Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices towards Single-Use Plastic Bags in the United Arab Emirates

Abstract

Due to their widespread misuse and inadequate waste management, single-use plastic bags represent the global plastic pollution crisis and ecosystem degradation. Comprehensive research on population knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) regarding single-use plastic bags is lacking in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This study aims to fill this gap by assessing the KAP levels among the UAE population and determining the relationships between these variables. A five-point Likert scale questionnaire from previous studies was used in a cross-sectional study, and the questionnaire was distributed via Google Forms. The UAE University Research Ethics Committee approved the study (ERSC_2024_4377). Non-probability sampling and G*power statistical analysis version 3.1.9.6 determined 385 UAE residents aged 18 years and older. The findings were verified through face-to-face interviews and Cronbach’s alpha tests. KAP variable associations were assessed using Chi-square tests, Pearson’s correlation coefficients, and a structural equation model with SPSS version 29.0. This test was chosen for robust categorical and continuous data. The study included 84.7% female, and 15.3% male participants aged 18 to 65 years, primarily aged 18 to 25 years, with most holding bachelor’s degrees (47.6%), and were students (51.4%), employed (33.1%), or unemployed (12.2%). The results indicated a favourable inclination towards sustainability, with mean ± standard deviation (SD) for seven knowledge questions (3.89 ± 0.7), seven attitude questions (3.99 ± 0.7), and five practice questions (3.42 ± 0.8) exceeding the midpoint. The correlation test showed that total knowledge was positively correlated with practice (r = 0.399; p < 0.001) indicating the increasing knowledge regarding single-use plastic bags associated with increasing sustainable practices and attitudes (r = 0.648; p < 0.001). There was also a significant correlation between the total attitude and practice (r = 0.487; p < 0.001). The findings suggest targeted educational and policy interventions to promote sustainable behaviour.

1. Introduction

A single-use plastic bag is a plastic bag specifically intended for one-time use [1,2]. The widespread use of disposable plastic bags can be mainly attributed to their affordable cost, lightweight design, and long-lasting nature, making them a popular choice for various consumer activities, especially grocery shopping [1,2,3,4]. However, misuse of plastic bags, including excessive consumption and improper disposal, significantly contributes to plastic pollution [3]. This pollution has dangerous environmental effects on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. The mismanagement of single-use plastic bags disposal can be attributed to insufficient waste management systems, which include garbage disposal, recycling, and energy generation from wastes [9]. The misuse may also be linked to a lack of awareness regarding the harmful consequences of inappropriate plastic use on the environment and resources [10,11,12,13]. Every year, the world uses and disposes of around five hundred billion plastic bags, meaning that one million bags are thrown away every minute [14,15,16].

Plastic bags that are discarded in aquatic ecosystems have the potential to accumulate in rivers and oceans [14]. This phenomenon disrupts the ecological balance and causes the degradation of habitats for diverse marine species [15,16,17]. In addition, numerous marine organisms, including seabirds, frequently consume plastic bags due to the incorrect perception that they are edible [16,17]. Consuming these discarded plastic bags can result in substantial internal harm and mortality [18,19,20]. Single-use plastic bags, despite their convenience and widespread use in terrestrial ecosystems, pose a substantial ecological risk due to their slow decomposition and long-lasting presence in the land [21,22].

Plastic products’ extensive utilization and prevalence have raised concerns regarding the exhaustion of non-renewable resources, leading to the inefficient utilization of energy and raw materials [23,24]. Plastic materials can experience long-lasting environmental degradation spanning thousands of years [25]. The improper disposal of single-use plastic bags can also cause infrastructure damage by obstructing drainage systems [26,27]. The accumulation of wastes hinders the natural movement of water, which in turn raises the likelihood of flooding and poses threats to public health [26,27,28].

Conducting knowledge (information), attitudes (feeling), and practices (behaviour) (KAP) studies is crucial for gathering data on individuals’ KAP regarding specific subjects [29]. These studies are essential for identifying gaps in the target KAP population, and they provide valuable insights that can inform on the development of effective strategies for environmental management [28,29]. Acquiring a thorough comprehension of these factors is essential for developing focused tactics that encourage sustainable behaviours and improve environmental consequences [27,29].

Sustainability refers to the capacity to maintain or sustain a process over time, ensuring its continuity for both the current and future generations [30]. Research focused on sustainability KAP can aid in achieving the objective of environmental sustainability [31]. On the other hand, effective resource and waste management is essential for achieving sustainability, particularly when addressing issues such as plastic pollution [31]. SDG 12 prioritizes sustainable consumption and production, promoting the responsible use and disposal of single-use plastics to safeguard the environment [32].

Furthermore, SDG 14 specifically addresses life below water and emphasizes the significance of effectively managing single-use plastic bags to mitigate their detrimental effects on marine ecosystems [33,34]. These objectives are in line with current efforts to address marine pollution and promote environmental sustainability [24,33,34]. The KAP research conducted on single-use plastic bags has a substantial influence on various studies [33]. The literature review provides a comprehensive examination but lacks an exploration of relevant research on single-use plastic bags in some countries, particularly in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) [35].

Several studies observed the gaps in the KAP of some populations, such as the participants in Durban, South Africa. The findings revealed that these participants generally hold negative attitudes towards single-use plastic and have a strong understanding of its negative effects on the environment [36]. They also showed a high level of knowledge regarding the environmental impacts of single-use plastic [36]. Previous research has also investigated various aspects of the utilization of single-use plastic bags, but significant gaps remain. For instance, a study conducted by Abdullah et al. [12] in Malaysia examined the relationship between knowledge and practices only and identified a correlation between them that was limited to certain groups, not to the general population, without examining the attitudes of all of them [12].

While another comprehensive study in Malaysia examined the KAP towards plastic among Malaysians, there is a lack of similar research in the UAE [37]. Separate research conducted in the Klang Valley, Malaysia utilized a self-administered questionnaire to specifically evaluate the KAP related to plastic use and management and its investigation was limited to young individuals and was specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic [38]. A study conducted in Greece by Charitou et al. [23] also focused exclusively on assessing the knowledge and attitudes towards marine plastic pollution. It was noted that the participants lacked a sufficient understanding of marine plastic pollution [23]. Nevertheless, they exhibited a favorable disposition towards diminishing their utilization of plastic [23].

A recent KAP study conducted by Hammami et al. [39] in the UAE with secondary school students in Sharjah, UAE assessed plastic pollution knowledge and attitudes. Four hundred students from six Sharjah secondary schools participated in a cross-sectional study. Self-administered questionnaires were distributed via probability-stratified random sampling in February and April 2016 [39]. The majority of the population understands how harmful plastic waste is to the environment (85.5%). A mean knowledge score of 53% was observed, with females (p < 0.01) and students with more educated mothers (p = 0.014) exhibiting more pro-environmental behaviours [39]. However, it did not include the wider adult population of the UAE, and its scope was limited to general sustainability without specifically addressing the issue of single-use plastic bag misuse [39].

Another example of a study conducted by Radwan and Khalil [40] in Sharjah is a study that investigated environmental sustainability in general without specifying single-use plastic, and the respondents were only Sharjah University students [40]. Another study performed by Alhosani in the UAE, specifically Ajman, implemented measures aimed at mitigating the plastic pollution issue and aimed to achieve zero emissions and promoted a ban on plastic bags, including the reduction of single-use plastic production [41]. However, they focused only on a specific region [41]. In addition, the previous study mentioned a high carbon footprint from the extensive utilization of plastic bags, with individuals consuming an average of 250 bags annually, reflecting unfavorable practices [41]. This shows the importance of assessing and evaluating the KAP of single-use plastic bags in UAE residences to know the reason behind plastic misuse [41].

Regarding the sociodemographics of the environmental KAP, a study in Malaysia showed a sociocultural correlation between age and knowledge [12]. Similarly, a study conducted in Greece and Lebanon examined the knowledge and attitudes of individuals in high- and upper-middle-income economies regarding the current use of plastics, their recycling practices, and the possibility of replacing them with more sustainable and biodegradable materials [42]. However, the study did not investigate the actual practices of these two populations.

In UAE, there is no study regarding the correlation between sociocultural factors and single-use plastic bags. However, a study by Rajput et al. [43] in the UAE focused on bottled water showed that they preferred the use of bottled water due to social habits [43]. Additionally, a study performed on single-use face mask in the UAE by Ajaj et al. [44] found that correlations with sociodemographic factors, especially gender, age, and educational attainment, affect group decisions about the best face mask to use and the knowledge of face mask disposal [44].

Generally, the research in the UAE focused more on bottled water instead of single-use plastic bags; in one study, they found that the average resident of the UAE used 450 plastic water bottles a year in 2011 [45]. Despite concerted efforts by non-governmental organizations to curtail the usage of plastic water bottles, little progress has been observed, along with a lack of proactive attitudes [46]. The importance of demographic variables, such as education and gender, in influencing environmental attitudes and behaviours cannot be overstated. However, the previous studies only examined specific aspects of KAP; for example, some studies exclusively concentrated on knowledge and practices [46].

Consequently, there is a lack of research on the KAP regarding single use plastic bags that specifically focuses on the UAE. From all these previous studies, it is appropriate to conduct a KAP model questionnaire that could fill these gaps regarding UAE research gaps, which is our aim. KAP studies can play a vital role in these efforts by providing data that help researchers understand public perceptions and behaviours related to plastic use and disposal. This understanding can guide the development of educational campaigns and policy measures to reduce plastic pollution [44,45]. For instance, a KAP study on single-use plastic bags in the UAE can reveal the level of awareness among the population about the environmental impacts of plastic waste, their attitudes towards using alternatives, and their actual practices in terms of waste disposal [39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46].

The present study emphasizes the significance of evaluating not only the current knowledge and attitudes but also the willingness to adopt sustainable practices. Consequently, our research focuses on investigating the extent of consciousness among UAE residents and their inclination to implement practical actions in order to mitigate plastic pollution. Our study aims to evaluate the KAP related to single-use plastic bags among the UAE population and to analyze the relationship between demographic factors and KAP levels. This objective raises these research questions and hypotheses:

What is the KAP level of single-use plastic bags in the UAE? Is there any correlation among KAP concerning single-use plastic bags in the UAE? Additionally, is there a relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and KAP regarding the usage of single-use plastic bags in the UAE?

The following hypotheses concerning single-use plastic bags in the UAE were formulated:

H0: 

There are no impacts of KAP, and sociodemographics on single-use plastic bags in the UAE;

H1: 

There are impacts of KAP, and sociodemographics on single-use plastic bags in the UAE.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Design

PLS-SEM has been used as a popular research method in various disciplines, including knowledge management (KM) [47,48]. PLS-SEM provides an alternative to covariance-based structural equation modeling (SEM), which is deemed more flexible in data requirements, the specification of relationships, and the ability to handle complex models [48].

Given the varying weights of each criterion, utilizing an advanced analysis method such as PLS-SEM allowed us to estimate complex models with multiple constructs, indicator variables, and structural paths without making distributional assumptions about the data. We utilized PLS-SEM in our research to examine the associations between several constructs in the context of the UAE regarding the KAP associated to the utilization of single-use plastic bags.

The dataset comprised responses from 393 individuals, including demographic information (gender, age, education, and employment status) and their responses to 19 questions assessing knowledge (seven items), attitude (seven items), and practices (five items) regarding single-use plastic bags. The data were first cleaned by handling missing values using mean imputation for numerical variables and mode imputation for categorical variables, ensuring completeness and consistency.

The measurement model was defined by associating the constructs with their respective indicators as follows:

-

Knowledge (K) was measured by seven indicators (KQ1 to KQ7);

-

Attitudes (A) were measured by seven indicators (AQ1 to AQ7);

-

Practices (P) were measured by five indicators (PQ1 to PQ5).

Our structural model hypothesized the following:

-

Knowledge influences attitudes;

-

Attitudes influence practices;

-

Knowledge directly influences practices.

The PLS-SEM of KAP toward the single use of plastic bags was generated using Jamovi 2.3.26 software, estimating its reliability and validity (Figure 1A). Partial least square (PLS) was used in the current research in addition to the SEM technique, which is capable of analyzing latent variables, indicators, and measurement errors in real time.

The PLS-SEM was used to assess the measurement and structural models in the current study. The measurement model, also known as the outer model, pertains to the connection between the constructs and their indicators. On the other hand, the structural model focuses on the relationship between the latent constructs themselves. The utilization of PLS-SEM in the present study is attributed to its capability to conduct a concurrent analysis of both the measurement and structural models, thereby yielding more precise computations. The process for calculating PLS-SEM in Jamovi 2.3.26 software is summarised in five stages, as depicted in Figure 1B [47,48].

2.2. Study Design and Data Collection

Data were collected from 427 volunteer participants living in the UAE using a five-point Likert scale items ranging from 1 to 5. A validated online cross-sectional questionnaire was used to assess the KAP of single-use plastic bags in the UAE based on previous articles. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethical Committee for Research at UAE University (ERSC_2024_4377). The sample for this study was obtained via non-probability sampling and the sample size was calculated based on the number of UAE residents determined using G*power, a tool for computing statistical power analyses (Figure 2) [49,50,51,52].

The questionnaire was divided into four parts: sociodemographics, knowledge, attitudes, and practices. Those sections were chosen carefully to evaluate the KAP levels of single-use plastic bags. The sociodemographic questions consisted of seven questions, and the knowledge questions consisted of seven questions, as demonstrated in

Table 1. Knowledge questions in the questionnaire.

* Knowledge Questions Number	Knowledge Questions (KQ)	Answers
KQ1	I plan to regularly purchase products with eco-sustainable packaging.	Strongly Disagree/Disagree/Neutral/Agree/Strongly agree
KQ2	By reducing my consumption of plastics, I can contribute to the preservation of environmental sustainability.	Strongly Disagree/Disagree/Neutral/Agree/Strongly agree
KQ3	Do you think single-use plastic causes harm to the environment?	No Knowledge/Little Knowledge/Neutral (Undecided)/Medium Knowledge/High Knowledge
KQ4	How serious do you think the harm caused by single-use in the natural environment?	Not severe/mild/moderate/severe/very severe
KQ5	Do you know that plastic bags can take 10–100 years to degrade in landfills?	No Knowledge/Little Knowledge/Neutral (Undecided)/Medium Knowledge/High Knowledge
KQ6	Plastic package contains monomers and additive chemicals.	No Knowledge/Little Knowledge/Neutral (Undecided)/Medium Knowledge/High Knowledge
KQ7	I am aware of the impact plastic litter can have on the environment.	No, not at all/I am a little aware/I am undecided/I am aware/I am absolutely aware

* KQ1–KQ7 = knowledge question number.

[12,36,53,54,55,56]. The attitude questions consisted of seven questions, as demonstrated in

Table 2. Attitude questions in the questionnaire.

* Attitude Question Number	Attitude Questions (AQ)	Answers
AQ1	Would you like to reduce your own consumption of single-use plastic?	No Knowledge/Little Knowledge/Neutral (Undecided)/Medium Knowledge/High Knowledge
AQ2	How many plastic bags do you buy do you buy per week?	I don’t know/zero/<5/5–10/>10
AQ3	It’s important to avoid single-use plastics bags in our daily life.	Strongly Disagree/Disagree/Neutral/Agree/Strongly agree
AQ4	I am willing to reduce my use of single-use plastic bags.	No I am not willing at all/I am unwilling/I am undecided/I am willing/I am totally willing
AQ5	I am willing to bring my own reusable bag if there is a reward (e.g., a discount on shopping).	No I am not willing at all/I am unwilling/I am undecided/I am willing/I am totally willing
AQ6	I think I am responsible to take care of the environment.	I am not responsible at all/I am a bit responsible/I am moderately responsible/I am quite responsible/I am totally responsible
AQ7	Would you prefer to buy a product that doesn’t contain microplastics or isn’t made with plastic even if it costs more?	Strongly Disagree/Disagree/Neutral/Agree/Strongly agree

* AQ1–AQ7 = attitude question number.

[12,23,36,53]. Lastly, the practice questions consisted of five questions, as demonstrated in

Table 3. Practice questions in the questionnaire.

* Practice Question Number	Practice Questions (PQ)	Answer
PQ1	I usually bring my own bag when I go shopping.	Strongly Disagree/Disagree/Neutral/Agree/Strongly agree
PQ2	Do you use reusable shopping bags?	Never/Rarely/Occasionally/Frequently/Very Frequently
PQ3	When you are grocery shopping, do you take your own shopping bags or use ones from the store?	Take own/Use ones from store/Both/It varies/I don’t know
PQ4	I think my actions have an impact on the environment.	No, not at all/Yes, they have a small impact/Yes, they have a moderate impact/Yes they have quite an impact/Yes, they have a huge impact
PQ5	I use a new plastic bag every time I go shopping.	Never/Rarely/Occasionally/Frequently/Very Frequently

* PQ1–PQ5 = practice question number.

[36,53,57,58].

To ensure a broad representation of views on single-use plastic bags, the inclusion criteria of participants included volunteering and living in the UAE. In addition, participants were between 18 and 80 years old. Exclusion criteria included participants less than 18 years old and visitors to the UAE. The overall Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the KAP questions was 0.824, indicating acceptable internal consistency and the reliability of the study instrument. Before conducting the online survey, face-to-face validation for 55 participants was performed to check the validity of the questionnaire.

2.3. Data Analysis Tools

The statistical analyses were carried out to evaluate and compare knowledge about plastics among participants. Data were collected, checked, revised, and organized in tables and figures using Microsoft Excel 2016. The collected data were subjected to outlier detections, and outliers were detected using boxplot methods and handled using IBM-SPSS. Normality was applied to check the data normality, whether parametric or nonparametric data, using the Shapiro–Wilk test and Kolmogorov–Smirnov test at the p = 0.05 level.

The nonparametric data were described statistically using both graphical and numerical descriptions. Parametric data were described in terms of means and standard deviations (SD). Nonparametric data were described in terms of frequencies (n, %), means, medians, modes, quartiles (Q1, Q3), and SD. Inferential statistics of nonparametric data for comparing scores were performed using the Chi-square test for goodness-of-fit.

However, inferential statistics of parametric data for comparing KAP were performed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at the p = 0.05 level. ANOVA was followed by Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) at the p = 0.05 level. The questionnaire reliability and internal consistency were assessed using Cronbach’s alpha test at a probability level of 0.05.

Three significance levels were proposed at p = 0.05 (*), 0.01 (**), and 0.001 (***). Data analyses were carried out using the computer software Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS), IBM-SPSS version 29.0 for Mac OS [59]. The analysis was conducted using the Jamovi 2.3.26 software and the SEM command for linear structural equation modelling. Using the program’s default method, ML (maximum likelihood), the analysis followed a two-step approach. The first step tested the measurement model to assess the loadings of indicators on the latent factors, and the second step tested the structural model. Missing data were treated by listwise deletion.

3. Results

3.1. Questionnaire Reliability and Internal Consistency

Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for the scale’s knowledge (seven questions), attitudes (seven questions), and practices (five questions) were 0.778, 0.802, and 0.753, respectively, indicating high reliability and internal consistency within each scale and for the whole questionnaire. The overall reliability for the combined 19 questions (

Table 4. Reliability analysis.

ID	Scales	Number of Questions	Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability *
1	Knowledge	07	0.778
2	Attitudes	07	0.802
3	Practices	05	0.753
Total **		19	0.878

* A Cronbach’s alpha reliability value greater than ± 0.70 shows high internal consistency. ** Total of all scale questions.

) was also high at 0.878. These results suggested that the scales are reliable tools for measuring the constructs of KAP, offering credibility to any findings derived from their use. This high consistency across all scales underscores their suitability for further research and practical applications where these constructs are essential.

Table 5. Detailed reliability and internal consistency analysis.

Variable	Scale Means if the Question Deleted	Scale Variance if the Question Deleted	Corrected Questions–Total Correlation	Cronbach’s Alpha if the Question Deleted
Age	80.532	145.872	0.229	0.867
Gender	81.550	159.600	0.003	0.861
Education	80.499	153.373	0.267	0.857
Employment	79.870	152.843	0.205	0.860
KQ1 *	79.802	146.762	0.435	0.852
KQ2	79.407	147.849	0.378	0.854
KQ3	79.262	146.587	0.468	0.851
KQ4	79.524	144.821	0.557	0.848
KQ5	79.481	146.414	0.409	0.853
KQ6	79.817	144.043	0.469	0.851
KQ7	79.285	145.097	0.571	0.848
AQ1 **	79.985	143.005	0.523	0.849
AQ2	79.880	143.850	0.515	0.849
AQ3	79.921	146.828	0.390	0.854
AQ4	79.847	142.762	0.530	0.849
AQ5	80.270	151.626	0.259	0.858
AQ6	79.305	144.335	0.596	0.847
AQ7	79.799	152.809	0.216	0.859
PQ1 ***	79.328	144.986	0.552	0.849
PQ2	79.214	145.985	0.654	0.847
PQ3	79.160	146.594	0.539	0.849
PQ4	79.249	143.632	0.604	0.847
PQ5	79.746	143.808	0.537	0.849

* KQ1–KQ7 = knowledge question number 1–7, ** AQ1–AQ7 = attitude question number 1–7, *** PQ1–PQ5 = practice question number 1–5.

gives a complete reliability and internal consistency analysis for study questions and variables. The table includes the scale mean, scale variance, corrected questions–total correlation, and Cronbach’s alpha if the question is deleted. These metrics assess scale question internal consistency.

Age, gender, education, and employment have good internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha values of 0.857 to 0.867. These variables have lower corrected questions–total correlations, with gender having a 0.003 correlation, suggesting it may be less aligned with the scale.

KQ1 to KQ7 have moderate to high corrected questions, total correlations between 0.378 and 0.571 and Cronbach’s alpha values between 0.848 and 0.854, indicating good internal consistency. AQ1–AQ7 have corrected questions, total correlations from 0.216 to 0.596, and Cronbach’s alpha values from 0.847 to 0.859, supporting their internal consistency.

3.2. Normality

The Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk normality tests revealed significant results for the KAP construct reliability.

The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test revealed significant deviations from normality for the constructs of knowledge (D(393) = 0.127, p < 0.001), attitudes (D(393) = 0.098, p < 0.001), and practices (D(393) = 0.085, p < 0.001). Consistently, the Shapiro–Wilk test also indicated significant departures from normality for knowledge (W(393) = 0.950, p < 0.001), attitudes (W(393) = 0.945, p < 0.001), and practices (W(393) = 0.979, p < 0.001).

3.3. Sociodemographic Variables

Four sociodemographic variables existed, and 393 respondents are from the UAE, as shown in Figure 3 and Figure 4.

The questionnaire data revealed that the majority of participants were females (85%), with a smaller percentage being males (15%); the difference between their scores was significant, as revealed by the Chi-square test (p < 0.001). Regarding the age distribution, most participants (29.8%) fall into the 18–20 years old, followed by the 21–25 years old (29.0%) and then 35–44 years old (14.2%). The differences between age groups was highly significant, as revealed by the Chi-square test.

The representation decreases steadily in older age groups. Regarding the participants’ educational level, the majority of them possess a bachelor’s degree (47.6%), followed by those with a high school degree or equivalent (33.3%). A smaller percentage possesses a master’s degree (12.0%) or a doctorate (6.4%), with only a minority indicating less than a high school education (0.8%). Regarding the current employment status, most participants were students (51.4%), followed by those employed (33.1%). Unemployment was reported at 12.2%.

3.4. Descriptive Statistics of the Constructs

The respondents were asked to rate their agreement following a five-point Likert scale ranging from one to five concerning knowledge of single-use plastic bags. The descriptive statistics in terms of means, SD, modes, medians, and percentiles (Q1, Q3) are presented in

Table 6. Descriptive statistics of the single-use plastic bag knowledge questionnaire.

Knowledge Question	Mean	SD	Mode	Median	Percentiles		Chi-Square
					25	75
I plan to regularly purchase products with eco-sustainable packaging.	3.6	1.1	4.0	4.0	3.0	4.0	<0.001 ***
By reducing my consumption of plastics, I can contribute to the preservation of environmental sustainability.	4.0	1.2	4.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
Do you think single-use plastic causes harm to the environment?	4.1	1.1	5.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
How serious do you think the harm caused by single-use in the natural environment?	3.9	1.0	4.0	4.0	3.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
Do you know that plastic bags can take 10–100 years to degrade in landfills?	3.9	1.2	5.0	4.0	3.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
Plastic packages contain monomers and additive chemicals.	3.6	1.3	4.0	4.0	3.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
I am aware of the impact plastic litter can have on the environment.	4.1	1.0	5.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
Knowledge	3.9	0.7	4.0	4.0	3.3	4.4	<0.001 ***
K score	4.1	0.9	5.0	4.0	3.0	5.0	<0.001 ***

***, highly significant at p < 0.001; SD = standard deviation; K score = knowledge score.

, in addition to the differences between the five scores on the Likert scale assessed by the Chi-square test.

The findings from Table 6 indicated that participants exhibited considerable knowledge regarding the environmental risks associated with single-use plastics, as demonstrated by their consistently high average scores for different questions. For example, a substantial portion of participants acknowledged that decreasing plastic consumption could have a positive impact on environmental sustainability (mean = 4.0, SD = 1.2) and were aware of the extended period of time it takes for plastic bags to break down in landfills (mean = 3.9, SD = 1.2).

The Chi-square tests yielded statistically significant results (p < 0.001) for all items, indicating a strong correlation between respondents’ knowledge levels and responses.

Table 7. Frequency and Chi-square values of the single-use plastic bag knowledge questionnaire.

Knowledge Question	Frequency, n (%)					Chi-Square
	1	2	3	4	5
	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
I plan to regularly purchase products with eco-sustainable packaging.	27 (6.9)	28 (7.1)	109 (27.7)	142 (36.1)	87 (22.1)	<0.001 ***
By reducing my consumption of plastics, I can contribute to the preservation of environmental sustainability.	34 (8.7)	8 (2.0)	34 (8.7)	169 (43.0)	148 (37.7)	<0.001 ***
Knowledge Question	No Knowledge	Little Knowledge	Neutral (Undecided)	Medium Knowledge	High Knowledge	Knowledge Question
Do you think single-use plastic causes harm to the environment?	12 (3.1)	27 (6.9)	45 (11.5)	121 (30.8)	188 (47.8)	<0.001 ***
Knowledge Question	Not Severe	Mild	Moderate	Severe	Critical	Knowledge Question
How serious do you think the harm caused by single-use in the natural environment?	14 (3.6)	22 (5.6)	88 (22.4)	145 (36.9)	124 (31.6)	<0.001 ***
Knowledge Question	No Knowledge	Little Knowledge	Neutral (Undecided)	Medium Knowledge	High Knowledge	Knowledge Question
Do you know that plastic bags can take 10–100 years to degrade in landfills?	23 (5.9)	41 (10.4)	40 (10.2)	131 (33.3)	158 (40.2)	<0.001 ***
Plastic packages contain monomers and additive chemicals.	30 (7.6)	60 (15.3)	66 (16.8)	126 (32.1)	111 (28.2)	<0.001 ***
Knowledge Question	No, Not at All	I Am a Little Aware	I Am Undecided	I Am Aware	I Am Absolutely Aware	Knowledge Question
I am aware of the impact plastic litter can have on the environment.	4 (1.0)	41 (10.4)	27 (6.9)	156 (39.7)	165 (42.0)	<0.001 ***

***, highly significant at p < 0.001; n = number of participants in each category; % = frequency percentage from total number of participants, the numbers between the parentheses in the table represent the percentage of respondents within each category.

evaluated the frequency distribution of responses to the knowledge questionnaire on single-use plastics. The data suggested that most participants agreed or strongly agreed with proactive statements regarding reducing plastic consumption and its positive impact on environmental sustainability. For instance, 37.7% of respondents expressed strong agreement, while 43% agreed that reducing their plastic consumption would enable them to make a meaningful contribution to environmental preservation.

The results, which were statistically significant at a p value of less than 0.001 for all questions, demonstrated a notable level of awareness among the respondents regarding the environmental consequences of single-use plastics and a strong inclination towards adopting sustainable practices.

The data from

Table 8. Descriptive statistics of the single-use plastic bag attitude questionnaire.

Attitude Question	Mean	SD	Mode	Median	Percentiles		Chi-Square
					25	75
Would you like to reduce your own consumption of single-use plastic?	4.1	1.0	5.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
How many plastic bags do you buy per week?	3.6	1.1	4.0	4.0	3.0	4.0	<0.001 ***
It’s important to avoid single-use plastic bags in our daily life.	4.1	1.0	5.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
I am willing to reduce my use of single-use plastic bags	4.2	0.8	4.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
I am willing to bring my own reusable bag if there is a reward (e.g., a discount on shopping).	4.2	0.9	5.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
I think I am responsible to take care of the environment.	4.2	1.0	5.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
Would you prefer to buy a product that doesn’t contain microplastics or isn’t made with plastic even if it costs more?	3.7	1.1	4.0	4.0	3.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
Attitude	4.0	0.7	4.14a	4.1	3.6	4.6	<0.001 ***
A-score	4.2	0.8	5.0	4.0	4.0	5.0	<0.001 ***

***, highly significant at p < 0.001; SD = standard deviation; A-score = attitude score.

indicated a proactive attitude in reducing the consumption of single-use plastics. Most participants indicated a readiness to decrease their utilization of plastic bags (mean = 4.2, SD = 0.8) and to buy environmentally sustainable products (mean = 3.7, SD = 1.1). Once again, the Chi-square tests revealed statistically significant associations (p < 0.001), confirming the consistency of these attitudes among the participants.

Table 9. Frequency and Chi-square values of the single-use plastic bag attitude questionnaire.

Attitude Question	No Knowledge	Little Knowledge	Neutral (Undecided)	Medium Knowledge	High Knowledge	Attitude Question
Would you like to reduce your own consumption of single-use plastic?	9 (2.3)	22 (5.6)	62 (15.8)	131 (33.3)	169 (43.0)	<0.001 ***
Attitude Question	Not Severe	Mild	Moderate	Severe	Critical	0.00
How many plastic bags do you buy per week?	34 (8.7)	20 (5.1)	76 (19.3)	203 (51.7)	60 (15.3)	<0.001 ***
Attitude Question	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	Chi-Square
It’s important to avoid single-use plastic bags in our daily life.	15 (3.8)	12 (3.1)	70 (17.8)	130 (33.1)	166 (42.2)	<0.001 ***
I am willing to reduce my use of single–use plastic bags.	6 (1.5)	8 (2.0)	45 (11.5)	183 (46.6)	151 (38.4)	<0.001 ***
I am willing to bring my own reusable bag if there is a reward (e.g., a discount on shopping).	10 (2.5)	16 (4.1)	30 (7.6)	152 (38.7)	185 (47.1)	<0.001 ***
I think I am responsible to take care of the environment.	11 (2.8)	21 (5.3)	58 (14.8)	112 (28.5)	191 (48.6)	<0.001 ***
Would you prefer to buy a product that doesn’t contain microplastics or isn’t made with plastic even if it costs more?	24 (6.1)	30 (7.6)	112 (28.5)	120 (30.5)	107 (27.2)	<0.001 ***

***, highly significant at p < 0.001. The numbers between the parentheses in the table represent the frequency percentage of respondents within each category.

goes over the attitudes regarding the utilization of disposable plastic bags. A significant proportion of respondents expressed a favorable attitude toward decreasing the usage of plastic bags. Specifically, 43.0% indicated their willingness to decrease their consumption of plastic bags. In comparison, 47.1% expressed their readiness to bring their own reusable bags in exchange for a reward, such as a shopping discount. The participants demonstrated a notable willingness to engage in actions promoting environmental sustainability as long as sufficient incentives exist. The high level of agreement (p < 0.001) in response to these questions indicated that the study participants hold positive and consistent attitudes towards environmental responsibility.

Regarding practical behaviors, as indicated in

Table 10. Descriptive statistics of the single-use plastic bag practice questionnaire.

Practice Question	Mean	SD	Mode	Median	Percentiles		Chi-Square
					25	75
I usually bring my own bag when I go shopping.	3.4	1.2	4.0	4.0	3.0	4.0	<0.001 ***
Do you use reusable shopping bags?	3.5	1.2	4.0	4.0	3.0	4.0	<0.001 ***
When you are grocery shopping, do you take your own shopping bags or use ones from the store?	3.5	1.2	5.0	4.0	2.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
I think my actions have an impact on the environment.	3.6	1.2	5.0	4.0	2.0	5.0	<0.001 ***
I use a new plastic bag every time I go shopping.	3.1	1.1	3.0	3.0	2.0	4.0	<0.001 ***
Practices	3.4	0.8	3.8	3.4	2.8	4.0	<0.001 ***
P–score	3.4	1.1	4.0	3.0	3.0	4.0	<0.001 ***

***, highly significant at p < 0.001; SD = standard deviation; P score = practices score.

and

Table 11. Frequency and Chi-square values of the single-use plastic bag practice questionnaire.

Practice Question	No, Not at All	I Am a Little Aware	I Am Undecided	I Am Aware	I Am Absolutely Aware	Knowledge Question
I am aware of the impact plastic litter can have on the environment.	4 (1.0)	41(10.4)	27 (6.9)	156 (39.7)	165 (42.0)	<0.001 ***
Practice Question	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree	Chi-Square
I usually bring my own bag when I go shopping.	37 (9.4)	50 (12.7)	103 (26.2)	120 (30.5)	83 (21.1)	<0.001 ***
Do you use reusable shopping bags?	21 (5.3)	63 (16.0)	97 (24.7)	116 (29.5)	96 (24.4)	<0.001 ***
When you are grocery shopping, do you take your own shopping bags or use ones from the store?	11 (2.8)	99 (25.2)	82 (20.9)	94 (23.9)	107 (27.2)	<0.001 ***
I think my actions have an impact on the environment.	16 (4.1)	83 (21.1)	77 (19.6)	103 (26.2)	114 (29.0)	<0.001 ***
I use a new plastic bag every time I go shopping.	33 (8.4)	126(32.1)	128 (32.6)	70 (17.8)	36 (9.2)	<0.001 ***

***, highly significant at p < 0.001. The numbers between the parentheses in the table represent the frequency percentage of respondents within each category.

, there was a recognition of the consequences of plastic usage, but the actual behaviors exhibited were diverse. As illustrated in Table 9, the average reaction to using one’s own bag while shopping was moderately positive (mean = 3.4, SD = 1.2), indicating the potential for enhancing the adoption of this practice. The frequency distribution (Table 11) corroborated these findings, indicating that many participants occasionally utilized bags provided by stores instead of consistently opting for reusable alternatives.

Table 11 provided a comprehensive understanding of the actual practices of participants in relation to their use of plastic bags. Although there was a general understanding of the environmental consequences, as evidenced by the question “I am aware of the impact plastic litter can have on the environment” in Table 11, the practices exhibited more substantial variations, and the results showed that 42% strongly agreed and 39.7% agreed. For instance, 21.1% of participants utilized their own bags while shopping (27.2% strongly agreed and 23.9% agreed), while 9.2% frequently relied on new plastic bags from the store.

These findings suggested a discrepancy between knowledge and actual behaviours, highlighting a potential opportunity for focused interventions to promote more sustainable actions. The Chi-square values (p < 0.001) indicated a significant difference in the responses to practice-related questions. This suggests that although awareness was high, the practical application of the knowledge was inconsistent. Improving practical application is crucial in this context.

3.5. Correlation Tests of Single-Use Plastic Bag KAP

3.5.1. KAP Scores

Figure 5 visually represents the distribution of mean scores and total scores for participants’ KAP, with significance levels indicated. The data consistently demonstrated statistical significance (p < 0.001), indicating clear differences in participants’ responses. Utilizing DMRTs aids in identifying the variability and clustering in the data, indicating a strong methodological approach to comprehending these KAP elements.

The mean total recorded scores for practice and knowledge were the highest, with averages of 28.0 ± 0.25, and 27.2 ± 0.26, which were significantly higher than the mean total attitude scores (17.1 ± 0.21). The same trend was observed in mean scores for practices (4.0 ± 0.68), and knowledge (3.9 ± 0.73) that were significantly higher than mean scores for attitudes (3.4 ± 0.84), as revealed by one way ANOVA and DMRTs at the p = 0.05 level.

3.5.2. KAP Scores and Sociodemographic Data

Figure 6A represents the distribution of KAP scores by gender. The results indicated no statistically significant differences in KAP scores based on gender (p > 0.05 for KAP * gender interaction). This suggests that gender does not significantly impact the participants’ KAP responses. However, in general, the means for KAP for females were higher than for males, and there was a significant relation at p < 0.001 *** for KAP.

Figure 6B displays a comprehensive visual comparison of KAP scores among different age groups. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed in the attitude scores, indicating considerable variations in these components among different age groups. The data presented in Figure 4 indicated that individuals in older age groups exhibited higher scores for attitudes and practices regarding the utilization of single-use plastic bags. The mean for age categories (45–54) (M = 27.3 ± 5.1) was the highest among the knowledge, attitudes (M = 19.96 ± 4.1), and practices (M = 30.0 ± 3.2).

Figure 6C visually demonstrates the distribution of KAP scores across different education levels. The graph demonstrated a positive correlation between higher levels of education and improved KAP scores, specifically in attitudes (p = 0.002), and practices (p = 0.047) related to single-use plastic bags.

Figure 6D concisely depicts the variations in KAP scores across various employment groups. Statistically significant differences (p = 0.037) were observed in the attitude scores. The graph illustrates that retired or full-time employees generally exhibited higher KAP scores.

The interrelationships between variables were determined using Pearson’s correlation analysis followed by two-tailed significance tests. Accordingly, various sociodemographic parameters showed no correlation with the total mean KAP scores. However, a positive, highly significant correlation existed between mean and total knowledge scores, mean and total attitude and practice scores. Pearson’s correlations are also presented as a blue–red heatmap. Red colour indicates a negative correlation, blue colour indicates a positive correlation, white colour indicates no correlation, and grey-boxed colours indicate significant correlations.

The total knowledge score showed a positive, highly significant correlation with practice (r = 0.399; p < 0.001), and attitude (r = 0.648; p < 0.001) scores. Moreover, the total attitude score was significantly and directly correlated with the practice score (r = 0.487; p < 0.001). These results supported a positive significant correlation between the three main parameters, KAP, as revealed by Pearson’s correlation coefficients and the two-tailed significance test (

Table 12. Mean total scores for single-use plastic bag knowledge, attitudes, and practices according to the total knowledge, attitude, and practice means, p value < 0.005.

	Age	Gender	Education	Employ.	Total–K	Total–P	Total–A	Mean–K	Mean–P	Mean–A
Age		<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	0.199	0.001 ***	0.002 **	0.204	0.001 ***	0.002 **
Gender	−0.255		<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	0.338	0.078	0.427	0.321	0.078	0.439
Education	0.588	−0.216		<0.001 ***	0.089	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	0.093	<0.001 ***	0.008 **
Employ	0.499	−0.316	0.423		0.093	0.094	0.021	0.093	0.094	0.024 *
Total–K	0.066	0.049	0.087	0.086		<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***
Total–P	0.168	0.090	0.198	0.086	0.399		<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***
Total–A	0.161	0.041	0.137	0.118	0.648	0.487		<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***
Mean–K	0.065	0.051	0.086	0.086	0.999	0.400	0.650		<0.001 ***	<0.001 ***
Mean–P	0.168	0.090	0.198	0.086	0.399	1.000	0.487	0.400		<0.001 ***
Mean–A	0.161	0.040	0.136	0.115	0.648	0.483	0.999	0.650	0.483

Total–K = knowledge total marks, which is the total of the knowledge questions’ marks, total–P = practice total marks, which is the total of the practice questions’ marks, total–A = attitude total marks, which is the total of the attitude questions’ marks, mean–K = mean of the total knowledge marks, mean–P = mean of the total practices marks, mean–A = mean of the total attitudes points. *, **, *** significant at p < 0.05, <0.01, <0.001.

).

Figure 7 displays a heatmap illustrating the correlation coefficients between different study variables, such as demographic factors and KAP scores. The red colour represents negative correlations, while blue colour represents positive correlations. Additionally, significant correlations were highlighted using grey boxes. This visual aid facilitates the rapid identification of significant influences and relationships, such as the favourable effect of education on all three KAP scores and the intricate interaction between age, knowledge, and practice.

Figure 8 expands upon the correlation analysis conducted in Figure 8 by examining additional variables or a more specific subset of the study population. The heatmap employs colour coding to represent the intensity and direction of relationships, serving as a valuable tool for identifying crucial factors that influence environmental behaviours. The relationship between higher levels of education and improved environmental practices is particularly significant, indicating that focused educational interventions could yield highly impactful results.

3.6. PLS-SEM

The current study relied on using SEM with a two-step approach. The first step involved the measurement model, which assesses the loading of indicators on the latent variables within a single model and determines its fit. The goodness-of-fit indicators are presented in

Table 13. The goodness-of-fit indicators for structural equation modelling (SEM).

Chi-Square (p Value)	df	RMSEA	SRMR	CFI	TLI	NNFI
870 (<0.0001 ***)	149	0.012	0.094	0.954	0.947	0.947

*** highly significant at p < 0.001, df = degree of freedom, RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, SRMR = standardized root square residual, CFI = comparative fit index, TLI = Tucker–Lewis index, NNFI = non-normed fit index.

.

The results indicated an acceptable fit based on the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) and non-normed fit index (NNFI), while the fit was in the ideal range for the comparative fit index (CFI index), as its value exceeded 0.95. The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) value was good, and the standardized root square residual (SRMR) index was close to zero, indicating a good fit.

However, the Chi-square value was significant, suggesting poor fit according to this index, likely due to its sensitivity to sample sizes exceeding 200 cases. The standardized loadings of the indicators on the latent factors are presented in

Table 14. The standardized loadings of the indicators on the latent factors.

Latent Variable	Indicators	Loadings	SE	Z	p Value
Knowledge	KQ1	1.0	0.000	--	--
	KQ2	1.094	0.068	16.04	<0.001 ***
	KQ3	1.103	0.082	13.46	<0.001 ***
	KQ4	1.206	0.083	14.59	<0.001 ***
	KQ5	1.022	0.084	12.18	<0.001 ***
	KQ6	1.007	0.076	13.25	<0.001 ***
	KQ7	1.295	0.080	16.21	<0.001 ***
Practices	PQ1	1.000	0.000	--	--
	PQ2	0.924	0.062	14.88	<0.001 ***
	PQ3	0.782	0.055	14.16	<0.001 ***
	PQ4	0.993	0.065	15.21	<0.001 ***
	PQ5	0.544	0.064	8.54	<0.001 ***
Attitudes	AQ1	1.000	0.000	--	--
	AQ2	0.362	0.070	5.17	<0.001 ***
	AQ3	0.996	0.038	26.37	<0.001 ***
	AQ4	0.1089	0.041	26.91	<0.001 ***
	AQ5	0.888	0.048	18.60	<0.001 ***
	AQ6	1.000	0.041	24.64	<0.001 ***
	AQ7	0.853	0.044	19.45	<0.001 ***

***, highly significant at p < 0.001, SE = standard error, Z = Z–statistic value, KQ1–KQ7 = knowledge questions, PQ1–PQ5 = practices questions, AQ1–AQ7 = attitudes questions.

.

All loadings for the measurement model were statistically significant, indicating that none of the indicators should be excluded from the analysis. All indicators under the latent variables included in the analysis should be retained. The next step in the SEM is to test the structural model. The goodness-of-fit indicators for the structural model are presented in

Table 15. The goodness-of-fit indicators for the structural model.

Chi-Square (p-Value)	df	RMSEA	SRMR	CFI	TLI	NNFI
2446 (<0.001 ***)	1375	0.062	0.004	0.993	0.977	0.977

***, highly significant at p < 0.001, df = degree of freedom, RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, SRMR = standardized root square residual, CFI = comparative fit index, TLI = Tucker–Lewis index, NNFI = non-normed fit index.

.

The goodness-of-fit indicators for the structural model were all within the ideal range for all indices. However, the Chi-square index was affected by sample size, the nature of data normality, or outliers, which resulted in a statistically significant value, indicating a poor fit. The values of the direct effects between the independent and dependent variables are presented in

Table 16. The values of the direct effects between the independent and dependent variables.

Dependent	Predictors	Effect Size	SE	Z	p Value
Practices	Attitudes	0.519	0.089	5.82	<0.001 ***
Practices	Knowledge	0.152	0.108	4.41	0.049 *
Attitudes	Knowledge	0.997	0.067	14.88	<0.001 ***

* highly significant at the 0.05 level. *** highly significant at p < 0.001. SE, standard error, Z, Z-statistic value.

.

There was a direct causal effect from the variable “attitudes” to “practices”, with a value of 0.519, which was a positive and statistically significant effect. There was a direct causal effect from the variable “knowledge” to “practices”, with a value of 0.152, which was a positive and statistically significant effect. There was a direct causal effect from the variable “attitudes” to “knowledge,” with a value of 0.997, which was a positive and statistically significant effect.

The graphical representation illustrates the direct causal effects between the independent and dependent variables. Figure 9 illustrates the initial conceptual model of the relationship between KAP towards single-use plastic bags. The constructs (K = knowledge, A = attitudes, P = practices) are represented as boxes, and the hypothesized relationships are depicted as directed arrows with path coefficients. Each construct was linked to its respective indicators, listed within the boxes. The R² values indicated the proportion of variance explained in the attitudes and practices constructs by their predictors.

The knowledge construct was best measured by items K7 and K4. When compared to other items, items P1 and P4 had the greatest loadings (1.00 and 0.99, respectively) for the practice construct, while indications A4 (1.09), and all A1, A3 and A6 (1.00) have the highest loadings for the attitude construct (Figure 9).

By leveraging PLS-SEM, we were able to uncover significant insights into the factors influencing sustainable behaviours related to single-use plastic bags in the UAE, providing a robust foundation for developing targeted interventions and policies. According to previous results, the main conclusions may be drawn from the results, and they are as follows: The findings indicated that, in terms of KAP toward single-use plastic bags, there was a positive awareness of KAP toward single-use plastic bags. As a result, when implementing KAP related to single-use plastic bags, people are aware of the impact of plastic on the environment and try to reduce waste by bringing their own bags when they go shopping; in addition to minimizing plastic waste, they tend to use reusable shopping bags.

There was a positive overview of the awareness and attitudes towards reducing the use of single-use plastic bags. However, they also emphasized the difficulties in effectively translating this awareness into consistent and practical actions. The highlighted results were a positive significant correlation between the knowledge mean, and scores and attitude and practice mean and scores. In addition, the total knowledge score showed a highly significant correlation with practices and attitudes. Moreover, the total attitude score was directly correlated with practices, and regarding sociodemographics, there was a correlation between higher levels of education and improved KAP scores, specifically in attitudes and practices. However, the practice score was higher than the attitude score.

4. Discussion

The current KAP research on single-use plastic bags significantly improves our understanding of this pressing environmental issue. The findings presented a valuable understanding of the correlation between individuals’ KAP concerning single-use plastic bags in the UAE.

Unlike previous studies that explored the connections between KAPs regarding single-use plastic bags, we utilized a second-generation statistical method called PLS-SEM to investigate the proposed relationships. PLS-SEM is an appropriate choice for research design and predicting causal links in situations where the sample size is small and the topic field is new. It is the most frequently employed SEM approach for such circumstances. Typically, a PLS-SEM is evaluated and understood through a two-stage process. The initial step involves assessing and improving the adequacy of the measurement model, followed by evaluating and reviewing the structural model. Ensuring the metrics’ reliability and validity is essential prior to making any inferences from the structural model. We evaluated the validity of the following research questions:

RQ1: What are the KAP levels of single-use plastic bags in the UAE? Are there any correlations among KAP concerning single-use plastic bags in the UAE?

RQ2: Are there relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and KAP regarding the usage of single-use plastic bags in the UAE?

Knowledge of single-use plastic bags use in the UAE has a moderating influence on the connection between attitudes and practices. Specifically, a positive attitude towards single-use plastic bags has a beneficial impact on practices related to their use. The proposed model for KAP regarding single-use plastic bags demonstrated a strong fit and was deemed satisfactory. The diagram illustrates the interconnection between the variables of food safety KAP in a structural model. The PLS-SEM method was utilized for conducting hypothesis testing.

The present study underscores the influence of sociocultural factors on attitudes and behaviours related to disposable plastic bags. For example, the sociocultural context examined in a previous study in UAE found that Sharjah’s environmental practices are affected by its culture [40]. On the other hand, in our current study, participants were ensured to represent the entire country and varied in age from 18 years to older to ensure generalization. Economic factors could affect environmental perception, such as in a study in Greece and Lebanon, which discussed the economic factors regarding single-use plastic bags with the possibility of alternative sustainable and biodegradable materials [42].

In our study, there was no relation with the economic factors reflected in employment status. A study by Hamza and Mahmoud [60] in Assiut City, Egypt, revealed that individuals with higher levels of education exhibited higher knowledge scores. This underscores the pressing need for enhanced education about environmental hazards [60]. Likewise, our study has shown a positive correlation between higher levels of education and improved KAP scores, specifically in attitudes (p = 0.002), and practices (p = 0.047) related to single-use plastic bags.

A different KAP study by Ismail et al. [38] regarding plastic usage during COVID-19 showed that the knowledge level was associated with age groups and the educational level, while attitudes were related to the educational level [38]. Although there was no relationship between sociodemographic data and the KAP in the current study, another study conducted in Vietnam by Giao and Thien [61] on the management of household solid waste revealed that plastic bags made up a significant portion of the waste, with 42.7% of the sample, and there were relationships between the educational level and age and KAP results [61]. Moreover, another study by Kittu et al. [62] was conducted to assess the KAP levels of Indian residents regarding the utilization and regulations of single-use plastics. The study revealed a notable increase in the perception of the law prohibiting the use of plastic bags among younger individuals, females, and those with higher levels of education and occupational status (p = 0.01), almost similar to the present study’s results [62].

A study conducted in Malaysia by Abdullah et al. [12] found a high level of awareness (97.6%) about the excessive use of plastic bags; their results showed that there was no relationship between knowledge and practices, while in the current study, there was a positive correlation between knowledge and practices. However, other research findings suggested a clear correlation between knowledge and practices [60]. Another study by Tharu and Shrestha [7] in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal, regarding the usage of plastic products among undergraduate students, suggested that they have inadequate knowledge and attitudes toward good practices [7]. On the other hand, in the present study, the average scores suggested a favourable inclination towards sustainability with very good KAP, all surpassing the midpoint. In a study in Northeast Malaysia, the knowledge score regarding street food hawkers supported the single-use plastic products was 9.2 ± 17.8 with the SD [63]. On the other hand, in the present study, the knowledge score was 3.89 ± 0.7 with the SD.

In contrast, a previous study conducted by Ismail et al. [38] in Malaysia before the COVID-19 pandemic on disposable plastic bags identified a lack of commitment to sustainable knowledge, highlighting the need for more individuals to adopt sustainable behaviours to reduce the usage of disposable plastic bags. While attitudes were linked to the educational level, the knowledge level was found to be related to age groups and the level of education [38]. Ismail et al. [38] study found a significant relationship between attitudes and practices, as well as knowledge and attitudes (p value < 0.05) [38]. Similarly, in the current study, the results showed a positive significant relationship between knowledge and attitudes. In contrast, another study by Coco Chin et al. [37] in Malaysia indicated a prevalent result where respondents exhibited low knowledge and practices for plastic pollution [37]. Moreover, another study by Kombiok and Naa Jaaga [64] in Ghana regarding the disposal of plastic waste showed that 87% of respondents have a negative attitude [64]. In addition, according to a Saudi Arabian study on tourists’ behavioural intentions to reduce plastic waste, attitudes did not greatly affect the prediction of environmental behavioural intentions [65].

Several studies have examined the effects of some strategies in countries that aim to reduce plastic pollution. For example, in Thailand, 75 prominent retail establishments have launched a campaign to cease the distribution of complimentary disposable plastic bags [66]. Panyagometh et al. [66] assessed the current situation and effectiveness of the plastic bag ban campaign in Bangkok and Phuket in Thailand, and they estimated the quantity of plastic bags used in these areas. Additionally, their study aimed to understand consumer behaviours regarding plastic bag consumption and management by utilizing a KAP model. The finding was that attitudes were more crucial than knowledge towards pro-environmental behaviours [66].

On the other hand, a survey in Cambodia was conducted to assess the added charges for plastic bags by supermarkets. The study demonstrated that inadequate KAP poses obstacles to the objective of decreasing plastic consumption in supermarkets [67]. These strategies were aimed at correlating knowledge with practices. Contrarily, in the present study, the total knowledge score showed positive, highly significant correlations with practice (r = 0.399; p < 0.001), and attitude (r = 0.648; p < 0.001) scores. A study conducted in Sharjah, UAE, focused on the KAP of sustainability among university students [40]. The findings revealed a favorable outlook about the significance of promoting sustainable practices [40]. A KAP study in the Maldives regarding single-use plastic usage demonstrated that 20.9% agreed to use reusable bags instead of plastic shopping bags [68]. Similarly, in the current study, 29.5% agreed to use reusable shopping bags.

The results of our research could be advantageous for numerous educators and public applications. These measures encompass limiting the production and usage of plastic and promoting the adoption of biodegradable alternatives to plastic bags to discourage their utilization. The education intervention may incorporate extensive plastic use awareness programs that prioritize the ecological consequences of plastic wastes and promote sustainable practices. Surprisingly, we have found unexpected results; although there was a strong level of knowledge (with an average rating of 3.9 out of 5) regarding the environmental impact of single-use plastics, people do not always take action accordingly (with an average practice score of 3.4). This implies that simply being aware of something may not be enough to cause a change in behaviour.

The significance of our findings is paramount for both educators and the general public. Educators should incorporate comprehensive programs that tackle plastic consumption into their curricula. This could entail implementing school-wide initiatives and incorporating environmental awareness into various academic disciplines. Prioritizing the emphasis on the enduring ecological ramifications of plastic usage and offering practical methods to diminish one’s plastic footprint is crucial. Sustainable practices are driven by public engagement and awareness campaigns, as well as collaboration between local governments, non-government organizations, and communities. They can coordinate efforts to clean up and recycle materials to decrease the use of disposable plastics. Additionally, they employ social media and public service announcements to raise awareness and encourage widespread participation in creating a sustainable future. One of the significant limitations is the lack of research on single-use plastic bags in the UAE. The current literature on single-use plastic bags is predominantly centralized in regions outside the UAE, and this is a limitation of the current research in comparing our study with a previous study to indicate if there have been any improvements over the years.

Our findings suggested several research areas to build on our work. First, longitudinal studies would help assess the KAP over time. These studies can assess the long-term efficacy of single-use plastic reduction education and policy. However, there are many important interventions that the UAE has already established [40], for example, introducing sustainability courses in the university to increase awareness [69] and a strategy for integrated plastic waste management in the UAE [41]. We also recommend that experimental designs be evaluated by educational campaigns, financial incentives, and policy changes to reduce single-use plastic misuse. For instance, testing the effects of higher plastic bag taxes or reusable alternatives could reveal the best strategies [70,71,72].

Deeper insights into single-use plastic bags require qualitative studies. As shown in our findings, these studies can explain why awareness does not always lead to action. Focus groups and interviews with different demographic groups can reveal behaviour change barriers and reveal public attitudes and practices. Comparisons between countries or regions can also reveal cultural and policy differences that affect plastic use and waste management. These could help create culturally and contextually appropriate interventions [70,71,72].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, from all results, there is a positive overview of the awareness and attitudes towards reducing the use of single-use plastic bags. However, our results emphasized the difficulties in effectively translating this awareness into consistent and practical actions. The highlighted result is a positive significant correlation between the knowledge mean, scores and attitude, and practice mean and scores. In addition, the total knowledge score showed a highly significant correlation with practices and attitudes. Moreover, the total attitude score is directly correlated with practice.

Regarding sociodemographic, there is a correlation between higher levels of education and improved KAP scores, specifically in attitudes and practices. However, the practice score is higher than the attitude score. The notable statistical results from all the tables emphasized the need for ongoing educational and policy-driven initiatives to close the disparity between attitudes and practices regarding single-use plastic bags. The limitation of the current study is the scarcity of comprehensive research on this subject. The study addresses a notable research need by specifically examining the UAE and provides accurate findings that may inform regional interventions and policy strategies. Furthermore, this study extensively examines the connections between KAP and single-use plastic bags, as opposed to previous studies that may have focused on specific aspects such as knowledge or attitudes. Therefore, it provides a thorough depiction of the interplay between these elements within the framework of the UAE.

Our research will benefit policymakers in establishing suitable interventions. The most effective way to increase KAP is to introduce a sustainability course, which has already been established in the university [69]. In addition, the strategy for integrated plastic waste management in the UAE is to achieve zero emissions [41]. Hence, we recommend following up on these strategies and sustainability course education. Moreover, we can check before and after implementing these strategies. For future studies, longitudinal studies, experimental designs, and qualitative methods are needed. These suggestions seek to address the consumption of single-use plastics to expand our research and contribute to a sustainable future. Overall, the current findings highlight a significant degree of consciousness and a favourable disposition toward minimizing the use of plastic among the participants. Nevertheless, there is a noticeable disparity between the knowledge and attitudes held by individuals and their actual behaviours, underscoring the necessity for additional interventions to promote more sustainable practices regarding single-use plastics. The notable Chi-square values observed in all our tables support the dependability of these findings and indicate that these patterns indicate the larger population surveyed in our study. The current research will benefit not only one aspect of the environment but also marine environments, desert environments, and sustainability by reducing plastic pollution. Due to its significance, the KAP model for single-use plastic bags is widely applied. However, from the perspective of the UAE, the KAP model is lacking when it comes to single-use plastic bags.

Reducing single-use plastic bags has many long-term sustainability benefits. It helps reduce plastic pollution, a major environmental issue affecting terrestrial and marine ecosystems. Additionally, by reducing the carbon footprint of extracting and processing these resources, this conservation effort helps mitigate climate change. Reusable alternatives and recycling are part of a circular economy, which reduces waste and promotes sustainability.