Plastic Pollution and why Corporations suck! - Sophie Antezana
Peter Dauvergne delves into the microplastic pandemic in the article The Power of Environmental Norms: Plastic Pollution and Microbeads. He argues that environmental norms are strengthened and diffused quicker when there is scientific data showing that it causes harm. Especially when political/corporational resistance is relatively non-existent and there is an increase in activism, there tends to be an effective resolution of the problem, as seen with microbeads. However, regardless of the obvious progress to eliminate the dangerous microplastics, the process has been unequal among different parties. Firms look for loopholes, miss deadlines, and also limit the possibility for reform.
Comparing the situation to the logic of collective action, it is clear that local and even larger communities have been creating regulations to tackle the microplastic problem without attempting to assert complete control. However, the fact that companies specifically try to find ways around said regulations is reminiscent of the Tragedy of Commons. Arguably, it is understandable for a corporation to use the microplastics (microbeads, synthetic fibers, plastic bottles, etc.) to prevent cost of production from soaring, therefore keeping retail prices cheap. Yet when practically the whole industry uses it, the collective result of the “commons” is a polluted planet. But each company does not want to be the first to start implementing change, rather they await for a “free-ride” from other, more sustainable companies.
All that being said, Dauvergne brings up the point that since microplastics have grown into such a negative connotation, it compels corporations to start changing in order to maintain consumers legitimacy. Plus with added economic clauses of regulation, it overall will be a loss to the industry if they continue to use microbeads. As a result, within a decade there has been a 2% decrease of microplastics flowing into marine life, proving how crucial environmental norms can be to maintain our planet.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2018.1449090
Comparing the situation to the logic of collective action, it is clear that local and even larger communities have been creating regulations to tackle the microplastic problem without attempting to assert complete control. However, the fact that companies specifically try to find ways around said regulations is reminiscent of the Tragedy of Commons. Arguably, it is understandable for a corporation to use the microplastics (microbeads, synthetic fibers, plastic bottles, etc.) to prevent cost of production from soaring, therefore keeping retail prices cheap. Yet when practically the whole industry uses it, the collective result of the “commons” is a polluted planet. But each company does not want to be the first to start implementing change, rather they await for a “free-ride” from other, more sustainable companies.
All that being said, Dauvergne brings up the point that since microplastics have grown into such a negative connotation, it compels corporations to start changing in order to maintain consumers legitimacy. Plus with added economic clauses of regulation, it overall will be a loss to the industry if they continue to use microbeads. As a result, within a decade there has been a 2% decrease of microplastics flowing into marine life, proving how crucial environmental norms can be to maintain our planet.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2018.1449090
Comments
Post a Comment