Send message to Author

Paper Short Abstract:

The paper analyzes the debate around waste treatment infrastructure in Sofia(2007-2022). Set within the framework of incineration pros and cons, the debate shifts the focus from implementing waste treatment solutions towards polarization arising from the waste imaginary causing questionable choices.

Paper Abstract:

Waste is a problematic materiality (Edensor, 2005) and as such impacts deeply on policies and treatment strategies. Environmental concerns are often outweighed by political agendas and economic interests (Alexander, 2012; Gille, 2007; MacBride, 2012). Because of waste's imaginary and materiality its treatment is often disproportionally outsourced to vulnerable communities (Alexander, 2012; Nixon, 2013; Pellow, 2007, 2004; Венков, 2023). This not only makes visible social hierarchies but also reinforces the feeling of belonging to the periphery for populations implicated in the process. A number of studies have demonstrated that waste treatment facilities serve as a basis for social cohesion(Cirelli and Maccaglia, 2019), however, a lack of a social contract regarding waste infrastructures not only polarizes societies, but also threatens to endanger the attainment of sustainable environmental solutions. My presentation will analyze the debate surrounding the waste treatment facilities in Sofia in 2007-2023 from an anthropological perspective. Set within the framework of incineration pros and cons, the debate shifts the focus from finding and implementing waste treatment solutions towards polarization arising from the waste imaginary. Very little is being said and done in terms of waste reduction, not only at the individual level, but also at the macro and production level. Public decisions are torn between NIMBY and the need to make a decision (administrative, substantive). This determines the location of part of the facilities but also its whole infrastructure while the environmental, social and cultural impacts are not comprehensively considered.