The main goal isn't to reduce the amount of overall plastic created its to reduce the amount of plastic trash that ends up on the streets, beaches, rivers, etc.
The article seems to argue that the goal is very narrowly to reduce the amount of plastic bags created/consumed and then claims a study shows that the bans do indeed achieve that goal. It's hard to imagine this goal not being achieved, but it's too narrow.
I haven't seen any study showing that total plastic trash, incorrectly disposed, is reduced. It could be hard to study, I admit. I'd love to know the amount of the reduction as well. My guess would be there is a reduction, but it is fairly small.
I'd imagine 7% reduction is the upper bound on the impact, but it could be smaller than that if other litter increased. Maybe that's high enough to make the ban worth the inconvenience, I don't know what the right threshold should be.
Broader goals could include reducing total plastic production, reducing fossil fuel mining, etc. I'm more suspicious that these goals are not being meaningfully affected by bag bans.
If that's the case, is targeting rich developed countries with efficient waste management and pickup the best approach? I live in a very clean, North American city. I rarely see plastic bags blowing around. We have residential garbage pick up, and public spaces all have public bins. Our landfills are, what I would assume, are well run. Does the plastic bag ban in my city make sense? We never had an issue with plastic ending up in lakes/rivers etc. Now look to developing nations where rivers and streams are overrun with plastic. Do they have plastic bag bans? Doesn't seem like it and seems like that is where there should be one.
If I was going to steel-man the argument, I’d suggest that you’re adding some kind of extra economies of scale to production of less polluting alternatives?
Also I note that mid-income countries like Thailand are also getting in on plastic bag reduction. The kind interpretation of that is that muang thai has finally discovered its eco-consciousness, but an alternative one is that they’re copying rich countries ‘cuz it’s fashionable, and that that effect might trickle down to the countries who are serious polluters
If the purpose it to keep plastic waste and microplastics out of your local environment and local drinking water sources, then local policies make sense.
Should other places that also have that potential problem also do that? Sure, probably, if it's practical. But people in country X usually don't get to make local policy for people in country Y.
