Citizens Opt for Plastic Bags Despite Ban and Fees

Montenegro’s recent ban on plastic bags thicker than 15 to 50 microns, implemented formally in October 2024, has failed to significantly reduce their usage, according to environmental advocates. Despite the prohibition, citizens continue opting for various types of plastic bags, raising questions about the effectiveness of the legislation.

Nina Mihailović, a representative of the non-governmental organization NVO Green Home, explained that while the banned bags have been removed from the market, they have been largely replaced by thinner bags for fruits and vegetables, as well as thicker bags classified as reusable, which incur an eco-fee. “The aim of the law was clear—to encourage the use of thicker bags more than once and reduce their consumption through financial penalties,” Mihailović noted. Despite this intent, she expressed doubt about the ecological benefits of the measure.

One of the critical issues identified by Mihailović is that the financial penalty for using thicker bags has not been compelling enough to motivate the majority of citizens to abandon their use. “The fee is evidently insufficient to persuade most people to give up plastic bags. This raises concerns that the measure may have inadvertently increased the amount of plastic waste generated, considering that the new bags are significantly heavier and bulkier than those banned,” she warned.

Mihailović argues that the only viable solution for reducing plastic waste is the complete ban or stringent regulation of plastic bags. “As long as they are available at retail outlets, consumers will choose them over carrying reusable bags made from safe and sustainable materials,” she asserted.

Despite various environmental campaigns and initiatives in Montenegro over the years, Mihailović believes that lasting change remains elusive. “Changing societal habits takes time, continuity in action, and strong, long-term initiatives to raise awareness. This is especially true in ecology, where behavioral changes are often linked to personal values and relationships with nature,” she emphasized.

Official data supports Mihailović’s concerns. The Environmental Protection Agency reported that over 10 million plastic bags were sold from the beginning of the ban in October 2024 until February 2025, generating approximately 150 tons of plastic waste in just a few months. “These figures do not indicate the success of the law nor the willingness of society to change,” she stated.

Highlighting the need for enhanced public awareness, Mihailović remarked that there is no longer room for debate regarding the harm caused by plastic bags. “After over 25 years of working on environmental issues, we can no longer discuss preparing society to accept the fact that plastic bags are harmful. This is no longer a matter of opinion; it is an undeniable scientific fact,” she asserted.

The negative consequences of plastic bag usage are already apparent, as evidenced by polluted riverbeds during cleanup initiatives and the alarming presence of microplastics in the environment. Mihailović stressed that reliance solely on voluntary compliance with ecological principles is insufficient.

“Consistent and systematic implementation of legal solutions is necessary, whether through motivational measures, punitive policies, or a combination of both,” she concluded.

The responsibility also lies with the government, according to Mihailović. “The greatest responsibility rests with those in power who are responsible for implementing environmental protection policies. An active and coordinated role from all societal actors—ministries, inspectors, retail chains, municipal enterprises, and citizens—is essential,” she stated.

Mihailović underscored the importance of individual accountability. “As long as we do not view planet Earth as our home and fail to recognize that harming the environment jeopardizes our health and the health of future generations, changes will be slow and limited,” she said.

Although inspection agencies have been somewhat active, Mihailović pointed out that their capacity is limited. “The small number of inspectors, coupled with numerous regulations and a wide range of responsibilities, complicates effective oversight. Inspections can be an important mechanism in reducing plastic bag use, but only with strengthened institutional capacity and broader societal understanding of the importance of environmental protection,” she concluded.

Vanja Cicmil from NVO Zero Waste Montenegro offers a slightly more optimistic view, suggesting that citizens have shown a willingness to change, albeit unevenly and without systemic support. “People are increasingly carrying reusable bags, especially those aware of the issues and who have had the opportunity to educate themselves. However, readiness is not solely dependent on individual goodwill,” Cicmil observed.

The challenges arise from mixed messages being sent in practice. “If you receive a free bag in a store or are offered an alternative that is still plastic, it sends the wrong message. We are ready, but change must be facilitated, supported, and clear. Reusable bags should become the standard, not the exception,” she urged.

Cicmil noted that while some retail chains comply with regulations and adapt seriously, others exploit gray areas. “Some retailers distribute thin bags at checkout, offer them for free, and replace one problematic bag with another,” she highlighted.

Responsibility for the poor relationship with nature is complex and shared among various stakeholders. “For years, we lived in a system promoting single-use, quick, and cheap options without considering the consequences. The responsibility is collective—between institutions, businesses, and citizens,” Cicmil stated.

She emphasized that change must be a collaborative effort. “Institutions set the rules, businesses provide solutions, and citizens demonstrate their preferences through their choices. When these three elements align, change happens rapidly,” Cicmil asserted.

On the subject of penalties, she believes the issue lies not in their existence but in their enforcement. “Fines often exist on paper, but if regulations are violated and penalties are rare or symbolic, they do not change behavior. Fines must be substantial enough to deter violations and must be consistently enforced,” Cicmil concluded.

Additionally, she noted that a portion of the collected funds should be transparently reinvested into environmental protection and citizen education. “When people see that rules are applied equally for everyone and that money goes to the right causes, trust in the system grows,” she stated.