Before the pandemic, India began to modernize their waste management system, installing Waste-to-Energy plants and privatizing waste collection (Demaria & Schindler, 2016, p. 302). This began to push waste-pickers out of the waste market, resulting in a deprivation of livelihood. Many waste-pickers felt this strain prior to the pandemic, and the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated these tensions. Waste pickers were already extremely vulnerable due to their occupation, income, and low caste. The pandemic worsened these conditions. The following sections indicate common themes throughout the systemized literature review.
Each of these sections detail a particular injustice faced by waste-pickers due to the COVID-19 pandemic, although none of the articles emphasized that this was an injustice. Most of the articles focused on distributive injustices, such as the distribution of unfair burdens or reproductive labor or the lack of access to certain goods and services. Procedural injustice was not mentioned in any of the articles, and some of the articles sparingly mentioned recognition injustices.
Distributive Injustice: Access to Markets during the Pandemic
Most of the literature discussed how the COVID-19 induced lockdowns closed waste markets, resulting in a depletion of income for waste pickers. Even before the pandemic, Chakraborty found that the entry of the private sector, such as the waste to energy plants, limited the access to waste for waste pickers, severely damaging their livelihoods (2021). Cities also thoroughly limited access to waste prior to the pandemic, and continued this practice during (Chen, 2020). Women had an even harder time; they struggled in finding space in community bins to segregate trash to sell it to the collectors. The pandemic had a greater perceived impact on women because they already had such limited opportunities [10, p. 12]. Thus, the pandemic compounded the limited availability of waste that the privatization of this sector has created.
Banerjee et al. echoed this finding, contending that the introduction of the private sector pushed waste pickers out of the market, which plunged them into further depravity. When the lockdowns were initiated in India, this economic insecurity was exacerbated because the collection of waste was restricted. The study highlights that 90% of female waste pickers were impacted severely by the lockdowns while 37% reported that they lost their work [11, p. 6]. After the lockdowns were recanted, 34% of the respondents were unable to get back to work, and for those who did, they did so without PPE. The lockdown also caused the rates for waste to decrease, directly impacting their livelihoods [11, p. 8].
Banerjee’s study raises two points: the pandemic exacerbated socioeconomic tensions that the waste picker community, especially women, were facing, and that the closures resulted in a loss of employment for waste pickers. But it is important to note that even in the waste sector, there were discrepancies in who lost their jobs and who didn’t, demonstrating distributive injustice. For example, Kakar et al. found that during the first wave of the COVID-19 lockdowns, contractual waste pickers did not face disruptions in employment, but informal waste pickers were highly limited in mobility and therefore could not sell or collect waste [12, p. 8]. This was also found by Jadhav et al., who described that self-employed (informal) waste pickers were prevented from going out and working, detrimentally affecting their income. The waste pickers who were working for the municipalities or employed in a more formal setting still had to work, collecting contaminated waste, without any PPE [13, p. 5288]. Morais et al. echoed this finding, adding that COVID-19 also had an impact on the price of commodities, which impacted the resale value of the recyclable material, impacting waste pickers’ income [14, p. 10]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, women were more likely to stop working in comparison to men. In Delhi specifically, many women said they needed capital to return to work, which men had more of, in comparison to women [15, p. 127].
Waste pickers receive very little income for the work they do, and there exists a gender bias in the income levels. According to Singh et al. women and men waste pickers in Chandigarh earn different incomes, despite serving the same number of households. The average income for men is about $154.22, whereas women make about $145.43 per month [16, p. 5]. Singh et al., found that men also receive more working hours and higher per-house service charges, which contributes to the higher average income. Some of the authors additionally mentioned that the higher incomes could also be attributed to gendered stereotypes, such as the perception that women do lighter work but during the pandemic, female waste workers were on the frontlines [17, p. 204], [18, p. 38]. The pandemic closed numerous shops where waste pickers would deliver their waste. Because of the closures, they were not able to sell the waste, therefore resulting in a decrease in income. Chen et al. found that of the nine cities that surveyed waste pickers, 60% of them said that they were not able to work during the lockdowns due to restrictions on movement, health concerns, and disruptions to the waste supply. The closures were one of the biggest reasons for the decrease in income for those working in Ahmedabad and Delhi [19, p. 49].
Distributive Injustice: Accessing Basic Goods
With a decrease in income, waste pickers, especially female waste pickers, could not gain access to basic goods and services like food, water, housing, and social security during the pandemic. Food insecurity and lack of healthcare, especially for female waste pickers, was common before the pandemic [20, p. 3]. However, this lack of basic goods and services was exacerbated further during the pandemic due to the decrease in income.
One study found that waste workers were not able to afford basic needs like housing during the pandemic, with many reporting that they were living in temporary housing, sometimes made of mud or plastic, exposing them to numerous health risks [12, p. 10]. Very few participants also had access to water or sanitation during the pandemic, and another study confirmed this finding, also contending that their participants faced food insecurity because their only source of income was disrupted [17, p. 213]. Waste pickers were discriminated against and harassed by the police, if they were to go out and secure food, because the lockdown measures were so stringent in poorer communities [21, p. 54]. In a way, the lockdowns worked against the informal sector, as it limited the mobility of those who needed to get food, creating a distributive injustice [17, p. 216]. Female waste pickers also faced increased trouble in gaining access to resources, especially food, with 56% of respondents in one study stating that they found it difficult to acquire food items [11, p. 11].
These waste workers became reliant on NGOs for food rations, but many reported that these rations were not adequate [12, p. 9], [17, p. 212]. Sanitation facilities were a huge concern for female waste pickers, as even before the pandemic, female waste pickers did not have access to sanitary amenities such as toilets, which is highly inconvenient during menstrual cycles. It is also common for women in this occupation to get a hysterectomy due to the constant sicknesses and exposures to toxic waste [20, p. 3].
Women also went food insecure more often than men due to the gendered relations of the household. The pandemic limited the amount of food that was able to be provided for poor, waste picker households, but one study found that women were always last to be served, therefore tended to eat less, increasing food insecurity, and rendering them more susceptible to disease and malnutrition [22, p. 66].
To alleviate the pandemic’s worst effects, the Indian government initiated numerous social security schemes, but there was disorganization and a lack of recognition of waste pickers and their issues[17, p. 205]. One example can be seen through the identity cards, which regulate access to healthcare or essential services, but since many waste-pickers tended to live in informal settlements, they did not have access to these cards [17, p. 210]. This issue could have been avoided if procedural justice had been implemented properly and waste pickers or representatives had access to decision-making structures. Furthermore, during the pandemic, insurance schemes for sanitation workers were announced to alleviate the costs of the pandemic, but waste-pickers were not included in these schemes, further demonstrating the lack of recognition [17, p. 212]. The government’s intent to provide social security to the waste pickers is commendable, but most of their policies and practices fell short.
Distributive Injustice: Accessing PPE
Most authors in this review mentioned that waste pickers were not given formal training or access to PPE during the pandemic. The lack of government recognition contributed to this as well. Waste workers were not provided proper equipment or even recognized in government schemes to alleviate some of the pandemic pressures [23]. The pandemic created a new health risk for these workers, as a surge of disposable plastics hit the environment, like masks that could contaminate and expose the waste pickers to COVID-19, and yet dealing with the biomedical waste was essential to prevent environmental degradation [24, p. 81].
Kisana & Shah found that female waste pickers were aware of the risk of handling COVID-19 contaminated waste, but the precautions given to them were not feasible in their line or work or they could not afford proper equipment to mitigate the risks [18, p. 43]. For example, many of the women interviewed explained that wearing gloves, masks, or overalls in the extreme heat was impractical and that they were extremely expensive [18, p. 44]. The workers also did not have any idea if the masks, tissues, or gloves they were segregating were from COVID positive patients [18, p. 45]. In Gokhale & Yadav’s study, they interviewed SWaCH members of Pune City, and found that most of the SWaCh members attributed their infection of COVID-19 to the lack of PPE they had while handling the waste [25, p. 11]. Female waste pickers were even more susceptible to COVID-19 and other risks, as detailed in earlier sections. Despite these risks, waste pickers were still not paid well, as the earlier sections demonstrated, creating an injustice.
Distributive Injustice: Increased Reproductive Labor
When COVID-19 shut down schools all over India, suddenly women started bearing the costs of childcare, providing for the family, and taking care of the household. These unpaid labor tasks are often referred to as reproductive labor, and numerous studies illuminated that reproductive labor increased greatly for female waste pickers during the pandemic [26]. Banerjee et al.’s study exemplifies this. They found that women are dually exposed to the tensions that the COVID-19 lockdowns caused. But more importantly, the study also found that during the lockdowns, women were subjected to more unpaid work, including childcare due to the school closures. 47% of respondents said that no one helped them with the unpaid domestic work, which they did on top of the paid work [11, p. 10]. 34% of the respondents found that managing their children's education was also an extreme challenge during the lockdown [11, p. 11]. Women also faced more pressure and hazards in their homes during the pandemic, due to the inability to purchase cleaner cooking fuels. Because of the decrease in income during the pandemic and many women’s unpaid household work, they were exposed more to unclean cooking fuels, impacting their health (Luthra, 2021). Hazards in waste-pickers’ households are not a COVID-19 phenomenon; in fact they tend to live in informal settlements near landfills and garbage, exposing them and their children to toxins [27].
Women also faced the dual pressure of marriage, with one respondent detailing how the groom's family threatened to revoke the marriage since her dowry decreased, so the respondent had to take out a loan to get married [11, p. 13]. These findings were echoed by Ismail et al., who said women with children were more likely to have adverse impacts on their economic activities, compounding the child-care/reproductive labor constraints faced by women [15, p. 136].
Ogando et al. found that care issues during the COVID-19 pandemic influenced female waste pickers' ability to work. For example, if a household did not have childcare support, they would be unable to work. Furthermore, due to the public nature of their jobs, women had increased anxieties about contagion, and they had to reduce their hours to take care of their children [28, p. 183]. As care responsibilities increased, household debt also increased [28, p. 190].
Recognition Injustice: Discrimination and Blame
The pandemic also exacerbated tensions of “untouchability” and discrimination against waste pickers. Prior to the pandemic, waste workers faced much discrimination in terms of employment, using public restrooms, and more. COVID-19 exacerbated this discrimination as people believed that waste workers were spreading the disease, forcing them to stay in their settlements due to public outcry [12, p. 14].
Women are dually marginalized in this work [29, p. 104]. Caste, poverty, and marriage structures are determinants of women entering the sanitation service. Women constantly face job insecurity, low pay, no social security, and physical and mental stress. Worst of all, they are continually made invisible by systems of oppression [29, p. 105]. Women are sitting at the crux of marginalization in this field, which results in disempowerment and poor mental health [29, p. 106]. The working restrictions during the pandemic were also discriminatory, where women were not allowed to enter common restrooms in the wealthy communities, reflecting the key tenets of "untouchability" [18, p. 45].
Finally, the pandemic also detracted from the waste pickers “right to waste” [25]. During and prior to the pandemic, waste pickers were not recognized and faced innate discrimination from the government and its’ institutions. Women often faced the brunt of this at the bottom of the social hierarchy ladder [17].