In this study, we investigate the shifting of modes of governing municipal waste, from disposal (waste-to-landfill) to waste as a resource (sustainable recycling). To this end, we frame this study combining the modes of governing approach developed by Bulkeley, Watson and Hudson with Bruno Latour’s sociology of translation approach (or Actor-Network Theory). Within this double framework, we investigate practices that emerge from the attempts made by multiple stakeholders to shift modes of governing waste. This study contributes to the modes of governing waste in particular and, to environmental policy implementation studies in general. We posit that shifting governing modes involves (i) the construction of human–non-human networks that support the stabilization of a particular governing mode; (ii) consideration of the role of non-humans, their agency and materiality and; (iii) the acknowledgement that counter-networks and unintended consequences are likely to emerge. When we add to this view the role of politics, a more complex, dynamic and rich picture of the phenomenon surfaces.
AlcadipaniRHassardJ (2010)
Actor-network theory, organizations and critique: Towards a politics of organizing. Organization17(4): 419–435.
2.
Associação Brasileira de Empresas de Limpeza Pública e Resíduos Especiais (ABRELPE) (2014) Panorama dos resíduos sólidos no Brasil 2014. Available at: www.abrelpe.org.br/panorama_apresentacao.cfm (accessed 13 September 2015).
3.
BennettJ (2005)
The agency of assemblages and the North America Blackout. Public Culture17(3): 445–465.
4.
BulkeleyHGregsonN (2009)
Crossing the threshold: Municipal waste policy and household waste generation. Environment and Planning A41(4): 929–945.
5.
BulkeleyHWatsonMHudsonR (2007)
Modes of governing municipal waste. Environment and Planning A39(11): 2733–2753.
6.
BullRPettsJEvansJ (2010)
The importance of context for effective public engagement: Learning from the governance of waste. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management53(8): 991–1009.
7.
CallonM (1986) Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In: LawJ (eds) Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?
London:
Routledge, pp.196–223.
CleggSR (2009) Managing power in organizations: The hidden history of its constitution. In: CleggSRHaugaardM (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Power.
Los Angeles, CA:
SAGE, pp.310–331.
10.
CourpassonDGolsorkhiDSallazJ (2012)
Rethinking power in organizations, institutions, and markets: Classical perspectives, current research and the future agenda. Research in Sociology of Organizations34: 1–20.
11.
CzarniawskaB (2004) Narratives in Social Science Research.
London:
SAGE.
12.
CzarniawskaB (2009)
Emerging institutions: Pyramids or Anthills?Organization Studies30(4): 423–441.
13.
CzarniawskaB (2017) Actor-network theory. In: LangleyATsoukasH (Eds) The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies.
London:
SAGE, pp.160–173.
14.
DaviesA (2009)
Clean and green? A governance analysis of waste management in New Zealand. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management52(2): 157–176.
15.
DavoudiS (2009)
Governing waste: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management52(2): 131–136.
16.
FaoroR (2001) Os Donos Do Poder: formação Do Patronato Político Brasileiro.
São Paulo:
Globo.
17.
FenwickTEdwardsE (2010) Actor-Network Theory in Education.
London:
Routledge.
18.
FlemingPSpicerA (2014)
Power in management and organization science. The Academy of Management Annals8(1): 237–298.
19.
GidwaniV (2015)
The work of waste: Inside India’s infra‐economy. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers40(4): 575–595.
20.
GilleZ (2010)
Actor networks, modes of production, and waste regimes: Reassembling the macro-social. Environment and Planning A42: 1049–1064.
21.
GregsonNCrangM (2010)
Guest Editorial – Materiality and waste: Inorganic vitality in a networked world. Environment and Planning A42: 1026–1032.
22.
GuimarãesMHAMcKeeALimaMLet al. (2015)
Putting transdisciplinarity into practice: A mixed mode procedure for stakeholder participation in natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management58(10): 1827–1852.
23.
GutberletJ (2015)
More inclusive and cleaner cities with waste management co-production: Insights from participatory epistemologies and methods. Habitat International46: 234–243.
24.
HirdMLougheedSRoweRet al. (2014)
Making waste management public (or falling back to sleep). Social Studies of Science44: 441–465.
25.
HowellJP (2015) ‘
Modes of Governing’ and solid waste mangement in Maui, Hawaii, USA. Environment and Planning A47: 2153–2169.
26.
HupePHillM (2016)
And the rest is implementation: Comparing approaches on what happens in policy processes beyond great expectations. Public Policy and Administration31(2): 103–121.
KallinikosJ (2012) Form, function and matter: Crossing the border of materiality. In: LeonardiPNardiBKallinikosJ (eds) Materiality and Organizing.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press, pp.67–90.
29.
LatourB (1984)
The powers of association. The Sociological Review32(1): 264–280.
30.
LatourB (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
31.
LawJ (2009) Actor network theory and material semiotics. In: TurnerB (ed.) The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory.
Hoboken, NJ:
Wiley-Blackwell.
32.
LawhonM (2012)
Relational power in the governance of a South African e-waste transition. Environment and Planning A44: 954–971.
33.
LedererJAOngataiDOdedaHet al. (2015)
The generation of stakeholder’s knowledge for solid waste management planning through action research: A case study from Busia, Uganda. Habitat International50: 99–109.
34.
LimaFPAVarellaCVSOliveiraFGet al. (2011)
Tecnologias sociais da reciclagem: Efetivando políticas de coleta seletiva com catadores. Revista Interinstitucional De Psicologia4(2): 131–146.
35.
MachiavelliN (1975) The Prince.
London:
Penguin Books.
36.
MacKillopF (2009)
The construction of ‘waste’ in the UK steel industry. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management52(2): 177–194.
37.
MagnaniN (2012)
Nonhuman actors, hybrid networks, and conflicts over municipal waste incinerators. Organization & Environment25: 131–145.
38.
MayP (2015)
Implementation failures revisited: Policy regimes perspective. Public Policy and Administration30(3–4): 277–299.
39.
MooreS (2012)
Garbage matters: Concepts in new geographies of waste. Progress in Human Geography36(6): 780–799.
40.
MunroR (2009) Actor-network theory. In: CleggSRHaugaardM (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Power.
Los Angeles:
SAGE, pp.310–331.
41.
NilssonMEklundMTyskengS (2009)
Environmental integration and policy implementation: Competing governance modes in waste management decision making. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy27: 1–18.
42.
ParkerGWraggA (1999)
Networks, agency and (de)stabilization: The issue of navigation on the River Wye, UK. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management42(4): 471–487.
43.
PettsJ (1995)
Waste management strategy development: A case study of community involvement and consensus building in Hampshire. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management38(4): 519–536.
44.
PiknerTJauhiainenJS (2014)
Dis/appearing waste and afterwards. Geoforum54: 39–48.
45.
PollansLB (2017) Trapped in trash: ‘Modes of governing’ and barriers to transitioning to sustainable waste management. Environment and Planning A. Epub ahead of print 12 July 2017. DOI: 10.1177/0308518X17719461.
46.
PorsanderL (2005) ‘My name is Lifebuoy’ An actor-network emerging from an action-net. In: CzarniawskaBHernesT (eds) Actor-Network Theory and Organizing.
Malmo:
Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press, pp.9–21.
47.
Samra-FredericksD (2005)
Strategic practice, ‘discourse’ and everyday interactional constitution of ‘power effects’. Organization12(6): 808–841.
48.
SasakiSArakiT (2013)
Employer–employee and buyer–seller relationships among waste pickers at final disposal site in informal recycling: The case of Bantar Gebang in Indonesia. Habitat International40: 51–57.
49.
SayesE (2014)
Actor-network theory and methodology: Just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency?Social Studies of Science44(1): 134–149.
50.
SmithSEWilliamsDGJohnsonNA (1997) Nurtured by Knowledge: Learning to Do Participatory Action-Research.
New York:
The Apex Press.
51.
SwitzerD (2017)
Citizen partisanship, local government, and environmental policy implementation. Urban Affairs Review53(1): 1–28.
52.
WatsonJ (2013)
Eco-Sensibilities: An interview with Jane Bennett. Minnesota Review2013(81): 147–158.
