Wal-Mart Thinks Americans Are Weaklings?
By Jenn | October 2, 2008
From Grist: “Wal-Mart aims to cut plastic-bag waste in its global operations by an average 33 percent over the next five years, the retail behemoth announced Thursday at the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative. And if you ever doubted that Wal-Mart is big, consider this: The move is expected to eliminate some 9 billion plastic bags each year, equating to more than 135 million pounds of trash by 2013. Wal-Mart will give out fewer bags, offer plastic-bag recycling, and encourage customers to use reusable totes (it will offer its own line of reusable bags for 50 cents each). In the words of one exec, the goal is to “encourage consumers to change their behavior, just one bag at a time.” That appears to apply particularly to non-American consumers: The 33 percent average will be attained by cutting bag use 50 percent in international operations and 25 percent in the U.S.”
What’s sticking in my craw is that Wal-Mart is only cutting U.S. bag use a measly 25%, while cutting international bag use by a somewhat more significant 50%. Why??
Is it because we Americans are physically unable to carry purchased products in our hands and thus need single-use disposable plastic bags, while our international counterparts have stronger muscles and tighter grips? Is it because we would picket and riot if we were no longer given a free plastic bag in which to carry our toothpaste to the car?
Please share your thoughts on why Wal-Mart would make this seemingly ridiculous distinction between us American shoppers, and all the other folks worldwide who are blessed enough to shop at their stores.
[Image by Monochrome via Creative Commons]
Topics: Waste |
I think they just think it is easier to change behaviour outside the US, as people are more green already - and I think they are right. I just spent 4 months in the US, in New York, and I couldn’t believe how far behind the US is on green issues compared to Europe.
Have ya *been* to WalMart lately? I still go there occasionally. But most people who can afford not to don’t shop at WalMart. It’s where you shop if you are poor and must have everything as cheaply as possible, and you’re worried about your family’s basic needs, not about whether you use plastic bags or not. Or you live in a small community where there is no place else to shop and/or you’re ignorant of the social implications of buying lots of cheap plastic cr*p from China from a huge evil corporation like Walmart. Basically what I’m saying is the majority of people who shop there are not the same people who concern themselves with ecological issues.
Lots of my more, er, stubborn friends and family are like this. I’d love Walmart to take a stronger stance on these issues, so my concerns won’t be considered eccentric any more. (That said, 25% is better than nothing…)
hey guess what im poor. yea i shop at walmart like you said poor people do. but you know what i recycle, use energy saving light bulbs, buy organic food, and also use those reusable bags that walmart sales. i buy organic soap, shampoo, any thing that i can, down to solar lights. so basically what im saying is POOR as in me do care about ecological issues just as all the other POOR people i know that are commited to make a difference. just because people shop at walmart dont mean its because they are poor. i know people that have got money and love walmart. i think walmart is doing good by eliminating the plastic bags. good for them.
Perhaps you are being too critical. I think the mere fact that Wal-Mart is encouraging the use of less plastic is a FAR bigger consciousness raising effort than Whole Foods phasing out plastic bags. People who shop at WF are much more likely to have already adopted more “green” practices than the average Wal-Mart shopper.
I may not like some of Wal-Mart’s practices, and choose not to shop there, but I will stand up and applaud all of their green efforts - from use and promotion of CFLs, to more economical milk jugs that reduce packaging in shipment and keep milk fresher longer. When large companies like Wal-Mart begin to realize that “green” can also make them more money, we’ll see other companies follow behind them…and that’s a good thing, right? Tiny choices on a grand scale.
i agree that wal-mart’s expectations of the average american consumer are unfortunately appropriate - hopefully this is just the beginning of their US efforts and will ease more consumers into questioning their consumption habits.
I think it’s definitely a cultural thing. In some of the countries that I’ve traveled to plastic bags are a luxury that you pay extra for when making a purchase. Therefore most of the population is used to bringing their own bags with them to the market or wherever they might shop. Reducing plastic bag use in this type of environment is going to be a lot easier than here in the US where, as you said, we are accustomed to receiving a free bag even for a single tube of toothpaste.
This is exactly what I was thinking. When I was traveling this summer, I was shocked (in a good way) to go to the grocery store and have to pay for a plastic bag (there were some times when I just can’t carry everything with me, and I was using my only grocery bag as a stinky laundry bin! Traveling green is a lot harder than I expected). I quickly realized that it was standard in pretty much every country I went to. So yeah, I think that Walmart IS saying that we can’t handle a 50% decrease in plastic bag usage… and I think they’re probably correct in saying so. Europe is far more ready to tackle ecological issues because they already have a mindset that it costs money to be wasteful, and I’m glad that Walmart is taking the initiative they are to get American consumers on the right track too.
First, I agree with Lynne about the US being a little behind and, perhaps, more stubborn. I was stationed in the Foreign Press tent during the DNC in Denver in August. My “job” on the Green Team was to tell people where their trash went (i.e.: “this is compostable, this goes in recycling, that goes in the landfill.”). Many times I was told something to the effect of “Yes, we’ve been doing this in my country for a very long time.” (complete with eye roll) or “It’s good to see that America is finally doing this.”
It is my understanding that many places in Europe don’t even offer plastic bags. Either you bring your own or…I don’t know….you’re SOL? So perhaps they feel that it will be easier to accomplish 50% in other countries?
I think they should stop offering plastic bags here altogether. Offer their reusable bags at $0.25 instead and, if you forget yours, you *have* to buy one. Wouldn’t the costs offset each other for Walmart? They would have to offer reusable bags at a cheaper price, but they’re not giving away all those plastic bags for free any more.
Considering that Wal-mart is,well, Wal-mart, they could do WAY more. They have so much power. Almost everyone goes there, and everyone knows what it is.
And I agree with Kellie. Why not 100%?
My first impulse was to complain wildly that Wal-Mart is a horrible place and why CAN”T they do more.
But then I thought about the whole concept of Tiny Choices. Good for them for taking even a small step. Like someone else mentioned, most people who shop at Wal-Mart are going there because that’s what they can afford and that’s what is their socio-economic norm. If they are going to push canvas bags, then that will be one more group of people that will learn about the positives of making their OWN Tiny Choice and maybe, a few more people in the world will be green(er).
So good for them. Now, I hope that they take a chance and push for a higher percentage of less plastic in the world.
What a good point :) We need to encourage Tiny Choices in both individuals and corporations. If Walmart went 100% and it backfired for whatever reason, it would surely send a message that going green is not financially worthwhile and they’d be back at 0%. Tiny choices work because they show that small efforts are attainable and worthwhile, and it’s easier to build on tiny choices than huge ones. So, let’s congratulate Walmart in their Tiny Choice and encourage them NICELY to increase their efforts in time.
As to why not 100 percent, Walmart has a seasoned relationship with the American Chemistry Council and likely is making concessions to plastic bag manufacturers and grocers in the US market. Last month the ACC managed to spend $180k to retard progress made in a plastic bag ban in Seattle. So many countries have dealt with this issue (years ago) Bangladesh, Ireland, South Africa; in the U.S. we nibble at it city by city. :: kasey goltra
Here in my little corner of not-America (that would be Canada) WalMart has been selling their own reusable bags (for 97 cents) for over a year now. Every time I go to WalMart (yes, I shop at WalMart occasionally; there are things I get there that I just can’t get for a remotely reasonable price anywhere else in my community) I am the ONLY person in all the vast check-out lineups using a reusable bag. The checkers always seem mildly surprised by my bag; the one checking me out this week said in a tone of slight shock as she saw how much it could hold, “Wow, these bags are actually really good.”
Much as I hate to be class-ist and snobby, I think the comments above about the average WalMart shopper being someone who is more concerned about a bargain than about the environment are right-on. And given what I’ve seen in the year or two since many stores in my community started offering reusable bags, I’d say plastic bags are not going away till stores start charging — steeply — for them, or just stop offering them as an option altogether.
I’m in Canada, too! :D
It’s true that most of the people who shop at Wal-mart shop there because they pretty much have to. But it seems to me that all the small businesses are the ones pushing for change. And please, you can’t say that Wal-Mart would lose significant money, even if anything did backfire for whatever reason. I’m not going to sympathize with a multi-billion dollar company who have barely done anything within their massive power to show that they care about the environment.
I agree that what they’re doing is good, though, and will definitely make a small but much-needed difference, especially considering the number of people who shop there (thousands per day, I’m guessing. That’s a lot of bags).
I think you’re looking at this the wrong way. Regardless what your feelings are about Walmart the fact remains that it doesn’t get any more mainstream than Walmart. If they are making people more aware of every persons responsibility for the planet, only good can come of that.
While I would love for them to go 100%, I suspect they would get complaints from their customers who would just think that Walmart is being cheap (which, in a sense, they are) and think that plastic bags are their right because they don’t even consider bringing a bag with them (or not taking one when buying something they can carry themselves already). Change is difficult and sometimes something is better than nothing.
I am sorry y’all but this is just another case of “greenwashing” Walmart is evil! And they know that 25% will make enough of the people who were on the fence happy to continue shopping at walmart. As far as what we can expect from the american consumer…Ikea has completely eliminated the free plastic bag. You can buy one of their fab huge blue bags for .99 (or bring your own) and reuse over and over or you can pay for a plastic bag (can’t remember how much right now). Ikea’s sales have not suffered from it one bit!
So I say however high we set the bar, the american consumer will rise to the occasion. If we don’t raise the bar, few of us will ever change our destructive behavior!
I’m not convinced that we can compare Walmart to IKEA. As a few other people on here have mentioned, Europe is on a different track with eco-consciousness. Of course a company that is founded and has most of its roots in Europe is going to be more inclined to ditch free bags altogether.
IKEA’s yearly earnings: 30 billion USD. Walmart’s SECOND QUARTER earnings: over 100 billion USD. Point being: look at the sheer number of bags that 25% represents.
Just imagine yourself going into a Walmart like an average, uninformed shopper. What would you buy? Probably some soap, shampoo, dvds, clothes, decorations for the house, etc. Now imagine yourself on an average IKEA expedition. Probably you’d be buying some piece of unassembled furniture, and maybe some impulse items like new bath accessories or a new set of drinking glasses. The point here is that you buy different things at Walmart and IKEA. Walmart is known for being an “everything” store where you can pick up things that you need (or think you need) to buy on a regular basis. People regularly leave Walmart with shopping carts full of small items that are not easily transported without bags, or that would require bringing 5, 6 or more reusable bags. Most people don’t think that far ahead. People go to IKEA, however, for furniture and redecorating that doesn’t happen on a weekly basis (rugs, wall hangings, storage units), which means that the majority of their purchases are probably items that cannot be bagged anyway! This is of course not true 100% of the time, but I’d say it’s a pretty typical experience for each store. That means there is a higher probability of a consumer feeling inconvenienced or even duped by Walmart if they start charging for plastic bags.
So again, American consumers have entirely different expectations when they shop at Walmart and at IKEA. I don’t think that people should start shopping at Walmart just because of this change. There are clearly many other problems associated with buying from chain stores. There are also many other problems associated with consumerism as a whole, which is the stem of the reason why people “need” 6 or more plastic bags to carry their purchases to their car. But we sure can’t expect Walmart to ward off consumerism, nor to make any procedural changes so radical (and yes it would be radical to many) that they could affect sales overall. It’s just not realistic, so in the meantime I don’t see why they should be blasted for making a plan of action that is likely to work, however small of a change it may be. Let’s just wait this out and see how well they implement their plans before accusing them of greenwashing.
Whoops. Sorry for the long rant. This thread has got me a bit riled up. I come from a very conservative family, and one that shops at Walmart A LOT, and I feel that it’s important to think about how these issues (and our reactions) are seen by a more conservative constituency that is only now beginning to move towards a greener lifestyle.
I think they could go beyond bags. They’re so crazy rich ($100 billion? What?!) that there are so many things they could do. And compared to all the possibilities, doing something so mainstream and taking such a small, uninspiring step with it, is, again, pathetic. I don’t think stores and companies realize what kind of reaction they’ll get from consumers if they make brave leaps of, um, eco-friendliness. These are the kinds of changes people are pushing for. The only people who aren’t pushing for them are the (rich) people who profit from exploiting the planet’s resources (aka not ‘average consumers’). I don’t know why anyone’s hesitating. It frustrates me, and, though I acknowledge that what they’re doing is good, I’m not going to applaud Wal-Mart for taking a baby step that many, many other (smaller) stores have already taken.
(P.S. buying a 99 cent tote bag isn’t exactly grueling)
[…] and I were talking, and something that really brings the topic home is a comment from Jenn’s recent WalMart bag post about shopping while poor (thanks Michele!): “hey guess what im poor. yea i shop at walmart […]