CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Recycling and Waste Management TechniquesGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impactWaste Management and Recycling

Alternative framings of transnational waste flows: reflections based on the E gypt–C hina PET plastic trade

Open access
Furniss, Jamie·2015·Area
DOI 10.1111/area.12160
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Through a discussion of E gypt–C hina trade in PET plastic, this paper seeks to show how contemporary recycling economies do not all conform to North–South directionalities, nor to the other assumptions about agency, vulnerability and environmental damage that inhere in the ‘neo‐colonial geographies of inequality’ paradigm. In so doing, it seeks to contribute to developing more optimistic and nuanced alternative framings of global waste flows. The paper follows a two‐part structure. The first half provides background on the author's research methods, the recycling business in E gypt and its ties to C hina before further outlining the paradigm the paper seeks to nuance, particularly as it has been developed through and applied to e‐waste case studies and entrenched in the principal legal instrument governing transboundary waste flows, the Basel Convention. The second half of the paper, after some conceptual notes outlining and locating the author's approach to the market in the literature, attempts to provide a few details of the E gypt–C hina PET market from fieldwork, focusing on two price‐shaping/making processes: market fluctuations during the global economic crisis in 2008/09 and the quality standards criteria applied by Chinese buyers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/area.12160

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Furniss, J.
Affiliations
University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Furniss, Jamie
Venue
Area
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-01-23
Volume
47
Issue
1
Pages
24-30
ISSN
  • 0004-0894 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-4762
DOI
10.1111/area.12160
OpenAlex
W1546770541
Cited by
21
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 3
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Area (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
University Of Edinburgh
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Global trade, sustainability, and social impact
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Waste Management and Recycling
Keywords
PET recycling, recycling market, Basel Convention, North-South relations, plastic waste trade, 2008 financial crisis, price formation, quality standards, environmental degradation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review