EFFECTIVITY OF PLASTIC BAG MADE OF MONGGO BEANS AS ALTERNATIVE

FOR PLASTIC CELLOPHANES

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The environmental impacts of plastic bags have been the target of increased community

concern and media attention around the world. The environmental impacts are a result of littered

plastic cellophanes primarily and secondly from the production and use of plastic. Littered

plastics become entangled in and ingested by wildlife in marine and terrestrial environments. It is

the very same characteristics that make plastic a versatile packaging material, durable,

lightweight, and high strength, that also makes plastic litter easily spread, persistent, visible, and

an essentially cumulative litter material (Allen Consulting Group (ACG) 2006 Page 20).

Moreover, plastics are contributing to the widespread and lesser known problem of plastic

pollution having significant impacts on wildlife feeding, hormone production, impacting on

reproduction, creating toxic chemical build up, affecting ecosystem processes and biodiversity.

Both the negative aesthetics of plastic bags and the more significant ecological damage

have negative socio-economic impacts. Littered plastic contributes to the loss of visual

aesthetics, the loss of wildlife and pristine wilderness areas, impacting the tourism industry and

those employed within. Additional socio-economic impacts involve damage caused to personal

property such as buildings, cars, boats and livestock, from entanglement and blocked drains, as

well as social concerns about the non-essential use of a non-renewable resource (oil and natural

gas). The concerns about plastic bags use are characterised by two interrelated factors:
environmental impacts, and their symbolic value (Nolan ITU 2002b). Plastic bagshave become a

politically incorrect symbol of the threat to the environment” (Byars 1995) which at a time of

climate change debate is giving PSB important status.

The profusion and limited tenure of plastic bags have tremendous harmful effects on the

ecosystem of the world (Moharam & Maqtari, 2014). Moreover, these products' limited life span

usage leads to disposal which takes centuries for decomposition. More and more countries are in

use of these products without the consideration of environmental impact (Kumar, 2018) as they

are more concerned with current development instead of looking at the future consequences. No

doubt there are several benefits associated with the use of plastic but the established system of

plastic is now known for the severe environmental issues.

So far, the concerned matter has been given less attention for its production and

consumption patterns (Nielsen et al., 2019). Plastic bags’ daily waste is the largest component of

environment pollution. Food packs with plastic lining, plastic bottles and other such items’

disposal can pollute groundwater and is also harmful to animal life. Because of careless attitude,

85% of plastic grocery bags are dumped in open landfills (Kumar, 2018). Some countries are yet

formulating policies while some others have implemented rules and regulations against the use

of polythene products. As per the United Nations (UN) 2018 report, it is mentioned that around

127 countries have implemented some kind of policies related to the prohibition for the use of

plastic bags (Mahmood et al., 2014; Shah, 2019). Researchers, scholars, investigators and

worldwide known national and international institutions have published several articles and

reports on the harmful impact of plastic bags in different regions but unfortunately in Pakistan,

the research related to the issue under consideration is very limited.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

 The purpose of this study is to provide information about the effectivity of plastic made

of monggo beans, and to summarize the measures taken to minimize these effects. Formal and

informal sources were used to obtain information about the alternatives for plastic bags.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The findings of this study would be beneficial to the following.

Community. This study will benefit the community in order for them to understand

having an alternative for plastic bags. Through this research, the community will further promote

the use of plastic cellophanes made from monggo beans.

Academic Institutions and administrators. Through this research, academic institutions

and administrators may promote programs and advocacies regarding monggo beans as an

alternative for plastic cellophanes.

Students. Students will be directly benefited from this research as its findings may

encourage them to alternatives for using plastic bags.

Future Researchers. This study would help future researchers enhance their knowledge

on the effectiveness of alternatives for plastic bags. Through knowing these, they can prepare

themselves for the advantages of its use and will benefit their future studies.

SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The research that I conducted only limits its scope to five employees who work at the

Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Digos City, Davao del Sur. This

study aims to know their opinions, knowledge and insights about monggo beans as an alternative

for plastic bags.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the study to be understood well, the following term is defined:

A plastic bag is a container made of a thin, flexible plastic film, nonwoven fabric, or plastic

textile. Plastic bags are commonly used to store and transport things such as groceries, produce,

powders, periodicals, chemicals, and garbage. It is a very prevalent type of packing. The seams

of most plastic bags are heat sealed, but some are bonded with adhesives or sewn.

Monggo/Mung Beans, also known as Vigna radiata, are members of the Leguminosae family of

legumes and beans. Their widespread use throughout Asia, particularly in China and the region

of Southeast Asia, attests to their popularity.

 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Alternative Plastic Bags

There are many environment-friendly alternatives to plastic bags, such as jute bags, paper

bags, bio-degradable bags, and reusable bags. Commonly, jute bags are recommended as an

environmentally friendly alternative to plastic bags because the bags are made from

biodegradable material which comes from a plant fiber called jute, mostly consisting of

cellulose. This is eco-friendly and has no harmful effects on the environment and agriculture.

Paper bags are also recommended as an environment friendly alternative to plastic bags. It has

been suggested that the natural fibers of paper and its recyclability creates a positive image of the

paper bags (Though, 2007; PBWG, 2002). Biodegradable plastic bags are another

alternative to the non-biodegradable plastic bags; however, they are not free from environmental

harm as they contain toxic materials. Therefore, the alternatives to plastic bags should be

carefully assessed before adoption so that they are soil and environment friendly (Though, 2007).

The best alternatives to plastic shopping bags are fully biodegradable bags which are

non-toxic for soil. Moreover, they might be manure for the soil after decomposition. Impulsive

usage of plastic bags is very harmful and this habit should be changed (PBWG, 2002 Page 21;

Though, 2007). Moreover, impulsive purchases are characteristic to the non-supermarket retail

sector, where reusable bags are less common and reduction campaigns have had limited success.

With no reusable bag readily obtainable at hand, and no environment friendly alternatives being

made available, consumers are thus overwhelmed with the experienced convenience and would

thus gladly accept or even request for the plastic bags. Thus, impulsive purchases have a
significant role in the reduction or increase of the plastic bags consumption and littering, and

alternatives provided by retailers can conclusively form a critical factor to the success of

reduction in the plastic bag usage. It is recognized that alternatives to the plastic bags provide an

opportunity for retailers to consider the most appropriate bags for grocery usages. Furthermore,

it is crucial that the bag proclaimed as an alternative to the plastic bags should be convenient for

practical purposes of normal usage and also environmentally friendly.

We need to use alternatives of plastic bags but we must bear in mind that alternative

plastic bags should be less or no harmful for our environment, especially agriculture. Agriculture

is basically our life. Agriculture supplies raw materials to the industry as food and non-food

materials. Any alternatives to plastic bags suggested must have the characteristics of less

harmful effects than the current ones or should have preferably zero environmental impact,

otherwise there would be no benefit for the people and agricultural development (ACG, 2006,

Page 41). This is a very significant factor to consider as natural alternatives might have the

potential for greater detrimental impacts on the environment and agriculture than the traditional

plastic bags. The natural fiber alternatives that are currently popular are jute bags, paper bags and

biodegradable or bio-plastics, in conjunction with the non-renewable alternatives, such as

heavier plastic bags, woven plastic bags and renewable calico cloth bags (Though, 2007). While

numerous alternatives to plastic bags exist, the currently favored alternatives can be

categorized in four main groups, such as, jute, paper, biodegradable and reusable bags. The jute

bags consist of many types and are biodegradable and quite compostable. Besides, they have no

negative effect on the environment and agriculture. The category of biodegradable bags

incorporates many classes of natural starch-based plastics, synthetic degradable plastics and

blended synthetic with natural plastics, with different environmental impacts from each
type. In contrast, paper bag is made with one format, although different grades, colors and

thickness and alter the environmental impacts of production and use. Finally, reusable bags can

be made from both the renewable and the non-renewable sources, including different types and

applications of plastics and cloth. Jute bags can be the best plastic bags alternatives which are

environment friendly and easily compostable.

Socio-Economic Implications of Environmental Impacts

The socio-economic impacts associated with the impacts of littered plastic bags are the

impacts from floods caused by blocked drains and sewers, negative impacts on tourism, and the

damage to property and infrastructure caused by plastic bags. Littered plastic bags have had

devastating effects in Bangladesh, and have resulted in nonnegotiable plastic bag management

by authorities. Bangladesh banned the distribution of plastic bags after plastic bags and other

packaging blocked storm-water drains preventing drainage, and amplifying the massive floods in

2002. The aggravated floods increased the already immense damage, casualties, and fatalities

caused by the floods. After floods there are well known concerns surrounding sanitation,

drinking water and the spread of disease. Longer-term issues in post flood areas are the impacts

to economic viability, especially where agricultural and farming land has been damaged, and the

social/cultural well being of people.

Further socio economic impacts of the littered PSB are the damage caused to property

and infrastructure. Major infrastructure was damaged in the Bangladesh floods, causing ongoing

infrastructure and government pressure. In a context closer to home PSB have also been the

cause of damage to property as a result of being littered. Littered plastic bags damage or ‘cook’

boat engines when wrapped around propellers and water intakes (Kearney 2007), causing engine

failure, which can be potentially life threatening (National Research Council (USA) 1995 &
MCS 2004). Littered bags can also damage cars, as demonstrated during the V8 Supercar 2002

“Bathurst 100” race. Two drivers were forced to stop when plastic bags blocked cooling

mechanisms, overheating the cars.38 These forced stops during a race had the potential to cause

a loss, which would have impacts on the racing team and economy based on the V8 Supercar

series. Other potential industry loss from littered PSB exists in the tourism industry.

The impact of littered plastic bags on tourism has been noted in Australia, Pacific and

Ireland. Australian public awareness of littered plastic bags was gained by the damage to the

environment leading to the loss of visual amenity and aquatic life (EPHC 2007). Specifically, the

impacts on endangered Loggerhead and Leatherback turtles, and more recently impacts on coral

and reef ecosystems (NOAA 2006). Both the loss of visual amenity and biodiversity due to

marine litter would also have significant impacts on environmental tourism to the Great Barrier

Reef and other environment-based attractions in Australia.

Pacific nations have been identified as being subject to international marine litter, and

suffering the consequences of the impacts on fishing and tourism (Hay 1992, Gregory 1999 and

Morishige et al 2007), moreover Pacific nations bear the brunt of impacts to tourism from marine

debris and a loss of biodiversity (Gregory 1999). The arrival of marine litter on Pacific nations is

unquestionably due to the islands geographic locations, and ocean currents delivering marine

litter to coasts (Morishige et al 2007). Also unavoidable is the uneven cost distribution created by

the clean up and disposal of foreign origin debris for Pacific nations (Gregory 1999). The Pacific

nations are in a predicament, as tourism is a major economic input to the Pacific, but tourism is

also intensifying the problems and costs of litter and waste management.

The impact of littered plastic bags on tourism was also noted in Ireland, and as a result

the government introduced a €0.15 on plastic bags, commonly known as the “PlasTax”.41
Factors leading to intervention in these countries were the large number of bags that are littered

each day to accumulate in trees, hedges, fences and drains around urban and rural areas,42

creating aesthetic and potential economic disturbance to tourism.

Ecological Impacts of Plastic Shopping Bags

The majority of ecological impacts of plastic bags are a result of the effects from plastic

bags as litter and pollution. Environmental impacts are evident both from bags as a whole item,

littered raw plastic materials and from littered bags that have eroded in the environment to

release microscopic plastic particles. In this way, littered plastic bags contribute to the larger

issue of plastic pollution. Terrestrial plastic bag litter does not appear to be a major problem for

wildlife (Nolan ITU 2002b & ACG 2006). However livestock have been known to consume

plastic bags, causing illness and fatalities (KIMO 2000).

In contrast, plastic bags are a common sight in the marine environment, and cause a

myriad of problems for wildlife. The impacts of marine litter are compounded by land-based

sources contributing up to 80 percent of marine debris (Gregory 1989, 1991).27 However there

have been documented cases of ocean borne plastic bags being blown onshore and inland

causing terrestrial problems (Wace 1995). Marine pollution is not limited to near shore; plastic

bags have been found more than 300 kilometres offshore, trapped in undersea lava formations

3.2 kilometres below the surface (Dive Discover 2006). This demonstrates how easily plastic

bags and other marine litter can be dispersed. Litter can travel thousands of miles being carried

by oceanic currents (Ebbesmeyer 2003) far away from the source of litter. The ability of marine

litter to be dispersed widely increases the potential for litter to become entangled with or

ingested by marine life.

Ineffective Global Policies

 India: Ban on plastic bags. Delhi raised the minimum thickness of bags and

subsequently ordered a ban but it wasn’t implemented thoroughly. This study suggests, where

bans are not effectively enforced, information campaigns on environmental impact (contribution

to the deadly Mumbai Floods) and cashback/alternative schemes had an impact on plastic bag

use.29 Fees, dependent on amount, decreased plastic bag use by up to 10%. This combination of

interventions decreased plastic bag usage from 80.8% to 57.1%. The study concludes that

blanket bans are not the best policy for developing countries that lack enforcement capacity, and

instead turn to fees, consumer awareness campaigns, and cashback plans.

Botswana: Plastic bag tax. Botswana implemented a plastic bag levy that is proving

ineffective, mostly due to the fact that consumers are willing to pay the tax to continue using

plastic bags. The study suggests that the levy be increased and that the government must

establish efficient collection methods to avoid the perception that the tax serves as revenue for

retailers.

San Francisco, CA: Plastic bag ban. In San Francisco, a ban on plastic bags (with no

mandatory fee) was first implemented in 2007, only applying to large supermarkets and grocery

stores with over $2 million in annual sales.33 The newsletter, UseLessStuff conducted a survey

on stores affected by this ban-only ordinance. Most retailers switched to offering paper bags, and

retailers unaffected by the ban-only ordinance continued primarily offering plastic bags.

Excessive use of paper bags was observed (with significant double bagging), and few customers

brought their own reusable bags.

Austin, TX: Plastic bag ban. The 2014 ban succeeded in decreasing Austin’s thin

plastic bag waste in litter, at levels 25% of that in a nearby community without the same

ordinance.32 However, retailers switched to thick, "reusable" plastic bags, not covered by the
ban. The overall decrease in plastic litter was minor, largely driven by a fivefold increase in thick

reusable plastic bags.

 CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH LOCALE

This study was conducted at Digos City Davao del Sur. This place was selected because

many respondents who have knowledge about making alternative plastic bags reside here. Digos

City is also a growing city that is suitable in making progress environmentally.

RESPONDENTS OF THE STUDY

The way in which I select a sample of individuals to be research participants is critical.

How I select participants will determine the population to which we may generalize our research

findings. The procedure we used for assigning participants to different treatment conditions such

as; selecting participants who are working in the Department of Environment and Natural

Resources.
RESEARCH DESIGN

This study used the quantitative method using phenomenological processes and

techniques. Quantitative research design is aimed at discovering how many people think, act or

feel in a specific way (Watsons, 2015). Quantitative projects involve large sample sizes,

concentrating on the quantity of responses, as opposed to gaining the more focused or emotional

insight that is the aim of qualitative research. According to Goertzen (2017), the standard format

in quantitative research design is for each respondent to be asked the same questions, which

ensures that the entire data sample can be analysed fairly. The data is supplied in a numerical

format, and can be analysed in a quantifiable way using statistical methods (Bloomfield &

Fisher, 2019).

Surveys can, however, be tailored to branch off if the respondent answers in a certain

way for instance people who are satisfied or dissatisfied with a service may be asked different

questions subsequently. In the study of Holton and Burnett (2005) quantitative research design

tends to favour closed-ended questions. Providing respondents with a set list of answers, they

will not normally be able to give lengthy open-ended responses. This design ensures that the

process of quantitative research is far more efficient than it would be if qualitative-style open

ended questions were employed (Brannen, 2017). It is more efficient because it is then not

necessary to carry out the time-consuming process of coding vast quantities of open-ended

responses. However, quantitative research design does often allow the inclusion of an ‘other’

category in the list of possible responses to questions, where appropriate In accordance with the

study of Hoe and Hoare (2012), that this allows those respondents who do not fit directly into the
main categories to still get their precise responses recorded and used in the analysis of the

research project results.

RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

The research instrument consists of three parts. The first part of the research instruments

consists of the name of the respondents. The second part is the research instrument that consists

of the answer sheet from 1-20 with corresponding boxes where the letter of their desired answer

will be inserted. Part three of the research instrument is the reading passages. It is a series of the

text to be read. There are three reading passages to be read and there are sets of questions in

every reading passage. The total number of questions is 30. The answering of questions will

require 20-25 minutes.

DATA GATHERED PROCEDURE

Data was collected online using Google Form because of the pandemic. This was the

time when the university prepared to implement flexible learning arrangements in response to

the shift in the education system to the new normal. To ensure the ethical conduct of the study,

the participants were instructed that upon proceeding with the online survey, they grant consent

to participate in the research voluntarily.

The data gathered were analyzed using SPSS version 23. Frequency count, percentages,

and mean were used to describe the data. Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to determine if there

were statistically significant differences between two or more groups of an independent variable

and Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare differences between two independent groups.

The result was significant if the p-value was less than.