Recycling networks movement. A green deep democracy or the politics of garbage.

CARENZO SEBASTIAN; KAIN JAAN-HENRIK; OLOKO MICHAEL; PEREZ REYNOSA JESSICA; MARIA JOSE ZAPATA CAMPOS; ZAPATA PATRIK

Edimburgo

Congreso; European Group on Organizational Studies; 2019

European Group on Organizational Studies

Waste pickers are increasingly being recognized both by society and by scholarship for theirsignificant contributions to reducing the carbon footprint of cities, recovering resources,improving environmental conditions and health of low-income residents andcreating jobs and income among the poor.Despite the stigma, low income and poor conditions in which these individuals work, wastepickers operating in cities around the world are increasingly connecting with each otherin many different ways: as self-help groups, youth-groups, extended family groups,cooperatives or associations, micro-enterprises or other forms of community-basedorganizations (CBOs).Many of these networks have expanded from community to city-wide and regional scales. City, regional and global waste pickers networks have been established during the last decades (e.g. the Argentine Waste Pickers Federation , the National Waste Pickers Movement in Brazil, the Latin American Network of InclusiveRecyclers Red Lacre or the Global Waste Picker Network supported by Wiego) all over theworld. In contrast to many platforms created by international aid development agencies, thesebottom-up networks are highly flexible and their ?learning by doing?and ?learning byinteracting? progress allows them to navigate in contested environments.These networks increasingly advocate wide engagement to break out of situations of projectisolation and narrow focus on local issues. Collective learning processeshave also helped these communities to move towards creating an international common voicein front of international agencies and the industryresisting, for example, the introduction of incineration technologies. These networks seemalso to facilitate cross-regional exchanges according to socio-economic backgrounds (lowincome to low income) and levels of maturity. Knowledge production is typically based notonly on best practices ? easy to pack in handbooks but difficult to replicate? but also on everyday practices.