Disaster waste and debris clean-up decisions of government actors in the United States: social process and socio-material systems

ABSTRACT

In the United States, debris removal is one of the costliest and most time-consuming elements of disaster response and recovery. It is essential to reducing secondary environmental and health risks, and to community recovery and rebuilding. Analysis of debris removal and waste management, though, primarily treats it as a series of operational steps and technical decisions. In contrast, this article analyses disaster debris removal decision-making as a social process. We present the findings of an ethnographic study that engaged over 70 government actors from federal, state, local, and Tribal agencies in focus groups and interviews. By examining the experiences of these actors, who are central to debris removal decisions, this article identifies decision points that send waste down particular pathways from collection to final disposal. Three operational areas of concern that emerge from the analysis are: local control and capacity, cost and reimbursement, and balance between urgency and sustainability. This article shows how social processes in particular socio-material systems shape these decisions, such as the interplay of waste and disaster institutional arrangements. Finally, it shares practical implications for social process workarounds to operational challenges, such as interagency and interlevel relationships, that can support on-the-ground decision-making.

KEYWORDS:

• disaster waste management
• disaster debris removal
• disaster debris
• relationship building
• disaster reimbursement
• sustainable materials management

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank reviewers who have improved the scope and presentation of this research: Mallory Turner, Jessica Daniel, Terra Haxton, Sang Don Lee, and 2 anonymous peer-reviewers, as well as research assistant Siena Henson. We would like to thank the research participants who shared their time and expertise, and who work diligently every day on critical environmental, health, and disaster issues.

Disclaimer

This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and approved for publication.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported in part by an appointment to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Research Participation Program administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the EPA. ORISE is managed by ORAU (Oak Ridge Associated Universities) under DOE contract number DE-SC0014664. All opinions expressed in this paper are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the policies and views of US EPA, DOE, or ORAU/ORISE.