaba. In the cleaning campaign of Aqaba
and socio-economic pillars) when considering the suit- gulf, 2.5 tons of plastic materials were extracted on a
ability of a policy in tackling plastic bags litter. monthly basis. This is mainly due to the visitors who
In Jordan, no study has been reported on the evalua- affect negatively marine biodiversity. On another hand,
tion of plastic bags management scenarios. Selecting the about 30 % of the tourists complain that touristic sites
proper policy depends on the analyses of the advanced are not very clean. Therefore, the revenues expected in
options effect on the environment, the business, the this field will be reduced [23] in absence of management
consumer, and the waste. This study aims to evaluate policy implementation.
the proposed scenarios of plastic bags management and If only 1 % of the 3 billion plastic bags consumed
provides analysis to the policy makers helping them yearly in Jordan find their way into the environment
to meet the goals of environment protection through rather than being properly disposed of, then over 30 mil-
controlled use of plastic bags. lion bags (137.5 tons) will be littered to the environment
each year. Consequently, this will increase the problem
Current situation in Jordan of solid waste in the country.
Plastic bags are used by over 44,000 retailers all over The per capita rate is expected to increase on account
Jordan ranging from bakeries to fast food and electron- of the development activities, population growth, and
ics [22]. The bags are mostly manufactured in Jordan changing patterns of Jordanian consumption behavior by
and are usually provided free of charge for shopping approximately 3 %/year [25, 26]. In addition, changes in
activities. The plastic industry of Jordan is presented public awareness can also be expected to affect it. This
by about 80 plastic firms, where about 2,800 persons will directly change the waste stream and consequently
are engaged in plastic bags production. These bags vary the level of demand for solid waste management ser-
from very small and thin one used for single servings in vices. The combination of these changes can be expected
fast food restaurants, to thick and sturdy bags used by to increase pressure on the Jordanian environment. Fig. 1
the large retailers. below projects plastic bags waste generation for selected
Consumers in Jordan use approximately 3 billion years between 2000 and 2020 in case no actions are taken
plastic bags per year, which means that the consumption to influence the amount of plastic bags waste generated.
in Jordan refers on average to 500 bags per person per This figure shows that the total amount is projected to
year. This value is higher than those of other countries. grow from 11,130 tons in 2000 to 17,227 tons in 2020.

149
 Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 52, 1, 2017

Since there are no regulations in Jordan controlling

the use of plastic bags, it is important to set a policy
that would influence the consumer behavior in terms
of decreasing the plastic bags use and hence the latter
environmental impact.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted on the ground of data

collected via structural and semi-structural interviews
with key representatives of the industry, the academic,
governmental, and municipal sectors, as well as other Fig. 1. Projected waste generation of plastic bags 2000-
organizations. More than 80 interviews were conducted, 2020.
400 emails were sent to the stakeholders, and 300 phone
calls were done. These interviews were used to obtain
technical information, to outline the socio-economic
indicators, and to specify the environmental burden of
the plastic bags used.
Different scenarios were proposed, analyzed and
then compared to identify the best one providing plastic
bags sustainable use. The potential impacts arising from
different policy measures were indicated.
The following chosen scenarios are currently being
considered by the government and other stakeholders:
Scenario 1: Plastic bags ban.
Scenario 2: Ban of plastic bags below a specific
thickness and size.
Scenario 3: Imposition of an environmental levy on
shopping bags. Fig. 2. Utilization of plastic bags in various fields in Jordan.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Small and thin plastic bags like those used in 12,000
public restaurants (15 %), 2000 bakeries (3 %), 2500
It is important to quantify the amount of plastic fruits and vegetables grocery stores (3 %). Another 26%
bags used by different retailers in Jordan at present are used by merchandise such as electrical and other
(Scenario 0), when no action is considered. In this case retail outlets.
it is expected that the consumption of plastic bags will Carrier bags that are used to carry multiple items
increase year by year with the increase of population by 32,000 retailers like the large shopping stores such
and the quality of life, as indicated in Fig. 1. as C-Town, Carrefour, Safe way and other large super-
As stated before, 3 billion plastic bags are used in markets which supply about 41 % (1.23 billion) of the
Jordan by different retailers as supermarkets, shopping total plastic bags distributed to consumers.
stores, cloth and shoes stores, bakeries and public res- Thick and large bags that can be used several times
taurants. Fig. 2 shows the utilization of plastic bags in like those used in 9000 clothes and shoes stores - they
various fields according to the information provided by present about 12 %.
Jordanian Statistics Department, Ministry of Environ- Fig. 2 describes the annual percentage of plastic
ment (MoE) and Ministry of Trade and Industry. bags consumed in Jordan depending on the distribution
According to Fig. 2, the plastic bags can be divided and number of retailers. However, it does not necessar-
into three categories as follows: ily reflect the real percentages of plastic bags that are

150
 Motasem N. Saidan, Linah M. Ansour, Hakam Saidan

distributed in the market because this issue is related to According to Scenario 2, a decrease of 60 % can
consumption capacity and purchasing capabilities. For be achieved if the banning is imposed on all small and
instance, Jordanians buy bread and groceries on a daily thin bags, which are used at groceries, bakeries and
basis, which is connected with increase of consumption public restaurants. This kind of banning reduces the lit-
of thin and small bags. So, based on studying consum- tering problem caused by small bags which have higher
ers’ capabilities the MoE has estimated that the percent tendency to balloon and fly away. In Jordan, both MoE
of the thin and small bags used in Jordan is about 60 % and MoTI have suggested to ban the bags of thickness
including all types of plastic bags but excludes the carrier less than 0.02 mm or black plastic bags smaller than
bags type which forms only 40 %. Hence, the average 45cmx50cm. Banning these bags and replacing them by
consumption of the small and thin bags on annual basis heavier and more expensive bags might consequently
equals to 1.800 billion, while that of the carrier bags is increase the cost but encouraging the re-use [31].
1.200 billion bags. Based on Scenario 3 and in case a levy of the range
The process of manufacturing plastic bags requires of 5-7 piaster is imposed per bag, then the plastic bags
significant quantities of both energy and raw materials. consumption is expected to decrease by about 60 % - 70
According to the literature, the energy used to manu- % on average [9, 31, 32]. Based on the experiences of
facture one high-density polyethylene (HDPE) plastic other countries, the increase of the levy value leads to a
bag is 0.48 MJ [19, 27]. Besides, the manufacturing of smaller reduction in the plastic bags demand and usage
one HDPE plastic bags produces 0.55 kg of atmospheric [6,31]. This is a conclusion derived in other countries
pollution and 0.05 g of waterborne waste [28]. This studies. For example, a similar scenario was introduced
means that Jordan consumes about 1,440,000 GJ only in Ireland, where the plastic bag use decreased by 90 %
for manufacturing the bags and produces 118,080 tons of [7] or China, where it decreased by 49 % [33].
CO2 equivalents if it is estimated that the only source of
energy is fuel oil as 1 MJ obtained by fuel oil gives 0.082 Assessment of the scenarios
kg of CO2 equivalents [29]. Furthermore, large amounts There has been no approach that has proven to be
of energy are required to deliver the oil, to ensure the the best considering all scenarios developed. It is so,
transportation and the disposal. Taking into account that because the success of an approach depends on the gov-
96% of the energy supply in Jordan is imported [30], ernmental and regulatory infrastructure and the nature of
then the proposed scenarios should contribute to reduce the problem in that area [34]. In order to select the best
this amount of energy and other harmful environmental scenario for implementation in Jordan, it is important to
impacts (i.e. CO2 emissions). compare the impacts of the three scenarios on variants
including the environment, the business, the consumers
Reduction potential and the waste.
According to the study which was conducted by the Based on the data gathered and its analysis, the
MoE in 2009, if Scenario 1, banning all plastic bags, is amount of annual energy consumed in plastic bags in-
implemented, about 50 % of the produced plastic bags dustries is estimated to be 1630 GJ. This in turn brings
could be exported to the neighboring countries without about air pollutants emission which is estimated to be
ever been used at the local market. Moreover, some facto- approximately 1,450,500 tons per year including emis-
ries have the capability to start external business and make sion of about 59,000-61,000 tons of CO2 equivalents.
regional market. Accordingly, if at least 95 % - decrease of Moreover, the waterborne waste produced is estimated
the remainder 50 % of bags consumed locally in Jordan to be 150 tons per year.
is expected, then about 48%-reduction altogether could Hence, the environmental impact of the proposed
be achieved. However, banning of plastic bags requires plastic bags management scenarios will be decreased
finding substitutes that should be made available and by around 50 % for Scenario 1, 60 % for Scenario 2,
suitable to the purposes of use in Jordan. The considera- and 70 % for Scenario 3. Fig. 3 shows the different
tion of these substitutes should be carefully investigated environmental impacts of the plastic bags management
with regard to their impact on the environment, their scenarios in comparison with the current situation where
availability to the customers, their cost and disposal. no action is taken. It is clear that Scenario 3 is the best

151
 Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 52, 1, 2017

Fig. 3. An environmental impact of the plastic bags management scenarios advanced.

Fig.4. An economic impact of the plastic bags management scenarios proposed (1 JD equals
to 1.41$).

option to decrease plastic bags consumption from an the distribution of plastic bags. However, for the full
environmental point of view. ban scenario the government should provide another
Fig. 4 compares the plastic bags management sce- cost-effective alternative, for instance to import paper
narios to the current situation, where no action is taken, and canvas bags, which are costly alternative for the
in view of their economic impact. society welfare.
Currently there are about 80 factories in Jordan In case of Scenario 2, which bans all bags of a thick-
producing plastic bags. They have 2800 employees. In ness and a size below predetermined values, some small
case of banning the plastic bags, some factories will be firms will also have to shut down. It is estimated that
significantly affected. They either have to shut down or this will refer to about 20 % of all firms in plastic bags
change their business. This might cause a loss of 1300 manufacturing. Thus, around 16 firms might be closed
jobs at least. and consequently 560-700 jobs would be lost.
On the other hand, 50 % of plastic factories will be If an environmental levy is imposed on plastic
able to export their products to the neighboring coun- bags in accordance with Scenario 3, the consumption
tries. These factories will not be affected by banning of plastic bags will be decreased on the ground of the
152
 Motasem N. Saidan, Linah M. Ansour, Hakam Saidan

market (supply and demand) model. The manufacturers plastic bags, Journal of Fibre Bioengineering and
will have to decrease the production and distribution Informatics, 1, 4, 2009, 307-320.
of the bags at the local market. Hence, it is estimated 2. W. C. M. Tan, S.C. Mehta, Merchandise vs. facility-
that 14 % of the small and medium plastic firms might driven services: Relative role in consumer choice of
be drastically affected. This would result in the loss of supermarkets in Singapore, Asia Pacific Advances in
390-400 jobs, in addition to the indirect jobs lost at the Consumer Research, 1, 1994, 160-164.
retailers and distribution services. Fehily et al. (1999) 3. M. A. Jalil, M.N. Mian, M. K. Rahman, Using plastic
analyzed the impact of the tax on the plastic bag industry. bags and its damaging impact on environment and
They estimated that in 1999, 11 % of the plastic bags agriculture: An alternative proposal, International
consumed were produced by four plastic manufactur- Journal of Learning & Development, 3, 4, 2013, 1-14.
ing firms [35]. Since then, one has gone out of business doi:10.5296/ijld.v3i4.4137.
causing the loss of 26 jobs. 4. A. Akulian, C. Karp, K. Austin, D. Durbin, Plastic
Based on the aforementioned outputs of the en- bag externalities and policy in Rhode Island,
vironmental and socio-economic assessments of the Environmental & Resource Economics, 38, 2007,
three proposed scenarios for plastic bags consumption 1-11.
managing, it is clear that Scenario 3 leads to better 5. I. Safitri Zen, R. Ahamad, W. Omar, No plastic bag
environmental aspects and minimum inverse impacts campaign day in Malaysia and the policy implication,
on the socio-economic elements of the plastic bags Environ Dev. Sustain., 15, 2013, 1259-1269. DOI
industries. It is also clearly stated that none of these 10.1007/s10668-013-9437-1.
scenarios might fully eliminate the plastic bags waste 6. J. Dikgang, M. Visser, Behavioural response to plastic
in the environment. bag legislation in Botswana, South African Journal
of Economics, 80, 1, 2012, 123-133.
CONCLUSIONS 7. F. Convery, M. Simon, F. Susana, The most popular
Three billion plastic bags are used in Jordan annually tax in Europe? lessons from the Irish plastic bags
as they are provided free of charge in the course of the levy, Environmental and Resource Economics, 38,
shopping activities. However, the authorities claim that 2007, 1-11.
plastic bags littering causes significant damages mainly 8. M. Schembri, Malta Experience: the Effects of Tax on
in the agricultural and tourism sectors. Plastic bags lit- Plastic Bags. Speaking at the 13th European Packaging
tering is also classified as one of the major reasons for Law Conference, March 2006, Brussels. www.repak.
sewage systems clogging, which in turn brings about ie/files/Mario%20Schembri.pdf.
rainfall-induced flooding of the tunnels and the roads. 9. R. Hasson, A. Leiman, M. Visser, The economics of
The current assessment of plastic bags management plastic bag legislation in South Africa, South African
scenarios shows that the imposition of an environmental Journal of Economics, 75, 2007, 66-83.
levy on plastic bags can dramatically decrease their 10. Legislative Council Panel on Environmental Affairs,
consumption by 70 %, and provide a better sustainable 2007. A Proposal on an Environmental Levy on
impact in comparison with the other scenarios advanced. Plastic Shopping Bags. <http://www.legco.gov.hk./
It is clearly stated that none of the proposed sce- yr06-07/english/panels/ea/papers/ea0528cb1-1666-
narios might fully eliminate the plastic bags waste in 17-e.pdf>.
the environment. Therefore, it is recommended that a 11. Clean Up Australia, 2007, Plastic bags - World
comprehensive policy concerning plastic bags waste report. <http://www.cleanup.org.au/PDF/au/cua-
should be developed based on the economic instruments world-update-on-plastic-bags-as-at 120207.pdf>.
and measures in line with the sustainability pillars. 12. D. Kemp, 2003, Ministerial Conference on Plastic
Bags by the Hon De David Kemp, MP, Federal
REFERENCES Minister for the Environment and Heritage. <http://
www.environment.gov.au/minister/env/2003/
1. S.S. Muthu, Y. Li, J.Y. Hu, P.Y. Mok, An explora- tr01aug03.html>.
tory comparative study on eco-impact of paper and 13. BBC News, 2006, Zanzibar islands ban plastic bags,

153
 Journal of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, 52, 1, 2017

Published November 10th, 2006. <http://news.bbc. 2012, Amman, Jordan.

co.uk/2/hi/africa/6135886.stm>. 25. P. Faircloth, S. Himmo, Regional Solid Waste
14. C. Goodyear, SF supes vote to ban plastic shop- Management Project in Mashreq and Maghreb
ping bags. San Francisco Chronicle, Wed March Countries, Country Report, Jordan, 2004.
28, 2007, <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article. 26. Z. Al-Hamamre, M. Saidan, M. Hararah, K.
cgi?f=/c/a/ 2007/03/28/SFSUPES.TMP>. Rawajfeh, H. Alkhasawneh, M. Al-Shannag, Wastes
15. A.C. Pigou, The economics of welfare, London, and biomass materials as sustainable-renewable
Macmillan, 1920. energy resources for Jordan, Renewable and
16. A. Sharp, S. Hoj, M. Wheeler, Proscription and its Sustainable Energy Reviews, 67, 2017, 295-314.
impact on anti-consumption behaviour and attitude: 27. S.S. Muthu, Y. Li, J.Y. Hu, P.Y. Mok, Carbon foot-
The case of plastic bags, Journal of Consumer print of shopping (grocery) bags in China, Hong
Behaviour, 9, 2010, 4. Kong and India, Atmospheric Environment, 45,
17. A. Tinney (Ed.), Plastic shopping bags in Australia, 2011, 469-475.
National Plastic Bags Working Group, report to the 28. Institute for Lifecycle Environmental Assessment,
national packing covenant council, 2002, <http:// Paper vs. Plastic Bags, Franklin Associates Ltd.,
www.ephc.gov.au/pdf/Plastic_Bags/Plastic_Bags_ 1990.
WG_Report.pdf>. 29. Australian Greenhouse Office, AGO Factors and
18. Ecobilan, Evaluation study of environmental impacts Methods Workbook, Department of the Environment
of paper and plastic carrier bags,2008,Downloaded and Heritage, 2006.
at: http://www.eurosac.org/eurosac/pdf/3808_ 30. M. Saidan, Sustainable Energy Mix and Policy
LCACarrier-Bags Methodology-(english).pdf. Framework for Jordan, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung,
19. S. Ellis, S. Kantner, A. Saab, M. Watson, Plastic Amman, Jordan, 2012.
Grocery Bags: The Ecological Footprint, Student 31. J. Dikgang, A. Leiman, M. Visser, Analysis of
publications, VIPIRG publications, University of the plastic-bag levy in South Africa, Resources,
Victoria, 2005, POBox 3050 STN CSC, Victoria. Conservation and Recycling 66, 2012, 59-65.
1-19. 32. W. Knowler, Why prices are rising, 2008, http://
20. G. Finnveden, A. Moberg, Environmental systems ww.iol.co.za/general/other/lol container.php/
analysis tools - an overview, Journal of Cleaner 33. He Haoran, The effects of an environmental policy
Production, 13, 2005, 1165-1173. on consumers: lessons from the Chinese plastic bag
21. K. James, T. Grant, LCA of Degradable Plastic Bags, regulation, Working Paper No. 453, 2010, University
Centre for Design at RMIT University, 2005, 17pp of Gothenburg, Sweden.
<www.cfd.rmit.edu.au/content/download/232/1787/ 34. W. Harrington, R.D. Morgenstern, Economic
file/ James_and_grant.pdf>. Incentives versus Command and Control: What’s the
22. Ministry of Trade & Industry (MoTI), Annual Report Best Approach for Solving Environmental Problems?
2012, Amman, Jordan. Resources, Fall/Winter, 152, 2004, 13-17.
23. Ministry of Environment (MoE.), Annual Report 35. Fehily, Timoney & Company, Consultancy study on
2012, Amman, Jordan. plastic bags, Report prepared for the Department of
24. Ministry of Agriculture (MoA), Annual Report Environment and Local Government, Dublin, 1999.

154

View publication stats