Municipal solid waste management in the interface between commercial and non-commercial repair: Lessons from Denmark and Sweden

Repair initiatives are experiencing a revival, increasingly attracting attention as a potential player for addressing circular sustainability challenges. A wide range of actors conducts repair on a commercial and non-commercial basis. However, the discussion regarding product circularity is often framed from a production and business model perspective. Less evident is scientific analysis concerning the growing number of actors engaged in repairing objects in the interface between commercial and non-commercial repair, including how municipal solid waste management companies engage in repair as part of waste prevention or preparing for reuse (PfR). This article investigates and gathers knowledge about the practice and collaborative dynamics of repair related to the waste sector, specifically focusing on the role of waste management companies. In the EU Waste Framework Directive, repair is stated as a strategy to prevent waste and as a strategy to prolong the life of products and their components, after they have become waste (Directive EU 2018/98/EC on waste, §9 & §11). However, the Directive is open to interpretation, leaving room for the individual waste management company to assess which items handed in or collected as waste may be repaired. In this paper, different priorities and practices among waste management companies are considered and taken as a new point of departure. Three waste management companies in Denmark and Sweden form the cases in this paper. Two conceptual models are developed to qualitatively analyze their different practices and strategies – the Doorstep Waste model and the Collaborative Dynamics model. Fourteen open-ended and semi-structured interviews, follow-up questions, and meetings during the available timeframe for this research (2018–2021) were initiated. Results revealed different approaches to repair. First, repair schemes focus on product repair at different stages from prevention to the stage, where waste can potentially return to product life. Second, initiatives take on different approaches to commercial and non-commercial strategies. Third, scopes vary from ‘short-term solutions’ prolonging the lifetime of consumer products to long-term waste prevention strategies. From a collaborative and networking perspective, a persistent character in the three cases is the waste management companies’ ability to create formal and informal relationship links with other stakeholders, including citizens, NGOs and the private sector. As a result, relational links created feedback loops and new communication channels, expanding reuse and repair activities, and creating a broader social value. However, the expanding role of municipal waste managenemt comapanies also reveals a dilemma since their activities border commercial repair and thus may lead to unfair competition on the market for repaired or reused products.