ABSRACT. This article argues that the experiences of war played an important role in reshaping the social practices of waste disposal between and 1950 . Before 1914 recycling was declining in the face of the challenge presented by the 'refuse revolution', the emerging culture of hygiene, and the rise of incinerator technology. This decline was partially reversed between 1914 and 1945 by the wartime imperative to efficiently utilise resources. The need to preserve both valuable shipping space and foreign currency reserves compelled wartime governments to seek stricter recycling measures from local authorities. One consequence of this was that waste management professionals, whose duties had previously been confined to the maintenance of the public health, suddenly reconstituted themselves as experts in resource management. In turn they transformed their attitude to waste, developing new salvage technologies that promised to increase levels of reuse and recycling. During this period there emerged a brief challenge to the nascent throwaway society. However, wartime salvage efforts did not prosper with the removal of the campaign for national survival. Even the economic problems of the late1940s proved insufficient to maintain the level of recycling without the drive provided by patriotism and Britain quickly slipped back into a throwaway culture. 1 IRecycling has become a pillar of the contemporary search for that utopia we call the 'sustainable society'. In the age of environmentalism recycling is presented as a 3 means of forging a new relationship between the consumer society and the waste it inevitably generates, a relationship that holds at bay the ecological implications of uncontrolled, unbounded consumption. Recycling is thus perceived to act as a brake upon the entropic results of runaway capitalism: a modern-day alchemy that can transmute increasing mounds of useless stuff into things of value. But, as so often, the claims of the good ship novelty come to grief on the rock of history. The current fad for recycling is not new. The municipal reclamation of domestic waste was pioneered in the early twentieth century, which saw efforts to encourage the 'salvage' or 'utilisation' of refuse as a means of coping with the problems of growing urban waste and of providing raw materials during wartime crises. This 'rediscovery' of recycling was partially an attempt to revive an older sense of the value of waste, which had been undermined by a IIFor the first three-quarters of the nineteenth century the recycling of waste products was a fairly common activity. In many urban areas domestic refuse was collected by scavengers and dustmen, and taken to dust-yards of the kind that inspired Dickens's novel Our Mutual Friend. These dust-yards were staffed mainly by women who were paid to rummage through the filth of cities and towns in search of reusable items such as brass, rags and
This article investigates the emergence of 'controlled tipping' as the preferred means of municipal waste disposal in Britain between 1920 and 1960
This article investigates the category of waste and its ideological function within Victorian political ecology. It seeks to draw out the connections between conceptions of nature, understandings of technology, and political economy in mid-Victorian capitalist ideology. It does so through a detailed reading of the corpus of one Victorian writer and commentator on technological subjects, Peter Lund Simmonds. Simmonds is interesting both as an everyday producer of knowledge about science and technology, and because he explicitly draws on the category of waste as a condition of possibility for technological progress and civilization. Ultimately he is indicative of the continuing str! ength of cornucopian ideas of nature among ideologues of capit! alist improvement in the mid-Victorian period, which suggests the limited metropolitan influence of any emerging conservationism or "green imperialism."
This article responds to current critiques of Ulrich Beck's ‘risk society’ thesis by historians of science and medicine. Those who have engaged with the concept of risk society have been content to accept the fundamental categories of Beck's analysis. In contrast, we argue that Beck's risk society thesis underplays two key themes. First, the role of capitalist social relations as the driver of technological change and the transformation of everyday life; and second, the ways in which hegemonic discourses of risk can be appropriated and transformed by counter-hegemonic forces. In place of ‘risk society’, we propose an approach based upon a ‘political ecology of risk’, which emphasises the social relations that are fundamental to the everyday politics of environmental health.
In this article, I discuss some of the questions that arise for environmental historians from recent historical and theoretical studies of waste. This article is not an attempt to methodically review the entire corpus of work on waste within the social sciences and humanities. Rather I seek to draw attention to the ways in which waste constitutes an important problem for environmental history in particular. The article is in four sections. The first two deal with conceptual approaches to waste that are presently popular and draws an analytical distinction between waste and dirt, terms that are often collapsed into one another but which, when kept distinct, can do more useful work. The third and fourth sections discuss present historical treatments of waste, their capacities and limitations, before I mark out possible ways in which historians can take seriously the analytical distinctiveness of ‘waste’.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.