This site requires Javascript to be turned on. Please enable Javascript and reload the page.

Worlding Electronic Waste Main Menu Chapter 1 | Introduction Chapter 1 summary and figures. Chapter 2 | Waste/Non-Waste Chapter 2 summary and figures. Chapter 3 | The Discard Test Chapter 3 summary and figures. Chapter 4 | Charting Flows of Electronic Waste Chapter 4 summary and figures. Chapter 5 | Looking Again in a Different Way Chapter 5 summary and figures. Chapter 6 | Weighty Geographies Chapter 6 summary and figures. Visit MIT Press

Figure 2.8

8994

Debate Graph view of the issue Add proposed list of hazardous/non-hazardous equipment. To open the visualization in a full browser window, click here.

This page has paths:

Chapter 2 | Waste/Non-Waste Josh Lepawsky
Contents of this path:
1. Figure 2.1
2. Figure 2.2
3. Figure 2.3
4. Figure 2.4
5. Figure 2.5
6. Figure 2.6
7. Figure 2.7
8. Figure 2.8
9. Figure 2.9
10. Figure 2.10
11. Figure 2.11
12. Figure 2.12
13. Figure 2.13
14. Figure 2.14 This diagram provides a qualitative representation of actors' partisanship for a preferred worlding. Horizontal lines extending from each actors' name indicate their apparent willingness to negotiate over the two options. The position of a given actor's name within its horizontal line (e.g., "EU") indicates its relative preference within the overall range it appears willing to negotiate. The two options (Mono-Bloc World and Global Value Chain World) do not sit at opposite ends of a smooth continuum. Instead, the jaggedness of the arrow between them is intended to visually represent that the two options are separated by a patchy, distributed, and non-coherent set of options. The further down horizontally actors are positioned, the less they share of a common worlding.