Why plastic bag bans triggered such a huge reaction
Queensland University of Technology’s Gary Mortimer and Rebekah Russell-Bennett delve into the consumer psychology behind Woolworths’ and Coles’ recent plastic bag bans in this crossposting from The Conversation.
Woolworths’ and Coles’ bans on plastic bags have been applauded by environmental groups, but were reportedly met with abuse and assault and claims of profiteering. Even comedians saw value in the theatre of the bag ban.
This reaction is due to supermarkets breaching their “psychological contract” with customers. When both major supermarkets appeared to back flip in the face of irate customers it only compounded the problem”.
The uproar is not about the principle of the behavioural change. It’s just the feeling when you realise you forgot to bring a bag and now you’re being punished with a 15c fine that the supermarket is making a profit out. The change will happen but in the meantime BRANDS can step into the space and support consumers in their hour of need with cool reusable, recyclable fold up handy bags. Face it. Right now the only people walking around with big shopping bags and spare plastic bags are the homeless and dog walkers! It’s a game now. And a great opportunity for brands to get themselves in the hands of consumers, especially in grocery. Smart marketers, you know what to do.
This is just a cheeky way for supermarkets to increase revenue. That’s all.
Anyone who thinks this is a sincere attempt to help the environment has completely missed the fact that (as this article rightly points out) they have not come anywhere close to removing plastic bags, they have simply started charging for them.
But then again, everyone in Australia always results to the method of ‘let’s tax something to change peoples behaviour’.
I am not sure about a psychological contract, the real reason is that it did not make sense.
First: the bags are not single use. People used them to bring their purchases home and then as bin liners in their kitchens. That’s two uses. Also used for damp clothes when travelling, pet litter, storing clothes and heaps of other things. So not single use.
So having forced customers to buy bags (also plastic) that are unsuitable as bin liners we now have to buy our bin liners (more plastic) with now two types of bags being used where there used to be one. Really?
And why? We are told it is for the environment but the Productivity Commission as long as 10 years ago said there was no advantage in banning these bags and further found that all the reports promoting the ban for saving the environment were all referring to each other as authorities.
So we are being put through unnecessary inconvenience for no reason other than virtue signalling by supermarkets to the Greens – a group that struggles to get 10 per cent of the vote in this country.
Democracy anyone? No wonder there is Checkout Rage.
People aren’t just buying biodegradable dog poo bags and bin liners?
In using the word “ban” in some form no less than fourteen times, this article perpetuates the humbug that caused the backlash from shoppers in the first place. The fact is, there is no ban on plastic bags – there is only cost-shifting from the supermarkets to the shopper. Rather than including the cost of plastic bags in the price of your groceries, the supermarkets are now selling plastic bags ON TOP OF that price. Coming on top of the requirement to donate your labour by operating your own checkout, this is adding insult to injury. Or rather, injury to injury. How curious that this did not occur to two “professors of marketing”!
The plastic bag “ban” is a conspiracy against the public, no more, no less.
Nice analysis but my take is simpler.
1. This is a classic example in people preferring to *seem* good as opposed to *do* good:
Yes, ban plastic and save the environment…. until it costs me or inconveniences me… then its a terrible idea.
2. People say things in research but you need to carefully unpick the results rather than blindly follow what a survey tells you.
This would have been a blind spot to Coles and Woolworths as I am sure all their research would have told them that everyone supported the ban, and there was going to be pats on the back all round. Until it actually translated to customers as longer wait times at checkout, shittier bag packing for what they bought, cost in terms of bags etc.
You know, when this happened in South Australia what seems like a lifetime ago, we adapted after our first shopping trip. I genuinely can’t remember anyone talking about it after the initial couple of shops as we accurately recognised the plastic bag ban for what it was – something utterly banal.
The fact there is any drama whatsoever – does not reflect well on consumers in other states. If someone is genuinely upset about having to remember to bring a bag to the sho with them…..they are in dire need of a hobby or pet, or just something worthwhile to care about….
This from the state that stood idly by while its government closed power stations and tore them down only to now depend of electricity from other states when the demand rises.
Alternatively can be interpreted as ….the only state actually doing something to meet our nation’s renewable targets. This game is fun! What else?
Thank you vicar.
The problem is the old bags, were not single use bags.
Everyone I know, used them at home for other purposes. Mainly for storing rubbish in.
Now we need to buy single use garbage bags…
…and no one has mentioned Aldis! We are all more than happy to purchase Aldis bags or bring our own bags to Aldis because we are also receiving great quality goods at cheaper prices. That’s Aldis contract with customers. Result – happy customers. And successful Aldis.
The whole plastic bag exercise reminds me of the thimble and pea trick.
I started stockpiling plastic bags for bin liners several months ago when I got whiff that a ban could be in the works. Man, I’ve got enough plastic bags to wipe out several dozen species of endangered turtles.
Make me an offer.
From my perspective the issue was a perception that this lacked authenticity. The explanation for the change was care for the environment yet the companies also benefited financially. Any time companies put prices up without an increase in service or reduce the level of service (e.g. no bag) and don’t reduce price then the community responds negatively. If the supermarkets had made it clear that not providing a plastic bag would save them $x and as result they would reduce price on HomeBrand flour, eggs etc by x cents and based on their data the change would be profit neutral to them (or even if they changed the fruit bags to paper bags and that would mean the whole change would be cost neutral) then I think community response would have been very different.
Line the area where the checkouts are, with cardboard boxes.
They do it at Bunnings (Wesfarmers)
Surely Coles, (Wesfarmers), can implement this with ease, but not the tiny annoying boxes, like Bunnings – use some decent sized ones. Harris Farm does and as a result I do my food shopping there.
With all due respect to the parties involved, the tactical implementation isn’t quite right from a marketing perspective, in fact it is backwards. Don’t charge for plastic bags. Instead, give people 5 or 10 cents off for each of their own bags that they use instead of a store plastic bag. Watch what happens.