Selecting a location to install a plastic processing center: Network of recycling cooperatives

• Add value to recyclable municipal solid waste.
• Network of recycling cooperatives to implement a plastic processing center.
• Method for selecting the installation location of a plastic processing center.
• The decision is linked to peer-to-peer comparison of the criteria and sub-criteria.
• Featured for the sub-criteria Payment for the service provided.

Cooperatives of recyclable material scavengers make the tasks of scavenging, storage, processing, and marketing recyclable solid waste economically viable for their associates. However, the residues collected by these cooperatives are sold to middlemen, who process the material and resell it to the transformation industry. Thus, the lack of processing of the material collected by the cooperatives, such as grinding of plastics, results in the loss of up to 75% of the aggregated value of the recycled products. A solution to add value to recycled material is the implementation of a plastic processing center (PPC). Subsequently, the use of cooperative networks is necessary because the minimum daily flow of plastic material required to operate a PPC makes investment for implementation by a single cooperative infeasible. To aid cooperatives and the representatives of government programs that support cooperatives in choosing a city to implement a PPC, this study proposes a method for selecting the installation location of a PPC based on the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) approach using social, economic, environmental, and public policy aspects. The method was applied to a network of cooperatives participating in a federal government program located in cities in the western region of the state of Parana, Brazil. Various scenarios were explored regarding preferences/weights assigned by the decision-maker to the criteria and sub-criteria for decision-making. The sub-criteria with the greatest roles in decision-making were payment for the service provided and restrictive municipal legislation; according to the decision-maker, this legislation represents the view of the municipal government regarding cooperatives. The secretariat of social action is responsible for monitoring cooperatives, and there is no compensation for scavenging performed in the city; this scenario does not apply to companies responsible for the selective collection of solid waste, which are accompanied by the secretary of the environment.