Consumer Awareness of Plastic: an Overview of Different Research Areas

Plastic makes our society more practical and safer. It is hard to consider eliminating plastic in some sectors, such as the medical field. However, after use, plastic waste becomes a global problem without precedents, and when not properly disposed of, it can cause several socio-environmental problems. Some possible solutions are recycling, the circular economy, proper waste management, and consumer awareness. Consumers play a crucial role in preventing problems caused by plastic. In this work, consumer awareness of plastic is discussed according to the point of view of the research areas—environmental science, engineering, and materials science—based on the analysis of the main authors’ keywords obtained in a literature search in the Scopus database. Bibliometrix analyzed the Scopus search results. The results showed that each area presents different concerns and priorities. The current scenario, including the main hotspots, trends, emerging topics, and deficiencies, was obtained. On the contrary, the concerns from the literature and those of the daily lives of consumers do not seem to fit in, which creates a gap. By reducing this gap, the distance between consumers awareness and their behavior will be smaller.

Similar content being viewed by others

Sustainable plastics waste management framework based on the analysis of people’s awareness, knowledge, attitude, skills, and action: development of sustainable plastics waste management approaches

Article 27 December 2022

A critical review and analysis of plastic waste management practices in Rwanda

Article 10 August 2024

Research progress for plastic waste management and manufacture of value-added products

Article 21 November 2020

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The correct management of plastic waste is a complex and delicate task. Several characters are involved but the consumer has a relevant role, being responsible for segregating and discarding all the waste they produce.

The greater the economic prosperity of a region is, the greater its municipal solid waste (MSW) composition complexity [1]. More available products and services for citizens occur as countries and cities become more prosperous and more populated [2]. In high-income countries and cities, packing wastes, especially plastics, are predominant among all the waste produced [3]. Consequently, the higher the MSW composition complexity, the greater the difficulty of managing it, especially the correct management of plastic. Plastic is ubiquitous in our lives and modern society, being a massive increase in the production of fibers and resins, from 2 Mt in 1950 to around 380 Mt in 2015 [4].

Plastic plays a unique socioeconomic role. Worldwide, thousands of jobs are generated, whether in the production or recycling of plastic [5]. Thus, in addition to contributing to the economy, it plays a tremendous social role. Employment can be defined as a source of income and also a link of its identity over individual attributions introduced by its achievement of the task [6]. In addition, employment means social integration, allowing contact among people, insertion, and the feeling of belonging to a group [7].

However, even with a tremendously positive influence on society [5], plastic pollution outperforms it, making plastic a major polluter. Over the years, people have accompanied a significant increase in the pollution of water bodies by plastic, reaching up to 53 Mt per year by 2030 [8]. According to Geyer et al. [4], around 6300 Mt of plastic waste had been generated up to 2015, being recycled only about 9% of this amount.

Even with legal procedures, regulations, and levies regarding the reduction of single-use plastic [9,10,11,12,13,14], knowing that the circular economy is crucial to reduce plastic pollution [15, 16], and knowing all the problems that plastic can cause when improperly disposed of, some consumers do not fulfill their role regarding the correct segregation and the final disposal of plastic waste that they produce. Some authors consider consumers as a primary source of plastic pollution [17] due to their lack of awareness or contribution to dealing with plastic. Besides, consumers may not want to put information into practice on individual actions relative to environmental and economic benefits [17].

Bibliometric analysis is an important instrument used to have an overview of different knowledge areas. Using specific software programs, the data of the publications collected from a search in a given database can be analyzed from a quantitative point of view. Among the possible data to be analyzed, the investigation of the keywords is essential to determine the research trend, identify gaps in the discussion concerning a given subject/research area, and identify the fields that can be interesting as future research areas [18]. The obtained results are relevant to influence new researchers to achieve progress in a given research area.

Considering the distinct role of consumers in the correct management of plastic waste and all the consequences that its incorrect management is likely to result in, consumer awareness of plastic was discussed, according to the literature of the last two decades. The analysis was based on the analysis of the main authors’ keywords obtained from a search in the Scopus database. Deepening the discussion, the point of view of the research areas—environmental science, engineering, and materials science—was also studied. The primary purpose was to comprehend the contribution of each area in developing consumer awareness of plastic. The results have shown that each area has different concerns and priorities. The current scenario was obtained by including the main hotspots, trends, emerging topics, and deficiencies.

Literature Review

Awareness is the knowledge that something exists or the understanding of a situation or subject based on information or experience [19]. Thus, within the scope of this work, although consumers know the problems that the incorrect disposal of plastic waste causes and the possible actions to mitigate existing problems, they do not collaborate positively.

Thomas [20] categorized four dynamic and ever-changing forms of non-recognition or unawareness, trying to elucidate why pollution is ignored:

In the circular economy, waste is a raw material. Waste is a resource continually circulated within the economy [21]. It is a valuable material. The consumer is responsible for making available correctly the recyclable waste they produce for selective collection. The consumer is responsible for reintroducing the plastic waste to the cycle again (Fig. 1 item 3). Then, the plastic waste is collected, separated, and washed, i. e., it is prepared for recycling (Fig. 1 item 4). Plastic is recycled (Fig. 1 item 5), becoming a raw material for producing new items. In the sequence, it is transformed into other items (Fig. 1 item 1). After, the items made of recycled plastic go to consumer markets (Fig. 1 item 2), and then, consumed again (Fig. 1 item 3), closing the cycle (considering the mechanical recycling). This cycle constitutes the circular economy (Fig. 1). However, the role of the consumer regarding plastic does not end at that point—it goes far beyond. Some authors [22] have identified 14 critical roles of the consumers in reducing plastic pollutants, as follows:

  1. (1) Support plastic-free brands and supermarkets;
  2. (2) Take initiatives to limit plastic littering;
  3. (3) Ensure proximity of waste disposal bins;
  4. (4) Contribute to municipal services;
  5. (5) Comply with regulations;
  6. (6) Demand for sustainable and biodegradable product options;
  7. (7) Reduce reliance on single-use of plastic;
  8. (8) Plan green purchasing;
  9. (9) Positive attitude towards responsible consumption and reuse of plastic;
  10. (10) Clear perception of the adverse environmental effects of plastic pollution;
  11. (11) Emphasize proper recycling practices;
  12. (12) Conversion of plastic source into a resource;
  13. (13) Promote green packaging preferences;
  14. (14) Motivate to opt for the green lifestyle.

figure 1

The lack of consumer awareness plays a crucial role in recycling rates. In some countries, such as Brazil, recycling rates are meager—only about 4%. Even worse, it causes plastic pollution, mainly in water bodies (as aforementioned), which causes negative impacts on the environment, fauna, and human health.

Plastic is found in several sizes in different water bodies around the globe, but the most common are microplastics [24,25,26,27,28,29], fragments of polymeric origin with dimensions between 1 and 1000 μm [30]. Some products, such as wet wipes [27], sanitary towels [27], and face masks [31,32,33], are sources of microplastics in water bodies when improperly disposed of.

Microplastics in water bodies damage different organisms as they cannot distinguish them from food [34]. The accumulation of plastic in their organisms hinders digestion and the absorption of nutrients, reducing the reserve of energy available and leading to premature death [35]. As a shocking example, news addressed a Magellanic Penguin found dead on a beach in the city of São Sebastião, on the north coast of São Paulo (Brazil). During its necropsy, a face mask (made of plastic) was found in its stomach (photo in the center of Fig. 1), the cause of its death [36].

Microplastics can be easily ingested by aquatic animals and by humans due to their small size. Additionally, microplastics can adsorb different contaminants, increasing their toxicity. It is estimated that humans ingest up to 5 g of microplastics per week [37]. The literature points to inflammation as the major impact of microplastics on human health [38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51]. Recently, microplastics were detected in breast milk for the first time [52].

Methodology

The methodology used in this work is described by de Sousa [53]. The bibliographic data inputs were obtained through a Scopus search on 12 August 2021. The keywords used were (consumer*) AND (awareness OR consciousness) AND (plastic* OR polymer*). Reviews and articles in English were considered from 2001 to 2020.

From Scopus, a scopus.bib file containing the data was taken, and a bibliometric analysis using the Bibliometrix (an R-package) was performed.

Next, from the Scopus search, the results obtained were limited to environmental science, engineering, and materials science research areas. For each area investigated, a scopus.bib file with the data was recorded and used to analyze the authors’ keywords.

The word cloud contains the 50 most frequent authors’ keywords. Five keywords per year with a minimum frequency of occurrence of 3 were analyzed for the evolution of the main terms.

Results and Discussion

The Scopus search obtained a total of 191 publications, with 156 articles and 35 reviews in English. The number of publications per year and area is presented in Fig. 2.

figure 2

The results show a growth in the number of publications over the period, with an annual growth rate of 15.39% (according to Bibliometrix). Even with a trend of increase in this figure, the number of annual publications is still low given the great relevance of the subject, and also demonstrates a real possibility of growth and improvement in the area, with ample space for research and development [54].

By analyzing the authors’ keywords, it is possible to obtain a panorama of the research field [55], as well as the hotspots and future trends. Authors use keywords to communicate their wishes to readers and the scientific community [56]. Some authors [54] explain that “keywords are the core of the paper, which indicates the research direction of the field by abstracting and summarizing the research content of the academic paper.” Given the importance of analyzing the authors’ keywords, they will be discussed in the present work.

The research area of consumer awareness of plastic (encompassing all the involved research areas) will be analyzed in the sequence.

All the Research Areas

From the 191 publications, a total of 720 authors’ keywords were obtained. The most relevant are as follows (number of occurrences in parenthesis): waste management (9), recycling (8), sustainability (7), plastic waste (6), packaging (5), consumer behavior (4), microplastics (4), pollution (4), and biopolymers (3). These keywords are hotspots concerning consumer awareness of plastic, especially waste management [57, 58].

Figure 3 presents the word cloud containing the 50 more frequently observed authors’ keywords in the results of the Scopus search about consumer awareness of plastic and the trending topic. The word cloud analysis can provide an overview of the current literature about consumer awareness of plastic. The size of the letters represents the frequency of the keyword. The word cloud contains the authors’ keywords that are more relevant in the field. Therefore, as a panorama is provided, the discussion can be deepened.

figure 3

Based on the authors’ keywords with the highest frequency and the word cloud, a concern from the literature about the problems that plastic (“plastic waste,” “packaging”) can cause/aggravate in the environment can be observed (“pollution,” “microplastics”), as well as the possible solutions to mitigate them (“consumer behavior,” “waste management,” “recycling,” and use of “biopolymers” and “biodegradable polymers”). This result also demonstrates the vital role of consumers in the plastics recycling chain through their pro-environmental behavior (“consumer behavior”).

Some possibilities to mitigate plastic pollution include the correct “management of plastic,” “recycling,” “levies,” and “consumer behavior.”

Other concerns depicted in the word cloud are the management of “e-waste” [59] and “food safety” [24, 58].

Single-use plastic is a massive concern in consumer awareness of plastic research. Around 49% of the global production of plastic is constituted by single-use items [60]. The point to be considered is that single-use plastic has a very short lifetime, being discarded just after use and consequently becoming responsible for enhancing the environmental damages and concerns caused by plastic waste. According to Forbes [61], around 160,000 plastic bags are used per second worldwide, and only less than 3% of this amount is effectively recycled. The literature [62] describes a more negative perception towards single-use plastic and relatively high awareness of the environmental impacts they cause, as observed in the word cloud due to the keywords “plastic straws” and “plastic bags.” Negative discernments of single-use plastic consumption are linked to higher levels of environmental awareness [63, 64]. On the other hand, even knowing the negative impact of plastic, some consumers still use them indistinctly [65].

According to Winton et al. [64], the most found macroplastics in freshwater environments in Europe are single-use short-term food acquisitions. Single-use plastics contribute to 60–95% of global marine plastic pollution [9]. So, abolishing all single-use products can effectively protect the environment and the world’s oceans [63].

Consumers can decide to reduce single-use plastic bags (SUPBs) in their daily life and engage in pro-environmental behavior [63]. In Chile, an informal and uncoordinated alliance of different sectors, including science, media, the general public, government agencies, schools, and universities, promoted the demise of SUPBs [63].

The literature points out to the circular economy and recycling as possible solutions for plastic waste management. The commitment of consumers, government, and companies (through the extended producer responsibility [66]), as part of the circular economy, is essential for reducing/solving the massive problem of plastic management since each sector is co-responsible for the environmental problems generated by plastic [55].

According to Fig. 3b, the evolution of the main terms can be visualized. Some terms have been kept in evidence in the literature for an extended period, such as “mechanical properties,” “consumer behavior,” and “food safety.” However, they have lost their evidence to other terms, such as “packaging,” “sustainability,” “marine debris,” “microplastics,” and “plastic waste.” The terms with the highest frequency are the most popular authors’ keywords, as depicted before. The term “waste management” has been kept in evidence from 2012 to 2020. It has the highest frequency, corroborating Fig. 3a. The terms with the highest frequencies, as mentioned previously, are currently in evidence, being considered hotspots in the research field of consumer awareness of plastic.

Regarding the authors’ keywords, 584 are from articles, and 136 are from reviews.

Based on the analysis of the authors’ keywords, emerging topics and trends are obtained. Trends or, in other words, subjects highly investigated, are present in reviews, whereas emerging topics are present in articles [67].

Table 1 presents the most frequent authors’ keywords in articles and reviews. The minimum number of occurrences for each keyword is 2. The keywords were separated into the following categories: actor, source, problem, mitigation, consequence, and policy. The main problem was plastic pollution (“microplastics,” “marine debris,” etc.). The actor is responsible for the problem, i.e., “consumer behavior.” The sources are the ones that produce plastic pollution, such as “plastic waste.” The consequences are the effects of plastic pollution. Mitigations lessen the consequences of plastic pollution. Furthermore, a policy is a rule to be followed by the population, such as a ban on a given plastic item. Plastic packages act as a barrier, protecting food against damage (food safety), and reducing food waste. However, some additives in the plastic can migrate to food in contact with the package, resulting in health impacts. So, the authors’ keywords “food safety,” “food contact material,” and “food waste” were categorized into a consequence.

figure 4

The role of consumers is evidenced through the keywords “awareness of consequences” [72], “consumer preferences” [73, 74], “attitude,” “theory of planned behavior” [75], “beliefs,” “behavior-based solutions,” “behavior change” [76], “anti-consumption behavior” [77], “awareness” [68, 78], “choice experiment” [74], “behavior,” “consumer behavior” [62, 64], “pro-environmental behavior,” and “willingness to pay” [79]. Some keywords present a minor frequency. The high number of keywords concerning the behavior of consumers shows that the environmental science area focuses on consumers. Their behavior and consumption are responsible for environmental problems caused/aggravated by plastic. As aforementioned, consumers also play an essential role in correctly managing plastic and its recycling [75] (Fig. 1).

Other possible solutions to mitigate the problems that plastic can cause are posed by the environmental science area, such as the use of “bioplastic bottles,” “bio-based packaging” [80], “biodegradable plastic bottles” (in substitution for conventional plastic bottles [81]), “bio-based plastic,” the correct “management of plastic waste” [63], “recycling” [75], and “plastic bag levies” [77, 79, 82].

Habits, norms, and situational factors predict the behavior of consumers. Despite a pronounced awareness of the associated problems that plastic can cause, consumers keep on appreciating and using it [65]. In Taiwan, some authors [1] demonstrated that the plastic and glass waste generation rate declined when economic activities expanded, mainly due to the strict enforcement of recycling policies accompanied by marketing campaigns encouraging recycling and enhancing the green awareness of consumers. Accordingly, an opportunity to increase consumer awareness is to encourage the opening of zero-packaging grocery stores, improving the social and environmental impacts of the food supply chain [78]. Another example of the importance of consumer behavior is the ban on SUPBs in Chile [63], which was driven by a broad concern among the general public, and led to a bottom-up movement culminating in the national government taking stakes in the issue.

Literature also analyzed the consumer perceptions of microplastics in “personal care products” [83], of using “compostable carrier bags” [84], and “plastic water bottles” [81]. Orset et al. [81] analyzed the perception and behavior of consumers of plastic water bottles, which depend on the viewpoint (i.e., consumer, producer, and social welfare). From the consumer point of view, the authors recommended the organic policy with subsidy, the three tools of the recycling policy, and the biodegradable policy with subsidy. Concerning the compostable carrier bags [84], a greater awareness was observed regarding the use of these bags and the recognition of the importance of green products, which are gaining space in the market and in the routine of consumers. Furthermore, about microplastics in personal care products [83], participants of the survey perceived the use of microbeads in such products as unnatural and unnecessary.

Engineering

From the Scopus search about consumer awareness of plastic limited to the engineering area, a total of 131 authors’ keywords were obtained in the 33 publications (24 articles and 9 reviews). The most frequently used keywords by the authors of the engineering area are as follow (frequency of occurrence in parenthesis): mechanical properties (3), bio-based plastic (2), composites (2), consumer preferences (2), and food waste (2). All the other keywords present the same frequency.

The word cloud containing the 50 more frequently found authors’ keywords in the results of the Scopus search of the engineering area is shown in Fig. 5.

figure 5

Based on the analysis of the authors’ keywords, the engineering area demonstrates some options to mitigate the impacts that plastic pollution can cause; options such as the “circular economy,” “e-waste management,” the use of “biodegradable polymers” [85], “bio-based plastic” [73], “composites” [86], “chitosan” [87], “eco-friendly plastic,” “bioplastic,” “bamboo” [88], “alginate” [87], “biobased” and “biodegradable” [89,90,91], “bio nanocomposites” [92], “CO2-derived products” [93], and “filler” materials. All these materials are possible options for producing materials that are more environmentally friendly.

As an example of using biobased/biodegradable polymer, some authors [91] studied the feasibility of biobased/biodegradable films for in-package thermal pasteurization made of polylactic acid (PLA) and polybutylene adipate terephthalate (PBAT). The results indicated that selected PLA and PBAT-based films are suitable for in-package pasteurization and can replace polyethylene for ≤ 10 days of shelf life at 4 °C.

This area focuses on economic aspects to encourage the use of materials that cause less environmental impacts, such as “demonetization” and a “cashless economy” since financial encouragement is considered an effective way to reduce plastic debris [76]. “Credible alternative actions and products offered by businesses or through legislation at competitive costs can produce positive behavior changes that eventually reduce plastic pollution” [17].

The area also alerts people to a material that causes a substantial environmental impact, the ‘Brazil coffee-in-capsules’ [94]. According to the authors [94], coffee consumers have a dominant role in helping turn coffee capsule waste into a financial resource or supporting other efforts toward circular practice, emphasizing the behavior and awareness of consumers.

This attitude also raises an alert of possible problems to human health caused/aggravated by the use of plastics with the presence of the keywords “endocrine disruption,” “carcinogenesis,” “allergen,” and “biogenic toys” [74] (to avoid “children contamination” [95]). These keywords express some consumer concerns about the use of plastics.

Even knowing that packages act as a kind of barrier protecting food against damage, extending the lifetime of foods [5, 33], and reducing food waste [78, 96] (another keyword present in the word cloud), additives contained in plastic can migrate from packaging to the food due to diffusion processes (keyword “food contact material,” also shown in the word cloud). As an example of the diffusion process, the release of bisphenol A (BPA), a monomer used in the manufacture of epoxy resins, from polycarbonate products such as plastic baby bottles, baby bottle liners, and reusable drinking bottles is proven by literature [97,98,99]. BPA (endocrine-disrupting chemical) is toxic and can cause several health problems, from cancer to the development of problems in the formation of sexual organs of babies and children, depending on the contamination level [98]. Additionally, additives can contaminate soil, air, water, and food [100, 101].

The research area also demonstrates the critical role of consumers regarding plastic use and its environmental impact through the keywords “consumer preferences” and “awareness” [78, 102].

Materials Science

From the Scopus search about consumer awareness of plastic limited to materials science, 72 authors’ keywords were obtained in the 28 publications (20 articles and 8 reviews). The most frequently used keywords by the authors of the materials science area are as follow (frequency of occurrence in parenthesis): recycling (3), antibacterial (2), and mechanical properties (2). All the other keywords presented the same frequency. The smallest frequency of the keywords of the engineering and materials science compared to the environmental science area is due to the smaller number of publications and authors’ keywords.

The word cloud containing the 50 more frequently found authors’ keywords in the results of the Scopus search of the materials science area is shown in Fig. 6.

figure 6

The keywords of the materials science area seem to show more significant concerns about the materials that compose the plastic, such as “high-density polyethylene” (HDPE) [103], “aliphatic polyesters” [90], “PET” (polyethylene terephthalate) [104, 105], “additives” [106], “antioxidants,” “kenaf fiber” [107], “antifogs” [106], “bamboo” [88], “dyes/pigments” [108], “bamboo rayon” [109], “copper nanoparticles,” and “biodegradable polymers” [89, 90]. Some of these keywords express the search for more environmentally friendly materials (for instance, the use of “natural fibers” [110] and “biodegradable polymers” [89, 90]), aiming at reducing environmental impacts caused by plastic.

Concerning materials, a meaningful example is the one by Stoll et al. [108], which analyzed the use of carotenoid extracts as natural colorants in PLA films. According to the authors, using carotenoids as colorants for polymeric materials represents an environmentally friendly way of obtaining colored packaging. Beyond the environmental advantages, this natural colorant reduced the oxygen permeability and presented a lubricant effect, increasing the film elasticity up to 50%. Some authors [110] investigated the processing of natural fibers in an internal mixer to be used for thermoplastic lightweight materials, which means a good alternative for the automotive industry.

The primary possibility to solve the problem of plastic waste posed by the area is “recycling” and others, such as the use of plastic residues in the production of “lightweight concrete” [111], “construction materials,” “composites,” and in “3D printing” [104]. 3D printing is an option for the recycling process of post-used plastics, as in the example of using PET [104].

Biodegradable polymers can be considered an option to reduce solid waste disposal problems and reduce the dependence on petroleum-based plastics for packaging materials [90]. However, some authors [89] detected some problems, namely, cost control, in-depth development of functions and applications, materials source extension, enhancement of environmental protection awareness and regulations, and systematical assessment of environmental compatibility of the biodegradable polymers.

All these possibilities should present the necessary mechanical properties for their specific final applications, demonstrated by the keywords “mechanical properties,” “compliance,” and “durability.” Also, the keywords “finite element analysis,” “kinetics,” “computational fluid dynamics” [112], and “package design” indicate some possibilities for analyzing the properties of a given material and design. Computational fluid dynamics (the “finite volume method”) was used to analyze the airflow and the heat transfer performances in the design and performance evaluation of fresh fruit ventilated distribution packaging by Mukama et al. [112], being that the vent-hole design affects cooling and strength requirements.

Some health impacts of plastic and some benefits are also presented, such as “heavy metal testing” [105], “antimicrobial” [113, 114], “antibacterial” [109], “exposure” [115], and “antimicrobial fruit quality.” The research area does not demonstrate the role of consumers in the problems that plastic can cause. However, it presents some possibilities for consumers to act actively and consciously through the presence of keywords “chemical education research” [116], “evaluation strategies,” and “environmental protection.”

Concerning the use of recycled polymers, some authors [117] analyzed the removal of the odor from HDPE by using a modified recycling process. Removing this type of contamination is considered a challenge in the industry and vital to establishing viable concepts for a circular economy for post-consumer HDPE packaging.

Based on the analysis of the authors’ keywords, the materials science area is more focused on solving environmental problems caused by plastic through designing and producing materials that cause a lower environmental impact and are more environmentally friendly options. It is also a way to make consumers more aware of their role when using plastics, providing consumers with options that cause less environmental impact.

Discussion

The work of Rhein and Schmid [68], which verified the real concerns of consumers regarding plastic packaging from a quantitative analysis based on consumers interviews, showed that consumer awareness involves the following five different aspects:

  1. (1) Awareness of environmental pollution: consumer awareness of the damage that plastic pollution causes to the environment and the oceans, knowing the necessity of environmental protection.
  2. (2) Awareness of the intensive use of plastic: consumers who are aware of the problems that plastic can cause but, even so, still use it unreasonably.
  3. (3) Awareness of consumers’ influence: even being aware, these consumers are concerned about companies and the influence caused by them.
  4. (4) Awareness of consumers’ powerlessness: consumers do not know how to contribute to the reduction of plastic pollution.
  5. (5) Awareness of the need for using plastic: consumer awareness of the positive characteristics of plastic making it essential in their daily lives, such as a hygienic way of storage.

According to the authors [68], “the different types of awareness strongly reflect how consumers think about problems associated with plastic and whether they feel that they are responsible and, therefore, able to change the current situation.”

As stated before, consumers may not want to put information into practice on individual actions relative to environmental and economic benefits [17]. In other words, many consumers have the information they need to dispose of plastic waste correctly and would rather avoid cooperating. So, consumers have a crucial role in the correct segregation and final disposal of plastic waste, but, unfortunately, some do not fulfill their role (Fig. 1), and consequently, several socio-environmental problems caused by plastic are aggravated. An example that can be observed daily is the significant increase in the number of face masks improperly disposed of on the streets during the COVID-19 pandemic. They end up going into water bodies and can kill animals (Fig. 1). These masks are degraded and release plastic microparticles [23, 33, 118].

Behavior changes can be blocked by psychological and practical barriers, turning the awareness raising into tortuous action [119]. Plastic-related behavioral change is not very successful if the focus is only on information and raising awareness [65]. Stakeholders interviewed by Steinhorst and Beyerl [120] agreed that consumers are not the most responsible agents of change but rather partners of producers, retailers, politicians, and disposal agencies, in which producers and retailers are considered the main agents. Private and public sector initiatives, well-enforced policies, and evidence-based media reporting can provide new norms and practices that are socially accepted [17]. According to Parashar and Hait [69], the primary drivers of plastic misconduct are the lack of awareness and attitude of consumers and their irresponsible behavior, as well as the stress on waste management infrastructure in terms of collection, operation, and financial constraints.

The impact of COVID-19 on people’s consumption behavior worldwide was studied [121], having the following as main results:

These results reveal the increase in the production of recyclable materials in homes and the lack of environmental awareness of most of the respondents. Contradictorily, just 32% segregated the waste they produced but demonstrated concern about the new design of packaging containing less plastic.

Likewise, Rhein and Schmid [68] demonstrated a similar profile of consumers and their awareness of the use of plastic. At the same time, some consumers are willing to pay more for other options that cause less pollution, citing concern for families and especially grandchildren. They claim that plastic pollution is the fault of Africa, Asia, and the Americas (i.e., outside Europe, where the research was performed). They know that the amount of plastic used in packages is large and sometimes unnecessary, such as plastic in shell fruits. However, these consumers cannot help change and assign responsibility to companies. A particular sort of laziness and a wish to buy goods without restrictions override the consciousness that the existing plastic system would, in principle, be changed. Some consumers are conscious of the use of plastic and know the problems they cause to the environment but agree that plastic is practical, unwilling to alter their consumption behavior. That is, “others” are responsible for pollution, not “me.”

Considering consumers’ daily consumption, hygiene, food safety, and practicality of use are more important than the environmental impact [122]. In the review of Heidbreder et al. [65], in which 187 studies were analyzed, people appreciate and regularly use plastic despite a noticeable awareness of related problems. Also, Nguyen [123] analyzed factors that affect Vietnamese consumers’ intention and behavior to bring their shopping bags (BYOB). The results illustrated a modest relationship between intent and authentic behavior concerning BYOB.

So, the literature shows a gap between consumer awareness and behavior. The literature needs to be focused on reducing this gap. According to Ali et al. [22], there is a lack of literature about the explicit roles of consumers, corroborating with the present work. The interrelationships among the consumer’s roles were identified by the authors, which provided action plans for decreasing plastic pollution.

According to the obtained results, each knowledge area has its concerns and priorities regarding consumer awareness of plastic. Nevertheless, such concerns and priorities are not in line with the ones of consumers in everyday life. Thus, by reducing this gap, literature can be a strong partner, for example, in the decision-making of authorities, such as in the creation of laws and norms aimed at reducing the real problem of the final disposal of plastic waste. “Consumers-citizens can greatly contribute to solving the plastic pollution problem and can be used as a stepping stone for further interdisciplinary research” [17].

As an example of the magnitude of the literature, Wang et al. [124] systematically reviewed and compared the publications related to plastic pollution before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among the main results, the authors observed that the total number of publications during the COVID-19 pandemic has been much higher than before, and this increase happened in a short period, demonstrating increasing attention to research on plastic pollution worldwide promoted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Another relevant case is Contact From the Future, a digital game on plastic pollution for children created by Panagiotopoulou et al. [125], which proposed to construct awareness and motivate pro-environmental behaviors.

As stated before by some authors [68], in the literature, consumer awareness of plastic is, in general, intrinsically linked to the consumers’ environmental awareness. The results from this work show that consumer awareness of plastic is broader, not limited to environmental consciousness, and each knowledge area has its concerns. These results align with Rhein and Schmid [68], which depicted that “the term awareness cannot automatically be equated with environmental concerns”.

Based on the analysis of the authors’ keywords, the environmental area is prone to concerns; engineering is focused on the solutions, and materials science in the materials that compose the plastic and the development of alternative materials. All of them are intrinsically connected in an attempt to mitigate the pollution caused by plastic. In other words, consumer awareness of plastic is a much broader issue, not just an environmental concern. Even knowing the importance of all the areas analyzed in the search for the growth of consumer awareness of plastic, it is perceived that the literature is not aligned with consumer awareness in their daily life. Literature needs, in addition to focusing on addressing deficiencies described above, meet the real requests of the population in the search for awareness and behavior change for the well-being of society. A schema is shown in Fig. 7.

figure 7

So, after all, how to raise consumer awareness of plastic? The literature has provided an outstanding contribution to this.

Integrated plastic waste management is a very complex issue and requires engagement at all levels, including producer, consumer, and government. The government is mainly responsible for establishing laws aimed at the common good and supervision so that they are fulfilled. As an example of Law Nº 12,305 in Brazil [126], laws addressing waste management highlight the shared responsibility in which consumers have an essential role.

Public policies are relevant, mainly in cases of consumers who, even knowing their role in the circular economy, do nothing for laziness, selfishness, or lack of awareness. They must change consumer habits through impositions when they do not collaborate. Some consumers contribute from a stimulus, a “currency of exchange,” collaborating only from some advantage. In this sense, it is up to the industries responsible for the reverse logistics of their products to encourage consumers in some way that seems feasible for them to contribute to reverse logistics and the circular economy.

Some authors [127] compared the result of focus group sessions in India with literature about sustainable packages for Fast Moving Consumer Goods (FMCG). Higher environmental awareness was observed in groups with higher levels of schooling. Young generations, especially those still attending school, have shown more awareness and concern about making sustainable choices, while older generations have shown a significant lack of awareness. Conversely, price is one of the most significant factors deterring purchase. Also, a lack of knowledge about the benefits offered by sustainable products makes consumers indifferent toward them.

Similar behavior was observed by Molloy et al. [128], which examined the perception of legislative actions on single-use plastics through surveys and interviews in four Atlantic provinces of Canada. Young generations, students, and high-level school people support the plastic ban. A higher percentage of females support the plastic ban. Men have less probability of contributing to environmentally friendly activities, such as carrying reusable bags.

In Islamabad Capital Territory of Pakistan [129], people who support the plastic bag ban are those with a high education level, health, and environmental awareness. According to the authors, to increase the effectiveness of Islamabad’s plastic bag ban, increasing public understanding of the effects of plastic pollution needs to receive more focus by investing money in awareness programs and campaigns, education investment, and proper implementation machinery.

In Ecuador [130], reusable bags are more likely to be used by the head of household with a high-education level and the rural population. On the other hand, the probability of using these bags reduces when the head of household participates in social organizations.

In Turkey, the use of free-of-charge plastic bags was banned. After this, some authors observed that, among the Istanbul population, women, married people, and high-income groups are more prone to consume plastic bags [131]. These groups should be considered the focal point when designing policies. Based on the authors, “policymakers and environmental organizations should provide the necessary campaigns and training to reignite the tendency to reduce plastic bag consumption as part of environmental awareness.”

There are also cases where the consumer does not contribute to the circular economy due to a lack of knowledge. For example, the survey results found that university students are unaware of the consequences of beverage packaging material choices on environmental sustainability [132]. They do not know how to contribute effectively in their day-by-day activities to the sustainability goal.

More environmentally conscious people are more prone to join environmental initiatives [128, 129, 133]. “Information is one of the most widely used means to promote pro-environmental behavior change” [134] and, consequently, make consumers aware of plastic and its impacts. So, education is an effective way to raise consumer awareness of plastic.

The Internet can improve consumers’ pro-environmental behavior [135]. The Internet has the leading role in providing environmental information, making environmental knowledge popular, and enhancing energy use and social relationships [135]. Moreover, communication through mass media as TV channels open to the public is essential means of information about plastic pollution. Additionally, shocking images, messages of victims of plastic waste, and emotive images are effective in developing consumer awareness since they attract the consumers’ attention and produce a debate on plastic use [136, 137]. “The media has a critical role in educating the public and policymakers on the current environmental concerns regarding plastic pollution” [22].

Last but not least, the plastic importance must be clear to everyone, no matter the way.

Conclusions

It is common in different areas of knowledge to have distinct interests. In an interdisciplinary area such as consumer awareness of plastic consumption and its paramount importance to society, it would be ideal for interests to converge for the well-being of society.

It was possible to observe that each area (environmental science, engineering, and materials science) presents different strategies to reduce the negative impact of plastic on human health and the environment. Each area contributes on its area in developing consumer awareness of plastic:

Concerning the analysis of the authors’ keywords:

So, the authors’ keywords analysis can describe the current scenario of consumer awareness of plastic literature and depict the main concerns of the authors. The analysis can also help outline the future of the research area based on filling in identified deficiencies.

However, all these concerns are not aligned with the ones of the consumer’s habit. It is a severe gap in which literature needs to turn, reducing the “distance” between consumer awareness and behavior.

Data Availability

Code Availability

References

  1. Nguyen KLP, Chuang YH, Chen HW, Chang CC (2020) Impacts of socioeconomic changes on municipal solid waste characteristics in Taiwan. Resour Conserv Recycl 161:104931. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2020.104931ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Kaza S, Yao LC, Bhada-Tata P, Van Woerden F (2018) What a waste 2.0: a global snapshot of solid waste management to 2050. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0
  3. Hoornweg D, Bhada-Tata P (2012) What a waste: a global review of solid waste management. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/17388. Accessed 11 Feb 2021
  4. Geyer R, Jambeck JR, Law KL (2017) Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made. Sci Adv 3:e1700782. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1700782ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  5. de Sousa FDB (2021) The role of plastic concerning the sustainable development goals: the literature point of view. Clean Responsible Consum 3:100020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100020ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Dejours C (1999) A banalização da injustiça social, 4th edn. FGV, Rio de Janeiro Google Scholar
  7. de Medeiros LFR, Macêdo KB (2006) Recycled garbage pickers – a profession beyond survival? Psicol Soc 18:62–71. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-71822006000200009ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Borrelle SB, Ringma J, Lavender Law K et al (2020) Predicted growth in plastic waste exceeds efforts to mitigate plastic pollution. Sci (80-) 369:1515–1518. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.ABA3656ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  9. Schnurr REJ, Alboiu V, Chaudhary M et al (2018) Reducing marine pollution from single-use plastics (SUPs): a review. Mar Pollut Bull 137:157–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2018.10.001ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  10. Xanthos D, Walker TR (2017) International policies to reduce plastic marine pollution from single-use plastics (plastic bags and microbeads): a review. Mar Pollut Bull 118:17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.02.048ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  11. Bezerra JC, Walker TR, Clayton CA, Adam I (2021) Single-use plastic bag policies in the southern african development community. Environ Challenges 3:100029. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2021.100029ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Linnebjerg JF, Baak JE, Barry T et al (2021) Review of plastic pollution policies of Arctic countries in relation to seabirds. Facets. https://doi.org/10.1139/FACETS-2020-0052ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Clayton CA, Walker TR, Bezerra JC, Adam I (2021) Policy responses to reduce single-use plastic marine pollution in the Caribbean. Mar Pollut Bull 162:111833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111833ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  14. Adam I, Walker TR, Bezerra JC, Clayton A (2020) Policies to reduce single-use plastic marine pollution in West Africa. Mar Policy 116:103928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103928ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Myers J (2020) China’s plans to reduce single-use plastics | World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/china-has-an-announced-ambitious-plans-to-cut-single-use-plastic/. Accessed 21 Feb 2021
  16. Masterson V (2020) Which countries have bans on single-use plastics? | World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/canada-bans-single-use-plastics/. Accessed 21 Feb 2021
  17. Marazzi L, Loiselle S, Anderson LG et al (2020) Consumer-based actions to reduce plastic pollution in rivers: a multi-criteria decision analysis approach. PLoS ONE 15:e0236410. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0236410ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  18. Secinaro S, Brescia V, Calandra D, Biancone P (2020) Employing bibliometric analysis to identify suitable business models for electric cars. J Clean Prod 264:121503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121503ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Cambridge dictionary (2022) https://dictionary.cambridge.org/pt/dicionario/ingles/awareness. Accessed 11
  20. Thomas L (2013) How and why environmental issues are neglected. Yale Environ Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2011.10.002ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Elgie AR, Singh SJ, Telesford JN (2021) You can’t manage what you can’t measure: the potential for circularity in Grenada’s waste management system. Resour Conserv Recycl. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105170ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Ali SM, Ahmed S, Ahmed HN et al (2022) Reducing plastic pollutants through catalyzing consumer roles: a novel application of fuzzy total interpretive structural modeling. J Clean Prod 335:130327. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2021.130327ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. de Sousa FDB (2021) Plastic and its consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2021 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-15425-W
  24. Usman S, Razis AFA, Shaari K et al (2020) Microplastics pollution as an invisible potential threat to food safety and security, policy challenges and the way forward. Int J Environ Res Public Heal 2020 17:9591. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH17249591ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  25. Prata JC, da Costa JP, Lopes I et al (2020) Environmental status of (micro)plastics contamination in Portugal. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 200:110753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.110753ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  26. Rodrigues D, Antunes J, Otero V et al (2020) Distribution patterns of microplastics in seawater surface at a portuguese Estuary and Marine Park. Front Environ Sci 254. https://doi.org/10.3389/FENVS.2020.582217
  27. Briain O, Marques Mendes AR, McCarron S et al (2020) The role of wet wipes and sanitary towels as a source of white microplastic fibres in the marine environment. Water Res 182:116021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116021ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  28. Yurtsever M (2019) Glitters as a source of primary microplastics: an approach to environmental responsibility and ethics. J Agric Environ Ethics 2019 323 32:459–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10806-019-09785-0ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. e Silva PHS, de Sousa FDB (2021) Microplastic pollution of Patos lagoon, south of Brazil. Environ Challenges 4:100076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2021.100076ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  30. Hartmann NB, Hüffer T, Thompson RC et al (2019) Are we speaking the same language? Recommendations for a definition and categorization framework for plastic debris. Environ Sci Technol 53:1039–1047. https://doi.org/10.1021/ACS.EST.8B05297/ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  31. Ammendolia J, Saturno J, Brooks AL et al (2021) An emerging source of plastic pollution: environmental presence of plastic personal protective equipment (PPE) debris related to COVID-19 in a metropolitan city. Environ Pollut 269:116160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116160ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  32. Anastopoulos I, Pashalidis I (2021) Single-use surgical face masks, as a potential source of microplastics: do they act as pollutant carriers? J Mol Liq 326:115247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2020.115247ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  33. de Sousa FDB (2020) Pros and cons of plastic during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recycling 5:27. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling5040027ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Hämer J, Gutow L, Köhler A, Saborowski R (2014) Fate of microplastics in the marine isopod Idotea emarginata. Environ Sci Technol 48:13451–13458. https://doi.org/10.1021/es501385yArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  35. Wright SL, Thompson RC, Galloway TS (2013) The physical impacts of microplastics on marine organisms: a review. Environ Pollut 178:483–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2013.02.031ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  36. Necropsia aponta que pinguim encontrado morto no litoral de SP engoliu máscara. https://g1.globo.com/sp/vale-do-paraiba-regiao/noticia/2020/09/15/necropsia-aponta-que-pinguim-encontrado-morto-no-litoral-de-sp-engoliu-mascara.ghtml. Accessed 16 Sep 2020
  37. WorldWide Fund for Nature (2019) No plastic in nature: assessing plastic ingestion from nature to people. Gland, Switzerland Google Scholar
  38. Prata JC, da Costa JP, Lopes I et al (2020) Environmental exposure to microplastics: an overview on possible human health effects. Sci Total Environ 702:134455. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.134455ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  39. Yuan Z, Nag R, Cummins E (2022) Human health concerns regarding microplastics in the aquatic environment - from marine to food systems. Sci Total Environ 823:153730. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2022.153730ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  40. Xu D, Ma Y, Han X, Chen Y (2021) Systematic toxicity evaluation of polystyrene nanoplastics on mice and molecular mechanism investigation about their internalization into Caco-2 cells. J Hazard Mater 417:126092. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JHAZMAT.2021.126092ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  41. Huang D, Zhang Y, Long J et al (2022) Polystyrene microplastic exposure induces insulin resistance in mice via dysbacteriosis and pro-inflammation. Sci Total Environ 838:155937. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2022.155937ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  42. Weber A, Schwiebs A, Solhaug H et al (2022) Nanoplastics affect the inflammatory cytokine release by primary human monocytes and dendritic cells. Environ Int 163:107173. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVINT.2022.107173ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  43. Yang S, Cheng Y, Chen Z et al (2021) In vitro evaluation of nanoplastics using human lung epithelial cells, microarray analysis and co-culture model. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 226:112837. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOENV.2021.112837ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  44. Huang Z, Weng Y, Shen Q et al (2021) Microplastic: a potential threat to human and animal health by interfering with the intestinal barrier function and changing the intestinal microenvironment. Sci Total Environ 785:147365. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2021.147365ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  45. Junaid M, Siddiqui JA, Sadaf M et al (2022) Enrichment and dissemination of bacterial pathogens by microplastics in the aquatic environment. Sci Total Environ 830:154720. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2022.154720ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  46. Tong X, Li B, Li J et al (2022) Polyethylene microplastics cooperate with Helicobacter pylori to promote gastric injury and inflammation in mice. Chemosphere 288:132579. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHEMOSPHERE.2021.132579ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  47. Rawle DJ, Dumenil T, Tang B et al (2022) Microplastic consumption induces inflammatory signatures in the colon and prolongs a viral arthritis. Sci Total Environ 809:152212. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2021.152212ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  48. Liu S, Li H, Wang J et al (2022) Polystyrene microplastics aggravate inflammatory damage in mice with intestinal immune imbalance. Sci Total Environ 833:155198. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2022.155198ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  49. Nikolic S, Gazdic-Jankovic M, Rosic G et al (2022) Orally administered fluorescent nanosized polystyrene particles affect cell viability, hormonal and inflammatory profile, and behavior in treated mice. Environ Pollut 305:119206. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2022.119206ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  50. Zheng H, Wang J, Wei X et al (2021) Proinflammatory properties and lipid disturbance of polystyrene microplastics in the livers of mice with acute colitis. Sci Total Environ 750:143085. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2020.143085ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhao L, Shi W, Hu F et al (2021) Prolonged oral ingestion of microplastics induced inflammation in the liver tissues of C57BL/6J mice through polarization of macrophages and increased infiltration of natural killer cells. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 227:112882. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOENV.2021.112882ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  52. Ragusa A, Notarstefano V, Svelato A et al (2022) Raman microspectroscopy detection and characterisation of microplastics in human breastmilk. Polym (Basel) 14:2700. https://doi.org/10.3390/POLYM14132700ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  53. de Sousa FDB (2022) A simplified bibliometric mapping and analysis about sustainable polymers. Mater Today Proc 49:2025–2033. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATPR.2021.08.210ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhou Y, Yang F, Wu X et al (2020) Bibliometric analysis of research progress on karst groundwater pollution. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 568:012040 ArticleGoogle Scholar
  55. de Sousa FDB (2021) Management of plastic waste: a bibliometric mapping and analysis. Waste Manag Res 39:664–678. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X21992422ArticleGoogle Scholar
  56. Vošner HB, Kokol P, Bobek S et al (2016) A bibliometric retrospective of the Journal Computers in Human Behavior (1991–2015). Comput Hum Behav 65:46–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.026ArticleGoogle Scholar
  57. Al-Khatib IA, Monou M, Abu Zahra ASF et al (2010) Solid waste characterization, quantification and management practices in developing countries. A case study: Nablus district – Palestine. J Environ Manage 91:1131–1138. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVMAN.2010.01.003ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  58. Lin AYu-Chen, Tzy-Ying Huang S, Wahlqvist ML (2009) Waste management to improve food safety and security for health advancement. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 18:538–545 Google Scholar
  59. Sarath P, Bonda S, Mohanty S, Nayak SK (2015) Mobile phone waste management and recycling: views and trends. Waste Manag 46:536–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WASMAN.2015.09.013ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  60. Ogunola OS, Onada OA, Falaye AE (2018) Mitigation measures to avert the impacts of plastics and microplastics in the marine environment (a review). Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:9293–9310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1499-zArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  61. Forbes (2020) Solving the problem of plastic bag pollution. https://www.forbes.com/sites/businessreporter/2020/10/22/solving-the-problem-of-plastic-bag-pollution/?sh=7d04b22b4c8a. Accessed 12 Apr 2022
  62. Van Rensburg ML, Nkomo SL, Dube T (2020) The ‘plastic waste era’; social perceptions towards single-use plastic consumption and impacts on the marine environment in Durban, South Africa. Appl Geogr 114:102132. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APGEOG.2019.102132ArticleGoogle Scholar
  63. Amenábar Cristi M, Holzapfel C, Nehls M et al (2020) The rise and demise of plastic shopping bags in Chile – broad and informal coalition supporting ban as a first step to reduce single-use plastics. Ocean Coast Manag 187:105079. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OCECOAMAN.2019.105079ArticleGoogle Scholar
  64. Winton DJ, Anderson LG, Rocliffe S, Loiselle S (2020) Macroplastic pollution in freshwater environments: focusing public and policy action. Sci Total Environ 704:135242. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.135242ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  65. Heidbreder LM, Bablok I, Drews S, Menzel C (2019) Tackling the plastic problem: a review on perceptions, behaviors, and interventions. Sci Total Environ 668:1077–1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.02.437ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  66. Quartey ET, Tosefa H, Danquah KAB, Obrsalova I (2015) Theoretical framework for plastic waste management in Ghana through extended producer responsibility: case of sachet water waste. Int J Environ Res Public Heal 2015 12:9907–9919. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH120809907ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  67. Garcia-Vazquez E, Garcia-Ael C, Topa G (2021) On the way to reduce marine microplastics pollution. Research landscape of psychosocial drivers. Sci Total Environ 799:149384. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2021.149384ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  68. Rhein S, Schmid M (2020) Consumers’ awareness of plastic packaging: more than just environmental concerns. Resour Conserv Recycl 162:105063. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2020.105063ArticleGoogle Scholar
  69. Parashar N, Hait S (2021) Plastics in the time of COVID-19 pandemic: protector or polluter? Sci Total Environ 759:144274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144274ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  70. Latinopoulos D, Mentis C, Bithas K (2018) The impact of a public information campaign on preferences for marine environmental protection. The case of plastic waste. Mar Pollut Bull 131:151–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2018.04.002ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  71. Widayat W, Praharjo A, Putri VP et al (2022) Responsible consumer behavior: driving factors of pro-environmental behavior toward post-consumption plastic packaging. Sustainability 14:425. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU14010425ArticleGoogle Scholar
  72. Khan F, Ahmed W, Najmi A, Younus M (2019) Managing plastic waste disposal by assessing consumers’ recycling behavior: the case of a densely populated developing country. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2019 2632 26:33054–33066. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-019-06411-4ArticleGoogle Scholar
  73. Scherer C, Emberger-Klein A, Menrad K (2018) Segmentation of interested and less interested consumers in sports equipment made of bio-based plastic. Sustain Prod Consum 14:53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SPC.2018.01.003ArticleGoogle Scholar
  74. Scherer C, Emberger-Klein A, Menrad K (2017) Biogenic product alternatives for children: consumer preferences for a set of sand toys made of bio-based plastic. Sustain Prod Consum 10:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SPC.2016.11.001ArticleGoogle Scholar
  75. Khan F, Ahmed W, Najmi A (2019) Understanding consumers’ behavior intentions towards dealing with the plastic waste: perspective of a developing country. Resour Conserv Recycl 142:49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2018.11.020ArticleGoogle Scholar
  76. Bartolotta JF, Hardy SD (2018) Barriers and benefits to desired behaviors for single use plastic items in northeast Ohio’s Lake Erie basin. Mar Pollut Bull 127:576–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2017.12.037ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  77. Zen IS, Ahamad R, Omar W (2013) No plastic bag campaign day in Malaysia and the policy implication. Environ Dev Sustain 2013 155 15:1259–1269. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10668-013-9437-1ArticleGoogle Scholar
  78. Beitzen-Heineke EF, Balta-Ozkan N, Reefke H (2017) The prospects of zero-packaging grocery stores to improve the social and environmental impacts of the food supply chain. J Clean Prod 140:1528–1541. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2016.09.227ArticleGoogle Scholar
  79. Madigele PK, Mogomotsi GEJ, Kolobe M (2017) Consumer willingness to pay for plastic bags levy and willingness to accept eco-friendly alternatives in Botswana. Chin J Popul Resour Environ 15:255–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/10042857.2017.1369243ArticleGoogle Scholar
  80. Wensing J, Caputo V, Carraresi L, Bröring S (2020) The effects of green nudges on consumer valuation of bio-based plastic packaging. Ecol Econ 178:106783. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLECON.2020.106783ArticleGoogle Scholar
  81. Orset C, Barret N, Lemaire A (2017) How consumers of plastic water bottles are responding to environmental policies? Waste Manag 61:13–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WASMAN.2016.12.034ArticleGoogle Scholar
  82. Mogomotsi PK, Mogomotsi GE, Phonchi ND (2018) Plastic bag usage in a taxed environment: investigation on the deterrent nature of plastic levy in Maun, Botswana. Waste Manag Res J a Sustain Circ Econ 37:20–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X18801495ArticleGoogle Scholar
  83. Anderson AG, Grose J, Pahl S et al (2016) Microplastics in personal care products: exploring perceptions of environmentalists, beauticians and students. Mar Pollut Bull 113:454–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2016.10.048ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  84. Santos SC, Sousa CVE, Sampaio D, de Fagundes O (2013) A influência da utilização das sacolas compostáveis no comportamento do consumidor de Belo Horizonte. Ambient Soc 16:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1414-753X2013000400002ArticleGoogle Scholar
  85. Santos C, Mateus A, Mendes A, Malça C (2017) Processing and characterization of thin wall and biodegradable injected pots. Procedia Manuf 12:96–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROMFG.2017.08.013ArticleGoogle Scholar
  86. Devadiga DG, Bhat KS, Mahesha G (2020) Sugarcane bagasse fiber reinforced composites: recent advances and applications. Cogent Eng doi. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2020.1823159ArticleGoogle Scholar
  87. Ramos PE, Cerqueira MA, Teixeira JA, Vicente AA (2017) Physiological protection of probiotic microcapsules by coatings. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 58:1864–1877. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2017.1289148ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  88. Beukers A, Bergsma O (2004) Lightness: ‘light, lighter, bamboo?’ JSME Int J Ser A Solid Mech Mater Eng 47:533–540. https://doi.org/10.1299/JSMEA.47.533ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  89. Yin G-Z, Yang X-M (2020) Biodegradable polymers: a cure for the planet, but a long way to go. J Polym Res 27:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10965-020-2004-1ArticleGoogle Scholar
  90. Lim LT, Auras R, Rubino M (2008) Processing technologies for poly(lactic acid). Prog Polym Sci 33:820–852. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROGPOLYMSCI.2008.05.004ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  91. Sonar CR, Al-Ghamdi S, Marti F et al (2020) Performance evaluation of biobased/biodegradable films for in-package thermal pasteurization. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 66:102485. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IFSET.2020.102485ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  92. Vilarinho F, Silva AS, Vaz MF, Farinha JP (2017) Nanocellulose in green food packaging. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 58:1526–1537. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2016.1270254ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  93. Arning K, van Heek J, Ziefle M (2018) Acceptance profiles for a carbon-derived foam mattress. Exploring and segmenting consumer perceptions of a carbon capture and utilization product. J Clean Prod 188:171–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.03.256ArticleGoogle Scholar
  94. Abuabara L, Paucar-Caceres A, Burrowes-Cromwell T (2019) Consumers’ values and behaviour in the Brazilian coffee-in-capsules market: promoting circular economy. 57:7269–7288. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1629664
  95. Akimzhanova Z, Guney M, Kismelyeva S et al (2020) Contamination by eleven harmful elements in children’s jewelry and toys from central asian market. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2020 2717 27:21071–21083. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-08631-5ArticleGoogle Scholar
  96. Chae JS, Kim SW, Lee JH et al (2020) Combustion characteristics of solid refuse fuel derived from mixture of food and plastic wastes. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 2020 224 22:1047–1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10163-020-00996-6ArticleGoogle Scholar
  97. Kubwabo C, Kosarac I, Stewart B et al (2009) Migration of bisphenol A from plastic baby bottles, baby bottle liners and reusable polycarbonate drinking bottles. Food Addit Contam - Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess 26:928–937. https://doi.org/10.1080/02652030802706725ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  98. Friques A (2019) Epidemia do plástico - Bisfenol A (BPA): Você precisa saber! Grafitusa, Vitória
  99. Goodson A, Robin H, Summerfield W, Cooper I (2004) Migration of bisphenol A from can coatings - Effects of damage, storage conditions and heating. Food Addit Contam 21:1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1080/02652030400011387ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  100. Hahladakis JN, Velis CA, Weber R et al (2018) An overview of chemical additives present in plastics: migration, release, fate and environmental impact during their use, disposal and recycling. J Hazard Mater 344:179–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.10.014ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  101. Raha UK, Kumar BR, Sarkar SK (2021) Policy framework for mitigating land-based marine plastic pollution in the Gangetic Delta region of Bay of Bengal- A review. J Clean Prod 278:123409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123409ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  102. Ma X, Park C, Moultrie J (2020) Factors for eliminating plastic in packaging: the european FMCG experts’ view. J Clean Prod 256:120492. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2020.120492ArticleGoogle Scholar
  103. Curtzwiler GW, Williams EB, Hurban E et al (2018) Certification markers for empirical quantification of post-consumer recycled content in extruded polyethylene film. Polym Test 65:103–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.POLYMERTESTING.2017.11.015ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  104. Ferrari F, Corcione CE, Montagna F, Maffezzoli A (2020) 3D printing of polymer waste for improving people’s awareness about marine litter. Polym 12:1738. https://doi.org/10.3390/POLYM12081738ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  105. Goodlaxson B, Curtzwiler G, Vorst K (2017) Evaluation of methods for determining heavy metal content in polyethylene terephthalate food packaging. J Plast Film Sheeting 34:119–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756087917707336ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  106. Singh P, Saengerlaub S, Wani AA, Langowski HC (2012) Role of plastics additives for food packaging. Pigment Resin Technol 41:368–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/03699421211274306ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  107. Saba N, Paridah MT, Jawaid M (2015) Mechanical properties of kenaf fibre reinforced polymer composite: a review. Constr Build Mater 76:87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CONBUILDMAT.2014.11.043ArticleGoogle Scholar
  108. Stoll L, Rech R, Flôres SH et al (2018) Carotenoids extracts as natural colorants in poly(lactic acid) films. J Appl Polym Sci 135:46585. https://doi.org/10.1002/APP.46585ArticleGoogle Scholar
  109. Teli MD, Sheikh J (2013) Bamboo rayon–copper nanoparticle composites as durable antibacterial textile materials. Compos Interfaces 21:161–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/15685543.2013.855528ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  110. Limper A, Fischer K (2018) Processing of natural fibres in an internal mixer opens up new perspectives for thermoplastic lightweight materials in the automotive industry. Int Polym Sci Technol 42:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/0307174X1504200201ArticleGoogle Scholar
  111. Attanasio A, Largo A, Alvarez L et al (2015) Sustainable aggregates from secondary materials for innovative lightweight concrete products. Heron 60:5–26 Google Scholar
  112. Mukama M, Ambaw A, Opara UL (2020) Advances in design and performance evaluation of fresh fruit ventilated distribution packaging: a review. Food Packag Shelf Life 24:100472. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FPSL.2020.100472ArticleGoogle Scholar
  113. Morais DS, Guedes RM, Lopes MA (2016) Antimicrobial approaches for textiles: from research to market. Mater (Basel) 9:498. https://doi.org/10.3390/MA9060498ArticleGoogle Scholar
  114. Simmons J (2003) The why, what and wherefore of antimicrobial systems. Polym Polym Compos 11:101–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/096739110301100205ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  115. Vangronsveld E (2013) Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI): EU classification; impact of REACH; worker and consumer exposure – perception versus facts. Int Wood Prod J 3:58–63. https://doi.org/10.1179/2042645312Y.0000000013ArticleGoogle Scholar
  116. Rajan KP, Gopanna A, Thomas SP (2019) A project based learning (PBL) approach involving PET recycling in chemical engineering education. Recycling 4:10. https://doi.org/10.3390/RECYCLING4010010ArticleGoogle Scholar
  117. Strangl M, Ortner E, Buettner A (2019) Evaluation of the efficiency of odor removal from recycled HDPE using a modified recycling process. Resour Conserv Recycl 146:89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2019.03.009ArticleGoogle Scholar
  118. Xu EG, Ren ZJ (2021) Preventing masks from becoming the next plastic problem. Front Environ Sci Eng 2021 156 15:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11783-021-1413-7ArticleGoogle Scholar
  119. Gifford R, Nilsson A (2014) Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: a review. Int J Psychol 49:141–157. https://doi.org/10.1002/IJOP.12034ArticleGoogle Scholar
  120. Steinhorst J, Beyerl K (2021) First reduce and reuse, then recycle! Enabling consumers to tackle the plastic crisis – qualitative expert interviews in Germany. J Clean Prod 313:127782. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2021.127782ArticleGoogle Scholar
  121. Filho WL, Voronova V, Kloga M et al (2021) COVID-19 and waste production in households: a trend analysis. Sci Total Environ 777:145997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145997ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  122. Feber D, Granskog A, Lingqvist O (2020) Daniel Nordigården How US consumers view sustainability in packaging. In: McKinsey Co. https://www.mckinsey.com.br/industries/paper-forest-products-and-packaging/our-insights/sustainability-in-packaging-inside-the-minds-of-us-consumers. Accessed 12 Apr 2022
  123. Nguyen TPL (2022) Intention and behavior toward bringing your own shopping bags in Vietnam: integrating theory of planned behavior and norm activation model. J Soc Mark. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSOCM-06-2021-0131/FULL/XMLArticleGoogle Scholar
  124. Wang Q, Zhang M, Li R (2022) The COVID-19 pandemic reshapes the plastic pollution research – a comparative analysis of plastic pollution research before and during the pandemic. Environ Res 208:112634. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVRES.2021.112634ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
  125. Panagiotopoulou L, Cía Gayarre N, Scurati GW et al (2021) Design of a serious game for children to raise awareness on plastic pollution and promoting pro-environmental behaviors. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 21:064502. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4050291/1100542ArticleGoogle Scholar
  126. Law No. 12305, Brazil. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12305.htm. Accessed 22 Oct 2022
  127. Jain P, Hudnurkar DM (2022) Sustainable packaging in the FMCG industry. Clean Responsible Consum 7:100075. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLRC.2022.100075ArticleGoogle Scholar
  128. Molloy S, Medeiros AS, Walker TR, Saunders SJ (2022) Public perceptions of legislative action to reduce plastic pollution: a case study of Atlantic Canada. Sustainability 14:1852. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU14031852ArticleGoogle Scholar
  129. Jehangir A, Imtiaz M, Salman V (2022) Pakistan’s plastic bag ban: an analysis of citizens’ support and ban effectiveness in Islamabad Capital Territory. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 24:1612–1622. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10163-022-01429-2ArticleGoogle Scholar
  130. Zambrano-Monserrate MA, Alejandra Ruano M (2020) Do you need a bag? Analyzing the consumption behavior of plastic bags of households in Ecuador. Resour Conserv Recycl 152:104489. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESCONREC.2019.104489ArticleGoogle Scholar
  131. Senturk G, Dumludag D (2022) The relationship between consumption of single-use plastic bags, environmental awareness, and socio-demographic factors. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 24:1494–1507. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10163-022-01407-8/TABLES/5ArticleGoogle Scholar
  132. Lai NYG, Wong KH, Zhu F et al (2022) Awareness and perception of the environmental sustainability of beverage packaging materials. In: Sani ASA, Zahid MNO, Yasin MRM et al (eds) Enabling Ind. 4.0 through Adv. Manuf. Mater. Lect. Notes Mech. Eng. Springer, Singapore, pp 447–460 Google Scholar
  133. Kitz R, Walker T, Charlebois S, Music J (2021) Food packaging during the COVID-19 pandemic: consumer perceptions. Int J Consum Stud 46:434–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/IJCS.12691ArticleGoogle Scholar
  134. Staats H, Harland P, Wilke HAM (2004) Effecting durable change: a team approach to improve environmental behavior in the household. Environ Behav 36:341–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916503260163ArticleGoogle Scholar
  135. Xiao Y, Liu X, Ren T (2022) Internet use and pro-environmental behavior: evidence from China. PLoS ONE 17:1–27. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0262644ArticleGoogle Scholar
  136. Dasmi C, Acuti D, Grazzini L, Aiello G (2022) How does the use of shockvertising trigger moral emotions? A focus on the plastic issue. In: Luceri B, Martinelli E (eds) Int Ser Adv Manag Stud. Springer, pp 169–184
  137. Septianto F, Lee MSW (2020) Emotional responses to plastic waste: matching image and message framing in encouraging consumers to reduce plastic consumption. Australas Mark J 28:18–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AUSMJ.2019.09.002ArticleGoogle Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technology Development Center, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Rua Gomes Carneiro, 1, 96010-610, Pelotas, RS, Brazil Fabiula Danielli Bastos de Sousa
  2. Center of Engineering, Modeling and Applied Social Science, Universidade Federal do ABC, Avenida dos Estados, 5001, 09210-580, SP, Santo André, Brazil Fabiula Danielli Bastos de Sousa
  1. Fabiula Danielli Bastos de Sousa
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

F. D. B. de Sousa wrote and proofread the manuscript for language editing.

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

This article does not include human participants or biological material data.

Consent to Participate

Consent for Publication

Competing Interests

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

About this article

Cite this article

de Sousa, F.D.B. Consumer Awareness of Plastic: an Overview of Different Research Areas. Circ.Econ.Sust. 3, 2083–2107 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-023-00263-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Get shareable link

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Copy to clipboard

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative