Waste Management Policy Implementation in South Africa: An emerging stakeholder participation paradox

G. Nhamo
{"title":"Waste Management Policy Implementation in South Africa: An emerging stakeholder participation paradox","authors":"G. Nhamo","doi":"10.4314/SAJEE.V20I0.122664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The need to eliminate plastic shopping bags from South Africa’s environment has resulted in the formation and implementation of the Plastic Carrier Bags and Plastics Flat Bags Regulations (hereafter referred to as the Plastic Bags Regulations).The new law requires manufacturers to produce thicker, reusable and recyclable plastic shopping bags sold at purchase points.However, some major retailers have refused to charge customers for the new bags claiming that they were not party to the policy process. Consumer organisations have called for boycotts and urged shoppers to support retailers that continue issuing ‘free’ bags. Drawing theoretical insights from actor network theory (ANT) and other actor oriented and practice-based policy frameworks, this small-scale study established that the failure to consider key actors and actants in the policy implementation process, and the role of powerful actor networks in the process have adversly affected the policy implementation process. Given that South Africa placed emphasis on consultative national environmental policy process approaches, the unfolding events and emerging policy process models show an emerging stakeholder participation paradox in implementing policies on waste management in South Africa.","PeriodicalId":272843,"journal":{"name":"The Southern African Journal of Environmental Education","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Southern African Journal of Environmental Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/SAJEE.V20I0.122664","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

The need to eliminate plastic shopping bags from South Africa’s environment has resulted in the formation and implementation of the Plastic Carrier Bags and Plastics Flat Bags Regulations (hereafter referred to as the Plastic Bags Regulations).The new law requires manufacturers to produce thicker, reusable and recyclable plastic shopping bags sold at purchase points.However, some major retailers have refused to charge customers for the new bags claiming that they were not party to the policy process. Consumer organisations have called for boycotts and urged shoppers to support retailers that continue issuing ‘free’ bags. Drawing theoretical insights from actor network theory (ANT) and other actor oriented and practice-based policy frameworks, this small-scale study established that the failure to consider key actors and actants in the policy implementation process, and the role of powerful actor networks in the process have adversly affected the policy implementation process. Given that South Africa placed emphasis on consultative national environmental policy process approaches, the unfolding events and emerging policy process models show an emerging stakeholder participation paradox in implementing policies on waste management in South Africa.
南非废物管理政策的实施:一个新兴的利益相关者参与悖论
由于需要从南非的环境中消除塑料购物袋,因此形成并实施了《塑料手提袋和塑料扁平袋规例》(以下简称《塑料袋规例》)。新法律要求制造商生产更厚、可重复使用和可回收的塑料购物袋,并在购买点出售。然而,一些大型零售商拒绝向顾客收取新袋子的费用,声称他们没有参与政策过程。消费者组织呼吁抵制塑料袋,并敦促消费者支持继续发放“免费”塑料袋的零售商。从行动者网络理论(ANT)和其他以行动者为导向、以实践为基础的政策框架中汲取理论见解,这项小规模研究发现,在政策实施过程中未能考虑关键行动者和行动者,以及强大的行动者网络在这一过程中的作用,对政策实施过程产生了不利影响。鉴于南非强调协商的国家环境政策过程方法,正在展开的事件和新出现的政策过程模型表明,在南非实施废物管理政策时,出现了利益相关者参与的悖论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信