The plastic bags ban in Kenya: a policy review

Plastic pollution is a complex and pervasive phenomenon, so frequent in the human experience of the last 50-60 years that it has been cemented in the collective imagination of almost all world civilisations. Throughout late-capitalist political and economic upheavals in Africa and elsewhere, plastic has come to represent new consuming habits and new types of moral dysfunction. Politicians are dealing with plastic in more and more situations. Governments create regulations to control pollution and stop the release of plastic into the environment. Environmentalist interest organisations support initiatives to raise awareness and encourage active citizenship. The industry, which is becoming more and more encircled, researches "sustainable" alternatives on the one hand while attempting to thwart regulation on the other, promoting the necessity of plastics in several key industries. The Kenyan government has stepped up its efforts to combat disposable plastics, winning accolades from other countries for the harsh measures it has put in place since 2017 that are focused on outlawing plastic bags. Due to opposition from the domestic sector, previous attempts to restrict the manufacture, sale, and distribution of plastic bags were unsuccessful. My thesis aims to cover the key moments of the ban’s issue, through an organic analysis, which favours the interpretative dimension of policy processes, in an attempt to move away from the American linear model of public policy theory. What factors have enabled particularly strict policies in the regulation of the single-use plastic supply chain? Who are the actors involved in the process? What incentives were introduced? What obstacles stood in the way of implementation? In an effort to understand the justification for a policy that seemed at odds with conventional conservation measures and market-driven techniques, conducting my lengthy investigation into the country's plastic bag legislation and related policy arena. The severity of the prohibition served a number of purposes: it conveyed a message from local actors to the public and corporate organisations who have been opposing any change in legislation or policy pertaining to the plastics sector that may adversely affect their operations. Whether this regulation merely represents another example of lawmakers who comply with the latest fashion, the result of major donor-driven organisations demanding evident rules regarding an endorsed development approach, or an ingenious plan that tricks the business community into controlling the country's waste management issue, the solution resides somewhere among these motivations and the actors who drive them.