3.8 Article

Waste colonialism and metabolic flows in island territories

期刊

JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECOLOGY
卷 29, 期 -, 页码 1-19

出版社

UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARIES

关键词

waste; waste colonialism; territorial metabolism; islands; political ecology

资金

  1. Maison des Sciences de l'Homme Lyon-Saint-Etienne [ANR-16-IDEX-0005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Islands are connected to global material flows, and their material outcomes reflect waste issues. This study compares waste realities in three French island territories using metabolism analysis and waste studies, highlighting the significance of different perspectives in studying island territories.
Islands are tightly connected to globalized material flows, with specific constraints and vulnerabilities. They are not closed metabolic loops of consumption, production, and waste, favorable to the circular economy. Small islands allow the observation of the material outcomes of circulation, from overflowing dumpsites to marine debris washing up on the shore. We argue that islands are key territories for better understanding the Capitalocene, precisely because of the ways in which they are connected to (rather than isolated from) globalized material flows. This article is a comparative geographical analysis of waste realities in three French island territories: Ndzuwani (Comoros), Reunion, and New Caledonia. It builds on metabolism analysis and waste studies-in particular waste colonialism-to address the different perspectives that these approaches open up for the study of island territories. The long-term sociohistorical context of each island helps to explain contemporary waste management policies and practices. A material flow analysis makes it possible to sketch out metabolic profiles that show the contribution of prevailing mining and agricultural industries to waste generation. The comparison of current situations regarding household waste discourses and economies shows how these territories are characterized by waste accumulation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据