Revisiting the experience of inconvenience and everyday life practices: the case of waste sorting

IF 3.6 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
L. Katan
{"title":"Revisiting the experience of inconvenience and everyday life practices: the case of waste sorting","authors":"L. Katan","doi":"10.1080/15487733.2022.2031563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The growing waste volume is an acute issue on the circular economy agenda and consumers play a key role by sorting recyclable materials from residual waste. In the literature, the experience of inconvenience is recurrently identified as a main barrier to sorting. Modeling inconvenience as the effort required for sorting, these studies suggest adjustments to communication and material arrangements, making recycling easier. This article offers a reappraisal of the experience of inconvenience and its conditioning. Using ethnographic data, the analysis explores the incongruities between participants’ sayings and doings – their articulated agreement with sorting and reluctance to do so. Waste biographies indicate that instead of overt efforts implied in the performance of sorting, embodied perceptions of normal waste practice govern which performances of sorting are experienced as inconvenient. This pre-reflective structuring of perception is anchored in and maintained by the relation of waste practices to co-occurring practices. Proposing a conceptual distinction, this article suggests that waste practices are performed as “secondary practices” enabling “primary practices,” that orchestrate participants’ dispositions and their immediate discernments of what are dispensable and, thus, inconvenient performances of sorting. This perspective elaborates on the understanding of inconvenience and the transition inertia of everyday practices toward sustainability.","PeriodicalId":35192,"journal":{"name":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2022.2031563","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The growing waste volume is an acute issue on the circular economy agenda and consumers play a key role by sorting recyclable materials from residual waste. In the literature, the experience of inconvenience is recurrently identified as a main barrier to sorting. Modeling inconvenience as the effort required for sorting, these studies suggest adjustments to communication and material arrangements, making recycling easier. This article offers a reappraisal of the experience of inconvenience and its conditioning. Using ethnographic data, the analysis explores the incongruities between participants’ sayings and doings – their articulated agreement with sorting and reluctance to do so. Waste biographies indicate that instead of overt efforts implied in the performance of sorting, embodied perceptions of normal waste practice govern which performances of sorting are experienced as inconvenient. This pre-reflective structuring of perception is anchored in and maintained by the relation of waste practices to co-occurring practices. Proposing a conceptual distinction, this article suggests that waste practices are performed as “secondary practices” enabling “primary practices,” that orchestrate participants’ dispositions and their immediate discernments of what are dispensable and, thus, inconvenient performances of sorting. This perspective elaborates on the understanding of inconvenience and the transition inertia of everyday practices toward sustainability.
回顾不便的经验和日常生活的做法:以废物分类为例
日益增长的废物量是循环经济议程上的一个尖锐问题,消费者在从剩余废物中分类可回收材料方面发挥着关键作用。在文献中,不便的体验经常被认为是分类的主要障碍。这些研究将不便建模为分类所需的努力,建议调整通信和材料安排,使回收更容易。这篇文章提供了对不便体验及其制约的重新评价。使用人种学数据,分析探讨了参与者的说法和行为之间的不一致性-他们明确同意分类和不愿意这样做。废物传记表明,不是在分类中隐含的明显努力,而是对正常废物实践的具体看法决定了哪些分类工作被认为是不方便的。这种感知的前反思结构是由废物实践与共同发生的实践的关系所锚定和维持的。这篇文章提出了一个概念上的区别,认为垃圾处理实践是作为“次要实践”来实现“主要实践”的,这协调了参与者的性格和他们对什么是可有可无的直接辨别,因此,不方便的分类行为。这个观点阐述了对不便的理解和日常实践向可持续发展的过渡惯性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy
Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy is a refereed, open-access journal which recognizes that climate change and other socio-environmental challenges require significant transformation of existing systems of consumption and production. Complex and diverse arrays of societal factors and institutions will in coming decades need to reconfigure agro-food systems, implement renewable energy sources, and reinvent housing, modes of mobility, and lifestyles for the current century and beyond. These innovations will need to be formulated in ways that enhance global equity, reduce unequal access to resources, and enable all people on the planet to lead flourishing lives within biophysical constraints. The journal seeks to advance scientific and political perspectives and to cultivate transdisciplinary discussions involving researchers, policy makers, civic entrepreneurs, and others. The ultimate objective is to encourage the design and deployment of both local experiments and system innovations that contribute to a more sustainable future by empowering individuals and organizations and facilitating processes of social learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信