GRASSROOTS INNOVATIONS IN WASTE

GOVERNANCE ADDRESSING SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT GOALS
J. Gutberlet

Department of Geography, University of Victoria, 3800 Finnerty Road, Victoria, BC, V8P 5C2, Canada

ABSTRACT: The generation of waste is a key concern in the city, particularly when inadequacies,
absences and weaknesses shape local waste management. The instruments, modes, procedures and
different actors that are involved and the patterns that arise influence governance outcomes. When
informal waste pickers organize collectively, e.g. as community-based organizations (CBOs), for
example youth-groups, cooperatives, associations, unions, networks or micro-enterprises and when
they engage in dialogues and partnerships with Government, industry or NGOs they create
opportunities to address sustainability. Through their everyday work waste picker organizations have
developed important spaces where innovations for sustainability and social justice can happen. These
grassroots social innovations are knowledge centers, sometimes constituting new technological
approaches, such as designing new products and finding new markets for discarded materials. They
discover novel ways of organizing themselves and their work flow and of managing their human and
material resources. Or they become involved in the dialogue and negotiations for new policies and legal
frameworks, benefitting organized waste pickers, the community and the environment. Diverse social
innovations have evolved out of the everyday work perspective of waste pickers, building on their local
knowledges on waste. While often unrecognized and unsupported waste picker organizations all over
the globe are contributing to improving the urban environment, reducing the carbon footprint of cities,
recovering resources, improving the environmental conditions and health of low-income residents, and
creating many jobs and income, particularly among the poor. Sometimes waste picker organizations
use the knowledge they have generated and accumulated as a resource to impact institutional reforms
and structural changes to waste management and waste governance. Overall their work addresses
several of the sustainable development goals (SDGs), particularly poverty reduction (goal # 1),
reduction of inequalities (goal # 5), decent work and economic growth (goal # 8), sustainable cities and
communities (goal # 11), and sustainable consumption and production patterns (goal # 12). This paper
will share findings from research conducted in 2018, mostly in Brazil on waste governance and
grassroots social innovations, as part of an international research project. Case study data from the
metropolitan region and the interior of São Paulo provides insights on some of the innovations of these
groups, the immediate outcomes, as well as some of the remaining challenges and policy
recommendations.

Keywords: waste governance, waste management, waste pickers, grassroots social innovations, sustainable
development goals, SDGs

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

1. INTRODUCTION

The human population worldwide generates unprecedented amounts of solid waste, two billion
tonnes per year of municipal waste in cities alone, and these amounts are expected to further rise and
even double by 2030 (UNEP, 2017). Not to overlook is the fact that since 1950 the world’s urban
population has grown from 746 million to 3.9 billion in 2014 (UNESCAP, 2014). Estimates show that 3
billion people worldwide are lacking waste collection and adequate waste disposal facilities, which
poses health risks (infections, exposure to chemicals, dust) and environmental impacts (soil and water
pollution, GHG emissions) (UNEP, 2019). The challenge is not only how we deal with waste, but how
and what we produce and consume. Cities are core drivers of the waste problem, but they are also
places, where significant change can happen. The problematic realities that emerge with waste
obviously require robust solutions.
Local governments have important decisions to make on how to best handle the complex waste
issues. Among the key challenges particularly global South cities are facing is the inability and absence
of the state in providing services and infrastructure to informal settlements and, as a consequence, the
trend of privatization of solid waste management services (Latendresse & Bornstein, 2017). Waste
governance sets out strategic goals and guiding principles, applies legal and financial instruments,
institutional arrangements, procedures and modes of operation, and involves different actors to address
waste collection and management (Kooiman, 2003). Particularly polycentric (Andersson & Ostrom,
2008) and multilevel governance (Benz, 2007; Kübler & Pagano, 2012) is cumulatively additive and
complementary and thus has the potential to enhance innovations, levels of cooperation between
participants for better outcomes and innovative learning. In this case, “[p]olitical authority is dispersed to
separately constituted bodies with overlapping jurisdictions that do not stand in hierarchical relationship
to each other” (Skelcher, 2005, p. 89). By tailoring governance to the specific local circumstances and
by enhancing accountability and transparency, more trust is developed within the community, creating
the ability to address big challenges, such as waste and poverty.
In many parts of the world waste pickers are the major recycling force, particularly when formal
recycling programs are lacking (Medina, 2000; Wilson et al., 2006, 2012; Chaturvedi & Gidwani, 2010;
Samson, 2009; Scheinberg, 2011; Linzner & Lange, 2013; Gutberlet, 2008; 2016). An estimated 15 to
20 million people are operating globally as waste pickers, many of them still on dumpsites (ILO, 2013).
There is great potential to improve selective waste collection and recycling in the city, increasing
material recovery rates, levels of reuse and material diversion into the circular economy with the
inclusion of organized waste pickers. There are several examples where governments have allowed for
the formal participation of waste pickers in local waste management (Arpacana, 2017; Ezeah et al.,
2013). In many of these cases the innovations coming from the waste picker sector have enabled better
selective waste collection programs, more social and economic inclusion, and have contributed to
building better communities and a cleaner environment. While many hurdles still remain, there is
currently a noticeable momentum of rising policy urgency related to waste issues.
Innovative environmental waste governance has the potential to tackle Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs), the United Nations Development Program universal call to action to end poverty, protect
the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. Particularly the following goals can be
addressed through innovative waste management, as will be demonstrated later: SDG1: End poverty;
SDG5: Achieve gender equality; SDG8: Productive employment and decent work; SGD11: Make cities
and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable and SDG12: Ensure sustainable
consumption and production patterns.
The paper starts with providing an introduction to the literature on grassroots social innovations and
will link the discussion specifically to waste and waste pickers, based on empirical evidence. The next
section highlights the context of waste governance, specifically defining polycentric and multilevel
governance, as a prospective format and mode that can address the challenges that come with waste
management. Waste is no longer an issue to be dealt with solely by engineers and through improved
technology, but rather requires the involvement of multiple actors in addressing waste from production,

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

consumption to the final destination of leftovers and waste. The next section introduces and describes
some of the SDGs related to waste management. I will draw on empirical research conducted in the
metropolitan area of São Paulo, under the Mapping Waste Governance project. The following part will
discuss, primarily in the context of the global south, the argument that grassroots social innovations in
waste management are already tackling several of the SDGs, with the result of building healthier
communities and cleaner environments. In the final considerations I will reflect on the requirement of fair
inclusion of organized waste pickers, for waste governance to more effectively contribute to the success
of the SDGs. Data was collected with 7 waste picker networks and the National Waste Pickers
Movement (MNCR) in Brazil, in 2018, via in-depth interviews with leaders of waste pickers networks
and the MNCR and follow-up workshops. The empirical work is part of an international research project
(Mapping Waste Governance), led by the author, who conducted the fieldwork in Brazil, together with a
research assistant (Solange Dias). The interviews provided mostly qualitative information on the history,
mandate and everyday praxis of waste picker networks, socio-economic outcomes, governance
structures, major challenges and recommendations. Mostly qualitative data from the interviews and the
workshop was transcribed and analyzed through content analysis. The research was granted research
ethics approval by the University of Victoria, with the ethics protocol number 17-193.

2. GRASSROOTS SOCIAL INNOVATIONS OF WASTE PICKER ORGANIZATIONS

Seyfang and Smith have coined the term ‘grassroots innovations’ to “describe networks of activists
and organizations generating novel bottom up solutions for sustainable development; solutions that
respond to the local situation and the interests and values of the communities involved” (2007, p. 585).
Grassroots social innovations are bottom-up, reflect ordinary peoples’ everyday life experiences and
struggles and involve democratic processes, actively engaging community members in the design,
development or production of an innovation, to benefit their community or the public at large, by bringing
social change developed, approved and owned by the grassroots. Social innovations can be linked to a
technology, a strategy and a management or governance practice. This involves “any type of
collaborative social undertaking that is organized at the local community level, has a high degree of
participatory decision-making and flat hierarchies" (Grabs et al., 2016, p. 100). I focus particularly on
grassroots and community-based social initiatives that emerge from organized waste pickers, in specific
local contexts and that explore alternative configurations in waste management, shaping governance
outcomes.
Smith, Fressoli and Thomas (2014) highlight the fact that grassroots movements seek socially
inclusive knowledge, processes and outcomes geared towards local communities. Grabs et al. (2016)
describe the different levels that influence successful grassroots innovations. At the individual level,
those involved in the innovation process act as role models, providing the social stimulus for the
development of the innovation. The group level promotes community action, engagement and support,
which increases the capacity to expand the innovation. Finally, with the societal level backing up the
innovation change, e.g. to local infrastructure can happen. There are obvious limitations to the process
of grassroots social innovations, primarily linked to the vulnerable situations of grassroots members in
terms of unstable employment, low income, racial inequality, low education levels, lack of social
services for this part of the population, and low access and insufficient health care (Gerometta et al.,
2005). Further barriers to the successful grassroots innovations are rural living location, overall lack of
recognition and even stigmatization of certain groups like waste pickers and little support from
community and family members.
Community support is crucial for an innovation to develop further, which means acknowledging
community inputs, values, and needs. It is also about continuity, persistence and engagement, involving
continuous learning and adapting to change. Cities are places of innovation, sites where new economic
ideas arise and were people organize in diverse and creative forms seeking to address everyday
politics, struggling for just and healthy cities.

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

 In many countries, social and technological innovations since the late 1990s have introduced
important changes to waste governance, particularly with new forms of organizations, such as waste
picker cooperatives, associations, federations, unions or networks, new models in waste management
have emerged (Aquino et al., 2009; Boeira et al., 2007). Brazil is a good example to look at for the
development of public policies, since 2003, that aim at strengthening the social and solidarity economy
and tackles poverty reduction at the national level (Caruana & Srnec, 2013).
Estimates for the number of waste pickers in Brazil vary between 400,000 and 600,000, depending
on the source (IPEA, 2013). The 2010 census (IBGE, 2012) counts 387,910 self-declared waste
pickers. According to IBGE, almost 39 per cent of the waste pickers in Brazil are organized in
membership-based organizations (cooperatives, associations). The average age of waste pickers is 39
years, the majority is Afro-descendent (66 per cent) and while 31 per cent are female, the majority of
the organized waste pickers are women. A significant number (20 per cent) is still considered illiterate
and only 25 per cent has completed their basic education (IBGE, 2012).
Worldwide, organized waste pickers form a social movement which provides innovative formulations
on how to deal with waste, how to promote participatory waste management and how to improve the
livelihoods of waste pickers, disrupting existing assumptions and preconceived ideas about them. In
Brazil, they are organized in the National recyclers’ movement (Movimento Nacional de Catadores(as)
de Materiais Recicláveis – MNCR) (MNCR, 2012). The movement is also part of the Latin American
recyclers’ movement (RedLacre) and the global network of waste pickers organization (GlobalRec).
These organizations reject the unacceptable social and economic conditions under which informal
waste pickers work, requesting policies and structures for inclusive solid waste management.
The MNCR was created in 2004, with the goal to expand inclusive solid waste management
programs throughout the country and to integrate the struggle of waste pickers for self-determination
and inclusion in the praxis of handling solid waste, which also means better access to funding and credit
lines. Waste pickers demand remuneration from the municipality for the public services they provide
with selective waste collection. In Brazil, they have been able to actively influence legislation and
institutional structures to include them in waste governance (Campos, 2014).
Interviews were conducted with seven waste picker networks (see Figure 2) in the metropolitan
region of São Paulo and also with the National Waste Pickers movement (MNCR). Rede Catasampa
was the first network to be created in 2006 and Coopcent, created in 2008, was the second network that
was formally established. The other networks while they might have operated earlier, were formally
created after 2012.
From the 7 networks analysed, Rede Paulistana (41 organizations with a total of 1,200 members)
and Rede Catasampa (20 organizations with a total of 750 members) are the largest networks, while
the others have between 7 (Coopcent) and 15 (Fepacore) member organizations, each one with about
500 or more members. All networks were initially created with the purpose of collective
commercialization, nowadays however, all of them perform several other mandates as well, including
capacity building (related to cooperativismo, work safety, waste management policy, technical issues,
such as waste minimization, etc.), negotiation with local governments to establish formal contracts,
project development, fundraising, environmental education involving the wider community, helping with
conflict resolution, inspections and certifications at the cooperative level. They sometimes provide
consultancy on waste management, e.g. to governments, formal recycling centers or
businesses/commerce. Network representatives participate in municipal council meetings, public
hearings or municipal and regional working groups to contribute to public policy making. As a network
they have greater bargaining power to negotiate contracts for individual cooperatives in their
municipalities.
Mota (2017) who studied three waste picker networks in the state of São Paulo also concluded that
networks are generally born with a commercial focus and then evolve different additional tasks. While
cooperation limited to instrumental and economic purposes is not sufficient, the fact of starting joint
activities with a concrete and commercial focus seems to facilitate the groups’ consolidation. The
network is configured as an important organizational arrangement in the face of complex challenges

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

presented by the recycling market (Boeira et al., 2007). National programs such as the national
government’s program Cataforte (the first program was established between 2007 and 2009) or specific
funding provided by Banco do Brasil Foundation, the National Secretariate of Solidarity Economy –
SENAES, or Petrobras are instrumental in the work of MBOs and networks.
Important technical social innovations have come out of these networks. For example, Rede
Solidária CataVida has started a Polymer factory and have adapted a process to industrialize the
transformation of cooking oil into soap and animal feed. The interview with this network reiterates the
importance of waste pickers to add value and to not just collect and classify materials, and yet, it seems
difficult to convince members to make products of higher value. Some cooperatives have left the
network already because they prefer to be paid immediately after selling their materials to
intermediaries, while selling collectively takes up to 15 days to receive payment. Nevertheless,
collective commercialization can obviously improve earnings significantly. Rede Solidaria CataVida sells
white High-Density Polyethylene (PEHD) at R$ 1.80 to the industry, while the middlemen are paying
only R$0.50 to R$0.80. A current challenge most networks are facing is the lower availability of
recyclable materials (due to more competition, also due to the creation of new small to medium scale
recycling industries) and the lack of working capital to be able to pay the cooperatives immediately for
their materials.
Social and livelihoods issues are central to the innovations, given the social economy approach and
cooperative values of these arrangements. Rede Catasampa also mentioned as social innovation, their
selective waste collection service provided to the public and private sectors as well as providing
certifications to MBOs and receipts proofing the amounts of materials recovered under the reverse
logistics program. In Mogi das Cruzes, for example, Rede Catasampa provides services to the
municipal recycling program Reciclamogi. The program is resilient, demonstrated by the fact that it has
survived the political transition of the local government administration. The waste pickers receive a fixed
value for the collection and sorting based on operation costs. They further benefit from subsidized
transportation, food, health coverage and social benefits. Their monthly income is around 1 minimum
salary (R$ 1,163.55, approximately US$300) plus benefits. A very similar case was mentioned by Rede
Verde Sustentável, that has strongly supported the negotiations to establish a contract for Avemare in
Santana de Paraiba, where they are now in charge of selective waste collection. Furthermore, the group
CMR, in Itapevi has established a partnership with the Instituto Eurofarma for environmental education
projects, they started out with 5 schools and now work with 44 schools, where they educate
(presentations to students) and collect all recyclable materials. The schools have become voluntary
stations collecting recyclable materials from the surrounding community.
According to Tirad-Soto and Zamberlan (2013) the spontaneous and voluntary and self-managed
organization of network members is essential for the consolidation of networks. The literature supports
the idea that while collective commercialization is the main theme for organization to address
challenges posed by the recycling market, network articulation is not limited to joint marketing (Aquino
et al., 2009; Boeira et al., 2007). Social capital is developed within the network, as well as a deeper
understanding about the reality itself, making the networks seek better alternatives to strengthen their
groups, by selling directly to the industry, by providing services or capacity building activities or by
exchanging knowledge making them stronger political actors. The following section will discuss how
waste pickers participate in waste governance.

3. WASTE GOVERNANCE

For cities in the global South to transition into more sustainable urban agglomerations, the
participation of grassroots actors and a shift in governance towards environmental governance is
required. The authors Lemos and Agrawal define environmental governance as the “interventions
aiming at changes in environment-related incentives, knowledge, institutions, decision making, and
behaviors” (2006, p. 298). It is about the set of rules and regulations, mechanisms and organizations

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

used by the political actors to influence environmental actions and outcomes. Environmental urban
governance presupposes an understanding of the complex social and environmental connections and
relations within the city system.
The growing amounts of waste generated in cities worldwide and the increased disparity in waste
management within cities and across regions are consistent challenges of global concern. Waste
management is a critical public service and waste that is not collected but rather informally dumped or
burned creates serious environmental problems, affecting the global community by leaking into lakes
and oceans, contaminating soils and animals, and by generating GHG emissions (and other pollutants)
that affect the climate. Waste is more than a sanitary or health problem to be addressed only with
technological solutions, but waste management requires an integrated approach, with focus on social,
cultural, ecological and economic facets linked to waste.
Waste governance takes a transdisciplinary and inter-sectoral approach to waste with a focus on
policies and regulations, as well as institutional arrangements that delimit how decisions are made and
how work is carried out. Thus, from a waste governance perspective, we are moving away from a
primarily engineering and prescriptive perspective (Bulkeley et al. 2005; Moore, 2012) towards a
polycentric, multilevel governance structure. Good waste governance requires the reconceptualization
of waste as a resource and an inclusive approach to waste management, with different waste actors
(waste pickers, small scale waste entrepreneurs) critically embracing innovative approaches.
The process of governing waste involves the articulation of different institutions, structures, practices
and actors. Issues of power, scale, and equity are equally important. Innovative forms of governance
are decentralized, participatory and inclusive, focused on waste reduction and resource recovery. Good
waste governance addresses: poverty reduction, builds community resilience and increases
environmental sustainability.
Optimizing municipal selective waste collection reduces final disposal in landfills (Rada et al., 2013)
which is crucial for large urbanized areas where land is scarce. The diversity of materials in solid waste
and the varying degree of recyclability and compostability requires specific forms of management,
making governance more complex, insofar as it also involves different segments of actors (e.g.
packaging and recycling industries, business councils, community-based organizations, NGOs, etc.).
The separation between organic and inorganic matter at the source is indispensable for the collection
and separation process of recyclable waste (and for the reuse of the organic fraction for composting
and biogas generation).
The inclusion of membership-based waste picker organizations in formal waste management is
already a reality in some cities in the global South, e.g. in Argentina, Brazil and Colombia (Gutberlet,
2015). Their participation in municipal selective waste collection programs generates additional benefits
in terms of reducing poverty and driving the circular economy (Wilson et al., 2006; Asim et al., 2012;
Velis et al., 2012, 2017; Scheinberg, 2012; Dias & Samson, 2016), which resonates with the state’s role
to ratify and implement environmental conventions, promote environmental research and support
vulnerable populations (Dias & Samson, 2016). Yet, almost all 7 networks raised concerns about the
continuous difficulties waste picker cooperatives face when negotiating contracts with local
governments. E.g. Rede Catasampa finds it challenging to always have to demonstrate to a city or
company that cooperatives have the competence and ability to do that service. Deeply seated prejudice
and stigma against waste pickers are still a significant barrier in formal contract negotiations with waste
pickers. Generally, the municipality ignores waste pickers, stigmatizes them and prefers to rather hire
companies to do the selective waste collection service. Cooperatives only have a chance if somebody
in a powerful position and with some decision-making power risks to hire a cooperative, as it has
happened in some cities in the metropolitan region of São Paulo (e.g. in Itapevi, Santana de Parnaiba,
Mauá). However, waste picker networks are more powerful in pressing local governments into applying
the federal waste management law, which clearly identifies waste picker cooperatives as priority hire
(Brazil, 2010).
Another issue identified by Rede Sul is the challenge to increase the number of cooperatives in the
network pool. Some cooperatives are not successful in their management, have debts related to unpaid

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

fines and are not up to date with legal requirements, thus risking to lose their agreement with the city.
These vulnerable circumstances sometimes distance a cooperative from the network. Yet, to help
overcome these difficulties is part of the networks’ mandate.
While an increase in multi-stakeholder participation in governance is a goal in environmental
governance, there is a need for greater synergies between governments and civil society organizations
(UNEP, 2019). As the examples have demonstrated there is still a lack of respect and
acknowledgement given to the work of organized waste pickers, resulting in difficult dialogue or the
avoidance of partnerships between waste pickers and the government. The network has more
permeation into Government, representing large numbers of waste pickers (each network brings
together 500 or more waste pickers) networks are more enabled to negotiate for better working
conditions and remuneration for the selective waste collection service.
City and regional governments need to identify key stakeholders involved in waste governance, e.g.
local grassroots actors (waste pickers and other marginalised groups), leaders from city administrations,
the private sector and local research institutes, to collaborate with national government partners and
other value chain actors, in order to collectively constitute a Local Governance Actors group, as was
created in the city of São Paulo (Besen et al., 2014; Besen et al., 2016; Fracalanza et al., 2016). This
group advises on the design and implementation of projects and consults according to the interests of
the different actors impacted by changes in policies and waste systems. In the case of the city of São
Paulo, a structure is in place where multiple actors are involved in promoting inclusive selective waste
collection (see Figure 2). It would be important to analyse in details the power structures that shape the
decisions-making process involving this group. Waste pickers are represented in the Local Governance
Actor group through representatives from the waste picker networks, specific forums (e.g. Waste and
Citizenship); committees (e.g. local waste management committees) and the national waste pickers
movement.

Figure 2. Key sectors and key actors involved in waste governance in the city of São Paulo

Produced by Besen and Gutberlet

The example for partnerships established between waste picker cooperatives, via their network
(WPN), to deliver waste services to the municipality or specific industries, as discussed earlier, are also
a good example for multilevel and polycentric governance structures applied to the municipal level,
allowing for innovative approaches in waste reduction, collection and diversion.

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

4. DISCUSSION: INCLUSIVE WASTE GOVERNANCE AND THE SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT GOALS

Similar to other recent international research reports (UN, 2017; 2014; WBGU, 2016), the 2016 UN
Habitat World Cities Report makes it very clear that “the new urban agenda should promote sustainable
cities and human settlements that are environmentally sustainable and resilient, socially inclusive, safe
and violence-free, economically productive; and better connected to and contributing towards sustained
rural transformation” (UN Habitat, 2016, p.2). The newly adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development presents 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to focus on in order to address
sustainability transition (Gupta & Vegelin, 2016; Le Blanc, 2015). Waste is a central topic in moving
towards sustainability transitions in cities of the global South. In this section I will argue, based on
research results and the literature, that inclusive forms of polycentric, multilevel, environmental
governance can tackle most of the SDGs. The following table (Table 1) describes nine goals that can be
tackled at various levels with innovative and inclusive approaches to waste management and
governance. In this paper the focus will be on the most evident contributions to only five of these goals.

Table 1: Waste picker organizations contributing to waste governance and tackling SDGs

SDG SDG Theme SDF Focus Links to grassroots membership- Links to polycentric and
based organizations (MBOs) and multilevel, environmental
waste picker networks (WPNs) governance
Goal No Poverty Economic growth MBOs provide income andSpecific policies, programs
1 must be inclusive to opportunities for human and skill and strategies in support of
provide sustainable development. WPNs provide
inclusive selective waste
jobs and promote capacity building and skill
collection, remunerating
equality. development to expand income MBOs for the resource
opportunities. recovery service they provide,
thus tackling poverty
reduction.
Goal Gender Gender equality is The majority of waste pickers Social work reaches women in
5 Equality not only a working in MBOs are women. vulnerable situations (single
fundamental Women participate to a large parent, abusive relationship,
human right, but a extend in the leadership of MBOs. poverty, illiteracy, etc.) in
necessary MBOs for specific actions to
foundation for a address these cases.
peaceful,
prosperous and
sustainable world.
Goal Decent Work Sustainable Improved working conditions in Decent work and economic
8 and Economic economic growth MBOs, following labor laws and growth are only possible with
Growth will require regulations; adding to economic fair service remuneration.
societies to create growth. WPNs help MBOs to MBOs and WPNs are key
the conditions that improve their working conditions actors in negotiating waste
allow people to and outcomes (work flow management contracts. Public
have quality jobs. organization, work efficiency and policies, laws and bylaws
effectiveness, health and safety at guarantee fair co-production.
work).
Goal Industry, Investments in Innovation and investment in Policy and funding availability
9 Innovation infrastructure are infrastructure to improve specifically to stimulate
and crucial to achieving collection, sorting, grassroots social innovations
Infrastructure sustainable commercialization and in waste management and
development. transformations to add value. waste governance.
WPNs support collective
commercialization and

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

 technological social innovations
(e.g. Polymer factory).

Goal Reduced Policies should be MBOs are mostly equity oriented, Support from social work to
10 Inequalities universal in following cooperative principles address the many social
principle, paying and values, applying self- challenges deriving from
attention to the determination and collective, inequality (e.g. alcohol and
needs of democratic deliberation processes. drug abuse, violence,
disadvantaged and WPNs make an effort to support illiteracy, homelessness,
marginalized less structured and weaker MBOs. stigmatization).
populations.
Goal Sustainable There needs to be a Recycling and education services Creating public fora with
11 Cities and future in which provided by waste pickers benefit multiple actor participation to
Communities cities provide local communities, reducing the stimulate and cross-fertilize
opportunities for waste of materials, reducing the the drive for healthy cities and
all, with access to risk of water logging and flooding, communities; recognizing the
basic services, etc. WPNs participate in different role waste pickers can play in
energy, housing, city forums, contributing ideas and this drive. MBOs and WPNs
transportation and experience in waste management. have important voices and
more. ideas to share.
Goal Responsible Responsible Waste picker MBOs educate the MBOs and WPNs participate
12 Production Production and public on the 3Rs. They present at in environmental awareness
and Consumption. schools, universities or businesses; campaigns for zero waste and
Consumption participate in conferences, responsible consumption.
workshops and seminars; make They participate in business
videos and art projects and council meetings and other
disseminate environmental stakeholder committees.
education materials on 3Rs and
how to best separate materials.
WPNs and MNCR are active in
discussions on responsible
production and consumption
(reverse logistics).
Goal Climate Action Climate change is a Waste pickers are at the core of Qualify the work of resource
13 global challenge resource recovery and the circular recovery waste pickers
that affects economy. They reduce landfill gas perform as 'clean
everyone, emissions (methane). GHG development mechanism' and
everywhere. emissions and energy are saved remunerate waste picker
from the resource recovery for MBOs for GHG emission
recycling, sparing virgin resources. reductions.
WPNs and MNCR are active in
discussions and activities on climate
action.
Goal Life Below Careful Waste pickers collect recyclables There is not yet a program in
14 Water management of which could otherwise be leaking place to actively strengthen
this essential global into the environment and and support waste picker
resource is a key waterbodies. The WPNs nor MNCR MBOs in coastal communities,
feature of a have yet engaged as concerted specifically gearing their
sustainable future. effort in this SDG. efforts to avoid waste leakage
into the ocean.

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

Goal Peace, Justice Access to justice for MBOs and WPNs are 'incubators'
16 and Strong all, and building for democratic governance. They
Institutions effective, are learning spaces where
accountable innovation and creativity happens.
institutions at all These spaces allow socially
levels. excluded individuals to use their
agency and re-conquer citizenship.
Many MBOs and the WPNs practice
transparency, accountability and
fairness in the everyday governance
of their organization.
Promote and maintain active
dialogue between waste
picker MBOs, WPNs and the
government, for knowledge
co-production, strengthening
and democratizing
governmental institutions.

SDG # 1 urges for poverty reduction. Waste pickers are numerous throughout the global South with
approximately 1 to 1.5 per cent of the urban population working informally or semi-informally with waste.
There are opportunities for poverty reduction in waste management.
The ILO estimates approximately 15 to 20 million informal waste workers worldwide with very low
incomes, often living below the poverty level. For Latin America and the Caribbean, estimates suggest
up to 3.8 million waste pickers, most of them working independently (Terraza & Sturzenegger, 2010).
Census data from Brazil shows that only 38.6 per cent of the waste pickers in Brazil work in formalized
organizations (IBGE, 2012). The monthly income of waste pickers varies significantly, depending on
whether they work independently or are organized, depending on the location where they work, the
access to infrastructure and technology, as well as the quality and quantity of materials, and level of
collective organization of the waste picker groups in the hierarchy of the commercialization of their
materials. In most cases waste pickers earn a higher income when they are organized and work
collectively.
Research results from the interviews unanimously underline the fact that the environmental and
community services waste pickers provide on a daily routine need to be fairly remunerated. Those
groups that have established a contract for the services of collection and waste diversion, are in a better
economic condition and are able to improve their working conditions. The municipal contracts are a
pathway to providing income security. However, without the support of the local government, and
without paying a fair price for the work of waste pickers the aim of eradicating poverty will not be
reached. In addition to income security, the ILO (2002) underlines the necessity for representation
security for decent work conditions. The better the representation, e.g. by the national waste pickers
movement (Movimento Nacional dos Catadores de Materiais Recicláveis), or waste picker networks,
the more powerful waste pickers are in negotiating contracts with the Government. Depending solely on
the income of commercializing the materials they have collected and separated will only perpetuate
poverty. This recommendation relates closely to SDG # 8.
Several international agencies, including the United Nations, the International Labor Organization,
and the International Co-operative Alliance, have declared that “the cooperative enterprise is the type of
organization that best meets all dimensions of reducing poverty and exclusion” (Wanyama, 2014, p. 59).
This has to do with the collective and value-based approach cooperatives take, that often empowers the
disadvantaged to fight for their rights and interests, and provides security (e.g. job security) given their
collective and solidarity-based way of operating.
Many of the waste picker networks also have the mandate to improve the working conditions and
outcomes (work flow organization, work efficiency and effectiveness, health and safety at work) in waste
picker MBOs, following labor laws and regulations.
The organized work of waste pickers also contributes towards SDG # 5, achieving gender equality.
The cooperative space attracts more women than men. It is an environment that affirms collective
female identities, allowing them to value themselves, develop personal self-esteem and provide
opportunities for personal growth, empowerment and leadership development Dias & Ogando, 2015). A
regional study identifies 56 per cent of organized waste pickers as women (INSEA Instituto Nenuca de

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

Desenvolvimento Sustentável, 2007). The number of women employed as waste pickers in associations
and co-operatives is increasing, from 18 per cent in 1993, to 55 per cent, in 1998 (Dias, 2002). Many of
the cooperative leaders are women. The research conducted under the MWG project confirms the
absolute dominance of female work force in waste picker MBOs. There is a distinct female leadership in
organized waste picker organizations in Brazil. Participating in a cooperative or association enables
women to become a leader and to develop their skills. The cooperative is a space that generates
collective consciousness. Women value the social relations within the working space, avoiding
alienation. Gambina and Roffinelli (2013) underline the relations between workers, bosses, employers
and the products generated as a process of alienation, in which the employees often feel outside the
job, where they do not see the utility of their work. The self-management (autogestão) of the
cooperatives changes the work relation and it empowers specifically women. The research confirms the
argument that women waste pickers who have experienced leadership, affirm how important collective
working practices are for them.
Cooperatives contribute towards gender equality, not just by increasing female membership and
providing them with an income, but also by expanding the opportunities for women to empower
themselves, to engage in capacity development and life-long learning as well as expanding their
leadership skills and helping other women. However, many of these women still remain in vulnerable
situations (single parent, abusive relationship, poverty, illiteracy, etc.) and local governments need to
provide resources for social workers to reach out to these individuals. Being part of MBOs makes it
easier to implement specific government programs for that.
SDG # 11 is about making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.
Adequate waste management is important, particularly in densely populated areas. The goal specifically
targets the reduction of the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, also by paying special
attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management. This goal puts emphasis on the
removal and the adequate disposal of waste, waste reduction, recycling and reuse.
Selective waste collection and environmental education services provided by waste picker MBOs
bring great benefits to local communities. They help increase resource recovery, reduce the waste of
materials, diminish the amount of waste deposited in landfills, reduce the risk of water logging and
flooding among many others. Waste picker networks participate in different city forums, contributing with
new ideas and experience in waste management. Creating public forums, assemblies or hearings with
multiple actor participation, as presented earlier in the case of São Paulo in figure 1 on the Local
Governance Actor group shows the diversity of actors that can stimulate and cross-fertilize the drive for
healthy cities and communities, recognizing the role waste pickers.
While still unrecognized and not remunerated waste picker MBOs widely already engage in
community work and environmental awareness campaigns for zero waste and responsible
consumption, addressing SDG # 12. Waste picker MBOs educate the public on the 3Rs. They give
presentations at schools, universities or businesses; participate in conferences, workshops and
seminars; make videos and art projects and disseminate environmental education materials on 3Rs and
how to best separate materials. Particularly when doing door-to-door collection of the recyclables, they
create opportunities to engage with the neighbourhood explaining the need for resource recovery.
Waste picker MBOs are often active in discussions on responsible production and consumption and
they are a central piece in the current reverse logistics program currently implemented with some
industry sectors (Ferri et al., 2015).

5. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

The research shows how waste picker networks, as grassroots social innovation, enable collective
commercialization among network members as a form of improving income (and thus tackling SDG #1)
but also as an important starting point for the beginning of the articulation between waste picker
organizations, local governments and industries. Having a concrete and tangible goal, such as

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

collective commercialization, facilitates meetings and creates discussion spaces to develop joint goals.
The practice of the network itself eventually evolves into more complex benefits, insofar as they are less
palpable and perhaps more difficult to understand, as also described in the literature (Aquino et al.,
2009; Boeira et al., 2007). Opportunities for empowerment and human development emerge in these
spaces, bringing to the forefront gender equality and other inequalities concerns, that can be negotiated
in the everyday context. The research demonstrates that the political role of networks is significant, in
promoting inclusive environmental waste governance and thus promoting the various ways in which
waste picker MBOs are key social actors that are able to address many of the SDGs.
There is a need for collaborative governance, with broad agreements and alliances among the
various sectors of society, as fundamental allies for the continuity and expansion of participatory waste
governance. In order for new forms of socially just and ecologically sustainable development to become
more accepted and permanent, there is a need for political engagement and pressure from civil society,
working at different scales, from global to local. In this way, policies capable of integrating and uniting
the diverse sectors of society, political actors and different government sectors into broad institutional
arrangements based on negotiated, inclusive and locally adjusted agreements can generate better
results in line with the SDGs and in the long run.
Including grassroots experiences from waste picker MBOs in the planning and implementation of
waste management benefits communities and the environment. Working with these MBOs under co-
production arrangements, e.g. prioritizing contracts remunerating waste picker MBOs for selective
waste collection services, is the prerequisite for waste governance to achieve beneficial outcomes with
respect to several of the SDGs.

AKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I acknowledge funding for this research from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
of Canada as well as from the Swedish Research Council. I would like to thank all waste picker
representatives who have participated and contributed to this research, as well as my colleagues from
the research project Environmental Governance in the São Paulo Macrometropolis, funded by the
Funding Agency of the State of São Paulo FAPESP, Brazil – Process No. 2015/03804-9.

REFERENCES

Andersson, K.P. & Ostrom, E. (2008) Analyzing decentralized resource regimes from a polycentric perspective.
Policy Sciences, 41, 71-93.
Aparcana, S. (2017) Approaches to formalization of the informal waste sector into municipal solid waste
management systems in low- and middle-income countries: Review of barriers and success factors. Waste
Management, 61 (2017), 593–607.
Aquino, I. F.; Castilho Jr., A. B. & Pires, T. S. D. L. A (2009) Organização em rede dos catadores de materiais
recicláveis na cadeia produtiva reversa de pós-consumo da região da grande florianópolis: uma alternativa de
agregação de valor. Gestão & Produção, 16 (1), 15–24.
Asim, M.; Batool, S.A. & Chaudhry, M.N. (2012) Scavengers and their role in the recycling of waste in
Southwestern Lahore. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 58, 152–162
Benz, A. (2007) Multilevel governance. In: Benz, A. et al. Handbuch Governance. Theoretische Grundlagen und
empirische Anwendungsfelder. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 297-310.
Besen, G. R.; Ribeiro, H.; Gunther, W. M. R. & Jacobi, P. R. (2014) Selective waste collection in the São Paulo
metropolitan region: impacts of the national solid waste policy. Ambiente & Sociedade [online], Vol. XVII (3):
253-272. Doi: 10.1590/S1414-753X2014000300015.
Besen, G.R. and Fracalanza, A.P. (2016) Challenges for the Sustainable Management of Municipal Solid Waste in
Brazil. Journal disP - The Planning Review. 52 (2), 45-52. DOI: 10.1080/02513625.2016.1195583

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

Boeira, S. L.; Campos, L. M. D. S.; Ferreira, E. (2007) Redes de catadores- recicladores de resíduos em
contextos nacional e local: do gerencialismo instrumental à gestão da complexidade? Organizações &
Sociedade, 14 (43), 37–55.
Brasil (2010) Política Nacional de Resíduos Sólidos Lei nº 12.305, 02.08.2010. Access:
http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato20072010/2010/lei/l12305.htm.
Bulkeley, H.; Watson, M.; Hudson, R. & Weaver, P. (2005) Governing municipal waste: towards a new analytical
framework. J. Environ. Plann. Policy Managent, 7 (1), 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15239080500251700.
Campos, H. K. T. (2014) Recycling in Brazil: Challenges and prospects. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
85:130– 138.
Caruana, M. & Srnec, C. (2013) Public policies addressed to the social and solidarity economy in South America.
Toward a new model? Voluntas, 24 (3), 713–732.
Chaturvedi, B. & V. Gidwani (2010) The Right to Waste: Informal Sector Recyclers and Struggles for Social Justice
in Post-Reform Urban India. India’s new economic policy: A critical analysis, 15, 125-153.
Dias, S. & Samson, M. (2016) Informal Economy Monitoring Study Sector Report: Waste Pickers. Cambridge, MA,
USA: WIEGO. Access: http://www.wiego.org/sites/wiego.org/files/publications/files/Dias-Samson-IEMS-Waste-
Picker-Sector-Report.pdf
Dias, S. M. (2002) Construindo a cidadania: avanços e limites do Projeto de Coleta Seletiva em parceria com a
ASMARE. Dissertação (Mestrado em Geografia) - Instituto de Geociências, Universidade Federal de Minas
Gerais, Belo Horizonte.
Dias, S. M. & Ogando, A. C. (2015) Engendering Waste Pickers Cooperatives in Brazil. ILO Research Conference
on Cooperatives and the World of Work, Antalya, Turkey, 9–10 November 2015. Accessed:
http://www.wiego.org/sites/default/files/publications/files/Dias-Engendering-Wastepicker-Cooperatives-
Brazil.pdf
Ezeah, C.; Fazakerley, J.A. & Roberts, C.L. (2013) Emerging Trends in informal sector recycling in developing and
Transition countries. Waste Management, 33, 2509–2519.
Ferri, G.L.; Chaves, G.L.D. & Ribeiro, G.M. (2015) Reverse logistics network for Municipal solid waste
management: The inclusion of waste pickers as a Brazilian legal requirement. Waste Management, 40, 173-
191.
Fracalanza, A. P. & Besen, G. R. (2016) Challenges for the Sustainable Management of Municipal Solid Waste in
Brazil. Journal disP – The Planning Review, 52 (2) 49-56.
Gambina, J. & Roffinelli, G. (2013) Building Alternatives Beyond Capitalism. In Piñeiro Harnecker, C. (Ed.)
Cooperatives and Socialism, A View from Cuba, (pp. 46-59). Palgrave Macmillan.
Gerometta, J., Haussermann, H. & Longo, G. (2005) Social Innovation and Civil Society in Urban Governance:
Strategies for an Inclusive City. Urban Studies 42 (11), 2007–2021.
Grabs, J., Langen, N., Maschkowski, G., & Schapke, N. (2016) Understanding role models for change: a multilevel
analysis of success factors of grassroots initiatives for sustainable consumption. Journal for Cleaner Products,
(134), 98-111. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.061
Gupta, J. & Vegelin, C. (2016) Sustainable development goals and inclusive development. Int Environ
Agreements, 16, 433-448.
Gutberlet, J. (2008) Recycling Citizenship, recovering resources: Urban poverty reduction in Latin America
Ashgate, Aldershot, 163 pp.
Gutberlet, J. (2015) Cooperative urban mining in Brazil: Collective practice in selective household waste collection
and recycling. Waste Management, 45, 22–33.
Gutberlet, J. (2016) Urban Recycling Cooperatives: Building Resilient Communities. London, New York: Routledge
Taylor & Francis Group. 183 pp.
IBGE (2012) Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílio 2012. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE.
https://ww2.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/trabalhoerendimento/pnad2012/default_sintese.shtm
International Labour Office (ILO) (2002) Decent Work and the Informal Economy–Report VI presented for the
General Discussion at the International Labour Conference 2002, Geneva: International Labour Office. ISBN
92-2-112429-0. Access: www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/ilc/ilc90/pdf/rep-vi.pdf.
ILO (International Labour Organization) (2013) The informal economy and decent work: a policy resource guide

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

 supporting transitions to formality. International Labour Office, Employment Policy Department, Geneva,
International Labour Office.
INSEA (Instituto Nenuca de Desenvolvimento Sustentável) (2007) Perfill sócio-econômico dos catadores da rede
CATAUNIDOS – 2007. Belo Horizonte: INSEA/UFMG/FELC, 31pp. Report.
IPEA (Instituto de Pesquisa Economica Aplicada) (2013) Situação Social das Catadoras e dos Catadores de
Material Reciclável e Reutilizável, Brasil. IPEA, Brasilia. 68 pp.
Kooiman, J. (2003) Governing as Governance. Sage Publication, London.
Kübler, D., Pagano, M.A. (2012) Urban politics as multilevel analysis. In: Moosberger, K. et al. (eds.). The Oxford
Handbook of Urban Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 114-129.
Latendresse, A. & Bornstein, L. (2017) Chapter 19: Urban Development: Cities and Slums in the Global South. In:
Haslam, P. A. et al. Introduction to international development (pp. 357-372).
Le Blanc, D. (2015) Towards integration at last? The sustainable development goals as a network of targets.
Sustainable Development 23(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1582.
Lemos, M. C. & Agrawal, A. (2006) Environmental governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources,
31: 297–325
Linzner, R., Lange, U., (2013) Role and size of informal sector in waste management – a review. Proc. Inst. Civil
Eng., Waste Res. Management, 166 (WR2), 69–83.
Medina, M. (2000) Scavenger cooperatives in Asia and Latin America. Resources, Conservation and Recycling;
31(1), 51–69.
MNCR (Movimento Nacional dos Catadores de Materiais Recicláveis) (2012) Declaração de princípios e objetivos
do MNCR. www.mncr.org.br/
Moore, S. A. (2012) Garbage matters: concepts in new geographies of waste. Progress in Human Geography 36
(6), 780–799. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309132512437077.
Motta, V. P. (2017) Dinâmicas de cooperação e a sustentabilidade das redes de cooperativas de catadores de
materiais recicláveis: estudo de casos múltiplos.174 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Administração) - Centro
Universitário FEI.
Rada, E.C., Ragazzi, M. & Fredizzi, P. (2013) Web-GIS oriented system viability for municipal solid waste
selective collection optimization in developed and transient economies. Waste Management. 33, 785–792. doi:
10.1016/j.wasman.2013.01.002
Samson, M. (Ed.). (2009) Refusing to be Cast Aside: Waste pickers organizing around the world. Cambridge:
WIEGO.
Scheinberg, A. (2011) Value added, modes of sustainable recycling in the modernisation of waste management
systems. PhD thesis. Wageningen University, The Netherlands, pp. 120 [Online] <http://edepot.wur.nl/179408>
Scheinberg, A. (2012) Informal Sector Integration and High Performance Recycling: Evidence from 20 Cities.
WIEGO Working Paper (Urban Policies) N 23 March 2012.
Seyfang, G. and Smith, A. (2007) Grassroots innovations for sustainable development: towards a new research
and policy agenda. Environ. Polit., 16 (4), pp. 584-603
Skelcher, C. (2005) Jurisdictional integrity, polycentrism, and the design of democratic governance. Governance:
An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions, 18 (1), 89–110. doi:10.1111/j.1468-
0491.2004.00267.x
Smith, A., Fressoli, M., & Thomas, H. (2014) Grassroots innovation movements: challenges and contributions.
Journal of Cleaner Production, (63), 114-124. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.12.025
Terraza, H. & Sturzenegger, G. (2010) Dinámicas de organización de los Recicladores informales: tres
Tirado-Soto, M. M. & Zamberlan, F. L. (2013) Networks of recyclable material waste-picker’s cooperatives: an
alternative for the solid waste management in the city of Rio de Janeiro. Waste Management. 33, 1004-1012.
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) (2019) Global Environment Outlook GEO- 6, Healthy Planet,
Healthy people. Cambridge. DOI: 10.1017/9781108627146 .
UN (United Nations) (2014) World Urbanization Prospects. The 2014 Revision Highlights. United Nations, New
York.
UN (United Nations) (2017) World Population Prospects. Key findings and advance tables. United Nations, New
York.

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com

UN-HABITAT (2016) World Cities Report 2016. Urbanization and development. Emerging futures. Nairobi, UN-
HABITAT http://wcr.unhabitat.org/
UNESCAP (United Nations-Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific) (2014) What is Good
Governance. Bangkok: UNESCAP. https://www.unescap.org/resources/what-good-governance [Accessed: 15-
05-2019]
Velis, C.A. (2017) Waste pickers in Global South: Informal recycling sector in a circular economy era. Waste
Management & Research, 35(4), 329–331.
Velis, C. A.; Wilson, D. C.; Rocca, O.; Smith, Mavropoulos, S. R. & Cheeseman, C. R. (2012) An analytical
framework and tool ('InteRA") for integrating the informal recycling sector in waste and resource management
systems in developing countries. Waste Management & Research, 30 (43), 43-66.
Wanyama, F. O. (2014) Cooperatives and the Sustainable Development Goals: A contribution to the post-2015
development debate. Geneva: ILO.
WBGU (German Advisory Council on Global Change) (2016) Humanity on the Move: Unlocking the
Transformative Power of Cities. Berlin: WBGU.
Wilson, D.; Rodic, L.; Scheinberg, A.; Velis, C. & Alabaster, G. (2012) Comparative Analysis of Solid Waste
Management in 20 Cities. Waste Management and Research, 30 (3), 237–254.
Wilson, D.; Velis, C. & Cheeseman, C. (2006) Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in
developing countries. Habitat International, 30, 797-808.

Proceedings SARDINIA2019. © 2019 CISA Publisher. All rights reserved / www.cisapublisher.com