“限塑令”的出台体现了治理“白色污染”的需要,然而,它忽略了社会规范的作用,难以获得公众的信仰,以致在实施过程中步履维艰。“限塑令”提高了执法成本、增加了交易费用,并为寻租提供了条件,面临被“架空”的命运。通过行政规制实现“限塑”相对于其他方式具有优越性。要实现“限塑”的目标,从目前来看,在生产环节需要对生产商征收污染税,在销售环节需要确立塑料袋押金制;从长远来看,则需要寻求环保而且低廉的替代品。对“限塑令”的分析提供了法律如何避免被“架空”的启示:应当充分关注社会规范,法律特别是控制有害行为的法律必须进行成本一收益分析,重视对意识形态的投入,从而确保一部法律能够增进社会福利。 However, it neglected the role of social norms and made it hard to gain the public’s beliefs, making it difficult to implement the plan. “Plastic limit order ” raised the cost of law enforcement, increased transaction costs, and provided the conditions for rent-seeking, facing the fate of “overhead ”. By administrative regulations to achieve “plastic limit ” relative to other methods have advantages. To achieve the goal of “plastic limit”, from the current point of view, it is necessary to impose pollution tax on the manufacturer in the production process and the plastic bag deposit system needs to be established in the sales process. In the long run, the environment-friendly and low-cost alternative should be sought Product The analysis of “plastic limit order ” provides the enlightenment of the law on how to avoid “overhead ”: should pay full attention to social norms, laws, especially the law of harmful behavior control must carry out a cost-benefit analysis, emphasis on ideology Invest in ensuring that a law can promote social welfare.