While plastics play an important role in the safety, shelf‐life, and affordability of many foods, their mismanagement as waste presents a serious environmental problem. In 2019, governments in Canada and globally were poised to take legislative action to curb the use of single‐use plastics, with strong public support. However, the COVID‐19 pandemic has since disrupted those initiatives as well as the public sentiment underlying them. The aim of our study is to measure changes in Canadian consumers’ attitudes toward single‐use plastic food packaging, from Summer 2019 to Summer 2020. The methodology relies on two, representative surveys of the Canadian population, carried out in May 2019 (n = 1,094) and in June 2020 (n = 977). Our measures explored potential impacts on consumer perceptions, driven both by new food safety concerns during the pandemic and also by increased price consciousness during a time of economic recession. We found that 55% of respondents were more concerned about food safety since COVID‐19, and that 50% of respondents had become more price conscious when buying groceries. However, we found only a slight decline in motivation to reduce plastics – though with a sharper reduction among males. A stronger shift was seen in attitudes towards policy, where our results show a clear decline in support for tighter regulations or bans on single‐use plastics, along with an increase in consumers’ willingness to pay for biodegradable alternatives. These findings suggest a more difficult road ahead for legislative approaches, but also potential opportunities for market‐based strategies and innovations in the food sector.

Plastic waste is a global environmental problem. However, management solutions must be developed within local, institutional contexts. This paper considers the Government of Canada’s ‘proposed integrated management approach to plastic products’ both as a strategy for management and as an expression of federal jurisdiction. What is the policy problem to which they are responding, and how are they characterizing that problem in order to claim jurisdiction? Most importantly, what are the policy implications of this jurisdictional question?