Second-Hand Cultures and Economies of Reuse, Repair, Sharing, and Care
1. Second-Hand Cultures and Economies of Reuse, Repair, Sharing, and Care
Edited by Petra Kuppinger
palgrave
macmillan
2. Second-Hand Cultures and Economies of Reuse, Repair, Sharing, and Care
Petra Kuppinger
Editor
3. Second-Hand Cultures and Economies of Reuse, Repair, Sharing, and Care
palgrave
macmillan
3.1. Editor
Petra Kuppinger
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Monmouth College
Monmouth, IL, USA
ISBN 978-3-031-99874-4
ISBN 978-3-031-99875-1 (eBook)
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2025
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Cover image credit : paula sierra/Getty Images.
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
If disposing of this product, please recycle the paper.
3.2. CONTENTS
| 1 | Introduction: Second-Hand Cultures and Economies of Reuse, Repair, Sharing, and Care | 1 |
| Petra Kuppinger | ||
| Part I | Spaces and Practices of Second-Hand Cultures | 33 |
| 2 | Reuse and ReUse: Informal and Institutional Transfer of Used Goods | 35 |
| Gretchen Herrmann | ||
| 3 | Social Capital in Secondhand Markets | 49 |
| Brianne Berry, Cindy Isenhour, Andrew Crawley, and Sujan Chakraborty | ||
| 4 | Greening Farmers Markets: How Communities Come Together to Keep Things Out of the Landfill | 77 |
| Susan Andreatta | ||
| 5 | “These Systems Will Provide Their Own Lessons”: University Reuse Programs as Sites of Material Care and Educational Praxis | 93 |
| Angela D. Storey and Henrietta K. Ransdell |
| 6 | Fixing Coffeemakers and Giving Away Couches: Urban Economies of Reuse, Repair, Sharing, and Care in Germany | 113 |
| Petra Kuppinger | ||
| Part II | Repair | 135 |
| 7 | Ready to Repair: Secondhand Electronics in Tanzania | 137 |
| Samwel Moses Ntapanta | ||
| Part III | Reusing and Circulating Clothes and Other Goods and Materials | 153 |
| 8 | “This Is Really Genbrug!” International Mothers’ Consumption of Second-Hand Children’s Goods in Copenhagen, Denmark | 155 |
| Erika Kuever | ||
| 9 | Frictional Infrastructures: Navigating the Socio-Spatial Landscape of Second-Hand and Waste Tyres in Mega-City Lagos (Nigeria) | 175 |
| Simon Coleman, David Garbin, and Andrew Esiebo | ||
| 10 | The Immense Possibilities of Six Yards of Cloth: Saris, Recycling, and Power in Indian Households | 201 |
| Subhadra Mitra Channa | ||
| 11 | Reclaimed Wood in a Reclaimed City? Or, the Story of Joe’s New Table | 219 |
| Simon Johansson |
| Part IV Religious Second-Hand Circuits | 229 |
| 12 Second-Hand for the “Third World”: Charitable Gift Giving During Religious Volunteer-Tourism in the Dominican Republic | 231 |
| Nicole Nathan | |
| 13 Secondhand Sacred: Christian Material Culture and Reseller Ethics | 251 |
| James S. Bielo | |
| Index | 271 |
3.3. NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS
Susan Andreatta is a Professor of Applied Cultural Anthropology at The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA. Her research and teaching interests coincide with an emphasis on social and environmental justice, food production, health, nutrition, and food security. She leads the sustainable campus garden initiative where she supervises 50 raised beds for faculty, students, and staff use. Since 2001, she has been the director for Project Green Leaf, a project that was established to assist farmers and the public in sustaining a local agriculture and food system.
Brieanne Berry is an Assistant Professor of Environment and Sustainability at Ursinus College. Trained as an environmental and economic anthropologist, Dr Berry has conducted research on Maine's vibrant reuse economies, and the value of localized thrift, resale, and redistributive economies in rural communities. She also has research interests in food waste and circular food systems, and serves on the leadership team of the Montgomery County Food Policy Council. Her work broadly explores the potential to find value in our discards. She authored more than a dozen peer-reviewed publications. Her interdisciplinary, collaborative research has been supported by the National Science Foundation and the Environmental Research and Education Foundation.
James S. Bielo is Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Northwestern University. He is the author of Materializing the Bible: Scripture, Sensation, Place (2021); Ark Encounter: The Making of a Creationist Theme Park (2018); Anthropology of Religion: The Basics (2015); Emerging Evangelicals: Faith, Modernity, and the Desire for Authenticity (2011); and Words upon the Word: An Ethnography of Evangelical Group Bible Study (2009).
Sujan Chakraborty earned his BBA and MBA, majoring in Marketing, from the University of Chittagong in Bangladesh. He worked for the central bank of Bangladesh for 4 years. His primary job responsibility there was to conduct bank inspections. After moving to the United States, he earned an MS in Economics from the University of Maine. During his stay in Maine, he did research on evolutionary economics, circular economy, and published a few papers revolving around these topics. Now he is pursuing a PhD in Economics at Indiana University Indianapolis focusing on the economics of philanthropy, and health economics.
Subhadra Mitra Channa is a retired professor of anthropology from Delhi University. Her research focuses on gender, cosmology, inequality and marginalization, identity, and urban studies. She is the author of Gender in South Asia (2013); The Inner and Outer Selves (2013); and The Dhobis of Delhi: An Ethnography from the Margins (2024). She co-edited Life as a Dalit (ed. 2016); Religious Pluralism in India (2023); and Colonial Anthropology: Technologies and Discourses of Dominance (2024). She was the Senior Vice President of the International Union of Anthropological and Ethnographic Studies (IUAES) and is at present the Co-Editor of Reviews in Anthropology. Her awards include two Fulbright teaching fellowships, Charles Wallace and several visiting professorships, as well as the Distinguished Teacher Award from Delhi University.
Simon Coleman is Chancellor Jackman Professor at the Department for the Study of Religion, University of Toronto, and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. He is a former editor of the Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute and a current co-editor of Religion and Society. Simon has carried out fieldwork in Sweden, Nigeria, and the United Kingdom. Recent books include Powers of Pilgrimage: Religion in a World of Movement (2022) and Ideologies and Infrastructures of Religious Urbanization in Africa: Remaking the City (2023, co-edited with David Garbin and Gareth Millington).
Andrew Crawley is an Associate Professor of Economics at the University of Maine. His research is focused on regional economic modeling, and the labor market, including matching efficiency analysis as well as input-output assessments. He has published in the leading regional science journals, Regional Studies, Urban Studies, and Regional Science Policy and Practice. His work has received funding from the National Science Foundation, National Institute for Food and Agriculture, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Economic Development Association. He also leads the EDA University Center at UMaine; this federally funded group supports regional economic research throughout the state of Maine working with public and private stakeholders.
Andrew Esiebo is a photographer based in Lagos who started his career by chronicling the rapid development of urban Nigeria. He is a winner of the Visa
Pour La Création Prize of the Institut Français and of the Musée du Quai Branly Artistic Creation Prize. See his work at andrewesiebo.com.
David Garbin is a Senior Lecturer in Sociology at the University of Kent, United Kingdom. His research focuses on migration, diaspora, transnationalism, urban change, and urban religion. He has conducted extensive fieldwork in Bangladesh, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Europe, and North America. He was the Principal Investigator of the “Pneuma-City” project, exploring the impact of end-of-life tires in West African megacities and the informal work of roadside tire repairers in Lagos (Nigeria). His books include Ideologies and Infrastructures of Religious Urbanisation in Africa: Remaking the City (2022, with Simon Coleman and Gareth Millington), Religion and the Global City (2017, with Anna Strhan), and Migration and the Global Landscape of Religion (2023).
Gretchen Herrmann is a retired librarian and anthropologist at SUNY Cortland where she taught Anthropology and Women’s Studies. She earned her PhD in Anthropology from Binghamton University, and she has published numerous articles on garage sales, community, affect, reuse, local currencies, and Christmas games.
Cindy Isenhour is Professor of Anthropology and Climate Change at the University of Maine. Her research is focused at the intersection of environmental governance and economic policy, with particular attention to the concept of the circular economy and efforts to design more sustainable systems of production-consumption-disposal. She is the author of more than 60 peer-reviewed publications and three co-edited books including Sustainability in the Global City (2015, with Melissa Checker and Gary McDonogh); Power and Politics in Sustainable Consumption Research (2019, with Lucie Middlemiss and Mari Martiskainen); and Consumption, Status and Sustainability (2021, with Paul Roscoe).
Simon Johansson is an anthropologist affiliated with Stockholm University specializing in urban transformation and social inequality. He currently works with building evaluation capacity of the Swedish Agency of Defense Analysis. His dissertation, Comeback Detroit, examined the socio-economic shifts in Detroit as affluent residents “return” to revitalize the city, often displacing long-time marginalized communities. Johansson’s academic work critically engages with the circular economy, gentrification, and the socio-political dynamics of post-industrial urban spaces, offering insights into how economic and cultural narratives shape cities and communities.
Erika Kuever is an associate professor of Consumption, Culture, and Commerce in the Department of Business and Management at the University of Southern Denmark, and has a background in Anthropology and East Asian Studies. Her research centers primarily around the politics of consumption in contemporary
China, including consumer rights, food safety, and provisioning under the COVID-19 lockdown. Some of her additional research interests include economic anthropology, tourism, religion and marketing, and consumption for children.
Petra Kupinger teaches anthropology at Monmouth College. She has conducted research on space and power in Cairo, Egypt, and space, culture, and Islam in Stuttgart, Germany. Currently, she is researching sustainable projects, lifestyles, and urban cultures in Stuttgart. Her publications include Faithfully Urban: Pious Muslims in a German City (2015); Cities and Places (2023). She edited Emergent Spaces: Change and Innovation in Small Urban Spaces (2021). Her work has been published in City and Society, Culture and Religion, City and Community, Anthropological Quarterly, Social and Cultural Geography, Journal of Urban Affairs, Space and Culture, Built Environment, Geographical Review, GeoJournal.
Nicole Nathan is Faculty Director of Bachelor of General Studies at Temple University where she strives to make education more accessible, inclusive, and equitable for adult learners through adaptive pedagogy and expansive curricular development. Her research in cultural anthropology focuses on postcolonialism, religion, and tourism. Through a multi-sited approach to the study of transnationalism, her work seeks to delineate processes of globalization at local levels and centers marginalized voices. Her work on evangelical mission encounters highlights some of the problematic aspects of secondhand donations, including the ways in which charitable giving and consumerism form a mutually reinforcing system.
Samwel Moses Ntapanta is a postdoctoral fellow at the Department of Anthropology at Aarhus University in Denmark. He is an ethnographer of contemporary urbanism along the western Indian Ocean coast, focusing in particular on coloniality, consumption, and discarding, debris of late capitalism, repairing and recycling economies, and money. He is the author of Gathering Electronic Waste in Tanzania: Labor, Value, and Toxicity.
Henrietta K. Ransdell is a research fellow at the University of Louisville in Louisville, Kentucky. She previously completed a Fulbright grant in Chachoengsao Thailand and is completing her master's in interdisciplinary studies—Sustainability in May 2024. Her research interests include environmental anthropology, community engagement, and education.
Angela D. Storey is an Associate Professor in the Department of Anthropology and Director of the Anne Braden Institute for Social Justice Research at the University of Louisville (KY, United States). With an emphasis on collaborative and engaged scholarship, her research explores the politics of urban environments and experiences of community-based activism. She currently coordinates long-term ethnographic projects in Cape Town, South Africa, and Louisville.
3.3.1. LIST OF FIGURES
| Fig. 3.1 | Income of survey respondents compared to Maine population | 56 |
| Fig. 3.2 | Age of survey respondents compared to Maine population | 56 |
| Fig. 3.3 | Educational attainment of survey respondents compared to Maine population | 57 |
| Fig. 3.4 | Network map of reuse relationships | 62 |
| Fig. 8.1 | A roadside sign in Copenhagen listing the many occasions for gift-giving during the Christmas holidays and exhorting residents to find gifts at their local recycling centers (photo by author) | 159 |
| Fig. 8.2 | Name tag for a flyverdragt (literally 'flight suit'), a padded, waterproof suit children wear outside in winter. Some tags have room for even more names, implying greater durability (photo by author) | 167 |
| Fig. 13.1 | Sign inside a St. Vincent de Paul thrift store in Aurora, Illinois (photo by author) | 254 |
| Fig. 13.2 | Screenshot of one of Emily's Instagram religious drops (screenshot by author) | 255 |
| Fig. 13.3 | Upcycled Mary bust sold on Instagram (screenshot by author) | 260 |
| Fig. 13.4 | Upcycled Warner Sallman Jesus print from the artist account dragjesusglitter on Instagram (screenshot by author) | 261 |
3.3.2. LIST OF TABLES
| Table 3.1 | Dimensions of social capital and approach to measurement | 59 |
| Table 3.2 | Controls and social capital measures | 60 |
| Table 3.3 | Marginal effects | 61 |
| Table 3.4 | Probit estimations for social capital models | 63 |
3.4. Introduction: Second-Hand Cultures and Economies of Reuse, Repair, Sharing, and Care
Petra Kuppinger
Fueled by overconsumption, inequalities in the neoliberal global economy, poverty, and concerns for the environment, recent decades have witnessed a robust continuation, revival, and growth of second-hand practices, markets, and cultures, and larger economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care. Across the world, there are expanding landscapes of thrift stores, used goods street markets, swapping events, yard sales, flea markets, and Internet platforms like eBay or Facebook marketplace. There are global circuits of used clothes and appliances. Used or discarded appliances are repaired and resold across the world. There are global cyber networks that connect experts who repair cell phones and other electronics. Repair Cafés extend the lifespan of electronics, appliances, and textiles. Share boxes or shelves dot urban sidewalks. There are for-free stores and cafés and food-saving and sharing projects and apps. Recycling, upcycling, repurposing,
P. Kuppinger (✉)
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Monmouth College,
Monmouth, IL, USA
e-mail: petra@monm.edu
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2025
P. Kuppinger (ed.), Second-Hand Cultures and Economies of Reuse,
Repair, Sharing, and Care,
and related practices that prolong the lifespan of objects are parts of everyday lives across the planet. Many of these practices have been robust elements of ordinary lifeworlds and cultures all along. Time-honored practices like fixing, mending, and creative reuse continue to play prominent roles in the lives of individuals and communities who engage in frugal, mindful, and resourceful practices that have been passed down to them. They stretch their resources and material possessions as much as possible because they have few other choices. Numerous individuals and communities make a living working with waste, and repairing, recycling, and upcycling things. People retrieve items and materials from waste streams. Simultaneously, practices of reuse, repair, sharing, and care are (re)discovered by younger generations or people who had previously considered them irrelevant or even a waste of time, because they were privileged enough to do so. These readopted practices are increasingly reaching the middle of wealthy (consumer) societies. Some have turned into profitable business ideas. Whether as the continuation of long-established practices, prompted by frugality, necessity, economic exclusion, long-held values and beliefs, or as practices fostered by environmental concerns, activities like second-hand markets, repair, repurposing, mending, or informal tool-sharing have proliferated in recent years. Guided by different motivations and necessities, people the world over buy and sell used goods, fix and resell appliances, or upcycle clothes and other materials for reuse. Some make art from cast-off objects or in creative ways recirculate the discards of others. The economic, social, and cultural circumstances and motivations for reuse, repair, sharing, and care differ vastly. Activities take endless shapes and are global in scope and impact. All help in their own small ways to reduce consumption, counter hyper-consumerism, challenge economic exclusion, and most importantly limit humanity's ecological footprint.
This book introduces people, spaces, and practices in this global landscape of second-hand cultures and economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care. Chapters explore how practitioners join, participate, and expand global economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care. People engage in daily work and routines that have always been sustainable like repairing household items, the sale of used items, or the creative reuse and repurposing of goods. They are mindful, creative, and careful in their use of material goods. Frugality and the abhorrence of waste are core values that guide long-established practices of recycling and reuse. Many individuals and communities are forced into second-hand economies, because they are excluded from dominant consumer economies and must buy used
goods. Recycling and repair work are ways to make a precarious living in a global capitalist economy that litters the planet with the discards of the privileged. The necessity to divert goods from landfills and incinerators often guides individuals, institutions, and municipalities. Their quests are rooted in the understanding that there is much life left in many tossed goods, and in ecological or political ideas. Some individuals seek the cultural “cool” of thrifted items. Others avoid consumerism and see minimalism as a chance to shed environmental burdens and individual costs of hyper-consumerism. They insist that used goods serve their needs just as well or even better than new ones. Others see resistance to consumerism as political protest and seek to vote with their money. Buying used items, they avoid the dominant capitalist market and join more sustainable and circular economies. Participation in second-hand economies becomes a political indicator, and thrifted items can signify environmental politics and consciousness. In the Global North, greed might have been “cool” in the 1980s, but green and sustainable practices are a new cool for those who are eager to learn practices from their elders or elsewhere to limit consumption of new goods, extend limited resources, decrease their carbon footprint, and live simpler and more mindful lives. Across the globe, economies of reuse are vital elements for those who remain committed to values of frugality or simply must make ends meet. Economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care are global in scope, but their expressions vary in different locations. Motivations to participate in these complex economies differ from involuntary to habitual, experimental, political, or activist. Diverse local and global second-hand circuits are interwoven.
This volume offers case studies of global second-hand cultures and economies and theorizes their complex interconnections. Much has been said about activities and projects in their specific context, but less work has been done to bring these examples into conversation with each other across the globe and across dividing lines between wealthy and less wealthy countries and lines of economic privilege, marginalization, and exclusion. Second-hand economies produce connections via the exchange of used goods, even if these lines remain invisible and are rarely acknowledged, and only occasionally problematized. This book juxtaposes case studies, activities, and projects and addresses questions about second-hand cultures from the diversion of consumer goods from landfills via municipal sharing websites, to the teaching of practices like avoiding single-use plastic on a farmers’ market, to discussions of the landscape of used tires in a megalopolis like Lagos. Authors address the problem of donated clothes
being forced onto recipients who do not need or want them and are often offended by these items, their quality, and this overall mode of “giving.” Authors address the material and spiritual quality of religious material items and how they are resold in physical markets or via the Internet. Authors ask crucial theoretical questions about the role and potential of small projects to initiate change and contribute to urban, national, and global political transformations.
Chapters explore activities in North America, Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Caribbean. Authors pay attention to the complexities of concrete social, cultural, and economic circumstances where activities unfold and the historical dynamics that shaped them. They describe processes of reuse, repair, sharing, and care and explore practitioners’ motivations. Based on ethnographic research, contributors describe details of practices and interactions in spaces and markets of reuse, repair, sharing, and care. They talk about the knowledge and skills involved in these practices. What values guide people’s actions? What do social spaces look like where economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care unfold? How do socialities in these spaces differ from those of the dominant capitalist economy? Authors inquire about differences between garage sales and brick and mortar thrift stores and their respective socialities. They discuss practices of reuse and recycling at a farmers’ market and how these practices affect interactions and (learning) experiences at the market. Can farmers’ markets encourage green practices beyond the sale of vegetables, and attempt to create more engaged, aware, and sustainable communities? What motivates women of different classes in India in their practices of reuse, repair, or recycling of saris? How do they rework or repurpose these fabrics? Contributors examine the intersection of the sacred and profane in the sale of second-hand religious items and explore the role of municipal sharing websites in diverting things from incinerators in Germany. They discuss why mothers in Denmark prefer the exchange and circulation of used children’s clothes to buying new items and analyze activities undertaken to expand the lifespan of car tires in Lagos. They explore how American university campuses that are overflowing with used microwaves, fridges, or desk lamps tackle issues of waste.
When authors examine practices of reuse, repair, sharing, and care, they do not lose sight of larger social, political, cultural, and economic contexts where these activities unfold. They analyze global economic and power dynamics that structure the trade in used appliances, like TV sets, between the UK and Tanzania. They show the environmental hazards of working
with used tires in urban Nigeria. They challenge the fashionable use of products made of “reclaimed wood” sourced from deserted homes in Detroit. Is this indeed an “admirable” sustainable practice or an act of greenwashing that unfolds on the backs of those evicted from the homes from which the wood was taken? Contributors question the ethics of donated clothes in the context of religious volunteer-tourism in the Dominican Republic. What is the point of forcing second-hand clothes on those who do not want them? Is reuse socially destructive in this context?
Theoretically, this volume contributes to debates about second-hand cultures and economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care that engage themes of environmental sustainability, inequality, poverty, degrowth, just transition, and social justice across the globe. Second-hand cultures and economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care are situated at complex intersections of necessary social and environmental transformations, applause, and recognition for worthwhile sustainable projects and activities, job opportunities, fields of dangerous labor, toxic exposure, and exploitative work relations. Few would debate the necessity of comprehensive economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care, but how can this be achieved without harm to and exploitation of those who do the work? Can individuals in Germany or Denmark celebrate their “sustainable” use of second-hand goods when these goods are the products of exploitative capitalist production in Bangladesh or Vietnam? Can sustainable activities be applauded when reused or recycled goods, even after their prolonged lifespan, still end up in landfills or workshops in the Global South to be dismantled under harmful conditions?
Analyzing “positive” examples of second-hand cultures and economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care, it is crucial to recognize how they are situated in global economic and political regimes. Is a “sustainable” product the result of exploitative processes somewhere across the globe that are invisible to consumers? What is the end-of-life reality of a thrifted shirt or a thrice-repaired toaster? How are we to understand the export and repair of TVs from the UK to Tanzania from a material and an ethical perspective? Without doubt, repairing goods and using second-hand items are worthwhile activities; however, it is paramount to ask questions about their sourcing, production, circulation, materials, toxicity, and end-of-life scenarios to understand their position in global networks and impact on people, animals, and the environment.
In addition to questions about sourcing, manufacturing, and end-of-life, it is vital to analyze how effective individualized practices can be in the
face of a planetary crisis. Can individual actions and small-scale projects contribute to robust economic, social, and ecological change, and challenge capitalist hyper-consumption and ecological destruction? Can reusable coffee cups, repaired TVs, and thrifted jeans really make a difference?
3.4.1. HISTORICAL NOTES ON REUSE, REPAIR, SHARING, AND CARE
For most of human history, second-hand cultures and economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care were integral to everyday life. People owned little and used what they had as long as possible. Frugality was a universal value. People reused, repurposed, and recycled things without using these terms. It was ordinary and shared practice (Alexander and Reno 2012, 5). Starting in the nineteenth century, modern industrial capitalism unsettled time-honored values and practices and offered ever more and “better” products to buy and subsequently discard the obsolete, outdated, or simply unwanted, now defined as garbage (Rogers 2005; Pellow 2004). From the beginning, the capitalist extraction of raw materials, production of goods, and disposal of waste were based on the exploitation of workers and degradation of the planet (Royte 2006; Miller 2000). In the nineteenth century, a powerful consumer culture emerged that marginalized earlier practices and economic circuits. Repair, once a core element of good stewardship, was slowly relegated to history or became a mark of poverty (Strasser 2000, 25). However, repair, reuse, repurposing, and care practices never disappeared (Alexander and Reno 2012). In the early twentieth century modern consumerism exemplified by fashion and new household appliances, bought in large and lavishly decorated department stores, became a core feature of distinction among urban elite and increasingly middle-class households (Zola 2012). At the same time, urban second-hand economies consolidated and catered to those excluded from the new consumerism.
At the turn of the twentieth century, thrift stores, flea markets, and other second-hand venues dotted cityscapes. They were rooted in traditions of rag pickers and bone or metal collectors who had long travelled towns and cities salvaging materials (Miller 2000). Old-style garbage collectors and second-hand dealers made cities cleaner, diverted materials from informal dumps, and created jobs for those who could not find other work (Lapolla 2009 [1935]). Their work was dangerous and precarious
(Pellow 2004). Emerging large charitable thrift stores consolidated used goods markets. In the United States, Salvation Army opened its first thrift store in 1897 and Goodwill in 1902 (Le Zotte 2017, 19). They sold used goods and aimed at “reforming” workers and customers (ibid., 17). They employed those deemed “unemployable,” used volunteer labor and professionalized the used goods trade and marginalized small rag pickers and traders (ibid.).
In the face of mass production, rapidly changing patterns of consumption, and growing social inequality, many individuals and households continued to be producers, makers, and menders. By force or choice, they maintained reuse and repair practices and patronized second-hand markets (Strasser 2000; Alexander and Reno 2012). Frugality remained a value. Clothes continued to be downcycled from Sunday to work wear or reworked into children’s clothing, and finally turned into cleaning rags or doormats.
After WWII, global capitalism solidified into a system of over-production and hyper-consumerism. Those with the means consumed ever more at ever-faster rates and produced unprecedented quantities of trash (Rathje and Murphy 2001). By the 1960s, consumerism and excess possessions filled middle class American homes to the brim and many needed to shed stuff to make room for more stuff. Until then, extra possessions had been “passed on through kinship and friendship networks” as “hand-me-downs” or given to charitable organizations for rummage sales (Crawford 2014, 25–26). As quantities grew, households experimented with new ways of ridding themselves of stuff. Hoping to make some profit from their excess belongings, people turned to sell things themselves, while having fun with their neighbors. Gretchen Herrmann (2019) dates the emergence of garage sales in the United States to the 1960s because of explosive consumerism. Herrmann and Stephen Soiffer explain that by the 1980s, garage sales represented a “cultural style, a quasi-ideological rejection of consumerism” (1984, 411) for consumers who started to value the “recycling of goods” and its environmental impact (ibid., 413). They had become an integral part of “mainstream American life” (Crawford 2014, 26).
In the late twentieth century, yard sales, or car-boot sales in the UK made the landscape of second-hand exchanges and other aspects of growing economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care more visible in the Global North. They connected with older circuits and networks across the globe (Minter 2019). In the twenty-first century, despite the pressures of the
global capitalist regime or because of them, people worldwide continue to make, repurpose, reuse, recirculate, share, and repair goods (Corwin 2018; Schmid 2020; Isenhour and Berry 2020). Driven by poverty, the necessity of austerity, wishes for frugality, and a heightened awareness of environmental crisis, people adopt practices and design creative projects to make ends meet, take care of each other, create jobs, and battle environmental degradation (Murphy 2017; Medina 2007; Carr 2023). Often it falls to the poor or immigrants to do dirty and dangerous resource recovery work (Gregson et al. 2016; Kuppinger 2023). Many projects and efforts remain local and invisible, but the results of their efforts are considerable.
3.4.2. RECENT ECONOMIES OF REUSE, REPAIR, SHARING, AND CARE IN THE GLOBAL NORTH
Starting in the 1990s Nicky Gregson and Louise Crewe conducted groundbreaking research on second-hand economies in the UK. When most analysts focused on work and value in the formal capitalist economy, Gregson and Crewe studied economic exchanges and social interactions at car-boot sales and other venues and highlighted the economic, social, and cultural contributions of marginal second-hand economies (1998). They insisted, “that second-hand worlds matter” (2003, 1) and identified second-hand markets as sites of “resistant consumer practices” (1998, 39) that employ different rules (haggling for prices), pricing mechanisms, and value systems. These markets are embedded in complex fields of “finding, fixing, bartering, trading, and gifting and selling” and create value in unexpected spaces (Isenhour and Berry 2020, 298) that offer mundane economic transactions and “fun and sociality” (Gregson and Crewe 2003, 41) for sellers, buyers, and visitors (Herrmann 2006; Murphy 2017). “People go to thrift stores for pleasure” (Machado et al. 2019, 391) and many second-hand venues are meeting places where “peer-to-peer collaborative consumption fosters community” (Albinsson and Yasantha Perera 2012, 305). Machado et al. argue that the more people go to streets fairs and similar events, the stronger their relationships become with people “in these circuits and the stronger their feelings of rejection for the traditional production chain” (2019, 303). This results in “financial benefits and critical behavior” (ibid.). Benedikt Schmid (2019) speaks of the “communality” of shared repairs spaces that offer cooperation and inclusion.
He insists that spaces like repair cafés or open repair workshops facilitate the “creation of (public) spaces for politics and debate” (ibid., 244). Chantel Carr links repair work to care for the world and people which are vital for “adapting to, and coping with the conditions of planetary breakdown” (2023, 223).
Second-hand markets offer goods at cheaper rates but also reflect, “the very same motivations that shape consumer culture more generally” (Gregson and Crewe 2003, 11). They also harbor “potential for consumer activism and empowerment” (ibid.) as participants play an “active role” (Machado et al. 2019, 319) and subvert dominant consumption patterns, when they prolong the lifespan of goods and avoid buying new things. Second-hand markets and related projects further “offer the potential to better educate individuals in the value of sustainability” and trigger “deeper engagement” with such issues (Murphy 2017, 170; Schmid 2019, 238). Gregson and Crewe point to the “birth of value” (2003, 2) in second-hand exchanges that departs from dominant economic practices, when “people create the conditions for value to emerge in the context of transactions” (ibid.). Sellers and buyers are agents and producers of value rather than passive consumers. They produce “commodity biographies” (ibid., 6; Appadurai 1986) and infuse meaning into moments and spaces of exchange. Selling and buying second-hand goods involves more time and labor than mainstream transactions, as sellers might repair items and customers search markets for desired goods.
Gregson and Crewe (2003) analyze the rapid proliferation of charity shops (charitable thrift stores) and other sites of second-hand exchanges (car-boot sales; auctions, retro/vintage shops, antique fairs, classifieds) in the UK since the 1970s. Some car-boot sales developed into fun fairs with food and bouncy houses as affordable family entertainment (ibid., 32). Urban charity shops professionalized and now line shopping miles, marking their arrival in the middle of society. Retro/vintage shops dot gentrifying and cool quarters (ibid., 39), indicating complex links of first and second-hand circuits and the commodification of useful/fashionable discards (ibid., 62; Isenhour and Berry 2020, 305). Here second-hand shopping becomes a sign of distinction and confers cultural capital/recognition to shoppers (Steward 2020). Gregson and Crewe understand much of the second-hand economy as sites of resistance and mindful and affordable consumption (1998, 40), but in the context of some retro/vintage shops, they point to limits. Such stores “produce second-hand worlds that are continually articulated with and understood in relation to spaces
associated with and identified with ‘the new’” (2003, 88). Curated second-hand boutiques resemble those that sell new products and function under the similar market rules, catering to particular social, cultural, and “taste communities” (ibid., 108).
Regardless of the organization of second-hand venues, Gregson and Crewe (2003) maintain that consumers carefully design their practices and understand them as politically, socially, and ecologically relevant. Interlocutors tell Gregson and Crewe that they practiced “green consumerism” (Gregson and Crewe 2003, 103). One person emphasized they had not bought new things in 20 years, another added that they only buy new underwear (ibid., 104), underlining beliefs that individual action matters. Another interlocutor remarked that buying used is “about fighting against the capitalist system. It’s about not being drawn into consumerism” (ibid., 103). They insist on their agency and political participation via consumer choices, remake linear consumer models of production–consumption–discarding, and propose different “temporalities of possession and disposal” (ibid., 117), when they keep goods moving and reinvest them into circulation when they no longer need them (Bohlin 2018). Second-hand spaces offer transactions that “subvert and transgress the experience of the mall and high street” (Crewe and Gregson 1998, 40). Of course, there is always the end-of-life moment for goods, but it can be postponed with good stewardship, reuse, and mending, and repurposing.
The sourcing of used goods is an increasingly competitive process where savvy traders comb markets for hidden gems and make sizeable profits which creates “complex, but highly localized and seemingly infinite chains of second-hand commodity circulation and re-use” (Gregson and Crewe 2003, 131). Traders seek “to buy (from the ‘unknowing’) to sell (to the ‘knowing’) in ways that are clearly about capturing competitive advantage and profit” (ibid.). In the process, valuable objects are removed from disadvantaged, often rural, communities to profitable urban markets (Isenhour and Berry, 2020). Second-hand markets become complex circuits that require considerable “commodity and geographical knowledge about disposal and sourcing” (Gregson and Crewe 2003, 141) and reflect dominant capitalist market dynamics and patterns of exploitation and exclusion.
Regardless of problems and limitations, many second-hand shoppers, makers, tinkers, and menders transfer considerable value from the capitalist economy to more socially and ecologically minded and historically grounded resilient economies of reuse and care (Graham-Gibson 2008).
They create “spaces of alternative economizing that are partially removed from capitalist valorization” and are “genuinely subversive” as they challenge the “apparent verities and certain singularities of capitalism” (Schmid 2019, 231, 247). Theorizing the proliferation of experimental social and economic projects, Graham-Gibson point to the global infrastructure of meetings, websites, and other media that describe, support, and solidify their impact (ibid., 614). They speak of “world-makers,” who in small groups tackle humanity’s challenges (ibid.). Graham-Gibson insist that invisible activities and projects are connected in their struggle for alternative futures, just economies, and planetary health. They state that non-market transactions and unpaid household and care work account for 30–50 percent of economic activities in countries across the world (ibid., 615). Current economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care unfold in such contexts. Garage sales, repair shops, swapping events, and repurposing activities are “spaces of difference” (ibid.) where patterns of labor, valuation, exchange, and sociality differ from capitalist markets and seek to “contribute to social well-being worldwide” (Graham-Gibson 2008, 615). This global care/alternative economy illustrates “the possibility of new economic becomings, rather than a condition of their impossibility” (ibid., 619).
Benedikt Schmid (2019) insists on the importance of repair and maintenance in more circular economies. He situates “repair within the context of a broader movement that work [sic] towards ‘repairing the world’” (ibid., 234). Repair responds to visible breakdown that disrupts the flow of life and smooth functioning of consumer society (Tironi 2019). Discarding a broken object and buying a new one is the “best” solution in a capitalist society. Repair challenges this desired trajectory. Schmid argues that repair practices are “counter-hegemonic movements with the potential to disrupt the stories and trajectories of waste, consumption and growth” (2019, 234). Whether by financial necessity or choice, repair and maintenance are crucial in the making of futures marked by care and sustainability (Corwin and Gidwani 2021). Repairing or repurposing are robust elements of resilient parallel economic networks. Schmid concludes that repair is “rebellious” (Schmid 2019, 239) and deeply interwoven with activities that similarly aim to “reconfigure commodity chains” and challenge linear economies (ibid., 242).
Analyzing the impact of a pair of thrifted jeans, a repaired vacuum cleaner, or an hour of work in a garden, one should not measure the dent these activities make in the capitalist economy. Instead, these are worthy
additions to time-honored global economies of reuse, repair, sharing, and care that represent conscious stewardship and creative production (Kuppinger 2021, 2023). Focusing on small acts frees us from the grasp of dominant discourses and theorizing that posits individuals as powerless (Graham-Gibson 2008). Small projects and spaces seed more robust and long-term transformations (Franck and Stevens 2007; Hou 2010) and represent “mundane forms of power” (Graham-Gibson 2008, 619) that reside in ordinary practices. Shaping messy lifeworlds and practicing care and stewardship foster “a love of the world” (Hannah Arendt, quoted in ibid.) and “draw on the pleasures of friendliness, trust, and companionable connection” (ibid.). Graham-Gibson challenge the “erasure” of small efforts by neoliberal discourses and highlight their impact and connectivity. It is paramount to map geographies of social and ecological practices and noncapitalist transactions, demonstrate their global connectivity and impact, and highlight integral elements of love, care, cooperation, and trust. Small efforts “create geographies of collective responsibility” (ibid., 622), maintain local knowledge, and engender moments and spaces of shared humanity. They foster the unexpected, individual agency, creativity, community, and challenge capitalism (Crewe and Gregson 1998, 50).
Joe Smith and Petr Jehlička (2013) point to the “quiet sustainability” of people in Poland and Czechia who tend to their gardens, grow healthy foods, take care of the soil, gift their produce to others, and share their “joy, exuberance, generosity, care, and skills” (ibid., 156). Smith and Jehlička highlight the “daily practice of a satisfying life” that does not loudly announce its sustainable achievements. Urban farms and community gardens (Ableman 2016; Hou 2014; Milbourne 2010) often include marginalized constituencies (Mares and Peña 2010; Truitt 2012). They provide nutritious produce for many, create urban oases in dense neighborhoods, and produce communal cohesion and networks, often across generational lines (Sokolovsky 2018; Allen & Charles 2013). For participants doing is enough, much like the thousands who have quietly but deliberately inserted “upcycling, reducing, reusing, recycling, repairing, and redistributing possession through sharing, donating, and ridding” into their lives (Albinsson and Yasantha Perera 2012, 308; Milbourne 2010). Invisible acts like “[C]rafts that take place in the shed, at the kitchen table or the village hall” outline “quietly revolutionary and ethically sustainable versions of how we might live and work: our values, relationships with others and the environment” (Hackney et al. 2020, 39; Corbett 2024). Small spaces and “households are key sites within which
the challenges of environmental sustainability and climate are negotiated and material made sense of” and deserve more attention (Carr 2023, 233). Their transformative potential is considerable. A look at popular texts about individual projects like zero-waste lifestyles, minimalist living, or plastic-free living further illustrates this point.
In 2006, Bea Johnson and her family of four embarked on a low waste, and eventually zero waste journey in California. Johnson (2013) chronicles her zero-waste experience and advises interested readers offering recipes for zero waste cosmetics, cleaners, and food. She was lucky to have a store that sold bulk and unpackaged goods and accommodated her quest, and to be financially able to shop at this store. Whether or not zero-waste is doable, Johnson is a veteran of a movement that inspired thousands and helped them live low-impact lives. Beth Terry (2012) had a plastic “epiphany” after she saw images of a bird that died with a stomach full of plastic. She went cold turkey with plastic and tried to shed all plastic in her daily life. She introduces individuals who pursued similar practices and goals, like Jean Hill who at the age of 85 fought for a plastic bottle ban in her Massachusetts town (ibid., 102–103). Terry insists on the relevance of networks, meeting similarly minded people, and joining political activism to increase the impact of emerging care practices. On a random Saturday, Joshua Becker (2016) had a stuff “epiphany,” when he tried to clean his overstuffed garage and never found time to play with his son because there was too much stuff to deal with. Becker and his family decided to rid themselves of many/most burdensome possessions and embarked on a journey of minimalist living. They became forerunners of the minimalist movement (D’Avella 2015). Johnson, Terry, and Becker describe individual radical lifestyle changes that resulted from their experiences or reflection. They were horrified by their own hyper-consumption as privileged individuals in the Global North and the consequences for people, animals, and the planet. They chose individual practices to address global problems and inspired others to adopt similar practices.
3.4.3. GLOBAL/IZED ECONOMIES OF REUSE, REPAIR, SHARING, AND CARE
Across the globe, millions perform remarkable social and ecological care work. Their efforts contribute to communal well-being and planetary health, but are rarely recognized, or are even shunned by those around
them (Fredericks 2018; Millar 2018). Chantel Carr points to the “invisible bodies that will inevitably hold our world together” with their “work, skill and value across all sectors” (2023, 224). The waste collectors in Cairo, Egypt, who are pioneers of reuse, recycling, and food salvaging, are one such example.
In the nineteenth century, what little waste there was in Cairo was sold to the makers of fulul (bean dish cooked overnight) or public bathhouses (Assad and Garas 1993 [1994], 2). The advent of modern consumer culture in the early twentieth century altered types and quantities of waste, and rural migrants started to collect refuse from wealthier Cairo households and continued to sell it to those who needed fuel (Volpi 1996, 14). They made a living, kept the city relatively clean, and established networks of reuse, repurposing, and recycling. In the mid-twentieth century, more rural migrants (mostly Christians from Upper Egypt), joined these efforts and subcontracted with the earlier collectors. The newcomers handled the street collection of trash; they became known as Zabbaleen (garbage workers). They used organic waste (most of the refuse) for their pigs (earlier Muslim collectors were prohibited by their religion from keeping pigs; Fahmi 2005, 156).
In the 1950s, the two groups set up settlements on the urban fringes (Kamel 1994) and extended their services in the growing city that did not have a municipal waste management system (Haynes and El-Hakim 1979, 104). Garbage proliferated and the Zabbaleen improved their sorting and recycling system. Materials were sold to dealers who resold them to workshops for reuse or recycling (ibid., 103). The Zabbaleen devised organic solutions and tailored work regimes and techniques to consumer patterns and resource markets. Waste provided work for thousands and recycling workshops emerged in Zabbaleen communities, where, for example, plastic was recycled into dishes and aluminum into cutlery. The Zabbaleen provided a tremendous service to the city and environment but remained poor and struggled with alarming health problems (Haynes and El-Hakim 1979, 105; Fahmi 2005, 157). In 1979, one Zabbaleen communities had an infant mortality rate of 40 percent (Haynes and El-Hakim 1979, 105).
In the 1970s, the Zabbaleen organized to create a cleaner work environment and on-site recycling that offered more profitable jobs. Their new association (in the Muqattam Mountain community) set up a composting plant for pig manure and organic waste (Kamel 1994) and a rag-recycling unit, that included social and health services (Kamel 1994, 118). A recycling school for children and youth followed (Iskander 2009). By
the 1990s, the Zabbaleen operated facilities for the recycling or reuse of aluminum, plastic, cloth, paper, cardboard, tin, bones, glass, and organic waste (Kamel 2009) but continued to live on the margins of urban society. At the same time, the municipality sought to replace them with international waste management companies. Regardless, in the late 1990s the Zabbaleen handled about 30–40 percent of Cairo's garbage, approximately 3000 tons/day (of a total of about 9000–10,000 tons, produced by 14 million residents; Aziz 2004, 9; Kamel 2009). They had developed a unique waste management system with an exemplary recycling rate of 80–85 percent (Boyd 2008, 47; El-Dorghamy 2009). The city tried to contract waste management firms that were asked to recycle a mere 20 percent of the collected waste (Fahmi and Sutton 2010; Rashed 2002; Kamel 2009). The Zabbaleen weathered numerous setbacks (the culling of their pigs in 2009 in the politicized context of the global swine flu) but kept bouncing back. In 2009, they processed 6000–7000 tons of waste daily (Slackman 2009; Williams 2009).
Cairo's Zabbaleen represent an incredibly efficient waste management, reuse, and recycling system that organically grew out of pre-industrial practices. For decades, workers improved workflows and techniques as consumption and refuse patterns changed. The example of the Zabbaleen also illustrates the high human costs of such work, especially in the years of rapid growth of garbage in the mid to late twentieth century. Families joined this work for lack of other options. As the community, housing, and work conditions improved, many stayed for the independence this work offered and the cohesion of the community (Iskander 2009, for similar phenomena in Brazil and India, see Millar 2018; Saraf 2020). Risks and hazards, albeit in a reduced manner, remain perilous features of the Zabbaleen's lives.
The Zabbaleen's work demonstrates the complexity of recycling economies. It is locally developed, but global in scope. Products that end in the Zabbaleen's sorting grounds are globally produced. Global corporations make profits from the soda or shampoo bottles the Zabbaleen sort. Even if locally manufactured, profits return to global capitalist centers. The Zabbaleen channel tons of materials into recycling streams, save vast quantities of CO2 emissions, and eliminate toxic leachates from landfills. They are part of global recycling networks, and some retrieved materials like PET bottles are traded in global markets (Furniss 2014). The Zabbaleen save millions of tons of waste from landfills, contribute to a cleaner city, and recirculate valuable resources. The case of the Zabbaleen illustrates