Toronto Takes Control: The Banning of Bottled Water

When trying to find a solution for reducing garbage levels and landfill use, one very popular issue comes to mind, bottled water. This fad has become a hot topic for waste management and its concerns because of the undeniable amounts of plastic waste it produces each year. Although this plastic is of high quality and in demand by recyclers, over eighty percent of these bottles are simply thrown away (Baskind, 2009). The idea of banning water bottles has been raised by several municipal governments but the city of Toronto has actually voted to ban the sale of these plastic products on all municipal premises by the year 2011. The article “Toronto bans water bottles” published by Canwest News Services explains this decision as well as other measures which the city plans to take in order to reduce their waste production.

By banning the sale of bottled water on premises such as City Hall and golf courses, the government will be implementing regulatory control in the sense that they plan to prohibit this specific action within the city and furthermore, will enforce consequences if these regulations are not met. As when other regulatory controls are put into action, an alternative has been proposed for this situation, including upgrades of already existing fountains to ensure that Torontonians have access to clean and safe drinking water (Canwest News Services, 2008). The government has attempted to approach the ever-increasing issue of plastic water bottles in the past by tactics such as moral suasion. This included stainless steel bottle campaigns and the education and awareness of plastic water bottles’ effects on the environment, but it is evident that the government felt a stronger strategy was needed to address the problem.

Others might argue that this problem could be handled using economic incentives as opposed to regulatory control. Instead of completely banning the sale of bottled water, an additional tax could be added to the cost of the product. The idea behind this tax would be that consumers would gradually become more and more discouraged to purchase bottled water and would begin to participate in more sustainable practises such as carrying a reusable water bottle with them and filling it up at the fountains. In order for this incentive to work successfully, fountains within Toronto would still have to be upgraded, therefore providing an alternative option to paying an increased amount for “packaged” water. Also, it would have to be advertised and made aware that a supplementary tax was being added to the price of the plastic product, or else consumers may be careless and continue to purchase the problematic bottles. Although command and control regulation is most appropriate when monitoring costs are very high, the process of monitoring this additional tax would not necessarily be out of proportion.

Another example of an economic incentive that could be implemented would be a deposit/cash back system. When purchasing bottled water, consumers would pay the normal price for the product as well as a small additional fee. Then, consumers would have the option of returning their emptied bottles to a specified location and would be given back that additional fee for doing so. This technique is currently used for waste products such as beer and liquor bottles as well as milk containers. It would convince buyers to return their bottles, causing more plastic to be recycled than thrown in the garbage. Also, even if consumers weren’t returning their bottles to compensate their deposit, it is likely that someone will use this system to their advantage to make a profit. Unfortunately, monitoring a process such as this might involve high costs because bottled water is such a commonly used product.

When it comes to this specific issue, I believe that it would be more appropriate to use regulatory control than the mentioned economic incentives to approach the problem of plastic water bottles and the ever-increasing levels of waste that are associated with them. I think it is necessary for Toronto to ban the sale of bottled water if the city wants to make a significant reduction in the amount of waste that enters their landfills. Although increasing the price of bottled water would divert some citizens from purchasing the product, many consumers would still not be financially affected by the additional tax. This means that bottled water would still continue to be purchased, and waste levels would not decrease by the desired amount. In the other case, a deposit/cash back system would cause more bottles to be recycled but there is still a very good chance that some would end up in landfills. For either situation, manufactures would still be fabricating the plastic product, which elucidates even more environmental concerns. If bottled water was completely banned in the city, citizens wouldn’t even have the option of purchasing it on premises (drastically decreasing plastic waste levels) and furthermore, the demand for the fabrication of plastic water bottles would decrease as well. In other situations, economic incentives have proven to be a less harsh and more appropriate approach, but as history has shown in the past, sometimes government command and control is necessary to avoid serious environmental harm.

References

Baskind, C. (2009) Five Reasons Not to Drink Bottled Water. 11 May 2008. http://lighterfootstep.com/2008/05/five-reasons-not-to-drink-bottled-water/. Accessed 15 November 2009.

Canwest News Services (2008) Toronto bans water bottles. 3 December 2008. http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1027243. Accessed on 15 November 2009.