Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PRELIMINARY IMPACTS
OF
CITY ORDINANCE 2009-370
BANNING/REGULATING THE
USE OF PLASTIC BAGS
IN
ANTIPOLO CITY
March 2012
By
Grace P. Sapuay
DEDICATION
This paper is dedicated to the people of Antipolo City. May their
awareness on environmental issues and the protection of their city
increase more so that they will leave a legacy of a clean and orderly city,
with properly managed waste; so that the next generations will be able to
inherit a city which is sustainably managed by environmentally and
socially conscious populace who cling to a concept of a world free of
waste.
ABSTRACT
Among the prevalent local and national issues on solid waste
management is the burgeoning problem of plastic litter all over the
country. Local governments as well as national legislative bodies are
seeking ways to minimize if not to eliminate plastics in solid waste.
Recently, Antipolo City implemented a local ordinance regulating/banning
the use of plastic bags in the commercial sector. In order to find out the
effectiveness of such ordinance in bringing about desired behavioural
change a survey was undertaken in the main wet and dry public market of
Antipolo City. The survey hoped to determine the initial effects of the ban
on the solid waste situation in the city and on the attitudes of the citizens
in the community towards the ban and towards the environment. The
data gathered survey was analyzed using the Predictive Analysis Software
(PASW) Statistics (SPSS version 18). The results indicated positive impact
of the ban on the use of plastic bags on solid waste situation of the city as
well as on the attitude and behaviour of the constituency as proven by
higher percentage of those favouring the ordinance and the bringing of
reusable bags when shopping. This was due to strict implementation of
the ban amidst the difficulty of gaining its acceptance to those primarily
affected. This goes to show that strict implementation can serve as a key
to
minimization
of
plastics
and
perhaps
consequently
effective
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author is forever grateful to the following people who have made
invaluable contribution to this research:
1. Hon. Nilo Leyble, Mayor of Antipolo City
2. Mr. Melvin A. Cruz, City Administrator of Antipolo (and his staff)
3. Ms. Jocelyn Masangkay, Head of the City Ecological Solid Waste
Management Office (and her staff)
4. Mr. Cecilio Panganiban, Public Market Administrator
5. Mr. Jun Gamat of the City Market Office (and his staff)
6. Ms. Maricel G. Rodriguez, Enumerator
7. Ms. Erna E. Canale, Enumerator
8. Mr. Rodel Camonas, Enumerator
9. All participants in the survey
10. Ms. Cora Jose
11. Engr. Samuel Sapuay
12. Prof. Mayu Munarriz (class adviser, Plan 299)
13. Prof. Kevin Carl Santos (U.P. School of Statisitics)
14. Prof. Mark Anthony Javelosa (U.P. School of Statistics)
15. Mr. Tony Gangan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1
Introduction
1.2
1.3
1.4
CHAPTER IV : METHODOLOGY
12
4.1
12
4.2
Survey Area
12
4.3
Research Design
12
4.3.1.
12
4.3.2.
Survey Description
13
4.3.3.
Statistical Design
14
CHAPTER V : FINDINGS
16
5.1
16
5.2
18
5.2.1
Profile of Participants
19
5.2.2
22
5.2.3
24
5.2.4
Practices
29
5.2.5
33
5.2.6
Statistical Analysis
35
41
List of Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
List of Tables
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
CHAPTER I :
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES
1.1
Introduction
Solid waste is among the major issues facing the Philippine society
today. More than ten (10) years after RA 9003 (The Ecological Solid
Waste Management Act 2001) has been signed into law, littering of solid
waste, most notably plastic bags, remain unabated. Peoples behaviour
towards solid waste has not changed. Most local government units have
not complied with the required engineered sanitary landfill (ESLF)
mandated by law and waste segregation is being done minimally all over
the country.
It is said that there is an on-going plastic bags pandemic1, and the
following are some of the facts about plastic bags:
1) Over 1 trillion plastic bags are used annually all over the world;
2) About 1 million plastic bags are used every minute;
3) A single plastic bag can take 2,000 years to degrade;
4) More than 3.5 million tons of plastic bags, sacks, and wraps
were discarded in 2008.
In the Philippines local initiatives had been launched to find
solutions to these issues. One of these initiatives was undertaken by the
City of Antipolo when it promulgated a local ordinance banning the use of
1
1.2
ii)
ii)
1.3
1.4
CHAPTER II :
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
to
its
success,
behavioural
changes
of
the
citizens
or
The key words plastic bags ban ordinance yielded 218,000 results within 0.08 seconds. The
selection was scanned and only those materials pertinent to this study, which focus primarily on researches
regarding banning of plastic bags and its effects on the state of solid waste management as well as the
behaviour of people towards the ban and towards solid waste particularly plastic bags, were selected and
downloaded for review. Over seventeen (17) articles were chosen and these were further screened to come
down with a total of five (5) pertinent literatures, three (3) of which are published in international journals,
while two (2) are discussion papers. Of the five (5) papers selected, three (3) papers directly deal with the
results of the ban and its effect on the behaviour of consumers as well as on the environment while two (2)
papers deal with the adverse effects of plastics on the environment. The papers were chosen for their
relevance to the proposed research as well as their importance in providing some insights on how such a
research might be conducted. They also provided some ideas on the rates of success as well as sustainability in
terms of the reduction of plastic usage and waste production in relation to such policies.
by
Chan-Halbrendt,
et
al,
(2009)
who
measured
the
Experiment (CCE), which is based on the idea that any good can be
described in terms of its attributes or characteristics and level of these
attributes. This was also used to explore the willingness of consumers to
pay for plastic carryout bags. Results of the study showed a preference
for bags which are made from materials other than non-degradable
plastic bags if such are sold cheaper. However, the experiment showed
that there are preference distinctions among age groups, which can be
exploited to devise strategies in promoting the effective implementation
of the policy. The researchers found that the policy has been carried for
over a year with some success, reducing the consumption of plastic bags
by as much as 66%.
Joining the growing number of countries creating tax levies as a
policy instrument to regulate the use of plastic bags is Botswana. In
assessing the effect of such legislation on the environment Johane
Dikgang and Martine Visser (2010) studied the behavioural responses of
people in Botswana towards plastic bags tax to curb demand on the use
of plastic bags. By analysing the sensitivity of consumers to the plastic
bags charges, the authors found out that the increase in the plastic bags
levy resulted in a sharp decline of consumption of plastic bags in shopping
per 1,000 BWP (Botswana Pulas) of retail purchases and the use of plastic
bags dropped to 24% weeks after the policy was implemented. The lowincome retailers experienced the steepest decline in consumption at 42%
followed by the high-income retailer at 39%. In comparing the effects of
7
such legislations in Ireland and South Africa, the authors found that
higher levies on plastic bags sustains the decrease in plastic shopping
bags demand and predicted that a high levy on plastic shopping bags in
Botswana will sustain such environmental effect.
In summary, the findings of the researchers have shown that
policies banning the use of free plastic bags as well as putting a levy on
plastic bags can help in limiting the use of plastic bags, consequently
reducing plastic waste in the areas of study. The studies, however, were
generally confined to consumer purchases in big supermarkets and did
not include those in the countryside, which was noted to have bigger use
of disposable plastic bags.
CHAPTER III :
FRAMEWORK AND CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM
During the height of typhoon Ondoy, Metro Manila and the outlying
provinces were submerged in the flood for many days. Plastic bags were
the most noticeable solid waste found floating in the flood and clogging
the waterways. The plastic bags were, therefore, blamed as the cause of
the sluggishness of the flow of floodwaters in moving towards the
watercourses,
which
took
so
long
to
recede,
inundating
many
communities for several days. In view of this, some LGUs have made the
move to legislate ordinances banning the use of plastic bags in their
localities. Among them was Antipolo City, which promulgated City
Ordinance 2009-370. After a two-year moratorium, the ordinance is now
being implemented starting November 2011.
The study expects to find positive impacts of the imposition of the
ban, which is meant to improve the solid waste situation in the city,
similar to the findings of the studies conducted as mentioned in the
literature reviewed.
In compliance with the ordinance, it is expected that supermarkets
and public markets in the city will be using paper bags instead of plastic
bags and that there will be a decrease in the use of plastic bags in public
markets as well as in the supermarkets where the dry goods are no
longer allowed to be carried in plastic bags. Instead, paper bags are to be
9
used for this purpose. Due to this, the consumers are expected to use
plastic bags less frequently and that, since traders in the city will no
longer use plastic bags. Hence, whatever plastic bags the consumers use
might be sourced outside Antipolo, where for example they are given
plastic bags from supermarkets in places where there is no such
ordinance.
As an initial reaction to the ban, it is expected to find a part of the
population still using plastic bags, though less frequently since IEC may
not yet be that thorough, or that some who shop from neighbouring
localities without such a ban would be carrying their goods in plastic
carryout bags. Others will have opted to use reusable bags that are sold
in the markets. Still others will be found no longer using plastic bags since
reusable bags area available and that these consumers might have
agreed that the ban is good so they tend to follow not just the ordinance
but their environmental conscience as well. These preliminary impacts are
expected to cause environmental awareness among the consumer
population such that they will also start to segregate their solid waste at
home since it has already been declared (through RA 9003) that they
must segregate their waste. At this point people will start to realize that
the ban on plastics is another step to better solid waste management.
Hence, most of them might start disposing their plastic bags and other
waste properly. The resulting effect will be a reduction in the volume of
plastic waste in the city. Therefore, it is highly expected that the solid
10
waste situation in the city has been greatly improved. This can be better
expressed in the following diagram, and which was used as framework of
the study:
PLASTIC BAGS WASTE
IMPLEMENTATION
PRELIMINARY IMPACTS
IN PUBLIC
MARKETS
On
Sources
of plastic
bags
CONSUMER BEHAVIOUR
1. STILL USE PLASTIC
BAGS
2. NO LONGER USE
PLASTIC BAGS
3. USE OF REUSABLE BAGS
DECREASE IN THE
USE OF PLASTIC
BAGS IN PUBLIC
MARKETS
CHAPTER IV :
METHODOLOGY
4.1
Survey Area
Research Design
12
interviews
with
an
actual
ocular
observation
of
the
after
few
hours.
The
accomplishment
rate
of
the
questionnaires was sixty per cent (60%). Some of the vendors were busy
with sales work and did not want to answer the questionnaires while some
13
of them simply did not want to answer the questionnaires and were not
returned.
4.3.3. Statistical Design
A simple random sampling was conducted for interviewing the
shoppers. Sixty (60) samples were taken and interviewed using face-toface survey technique. This was done by randomly selecting shoppers.
Samples were selected at random at certain times of the day. For
example, twenty (20) samples were interviewed in the morning until
12:00 noon, twenty (20) samples were interviewed in the afternoon, and
another twenty (20) samples were interviewed early evening. This was
done to determine whether there is a difference among the shoppers at
certain times of the day.
For the shop-owners, convenience sampling was done since they
were busy with their businesses, such that only those willing to answer
the survey forms were interviewed while the others were given the forms
and retrieved after a few hours. Thirty (30) samples were gathered for
this study.
Key informants were also interviewed for this study in order to
determine the extent of implementation and how such implementation is
conducted within the entire LGU. For this purpose, the City Administrator,
the Public Market Administrator, as well as the head of the Ecological
Waste Management Office were interviewed. This was conducted by
14
visiting their respective offices. Secondary data were also requested from
their offices regarding solid waste as well as the ordinance.
15
CHAPTER V :
FINDINGS
5.1
16
17
5.2
The survey yielded two (2) types of data, numerical and categorical
(nominal). For such types of data, a Chi-square (X2) statistic was used
here to compare the variables and to find out whether there exists any
relationship or correlation between these variables. The chi-square is used
to investigate whether distributions of categorical variables differ from
one another3. After Chi-square, a post test statistical method, Cramers V
was calculated to determine the strengths of association between the
variables tested. Cramers V coefficient4 is useful for comparing multiple
X2-test statistics and is generalizable across contingency tables of varying
sizes and is mainly used to calculate associations using nominal data. To
describe the strength of association, Cramers V is described as having
values from 0 to 1 where >0.5 signifies high association while 0 to 0.1
has little or no association. Calculations for these values were done
through
PASW.
The
software
PASW
Statistics
(SPSS
version
18)
3
4
http://math.hws.edu/javamath/ryan/ChiSquare.html
http://www.acastat.com/Statbook/chisqassoc.htm
18
Profile of Participants
Characteristics
Age
Sex
Male
Female
Educational Attainment
High School
College
Weekly income
P1,000-5999
P6,000-9,999
>P10,000
No answer
Frequency
Percentage (%)
3
14
13
10.0
46.7
43.3
7
23
23.3
76.7
12
18
40.0
60.0
18
6
2
4
60.0
20.0
6.7
13.3
N Cases = 30
Thirty (30) shop-owners were interviewed for this study (Table 1),
all owning a stall or stalls inside the public market of Antipolo City. Of the
19
shop-owners who answered the survey forms, 10% were between the
ages of less than twenty (20) years old to twenty-nine (29) years old.
Most of the participants interviewed were within the age range of 30-39
years old (46.7%) while the rest were over 40 years old (about 43.3%).
Most of the thirty (30) participants interviewed were females, about
76.7%; while a smaller percentage, about 23.3%, were males.
More than half of the shop-owners who answered the survey
questionnaires finished college degree (about 60%), while 40% finished
high school/vocational school.
When asked about their weekly income, most of the shop-owners
(60%), stated they earn between P1,000-P5,999 pesos, while some of
them (20%) earn between P6,000-P9,999.00 and only a few (6.7%) earn
a weekly income of more than 10,000 pesos. About 13.3% did not state
their income in the survey questionnaires.
Table 2 below shows the profile of the shoppers interviewed for this
study. From this Table, it can be seen that 21.7% of the shoppers
interviewed were aged less than or equal to 29 years old, while 31.7%
were between 30-39 years old. It can be seen that the majority of
shoppers surveyed were 40 years old and over, comprising 46.7% of the
sample.
Although the participants were chosen at random, more female
shoppers were interviewed (71.7%), while the male shoppers comprise
only 28.3% of the sample. It cannot be concluded here that more females
20
do the shopping than males, however, it can be said that at the time of
sampling, more females arrived than males and thus, they were the ones
mostly interviewed for this purpose.
Table 2 : Profile of Shoppers Participants in the Survey
Characteristics
Frequency
Percentage (%)
13
19
28
21.7
31.7
46.7
17
43
28.3
71.7
8
34
18
13.3
56.6
30.0
16
20
24
26.7
33.3
40.0
3
1
10
10
24
4
7
1
5.0
1.7
16.7
16.7
40.0
6.7
11.7
1.7
Age
<=29
30-39
>=40
Sex
Male
Female
Educational Attainment
Elementary
High School/Voc
College
Monthly Family Income
<4,999
5,000-9,999
>=P10,000
Occupation
Student
Govt Employee
Private Employee
Self-employed
Homemaker
Labourer
Others
No answer
N Cases = 60
owners;
5%
are
students,
1.7%
works
in
Shopowners
Shoppers
Shopowners
Yes
60
30
100%
100%
No
Yes
58
28
96.7%
93.3%
No
3.3%
3.3%
Yes
52
26
86.7%
89.7%
No
13.3%
10.3%
Yes
58
29
96.7%
96.7%
No
3.3%
3.3%
Variables
1. Awareness
ordinance
of
the
2. Understand
the
reason
for
regulating/banning
the use of plastic
bags
3. Satisfied with
ordinance?
the
4. Understand
the
advantage of using
reusable bags
Percentage
23
business owners regarding the ordinance have been distributed all over
the city5.
5.2.3
Per interview with some business owners who are far from the city center
24
wish to change the ordinance and add a P5.00 levy for using plastic bags
or whether they prefer the current ordinance which bans the use of plastic
bags for all dry goods purchases and limits such use for wet goods
purchases. The responses are shown on the following figures below:
The figure above shows that 96.7% of the respondents bring their
own reusable bag nowadays when shopping, while only a few (3.3%)
never bring their own reusable bags. When asked why, the only reason
they gave was that they always forget to bring reusable bags with them
when they go shopping.
25
The shoppers were also asked for their opinions regarding buying
reusable bags for their groceries. Most of them (65%) said that buying
27
reusable bags is all right with them because they can contribute to
environmental protection (See Table 4 below). About 25% said that it was
fine with them as long as they could carry the things they bought, while a
few of them (10%) said they were annoyed because of the extra
expenses.
Table 4 : Shoppers Comments on Buying their Own Reusable Bags
Comment
Frequency
Percent (%)
10.0
15
25.0
39
65.0
Total
60
100.0
not favour the ban are listed separately to show the precise reason given
by the respondents.
Table 5 : Shop-owners Opinions Regarding the Banning of Plastic Bags
Opinions on why plastic bags should or
should not be banned
Frequency
Percentage (%)
11
36.7
6.7
11
36.7
6.7
No answer
13.3
30
100.0
Total
5.2.4
Practices
grumble and demand for plastic bags, they were afraid to pay the penalty
(which is PhP500.00 for the first offense, PhP800.00 for the second time
and revoking of license to sell on the third time of violation).
Table 6 : Frequency and Percentage of Shoppers and Shop-owners Still
Using Plastic Bags
Still use plastic
bags
Shop-owners
Yes
Frequency
17
Percentage
56.7
No
11
36.7
6.7
No answer
Sometimes
Total
30
100.0
Shoppers
Frequency Percentage
15
25.0
24
40
21
35
60
100.0
It was also found that other sellers in the dry goods area use plastic
bags as courtesy to the customers who do not have shopping bags with
them for the convenience of carrying the goods bought. When asked why
they still use such despite the ban, the reason given was that it is only
banned when caught and that the customer needs to have the goods
packaged in a sturdy carryout container. From Table 8 above, it can be
seen that more shoppers no longer use plastic bags as carryout container
when shopping because they want to cooperate with the government
policy and that they did not want to get caught and pay the penalty. The
same reasons were given by the vendors who are no longer using plastic
carryout bags.
30
When
the
vendors/shop-owners
were
asked
whether
their
Frequency
Percent (%)
Yes
20.0
No
24
80.0
Total
30
100.0
Table
above
shows
that
some
20%
of
the
shop-owners
Dry goods vendors make paper bags out of old newspapers or telephone directories and discarded
magazines.
31
Trash reduced
Shoppers
after
the
Shop-owners
Frequency
Percent (%)
Frequency
Percent (%)
Yes
24
40.0
21
70.0
No
11.7
30.00
Somewhat/a bit
29
48.3
Total
60
100.0
30
100.0
32
5.2.5
34
Statistical Analysis
The results of the survey on the shoppers were subjected to Chisquare analysis, since this group had a bigger sample size than the shopowners. For the survey on shop-owners, only the frequencies and
percentage were considered since the sample size was too small for
statistical treatment using a chi-square analysis. To further test the Chisquare values, Cramers V was also used for nominal values to determine
the generalizability of the samples. The demographical data were
compared with the data on the choice of carryout containers and with
regards to the satisfaction with ordinance.
Table 9 below shows the percentage of respondents who use
reusable containers when shopping as against those who use disposable
containers when shopping. It was found that 92.3% of the respondents
within the age range 29 years and below favoured using reusable bag
while only 7.7% favoured the use of disposable containers. About 78.9%
35
of those respondents aged 30-39 years old favoured the use of reusable
containers, and only 21.1% among the respondents aged 30-39 years old
favoured using disposable containers for shopping. Among those aged 40
years old and over, 85.7% favoured the use of reusable containers for
shopping, while only 14.3% favoured the use of disposable carryout
containers. From this Table, it can be seen that there is a high percentage
of those who favoured using reusable carryout containers/bags across age
groups, signifying that age had nothing to do with choosing the type of
container. To further test this, Cramers V, which is used to test for the
generalizability of the sample within a population, was run in order to
check whether there was any relationship. As it turned out, a Cramers V
equal to 0.136 indicates a weak relationship between the variables within
the samples. Similarly, a value of p = 0.576 means that there was no
sufficient data/evidence to generalize this result within the population.
Table 9 : Age Group vs. Choice of Carryout Container
Age group
<=29
30-39
>=40
Approx. Sig. (p<.05)
Cramers V
N cases = 60
Choice of Carryout
Containers
Disposable
Reusable
7.7%
92.3%
21.1%
78.9%
14.3%
85.7%
0.576
0.136
Total
13
19
28
No
Total
<=29
84.6%
15.4%
100%
30-39
94.7%
5.3%
100%
>=40
82.1%
17.9%
100%
.446
Cramers V
.164
N cases = 60
From the table above, it can be said that there was a very high
percentage of those who were satisfied with the ordinance banning the
use of plastic bags compared to those who were not satisfied. Checking
for correlation using age groups to determine the variability of yes
answers among the age groups, the results generated for the age vs.
satisfaction with ordinance indicated that there was no correlation
between these two variables within the sample and that it could not be
generalized for the entire population.
Similarly, in trying to establish the relationship between the
educational attainment and choice of carryout containers, it was found
that there was a high percentage of respondents who would rather use
reusable containers than disposable ones, across all categories of
educational attainment as can be seen in Table 11 below:
37
Educational
Attainment
Elementary
High School/Voc
College
Approx. Sig.
(p<.05)
Cramers V
N cases = 60
Choice of Carryout
Container
Disposable
Reusable
12.5%
87.5%
8.8%
91.2%
27.8%
72.2%
0.070
Total
100.00%
100.0%
100.0%
0.234
Educational
attainment
Elementary
High School/Voc
85.3%
College
Approx. Sig. (p<.05)
94.4%
Cramers V
14.7%
5.6%
0.379
Total
100%
100%
100%
0.180
N cases = 60
38
It can be said from the data gathered that education has nothing to
do with the satisfaction/dissatisfaction of the respondents regarding the
policy implemented. At any educational category, they can be satisfied
when they perceive that the policy is doing good for the environment as
well as to the behaviour of the people. Naturally, as can be seen from
Table 12, not everyone will be pleased with such a policy and will always
resist change, such that some of the shoppers interviewed said that they
were not satisfied with the ordinance banning the use of plastic disposable
bags, because for them, plastic bags offer the most convenient way to
carry the goods they purchased.
Table 13 : Income Category vs. Choice of Carryout Container
<PhP 4,999.00
PhP 5,000.00 PhP 9,999.00
>= PhP10,000.00
Total
Disposable
Reusable
18.8%
81.3%
100%
5.0%
95.0%
100%
20.8%
79.2%
100%
0.303
Cramers V
0.199
N cases = 60
of
carry
out
container.
Across
the
income
groups,
more
Yes
No
<PhP 4,999
81.3%
18.8%
100.0%
PhP 5,000-9,999
90.0%
10.0%
100.0%
>=PhP 10,000
87.5%
12.5%
100.0%
0.736
Cramers V
0.101
N cases = 60
40
CHAPTER VI :
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The study was able to provide a birds eye view of the preliminary
effects of the ordinance as well as gain some knowledge on how those
who were interviewed felt about it.
The data from the survey was able to prove the hypothesis of the
study, which found a positive impact of the ban on the solid waste
situation of the city as well as the attitude and behaviour of the
constituency as proven by the high percentage of those who favour the
ordinance and the bringing of their own reusable bags when shopping.
In this study, it was found that, nowadays, vendors/shop-owners in
the dry goods section no longer use plastic bags (except for a few which
try to sneak-in plastic bags at the behest of some consumers, just to
please them), and use paper packaging instead. These paper packaging
are in the form of recycled materials such as old newspapers, magazines
and phone directories and made into paper bags because the shopowners/vendors find the brown paper bags more expensive. This clearly
shows how people can be creative in order to comply with the policy.
Although there is no baseline data to determine the volume of reduction
in plastic bags waste, the reduction of plastic bags littering the streets has
definitely been achieved. Also, since the people have become aware that
the plastic bags ordinance was implemented to curb the waste littering,
41
43
While it is true that plastic bags waste can clog waterways because
they are non-biodegradable, other solid waste can do the same. And
using paper put a huge demand on our trees and water supply. It is
clearly
not
the
best
solution.
To
put
it
simply,
with
the
strict
44
the
citizens in
protecting the
46
REFERENCES
Adane, Legese and Diriba Muleta. (2011). Survey on the usage of
plastic bags, their disposal and adverse impacts on environment: A case
study in Jimma City, Southwestern Ethiopia. Journal of Toxicology and
Environmental Health Sciences Vol. 3(8) pp. 234-248, August 2011. ISSN
2006-9820 2011 Academic Journals. Available online at http://www.
academicjournals.org/JTEHS Accessed Dec. 3, 2011.
Begum I, Zareena. (Undated). Plastics and the Environment.
Dissemination Paper 12. Center of Excellence in Environmental Economics
(Sponsored by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of
India), Madras School of Economics. Available online at http://coe.
mse.ac.in/dp/Paper%2012.pdf Accessed on Dec. 4, 2011.
Chan-Halbrendt, C, Di Fang, and Fang Yang. (2009). Trade-offs
between shopping bags made of non-degradable plastics and other
materials, using latent class analysis: the case of Tianjin, China.
International Food and Agribusiness management Review, Vol. 12 Issue
4, 2009. Available at http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/nrem/staff/downloads
/20091006_Formatted.pdf. Accessed on Dec. 4, 2011.
Dikgang, J and M. Visser. (2010). Behavioral Response to Plastic
Bag Legislation in Botswana. Environment for Development discussion
paper series May 2010 EfD DP 10-13. Available online at
http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/EfD-DP-10-13.pdf Accessed Dec. 7,
2011.
Xiufeng Xing. (2009). Study on the ban on free plastic bags in
China. Journal of Sustainable Development. Vol. 2. No. 1 pp. 156-158.
Available online at www.ccsenet.org/journal.html Accessed last Dec. 3,
2011.
47
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Ms. Grace Penaflor Sapuay graduated with a Bachelor of Science
degree (major in Marine Science) at the University of the Philippines
(Diliman) in 1983. She finished her Master of Science degree in Fisheries
major in Fishery Biology at the University of the Philippines in the Visayas
in 1987. In 1988 she was granted a Monbusho Scholarship by the
Japanese Governments Ministry of Education (Monbusho) and pursued a
Masters Degree in Fisheries specializing in fishery resources from
Kagoshima University, Kagoshima City, Japan.
Ms. Sapuay has been working as a freelance consultant in various
fields such as environmental management, solid waste management,
coastal resources management, coastal planning and other projects
requiring her expertise as a fishery and marine biologist, solid waste
management and environment specialist.
She is an avid advocate for environmental protection. After one of
her stints doing projects on solid waste management in 2004, which took
her to many places all over the Philippines, she saw the need to educate
the children and youth on environmental protection. Thus, she founded
the Kalipunan ng mga Kabataan para sa Kalikasan (KALIKASAN) in order
to help raise the awareness of children and youth on various
environmental issues affecting the country and the world. She also
started participating in international conferences on environment, taking
with her children, and all founding members of Kalikasan in order to train
them as future environmental leaders and enable them to participate in
areas concerning environmental management outside the country. As a
result, she has been invited to many activities, either as a speaker or
participant and guest at meetings and discussions concerning
environmental management.
Currently, Ms. Sapuay is enrolled at the UP School of Urban and
Regional Planning (Diploma in Urban and Regional Planning). She is a
member of the Board of Directors of the Solid Waste Management
Association of the Philippines (SWAPP) where she holds the position of
Vice-President for Luzon. She is also a member of the UP Planning and
Development Foundation (UP PLANADES); the Philippine Institute of
Environmental Planners (PIEP), and currently secretary of the Philippine
Association of Japanese Government Scholars (PHILAJAMES). She
continues to do her work on environmental advocacy and dreams of
being able to hold a National Childrens Congress on Environment
sometime.
48