This article seeks to make an original contribution to the study of environmental conflicts on waste management infrastructures by applying concepts derived from actor-network theory in an empirical case study. The article is organized into three main parts. The first highlights how the bulk of the literature on the subject has systematically ignored the role of natural/material factors. The second part analyzes the theoretical and methodological contribution of actor-network theory to the analysis of environmental conflicts. Finally, the third part focuses on a case study from northern Italy concerning a conflict over a project for a large-scale municipal waste-to-energy incinerator. The author shows how the outcome of the conflict, namely the failure of the project notwithstanding a convergence of powerful interests, can only be fully understood by adopting a relational definition of agency that sees it as the effect of the process of building associations between humans and nonhumans.
BowlerI. (1999). Recycling urban waste on farmland: an actor-network interpretation. Applied Geography, 19, 29-43.
2.
CallonM. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc bay. In LawJ. (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge (pp. 196-233). London, England: Routledge.
3.
CampbellR. A. (2002). A narrative analysis of success and failure in environmental remediation: The case of incineration at the Sydney Tar Ponds. Organization & Environment, 15, 259-277.
4.
CarolanM. (2005). Society, biology and ecology: Bringing nature back into sociology’s disciplinary narrative through critical realism. Organization & Environment, 18, 393-421.
5.
CattonW. R.DunlapR. E. (1978). Environmental sociology: A new paradigm. The American Sociologist, 13, 41-49.
6.
CitroniG.LippiA. (2009). Pubblico e privato nella governance dei rifiuti in Italia (Public and Private in Waste Governance in Italy). Rivista Italiana di politiche pubbliche, 1, 71-108.
7.
DaviesA. (2007). A wasted opportunity: Civil society and waste management in Ireland. Environmental Politics, 16, 52-72.
8.
DaviesA. (2008). Civil society activism and waste management in Ireland: The Carranstown anti-incineration campaign. Land Use Policy, 25, 161-172.
9.
DunlapR. E. (2008). Promoting a paradigm change: reflections on early contributions to environmental sociology. Organization & Environment, 21, 478-487.
10.
GilleZ. (2010). Actor networks, modes of productions and waste regimes: Reassembling the macro-social. Environment and Planning A, 42, 1049-1064.
11.
GoedtkeT. L.RikoonS. (2008). Otters as actors. Scientific controversy, dynamism of networks, and the implications of power in ecological restoration. Social Studies of Science, 38, 111-132.
12.
GoldmanM.SchurmanR. A. (2000). Closing the “great divide”: New social theory on society and nature. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 563-584.
13.
GregsonN.CrangM. (2010). Materiality and waste: Inorganic vitality in a networked world. Environment and Planning A, 42, 1026-1032.
14.
HawkinsG. (2009). The politics of bottled water: Assembling bottled water as brand, waste and oil. Journal of Cultural Economy, 2, 183-195.
15.
KhooS.RauH. (2009). Movements, mobilities and the politics of hazardous waste. Environmental Politics, 18, 960-980.
16.
LatourB. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
LatourB. (1991). Technology is society made durable. In LawJ. (Ed.), A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 103-131). London, England: Routledge.
18.
LatourB. (1996). Aramis, or, the love of technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19.
LatourB. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
LeeS.RothW. (2001). How ditch and drain became a healthy creek. Re-presentations, translations and agency during the re-design of a watershed. Social Studies of Science, 31, 315-356.
22.
LeonardL. (2006). Green nation: The Irish environmental movement from Carnsore Point to the Rossport Five. Drogheda, Ireland: Greenhouse Press.
23.
LeonardL.FaganH.DoranP. (2009). A burning issue? Governance and anti-incinerator campaigns in Ireland, North and South. Environmental Politics, 18, 896-916.
24.
LockieS. (2004). Collective agency, non-human causality and environmental social movements. A case study of the Australian landcare movement. Journal of Sociology, 40, 41-57.
25.
McCauleyD. (2009). Wasting energy? Campaigns against waste-to-energy sites in France. Environmental Politics, 18, 917-938.
26.
MinerviniD. (2010). L’assemblaggio come ontologia della sociologia ambientale (The assemblage as the ontology of environmental sociology). Quaderni di Teoria Sociale, 10, 241-265.
27.
MolA. J.SpaargarenG. (2005). From additions and withdrawals to environmental flows: Reframing debates in the environmental social sciences. Organization & Environment, 18, 91-107.
28.
MorisiM.PaciA. (Eds). (2009). Il bisogno di decidere. Termovalorizzatori: dalla politica dei rifiuti al rifiuto della politica. Bologna, Italy: Il Mulino.
29.
MurdochJ. (2001). Ecologising sociology: Actor-network theory, co-construction and the problem of human exemptionalism. Sociology, 35, 111-113.
30.
MurdochJ.MarsdenT. (1995). The spatialization of politics: Local and national actor-spaces in environmental conflict. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 20, 368-380.
31.
MurphyR. (2002). The internalization of autonomous nature into society. Sociological Review, 50, 313-333.
32.
RootesC. (2006). Explaining the outcomes of campaigns against waste incinerators in England: Community, ecology, political opportunities and policy contexts. Research in Urban Policy, 10, 179-198.
