And that government, knowing that relying on individuals hasn't worked, still needs to find a way to solve the problem. A possible solution is to make the corporation responsible for the trash they produce. Once this happens, the corporation will begin to explore options such as rewarding customers for returning used cups, providing reusable cups, and even employing people to pick up any of their cups littered throughout the city.
For example, Coke could offer to refill their drink bottles, but the truth is, if you're out and about and want another pint of coke, you need to buy another container with it, which ultimately will need to be dealt with by your areas waste management system etc etc.
As a company they contribute so much to waste, and draw such significant profits that they must at least be somewhat implicated for the production of this pollution.
Another angle: if cars are being marketed to everyone left right and centre, and lots of people buy cars that ultimately produce tonnes of greenhouse gasses, who do you hold ultimately accountable for the pollution? the consumer who has had adverts/dreams rammed down their throat or the chaps selling the cars?
Any plan to deal with waste is going to be entirely thwarted by people who choose to litter. The lifecycle of Coca Cola packaging could become 100% waste free, but litter would still be created any time somebody chooses the throw the packaging on the ground. People have an individual responsibility to not litter, and it really doesn’t have to do much with the discussion on sustainable packaging. If your starting premise to solving any problem is ‘people are 100% not responsible for their choices’, then you’re never going to solve anything.
But unfortunately, it's infeasible to penalize them directly. And the panopticon required to do so would cause more harm than benefit. Ergo, we target upstream as the least bad solution.