Hygiene practices in everyday Life
Exploring the adoption and environmental implications of disposable gloves
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54337/plate2025-10318Keywords:
Disposable gloves, Single use products, Social practice theory, Practices for longevity, Focus groupsAbstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to increased use of disposable products, notably face masks and disposable gloves. While these items serve as a protective barriers against health hazards, they also pose significant environmental risks due to their resource-intensive production and waste generation. This study explores the adoption of disposable gloves beyond healthcare, probing their use and significance in the daily lives of Norwegian consumers. Employing social practice theory, the research investigates the underlying reasons and ways Norwegian consumers incorporate disposable gloves into various practices, and how more sustainable alternatives could be promoted. The methods encompass mobile ethnography and focus groups with Norwegian consumers. The findings demonstrate that disposable gloves are used to reduce health risk and enhance hygiene in daily life conveniently, consequently increasing waste. Alternative methods for increasing hygiene, such as reusable and longer lasting products or hand washing, are perceived as less hygienic and less convenient. Conclusively, the study sheds light on the complexities of changing material-practice entanglements and offers insights for developing more sustainable hand hygiene practices.
References
Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Sage Publications.
Cetina, K. K., Schatzki, T. R., & Von Savigny, E. (2001). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. Routledge.
Dodamani, A. S., Jadhav, H. C., Khairnar, M. R., & Naik, R. G. (2020). Dental professionals' knowledge and behavior towards utilization of gloves: a cross-sectional survey. J Prev Med Hyg, 61(4), E636-e641. DOI:10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2020.61.4.1291
Dolonen, K. A., & Hernæs, N. (2021, 17.3.2021). Det produseres for få hansker: Usikkert om Norge får nok. Sykepleien. https://sykepleien.no/2021/03/det-produseres-fa-hansker-usikkert-om-norge-far-nok
Douglas, M. (2003[1966]). Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. Routledge.
FHI. (2024). Markering av 5. mai - håndhygienens dag. Erfaringsoppsummering fra 2024. Folkehelseinstituttet.
Horlick-Jones, T. (2005). On ‘risk work’: Professional discourse, accountability, and everyday action. Health, risk & society, 7(3), 293-307. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698570500229820
Hunt, L. W., Fransway, A. F., Reed, C. E., Miller, L. K., Jones, R. T., Swanson, M. C., & Yunginger, J. W. (1995). An epidemic of occupational allergy to latex involving health care workers. J Occup Environ Med, 37(10), 1204-1209. DOI:10.1097/00043764-199510000-00011
Jędruchniewicz, K., Ok, Y. S., & Oleszczuk, P. (2021). COVID-19 discarded disposable gloves as a source and a vector of pollutants in the environment. Journal of hazardous materials, 417, 125938. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125938
Koncept Analytics. (2013). Global Rubber Gloves Market Report. https://issuu.com/prkonceptanalytics/docs/global_rubber_gloves__market
Kutralam-Muniasamy, G., Pérez-Guevara, F., & Shruti, V. C. (2022). A critical synthesis of current peer-reviewed literature on the environmental and human health impacts of COVID-19 PPE litter: New findings and next steps. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 422, 126945. DOI:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126945
Oaten, M., Stevenson, R. J., & Case, T. I. (2009). Disgust as a disease-avoidance mechanism. Psychological bulletin, 135(2), 303. DOI: 10.1037/a0014823
Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices. A development in culturalist theorizing. European journal of social theory, 5(2), 243-263. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310222225432
Rose, R. F., Lyons, P., Horne, H., & Mark Wilkinson, S. (2009). A review of the materials and allergens in protective gloves. Contact Dermatitis, 61(3), 129-137. DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01580.x
Schatzki, T. (1996). Social practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527470
Shove, E. (2003). Comfort, Cleanliness and Convenience: The Social Organization of Normality. Berg.
Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How it Changes. Sage Publications. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250655
Singh, N., Tang, Y., & Ogunseitan, O. A. (2020). Environmentally Sustainable Management of Used Personal Protective Equipment. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(14), 8500-8502. DOI:10.1021/acs.est.0c03022
Wakefield-Rann, R., Fam, D., & Stewart, S. (2020a). Microbes, chemicals and the health of homes: integrating theories to account for more-than-human entanglements. BioSocieties, 15(2), 182-206. DOI:10.1057/s41292-019-00147-7
Wakefield-Rann, R., Fam, D., & Stewart, S. (2020b). Routine exposure: social practices and environmental health risks in the home. Social Theory & Health, 18(4), 299-316. DOI:10.1057/s41285-018-00084-8
Wang, Z., An, C., Lee, K., Chen, X., Zhang, B., Yin, J., & Feng, Q. (2022). Physicochemical change and microparticle release from disposable gloves in the aqueous environment impacted by accelerated weathering. Science of The Total Environment, 832, 154986. DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154986
Welch, D., & Yates, L. (2018). The practices of collective action: Practice theory, sustainability transitions and social change. Journal for the theory of social behaviour, 48(3), 288-305. DOI: 10.1111/jtsb.12168
