Was the government policy good?
Sep 06, 2025 19:16
21
2
1
English
In 2020, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry decided to charge for plastic bags, with the aim of providing an opportunity for people to consider whether they are truly necessary and reconsider their lifestyles.
Five years have passed since then, but has charging for plastic bags contributed to changing public awareness?
Five years have passed since charging for plastic bags was introduced, and multiple pieces of data suggest that it is difficult to say that the policy has fully achieved its goal of "changing public awareness." Below, we will argue the reasons why it is considered a failure.
① The Gap Between the Goal of Changing Attitudes and Reality
A public opinion survey conducted by the Cabinet Office in 2022 revealed the following results:
Response Content Percentage
High interest and action before the fee was introduced 19.3%:
Interest increased and they started taking action after the fee was introduced 58.8%:
Interest increased but behavior did not change 16.2%:
No change in interest or behavior 4.2%:
At first glance, it may seem that many respondents said their interest had increased, but when combined, those who have not actually taken action (16.2%) and those who have not changed at all(4.2%) account for approximately 20%.
Furthermore, even among those who responded that they have taken action, 68.5% of those who said they "started carrying their own bags" cited "economic reasons due to the fee," which is hardly an indication of increased environmental awareness.
② The Actual State of Plastic Bag Refusal and Its Insanity
The same survey also revealed the following results regarding the current state of plastic bag refusal:
Response Percentage
I had been refusing plastic bags before the charge was introduced 16.1%
I have been refusing since the charge was introduced: 44.1%
I would refuse if there was a charge, but would accept if it was free: 25.3%
I would still buy them even if there was a charge 13.3%
In other words, approximately 40% of people responded that they would use plastic bags if they were free or would buy them even if they were paid for, indicating that their use of plastic bags is based on price rather than necessity.
This deviates from the original purpose of the policy, which is to consider whether they are truly necessary.
③ Side Effect: Increased Use of Household Garbage Bags
According to a survey by the Ministry of the Environment, sales of household garbage bags increased by approximately 10% after the charge was introduced.
This is because people who previously used free plastic bags as trash bags began purchasing designated trash bags instead.
As a result, it is possible that the policy has not led to an overall reduction in plastic usage and may even have had the opposite effect.
④ Conclusion: Insufficient to Change Attitudes
Refusing plastic bags is a price-driven behavior and does not necessarily reflect increased environmental awareness.
Approximately 20% of the public has not changed their attitudes or behaviors.
Increased demand for garbage bags is offsetting the reduction in plastic use.
Based on these data, charging for plastic bags has had only limited success in changing public attitudes, and we must conclude that it is a near failure as a policy.
経済産業省は2020年に、レジ袋を有料化することで、それが本当に必要かを考えて、私たちのライフスタイルを見直すきっかけとすることを目的として、レジ袋の有料化を決定しました。
あれから5年たった現在、レジ袋の有料化は当初の国民の意識変革貢献したのでしょうか?
レジ袋有料化から5年が経過した現在、その政策が「国民の意識変革」という目的を十分に達成したとは言い難いことが、複数のデータから浮かび上がっています。以下に、失敗と評価される根拠を論証します。
① 意識変革の目的と現実のギャップ
2022年に内閣府が実施した世論調査では、以下のような結果が示されています:
回答内容 割合
有料化以前から関心が高く行動していた 19.3%
有料化後に関心が高まり行動するようになった 58.8%
関心は高まったが行動に変化なし 16.2%
関心も行動も変化なし 4.2%
一見すると「関心が高まった」とする回答が多いように見えますが、実際に行動に移していない層(16.2%)と、そもそも変化がない層(4.2%)を合わせると約2割。
さらに、行動したと答えた層の中でも、「マイバッグを持ち歩くようになった」理由の68.5%が“有料化による経済的理由”であり、環境意識の向上とは言い難い。
② レジ袋辞退の実態と形骸化
同調査では、レジ袋辞退の状況についても以下のような結果が出ています:
回答内容 割合
有料化以前から辞退していた 16.1%
有料化後から辞退している 44.1%
有料なら辞退、無料なら受け取る 25.3%
有料でも購入している 13.3%
つまり、約4割の人が「無料なら使う」「有料でも買う」と回答しており、レジ袋の使用を“必要性”ではなく“価格”で判断していることが分かります。
これは、政策の本来の目的である「本当に必要かを考える」こととは乖離しています。
③ 副作用:家庭用ゴミ袋の使用増加
環境省の調査によると、レジ袋有料化後、家庭用ゴミ袋の販売量が約10%増加しました。
これは、無料レジ袋をゴミ袋代わりに使っていた層が、代替として専用ゴミ袋を購入するようになったためです。
結果として、プラスチック使用量全体の削減にはつながっていない可能性があり、むしろ逆効果となっている面もあります。
④ 結論:意識変革には不十分
レジ袋辞退は価格による行動であり、環境意識の高まりとは言えない
約2割の国民は意識も行動も変化していない
ゴミ袋需要の増加により、プラスチック使用量の削減効果が相殺されている
これらのデータから、レジ袋有料化は「国民の意識変革」という目的に対しては限定的な成果しか上げておらず、政策としては失敗に近いと評価せざるを得ません。
Japanese
NATIVE
English
B1
- Sun
- Mon
- Tue
- Wed
- Thu
- Fri
- Sat
N points
1,370
User rankings by N points (in the last 3 days)
59 / 801 English
Votes
31
Thanks
112
ID:
d62b8669