Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024.

№ 1(25)

НОВІТНЯ ІСТОРІЯ
УДК 94: 504.064.4 + 658.567 "1941/1943"
http://doi.org/10.46869/2707-6776-2024-25-2
Perga Tetyana
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8725-3451

RESOURCE POLICY OF THE THIRD REICH IN

THE REICHSKOMMISSARIAT UKRAINE:
WASTE RECYCLING IN 1941-1943
This article explores the assortment and primary methods of waste collection within the
Reichskommissariat Ukraine during the occupation by Nazi forces. The Ukrainian occupational press
serves as the primary source for this article. It demonstrates that the extraction of various resources
and the plundering of material valuables were directed towards supporting the economic and military
power of the Third Reich, with waste collection policies being one of its facets. To facilitate this
activity in this realm, the Nazis utilized existing infrastructure within the territory of Ukraine,
including warehouses, factories, and offices of Soyuzutyl, established on the eve of the Second World
War, as well as the infrastructure of the consumer cooperative system. It is shown that the specificity
of Ukraine lies in assigning waste collection duties to consumer cooperatives, which transformed into
the primary suppliers of various raw materials for the needs of the Third Reich. Local administrations
and individual cooperatives actively participated in this endeavor, and special associations were also
established. Additionally, the occupying authorities sought to involve schoolchildren and the broader
population, developing various incentive systems for this purpose, although the participation of these
actors was minimal. The article examines the peculiarities of waste collection propaganda within the
territory of the Reichskommissariat Ukraine, which was based on ideological motives such as
gratitude for liberation from Soviet rule, as well as economic motives related to the need for waste to
produce consumer goods for the local population by enterprises of the Nazi regime. It is argued that
primary attention was given to collecting scrap black and colored metals, as well as bones, paper, and
rags. The author suggests that the scale of economic plundering of Ukraine was much larger than
commonly believed, yet acknowledges that this requires further in-depth research involving a wide
range of archival sources.
Keywords: waste, secondary use, World War II, Nazi Germany, occupation press, Jews, metals,
paper, rags, bones.

During the aftermath of the Second World War, Ukraine suffered significant
material losses. Equipment from numerous enterprises was either destroyed or
transported to Germany, millions of heads of livestock and domestic poultry were
lost, and numerous cultural and historical treasures were affected. Researchers
estimate the losses incurred by the Ukrainian SSR at 285 billion RUB, or 100 billion
US dollars at the prevailing exchange rate at the time, emphasizing that this
constituted 40% of the material losses experienced by the USSR during World War II
[1]. However, the economic aspects of the German occupation of Ukraine, which
lasted from 1941 to 1944, have not yet been systematically examined. Specifically,
this figure does not include the value of resources gathered by Nazi Germany within
51
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

Ukrainian territory to support the economic endeavors of the Third Reich. It can be
surmised that the scale of economic exploitation inflicted upon Ukraine was
considerably greater. The gathering of waste resources in Ukraine during the
occupation remains overlooked by researchers thus far, yet this aspect presents
prospects for reevaluating the damages inflicted upon occupied territories and
countries, taking it into account.
This article aims to analyze the activities of the occupying authority concerning
the collection of various waste materials within the territory of the Ukrainian Soviet
Socialist Republic (USSR). The research focuses on the territory of the
Reichskommissariat Ukraine which was established on its territory during the nazi's
occupation. We intend to reconstruct the main directions and methods of this activity
based on an analysis of Ukrainian press publications from the period of occupation
spanning 1941-1943, which serve as the primary source for this investigation. It is
important to note that this article will present facts published in several
collaborationist newspapers that have a distinctly propagandistic nature, and their
verification requires further comprehensive research. This study represents the initial
step in the exploration of waste utilization and recycling in the territory of Ukraine
during WW II and is aimed at revealing prospective avenues for further scholarly
inquiry, which can be identified based on the provided sources. The article consists of
three parts. The first part briefly examines the historiography of this scientific issue,
the second part discusses the policy regarding secondary waste utilization in the Third
Reich, and the third part focuses on the situation within the territory of the
Reichskommissariat Ukraine.
Analysis of historiography
The economic policies of the Third Reich in occupied territories have been
thoroughly analyzed by both foreign scholars (R. J. Overy, T. Penter, D. Pohl,
A. Tooze, Yvonne Badal, R. J. Evans, J. Richard, P. Staudenmaier, M. Harrison,
R. J. Overy, C. Buchheim, J. Scherner, H.-J. Braun, G. D. Feldman, etc.) and
Ukrainian scholars. The study of the Nazi occupation period began in the USSR
immediately after the end of World War II and occupied a significant place in Soviet
historiography. After Ukraine gained independence, this academic direction
continued however it focused mostly on the territory of Ukraine. In the monograph
“Ukraine in the Second World War and the Great Patriotic War (1939-1945)”
published in 1998 by M. Koval, Germany’s policy towards Ukraine was referred to as
the economic warfare of the Third Reich [2].
The analysis of the economic policies of the occupying authority has also been
developed in the publications of O. Akunin, O. Zakharchenko, V. Orlyanskyi,
I. Spudka, V. Naumenko, and O. Potylchakуес. Regional aspects of this policy have
been examined by O.V. Tyshyn, T. Vynarchuk, V. Cherniavskyi, and others. The
state of agriculture in the occupied territories is the subject of comprehensive work by
O. Perehrest. The removal of cultural treasures from Ukraine by Germany and the
ethno-cultural heritage have been addressed in their scholarly achievements by

52
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

V. Soloshenko and I. Muzichenko. Significant attention has also been devoted to the
daily lives of Ukrainians under occupation by V. Shaikan, O. Udod, T. Vronska,
D. Malakov, O. Honcharenko, and others [3].
Mainly Ukrainian researchers focus on the consequences of Nazi Germany’s
economic policies in Ukraine during the occupation period, crimes committed by the
Nazis, the Holocaust etc. However, the issue of waste collection and secondary
utilization has not been the subject of thorough investigations.
Foreign experts dedicate considerable attention to the resource policy of the Third
Reich. According to Dieter Pohl, the notion of economically exploiting Ukraine was
well-established among the political and military elites of Germany. Since the WWI,
Ukraine has been perceived in German public opinion as the “granary” of Russia – a
vital source of food supply [4]. However, the Nazis’ interest in Ukraine extended
beyond the agricultural sector. Similar to their approach in all other occupied
territories, significant emphasis was placed on various resources, including waste,
particularly metals. The preparation for war and large-scale military operations
necessitated not only the establishment of a stable raw material base in the Third
Reich but also its expansion. This led Nazi Germany, as early as the 1930s, to
reassess the significance of many waste materials, considering them valuable raw
materials for the war industry.
Foreign researchers on this topic (A. Berg, A. Tooze, H. Weber, C. Denton,
R. Oldenziel, E. Vaupel, F. Preis, A. Sudrow, etc.) have extensively analyzed many
aspects of waste utilization in the Third Reich. German researcher Heike Weber
conceptualized this policy as a “national socialist waste exploitation regime”, which
was based on the extraction of various resources and the plundering of material
valuables to support the economic and military power of the Third Reich [5].
According to Adam Tooze, the Nazi vision of Germany’s prosperity was closely tied
to policies of expansion, war, and genocide. He argues that Hitler’s delusional logic
regarding the existential threat to the German race pushed Germany into war at a time
when its economy was simply unable to support it [6]. Anna Berg argues that garbage
and waste management practices played a central role in the politics of war and the
development of genocide in the Third Reich and Nazi-occupied Europe [7]. She
considers the Third Reich to be the first country in the world to set a political goal of
achieving zero waste. By analyzing activities related to scrap and metal collection
and the methods of the salvage industry in Germany and Nazi-occupied Europe, she
argues that waste management and recycling were integral parts of the Nazi racial
order and crystallized as a central strategy for managing the chaos of war. Hundreds
of thousands of volunteers collected paper, bottles, scrap metal, kitchen waste, bones,
and carcasses to expand the Reich’s resource base and enhance the regime's
capabilities for waging war [7]. However, unlike other countries worldwide that
implemented supportive or mobilization measures during WWI and WWII, aiming to
fully incorporate waste utilization in various sectors of the economy, Nazi Germany,

53
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

in its pursuit of resource acquisition, committed horrific crimes against humanity,

including the Holocaust.
The military economy facilitated the adoption of a strategy involving the
exploitation of forced labor and resource extraction through plundering, seizing “war
booty”, or redirecting local production for military purposes. German forces looted
not only industrial and agricultural raw materials but also waste materials.
R. Oldenziel and H. Weber note that the model of development for the salvage
industry was influenced by the First World War. In the eyes of the Nazi leadership,
this war demonstrated numerous failures in economic management. Therefore, the
Nazi regime sought to avoid repeating these mistakes at all costs and developed more
efficient measures [8].
The military economy facilitated the adoption of a strategy involving the
exploitation of forced labor and resource extraction through plundering, seizing “war
booty”, or redirecting local production for military purposes. German forces looted
not only industrial and agricultural raw materials but also waste materials.
R. Oldenziel and H. Weber note that the model of development for the salvage
industry was influenced by WWI. In the eyes of the Nazi leadership, this war
demonstrated numerous failures in economic management. Therefore, the Nazi
regime sought to avoid repeating these mistakes at all costs and developed more
efficient measures [8].
They gradually displaced Jews, who had been involved in the collection of metal,
scrap, and bones in the 1920s and early 1930s [9]. Upon coming to power, the Nazis
began to remove Jews and other “undesirable elements” from this activity [7]. The
German company “Goldschmidt” transformed during this period into one of the
largest chemical companies in Germany and even imported used cans from other
countries. By taking control of several smaller Jewish competitors as part of the Nazi
regime’s “aryanization” process, it obtained a monopolistic position in the waste
market [10].
As Jews were prohibited from engaging in scrap trading, Nazi officials replaced
them with organizations affiliated with the Nazis and supported efforts to develop the
waste recycling industry through a wide-ranging propaganda apparatus. Starting from
the mid-1930s, the National Socialist People’s Welfare (NSV), the Hitler Youth, the
League of German Girls, other Nazi organizations, as well as local branches, blocs,
and district leaders initiated various actions to “rescue” household waste [7, p. 455].
Despite the removal of Jews from waste collection activities and the Holocaust that
occurred in Europe, the Nazis for some time utilized those among them who had
experience in this field. This not only underscores the importance of waste for the Third
Reich but also highlights the high qualifications of some Jews, making them indispensable
even during the Holocaust. For example, Witold Mędykowski provides evidence of Jews
being used to collect metals in Poland. He asserts that there was a particular group of Jews
in the country who stood out from all others – they were individuals involved in collecting
salvage materials. Thousands of Jews were simultaneously hired to collect iron scrap and

54
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

non-ferrous metals, gathering a significant amount of this type of waste. For instance, in
September 1940, 50,000 kg of scrap and 20,000 kg of metal were transported from one
district, while 300,000 kg of scrap and 1,000 kg of metal were awaiting shipment. The
importance of their work is indicated by the fact that until mid-1943, they were able to
freely travel around the country; however, later they were sent to the Auschwitz
concentration camp [11].
Several researchers have uncovered the specifics of waste collection and recycling
in occupied territories in Western Europe. Charles Denton illustrated the situation in
France from 1939 to 1945. He notes that although at the beginning of the war French
propaganda mocked the attempts of the Nazis to develop the waste recycling industry
as evidence of economic weakness, officials from the Ministry of Armaments
followed Nazi Germany’s lead by conducting salvage operations for collecting and
utilizing scrap iron and paper, albeit keeping it hidden from the population [14].
These and several other studies on the resource policy of the Third Reich indicate
that the Nazis’ understanding of the importance of waste as additional raw material
for the development of the German economy contributed to the expansion of tools for
resource exploitation and extraction from occupied territories, often accompanied by
repression against the population and the Holocaust.
Waste recycling in Germany before and during the WWII
Waste recycling in Germany before and during World War II was not an invention
of the Nazis. The understanding of the value of various wastes (such as bones, rags,
and later metals, paper, and rubber) as secondary raw materials began to develop
much earlier. In the second half of the 19th century, in many countries of Europe and
America, there was an active collection of rags, which were the main resource for
paper production, and bones, which were used in the sugar industry as fertilizer in
agriculture. This activity was mainly carried out by Jews and Roma (rag and bone
pickers). In the Russian Empire, particularly in the Pale of Settlement, Jews were also
involved in this activity [15]. In the 1920s, many of them worked in Soviet
companies engaged in waste disposal in Right-Bank Ukraine [16].
Although waste collectors, known as peddlers, existed in Germany as far back as
the 19th century, WW I propelled this activity in Germany. In the 1920s, as
mentioned earlier, waste collection in Germany was predominantly in the hands of
Jews. Replacing them with other actors, the Nazi leadership from the autumn of 1936
sought to systematize and structure their efforts within the framework of the Four-
Year Plan. Its publication contributed to the formation of a more comprehensive
approach to resources. To reintegrate waste into production as resources, many items
were termed secondary materials. The war further radicalized this trend and created a
context in which achieving “zero waste” became state policy.The Imperial Ministry
of Economy established the Imperial Commissioner’s Office for the Utilization of
Secondary Resources. Hermann Göring’s appointment of Wilhelm Ziegler as Reich
Commissioner for Scrap Utilization in the summer of 1937 intensified this activity
[5; 9, p.120].
55
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

Residents of all cities with a population of over 35,000 were required to sort
household waste at landfills, collect all materials suitable for recycling, maintain
statistical records of waste quantities, and report on this monthly [14]. The following
year, Czigler ordered the removal of wrought iron railings both on state-owned and
private properties; wide-scale metal collection campaigns were also introduced, such
as the “Iron Week”. In Saar-Palatinate, wrought iron fences, garden railings, and even
iron crosses from gravestones were dismantled. In 1940, the Reich Commissioner’s
Office for Scrap Utilization was established within the Ministry of Economics,
headed by Hans Heck [9, p. 121]. In 1942, within this Reich Commissioner’s Office,
a position of special representative for the extraction of horns and hooves was
established [9, p. 123]. A series of orders and directives facilitated the systematic
redirection of waste streams for the needs of the wartime economy. However, in pre-
war Germany, not only metals were collected.
In 1936, the future Minister of Food and Agriculture, Herbert Backe, aggressively
introduced a system to collect kitchen waste for use as animal feed, particularly for
pigs. In March 1937, Hitler signed a law on the use of secondary materials, which
granted the Minister of the Interior the authority to demand that secondary materials,
including scraps and textile products, be cleaned, disinfected, or destroyed if
necessary to ensure the health protection of the nation before returning to the
economic cycle [7].
The German economy, especially after the campaign in Western Europe and to a
greater extent after the beginning of the war with the USSR, was cut off from the
supply of many key raw materials due to the blockade. Military production required
important raw materials such as non-ferrous metals, so the Germans sought ways to
obtain them from scrap collected from various old and unnecessary items. However,
scrap collectors gathered not only metal scrap but also paper, rags, and many other
types of waste. Groups of collectors, consisting of several individuals, had horse-
drawn carts at their disposal, roaming the area in search of needed items or
purchasing waste at low prices, which they then sent to special depots.
Mobilization of resources during WWII encompassed not only manpower, food
products, raw materials, and substitutes but also waste. Until 1940, the Nazi regime
systematically sought to increase its raw material base by harnessing materials that
could be used secondarily. The population was urged to donate various household
items and objects. The main focus was on materials that could be useful for weapon
production and the development of war-related economic sectors: iron and metal
scrap, paper, and textiles.
In the pre-war period, the Reich collected 650,000 tons of paper, 55,000 tons of
scrap metal, 8,000 tons of rags, 2,000 tons of bones (from canteens and the food
industry), and 1,200 tons of metal scrap. The wartime economic “exploits” of
secondary materials significantly exceeded the peacetime level. In total, the Reich
processed 240,637 tons of secondary textiles, of which 188,336 tons were rags
(mostly waste from commercial textile enterprises, requisitioned from domestic

56
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

production). In February 1944 alone, the Nazis transported 8,526 tons of various
secondary materials from occupied territories to the Reich. In March 1945, a total of
63,250 tons of textiles were collected from domestic sources [7, p. 460].
In the Ukrainian press for July 1942, we found information that “in Germany,
there were [possibly for the first half of 1942] collected: 5,680,145 men’s suits,
jackets, vests, pants, and coats, 4,414,743 pieces of women’s dresses, skirts, blouses,
etc., as well as a very large quantity of underwear and other items. In total,
51,467,400 kg of textile waste was collected, which will be recycled. This quantity is
enough to clothe approximately 2,5 million men and 2 million women” [15, p. 4].
The robbing of resources from the Soviet Union was carefully planned, as
indicated by the “Directives for the Administration in the Newly Occupied
Territories” (the so-called “Green Folder”) by G. Göring. Although this document
emphasizes the use of occupied territories to obtain agricultural products and oil, as
well as the main directions for preserving certain industrial sectors, this activity also
included the collection of resources for their secondary use for the needs of the
German army.
As Ivan Vetrov notes, the management and exploitation of the Ukrainian economy
were carried out both through military channels and civilian occupation authorities.
The plundering of the occupied territories was overseen by the Ministry of National
Economy of Germany, the Ministry of Armaments and Ammunition, and the
Economic Staff of the Supreme Command of the Wehrmacht. From the end of 1941,
numerous staffs of labor brigades and labor agencies were also included in this
system to provide the military economy of Germany with sufficient labor resources.
By order of G. Göring dated September 6, 1941, the position of General Inspector for
the Confiscation and Utilization of Raw Materials in the occupied eastern territories
was introduced [16, p. 96-100]. Although formal overall management of the economy
of the occupied territory was carried out by civilian administration, it was done under
the direct leadership of the military authority.
Waste collection in the occupied territories of Ukraine
Due to its developed agriculture and abundant natural resources, Ukraine was
primarily seen by the Nazis as a raw material base that could supply the Wehrmacht
army with food. As German researcher Dieter Pohl writes, the idea of economic
exploitation of Ukraine was well known among the political and military elites of
Germany. Since the WWI, Ukraine in the public opinion of Germany was imagined
as the “breadbasket” of Russia - as an important source of food supply [4]. However,
as sources testify, significant attention was also paid to other types of raw materials.
In June 1941, a position was created within the Third Reich for overseeing the
collection and utilization of raw materials and other materials crucial for wartime
needs in the occupied eastern territories. This position was known as the
Commissioner for Scrap and Old Metal Extraction in the Occupied Territories. It was
held by Major Shu, the commander of a special military-economic unit [17]. This
initiated a systematic and large-scale operation to collect metal scrap in the occupied
57
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

territories, which was strategically important for Germany. The task was to collect
metal scrap from all areas under civilian administration. The occupying authorities
expected the population to demonstrate a willingness to make sacrifices, thus
showing their understanding of the importance of the “European struggle against the
Soviets” [18, p. 2].
The development of waste collection policies in the territory of the
Reichskommissariat Ukraine relied on the use of Soviet infrastructure and
mechanisms established in the USSR during the 1930s, where the main actors in this
activity were the all-Union institution “Soyuzutil” and the system of consumer and
industrial cooperation embodied in Vukoopspilka. Nothing is surprising about this.
As Heike Weber asserts, the formation of the national socialist waste exploitation
regime began, among other things, with the utilization of existing infrastructure in
Germany at that time and the revival of various popular practices in imperial
Germany [5].
To collect scrap materials immediately after the occupation of Ukrainian territory,
the system of consumer cooperation was restored, and procurement offices were
established within consumer cooperatives and district consumer cooperatives. To
expedite the organizational stage, at the end of 1941 and the beginning of 1942,
regional administrations transferred all property, goods, and other valuables
belonging to consumer cooperatives and state trade in the Ukrainian SSR to the
newly established consumer cooperation [19, p.2].
In addition to food products such as potatoes, vegetables, fruits, dried fruits,
mushrooms, honey, beeswax, wild berries, acorns, medicinal plants, eggs, poultry,
skins, furs, horsehair, bristles, wool, horns, hooves, down, and feathers, they were
also tasked with collecting and recycling scrap materials, including rags, old rubber
footwear, and other rubber products, paper, scrap of non-ferrous and ferrous metals,
bones, scraps, and more [20, p. 4].
A typical example is the Poltava Oblast Consumer Cooperative Union, which was
one of the largest in Ukraine. It comprised 44 district consumer cooperatives of the
region, including 55 rural consumer societies. Its activities covered a territory with a
population of about 2 million people, and it employed 7,180 workers and officials. To
fulfill the tasks of the occupational authority, it established a network of procurement
offices and collection points, along with their authorized representatives in villages,
for collecting raw materials locally. The structure of such offices typically consisted
of units such as an egg base, vegetable, trade, and procurement departments. The
latter was responsible for collecting salvageable materials, scrap metal, and medicinal
plants. For example, the Myrhorod Procurement “Zahotutil” office had a profit of
23,400 RUB as of August 14, 1942 [21, p. 2].
In the Kyiv region, the task of “immediately opening procurement points in the
district center and each village for purchasing from the population” was set by
Resolution No. 4 of the Kyiv Regional Administration on November 21, 1941
[20, p. 4]. In Kyiv itself, the Procurement Office for Industrial Raw Materials of the

58
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

Kyiv District Consumer Cooperative was established on December 12, 1941. It was
intended to supply all enterprises, institutions, cooperatives, organizations, as well as
private individuals who were legally engaged in the processing of industrial raw
materials [22, p. 4]. As of February 9, 1943, the Kyiv District Consumer Cooperative
already had 18 collection points for waste materials, where they purchased discarded
clothing, cotton, fur, linen waste, non-ferrous metals, bottles, and pharmaceutical
glassware. In return, they provided the population with salt and matches equivalent to
50% of the value of the surrendered rags and 25% of the value of the paper
[23, p. 4].To give an idea of the scale of procurement activities, let’s consider the
example of the Pervomaiska (May Day) office. Its annual plan for 1942 included:
1,180,130 eggs, 7 tons of cherries, 700 kilograms of rubber, and 2.5 tons of non-
ferrous metal [24, p. 4].
Additionally, various procurement enterprises were established. For example, on
August 28, 1942, in the capital of the Reichskommissariat Ukraine, Rivne, the
Society for Procurement and Processing of Old Materials and Waste in Ukraine was
established with a charter capital of 1 million RUB. It was responsible for organizing
the procurement and processing of various old materials and waste in Ukraine and by
enterprises operating in this field [25, p.2].The main focus was on procurement of
iron and non-ferrous metals – copper, zinc, bronze, tin, scrap, paper, and rubber.
Scrap metal was transferred to Major Shu’s headquarters, high-quality fabric scraps
to the “Textile Industry Development Society of Bialystok”, and items unsuitable for
yarn production, as well as old paper, to paper mills in Ukraine [26, p. 2].
A series of articles in the occupation press allows us to conclude that the German
authorities managed to reproduce in Ukraine the cycle of waste recycling – from
collection and sorting to processing. For this purpose, existing pre-war infrastructure
such as warehouses, shops, and processing plants of the “Soyuzutil” enterprise
established in the USSR in 1932 was utilized. Procurement offices sought to engage
former employees of this enterprise who, for various reasons, remained in the
occupied territory, as well as anyone familiar with “the condition of secondary raw
materials and willing to work in this industry” [27, p. 2]. In cities and villages, teams
of waste collectors were established to serve either individual large enterprises or
rural areas. They would supply the collected waste from collection points to district
bases, support points, or directly to central warehouses. From there, the waste would
be sent to central sorting warehouses – factories of the “Soyuzutil” enterprise in
Kharkiv, Hlukhiv, Konotop, Stalino, Simferopol, and other cities. After sorting, the
waste materials were sent to the respective factories for further processing; for
example, bones and old paper went to Melitopol, scrap metal went to Klintsy etc.
[28, p. 2].
We are unable to reproduce the social portrait of waste collectors in the occupied
territories, which has not yet been the subject of research. Undoubtedly, some
individuals were engaged in or periodically joined this activity for ideological or
economic reasons. In our view it is worth examining this issue from the perspective
59
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

of both political and economic collaboration, meticulously analyzing various socio-

economic contexts.
From the first months of the occupation, there was agitation for the collection of
raw materials and waste disposal. For instance, as early as October 18, the
Dnipropetrovsk newspaper “Vilna Ukraina” wrote that “the collection and utilization
[of waste] are of great importance. No piece of paper, glass, leather, or metal should
be wasted but should be recycled. There are whole tons of works of ‘leaders’ alone.
And these works and portraits would be useful; they could be raw materials for a new
pen. It is necessary to establish this business now” [29, p. 2].
A typical article is “Collect Waste Materials”, in which the author pointed out that
valuable raw materials – thousands of tons of colored and black metal, broken glass,
and paper lying around corners without any benefit – should be collected. For this
purpose, economic organizations should establish collection points for waste
materials, where the city’s population could deliver them [30, p. 2]. In later
publications of such articles, the authors appealed to anti-Soviet sentiments, which, in
their opinion, were supposed to be present in Soviet citizens who, for various reasons,
remained in the occupied territories: “By collecting all waste materials, you increase
the military potential, strengthen the military-industrial might of Germany and its
allies in the fight against Bolshevism, accelerate victory over it, and bring the time of
peace closer. No piece of old rag, paper, or metal should be wasted in vain”. The
Nazis, through the mouths of Ukrainian collaborators, declared that “Ukrainians must
show their gratitude to the German command for liberation from Soviet oppression
and actively participate in the metal collection”. Therefore, the population, albeit
somewhat reluctantly, responded to this call and parted with items that could be
dispensed with in their households but were crucial at the time for arming the German
army and its allies [31, p. 4]. Accordingly, typical advertisements resembled the
following: “Many residents of Kyiv have already delivered their waste of colored
metal and rubber to collection points. When you also have such waste, do not keep it
to yourself, but immediately hand it in!” [32, p. 2].
In the summer of 1943, a promotional campaign titled “Today – waste, tomorrow -
goods!” which was held in the Ukrainian press indicated that waste materials were
not only used to support the German war industry but also for the production of
consumer goods such as clothing, various household items [33, p. 2], agricultural
implements, tractors, and household goods [34, p. 2]. This attempt aimed to position
this activity as a care for the Ukrainian population. The collaborators considered this
an additional argument to encourage the population to collect waste more actively.
The Nazi authorities attempted to involve a wide range of actors in the activity of
collecting scrap metal, including house wives, janitors, schools, disabled
organizations, and mutual assistance committees [35, p. 4].
The occupation authorities sought to incentivize the population and organizations
to engage in this activity by introducing reward vouchers. Depending on the type of
raw material residents of the occupied territory delivered, a different number of

60
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

points was accrued. According to the decree of Deputy Gebietskommissar von

Hemmingen, for every 10 Reichsmarks spent, the following points were accrued for
the delivery of waste materials: for colored metals – 48 points; rags – 60 points;
rubber – 60 points; old paper – 120 points; phonograph records – 36 points; bones –
72 points; down and feathers – 30 points; horns and hooves – 96 points; bottles –
30 points; shot – 80 points. These points, indicating the amount collected, could be
used in German shops to purchase goods at fixed prices. In Dnipropetrovsk,
collection points were to pay 2,5 Reichsmarks per kilogram of copper,
1,5 Reichsmarks per kilogram of brass, 2,15 Reichsmarks per kilogram of aluminum,
1,9 Reichsmarks per kilogram of German silver, and 1,2 Reichsmarks per kilogram of
lead [16, p. 96-97]. Enterprises received certificates indicating the quantity of
delivered raw materials, based on which their rewards were to be calculated. The
money received by industrial enterprises for waste materials was intended to be used
for the benefit of workers and officials, for example, for arranging communal
facilities, aiding in the organization of gardens, etc. [36, p. 4].
Authors of articles in the Ukrainian collaborationist press stated: “Our schools can
play a significant role in collecting waste materials. To achieve this, it is proposed
that each school establish a collection point for waste materials. Students will
contribute to these collection points, benefiting not only their own families but also
neighboring families without school-aged children” [36, p. 4].
Furthermore, schoolchildren were expected to assist in collecting waste materials
(such as paper, colored and black metals) and medicinal plants during summer
vacation [37, p. 2]. This announcement reflects an aspiration to implement in Ukraine
the experience of involving schoolchildren in waste collection, as practiced in Nazi
Germany, where this phenomenon was widespread.
As Heike Weber and Charles Denton write, in German schools in the late 1930s,
positions of waste educators were established to oversee the waste collection process
and deliver them to local businesses dealing with rags and bones. In 1941, a new
incentive system was introduced, rewarding points and prizes to the best-performing
students and schools. German students annually collected between 22,000 and 26,500
tons of bones. It can be assumed that German students were motivated by a sense of
patriotism, as these campaigns were conducted under the slogan “Germany needs
resources!” [9, p. 125].
However, the motivation of Ukrainian schoolchildren was different. It was
believed that “the children, in gratitude for their liberation from Bolshevik pioneer
groups and the Komsomol, would gladly collect colored metals” [38, p. 4]. We have
found information that in the Malovistivka district of the Kirovohrad region, on
May 15, students collected 2,500 kg of colored metals [38, p. 4]. We do not have
information confirming the widespread participation of Ukrainian students in such
actions, apart from the publication of this fact in the newspaper “Ukrayinske Slovo”.
However, it can be assumed that such cases were not widespread, as students were
primarily utilized for agricultural work. For example, according to V. Hnidy, in the
61
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

village of Bilenke on the island of Khortytsia and the restored farms “Zaporozhets”
and “Sich” from Zaporizhzhia, over 900 students were sent to work. Additionally,
700 students worked in household farms [39].
Within the territory of the Reichskommissariat Ukraine, primary attention was
devoted to metals, which served as raw materials for weapon production. Both
industrial scrap metal (metal scraps remaining at Soviet industrial enterprises) and
household scrap metal were collected. Various items made of copper, nickel, tin,
brass, zinc, bronze, new silver, tombac, ashtrays, wall decorations, bronze
decorations, jars, boxes, plates, pitchers, cauldrons, trays, household items, especially
kitchenware, bird cages, candlesticks, samovars, tableware, door plates, metal
advertising signs, clasps, window locks, hooks, grilles, gates, balustrades, figures, old
weapons, and so on, were collected [40, p. 2].
Massive requisitions of various metal products were also carried out. In May 1942,
an author of one article wrote that “there were many different colored metals in the
form of scrap, damaged utensils, tools, decorations, etc., in cities and villages. This
valuable metal, mostly unnecessary for the population, is lying wastefully in closets
and basements. But it is necessary for the military industry of Germany” [40, p. 2]. It
can be assumed that such calls encouraged requisitions of such items.
It is worth emphasizing that in the occupied territories, popular methods of
mobilizing the population and workers of the waste disposal system, such as mass
campaigns (monthlies), were used, similar to those in Nazi Germany and the Soviet
Union. The first large-scale campaign for collecting scrap metal unfolded in
May-June 1942 on the initiative of the Reichskommissar of Ukraine. In the territory
of the Reichskommissariat Ukraine, the collection of waste materials was entrusted to
the existing department of industrial economy within the Third Main Department, and
in the representations of the General Commissars – to the departments of industrial
economy. To intensify this process, a labor commission was also established, which
included deputy heads of the SS and police, the commander of the armed forces,
Major Schu. Under the general and regional commissioners, labor headquarters
existed to engage responsible workers from the local population in this activity. The
“Soyuzutyl” store in Rivne became the place of accumulation for waste materials
[41, p. 2].
In all populated areas, relatively short deadlines were announced for its
implementation. For example, in the city of Kamyanske, the deadline for delivering
scrap metal to enterprises and households was set from May 10 to May 30, 1942, and
for the general population from May 10 to June 10, 1942 [41, p. 2].The mayor of the
city of Bila Tserkva and the Bila Tserkva district, Maykivsky, issued an order on
June 28, 1942, regarding the diligent collection of colored metals. The population did
not rush to comply with the orders of the occupying authorities, as he stated that if
voluntary collection did not yield the desired results, house-to-house checks and
forced collection of colored metals would be implemented. Village elders, and in Bila

62
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

Tserkva specifically, the Housing Department, were instructed to collect and deliver
all colored metals within a week, by July 5 [42, p. 2].
In July 1942, at the direction of the Stadtkommissar in Kyiv, a large-scale
collection of available waste material took place, including old iron, steel, unusable
cars, canned boxes, various small broken metals, and so forth. The collected scrap
metal was transported to four railway stations: Kyiv-Tovarnyi, Kyiv-Pechersk, Kyiv-
Petryvka, and Kyiv-Lukyanivka, where special platforms were allocated for this
purpose. All companies, institutions, district chiefs, and housing administrations
participated in the collection of metal waste. According to the Stadtkommissar’s
order, they were required to immediately commence the transportation and delivery
of waste material using their means, free of charge. In the housing administrations,
building managers and precinct inspectors of the public order service were
responsible for this matter. They organized the collection and transportation of metal
waste to the tram tracks. Residents of each building were also required to help collect
all available waste in the yards, streets, and premises. The organization of waste
collection and delivery in the Municipal Administration was entrusted to the city
secretary, and in the districts, to the district secretaries [43, p. 4].
In the autumn of 1942, the collection of other types of waste materials intensified
in Ukraine. At the end of September and the beginning of October, a series of orders
were issued by the general commissars to “all institutions, organizations, and private
individuals who had cellars or other places for storing waste materials, to
immediately submit announcements to the procurement and sales office and transfer
all waste materials to its disposal”, [44, p. 4] indicating the low pace of voluntary
submission of waste materials by the population. Companies involved in the
collection of metals, as well as other types of waste materials, were also organized in
1943.
At present, we are unable to ascertain the effectiveness of these measures, the level
of public participation in waste collection during the occupation, and the overall
volume of their disposal. Generalized data in this area is currently lacking, and we
can only imagine it based on several facts. For instance, in the Pervomaiskyi district
of Mykolaiv Oblast in the first half of 1942, a plan was set to collect 52,000 kg of
scrap black metals and 700 kg of colored metals. In Kyiv, from January to May 1942,
284 tons of colored metals were prepared and dispatched to corresponding factories
according to work orders. Within just six days of one month, 26 tons of metals were
prepared, including 7 tons in the Borodyanskyi district and 9 tons in the Makarivskyi
district [45, p. 4].
Analysis of the Ukrainian press allows us to conclude that the Third Reich utilized
waste materials quite extensively. Among scrap metals, the most important was the
scrap of non-ferrous metals such as bronze, brass, aluminum, and their various alloys,
which were used in military industry [36, p. 2]. Woolen rags were used to produce
new fabrics, clothing, and threads; cotton rags were used to make paper, cardboard,

63
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

bags, and various stationery. Waste rags were used for stuffing mattresses, pillows,
and wiping materials [46, p. 4].
Bones were used in the production of a wide range of goods, including soap,
lubricating oil for machinery, explosives, candles, varnish and glue, insulation
materials, printing inks, cosmetic products, fertilizers, feed for poultry [47, p. 3],
canned broth and consumer powders [48, p. 3], bone charcoal, and bone meal for the
sugar industry and agriculture. One of the bone processing plants, located between
Kovel and Kostopol, processed 10 tons of bones per month, yielding 6 tons of bone
charcoal [49, p. 4].
The recycled old paper was used in the production of insulation pipes, gaskets or
building panels, casings, spools, paper linoleum, crates, various utensils, bicycle
handles, military gearboxes, and bottles (by the end of 1942, 25 million pieces were
sent to the front), hammers for the leather and rubber industry and pest control in
agriculture, machine cleaning apparatuses, crepe paper for packaging and blackout
purposes, and more. The majority of waste paper was utilized in the production of
corrugated paper, which was used to make boxes [50, p. 3]. The collaborationist press
claimed that “every 20 tons of old paper saved about 60 cubic meters of timber,
which is almost a hectare of commercial forest”, thereby adding ecological arguments
to the secondary use of paper.
Old rubber boots, various plastic rubber products, and vinyl records were used in
the chemical industry; bottles and broken glass in the glass industry; flax waste and
short fiber cotton, leather scraps, felt, pig bristles, and horsehair for textile
production, leather, and haberdashery items; apricot pits were used in perfumery
[35, p. 4].
Thus, the economic exploitation of Ukraine by Nazi Germany during WWII was
broader than commonly believed. It included the extraction of many waste materials
that were valuable raw materials for the development of various sectors of the
wartime economy. Local administrations, agricultural cooperatives, various societies,
enterprises, institutions, and individual citizens living in both urban and rural areas
were involved in this activity. An appropriate infrastructure was created, based on the
pre-war infrastructure formed in the USSR. However, questions remain unanswered
regarding the motivation of the main actors involved in waste collection, the
operations of enterprises in their processing within Ukraine, mechanisms for
collecting various types of waste materials, and the outcomes of this activity, which
could serve as prospects for further research.

Bibliography
1. Україна в Другій світовій війні. К.: Український інститут національної пам’яті, 2015. URL:
https://old.uinp.gov.ua/sites/default/files/userupload/broshura-ukr-sait.pdf
2. Коваль М.В. Україні в Другій світовій і Великій вітчизняній війнах (1939-1945 рр.).
К.: Видавничий дім «Альтернативи». 1999. 336 c.
3. Шайкан В. Повсякдення українців у роки німецької окупації. 1941-1944. К., 2010. 79 c.

64
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

4. Дітер Поль. Німецька окупація України 1941-1944 у контексті подій Другої світової війни.
URL: https://www.historians.in.ua/index.php/en/doslidzhennya/1547-diter-pol-nimetska-
okupatsiia-ukrainy-1941-1944-u-konteksti-podii-druhoi-svitovoi-viiny
5. Weber H. Nazi German waste recovery and the vision of a circular economy: The case of waste
paper and rags. Business History. 2022. No. 64(5). Р. 882-903.
DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2021.1918105
6. Tooze A. The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy. London
and New York: Allen Lane for Penguin. 2006. 800 р.
7. Berg A. The Nazi rag-pickers and their wine: the politics of waste and recycling in Nazi
Germany. Social History. 2015. Vol. 40. No. 4. Р. 446–472.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071022.2015.1076124
8. Oldenziel R., Weber H. Introduction: Reconsidering Recycling. Contemporary European History.
2013. Vol. 22. No. 3. Р. 347–70. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43299390
9. Denton C.B. Weber, H. Bones of contention: The Nazi recycling project in Germany and France
during World War. Coping with Hunger and Shortage under German Occupation in World
War II. Springer International Publishing, 2018. P. 119-139. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-77467-1_7
10. Denton C., Weber H. Rethinking waste within business history: A transnational perspective on
waste recycling in World War II. Business History. 2022. No. 64(5). Р. 855-881.
DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2021.1919092
11. Mędykowski W.W. Macht Arbeit Frei?: German Economic Policy and Forced Labor of Jews in the
General Government, 1939-1943. Boston: Academic Studies Press. 2018. 418 р. URL:
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv75d8v5
12. Мінц І.О. Кістки. Харків: Народний Комісаріат торгівлі УРСР. Відділ сировини.1932. 26 с.
13. Perga T. Waste Recycling in the Early Soviet Union Period: The Success Story of Ukrutilzbir
JSC. Scientific Notes of the VDPU named after Mikhail Kotsiubinsky. Series: History. 2022.
No. 39. Р. 26-31.
14. Denton C. ‘Récupérez!’ The German Origins of French Wartime Salvage Drives, 1939–1945.
Contemporary European History. 2013. No. 22(3). Р. 399-430.
DOI:10.1017/S0960777313000210
15. Добрі наслідки збирання текстильного утилю. Нове українське слово. 1942. 15 липня
(№ 161). С. 4.
16. Вєтров І.Г. «Фінансова війна» третього рейху на окупованій території України в 1941 –
1944 рр. УІЖ. 1995. № 3. С. 96 – 100.
17. Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law
No. 10, Nuremberg, October 1946-April, 1949: Case 11: U.S. v. von Weizsaecker (Ministries
case). U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949. Nuremberg War Crime Trials, Nuremberg,
Germany, 1946-1949.
18. Металолом для боротьби з більшовизмом. Кам’янські вісті. 1942. 9 червня (№ 67). С. 2.
19. Постанова Київської обласної управи. Відродження (Тараща). 1941. 10 грудня (№ 23). С. 2.
20. Постанова Київської обласної управи №4. Українське слово (Київ). 1941. 21 листопада
(№ 63). C. 4.
21. Контора «Заготутиль». Відродження (Миргород). 1942. 14 серпня (№ 84). С. 2.
22. Заготовча контора промислової сировини. Нове українське слово. 1941. 19 грудня (№ 5).
C. 4.
23. Реклама. Нове українське слово. 1943. 9 лютого (№ 33). С. 4.
24. Первомайська райконтора із заготівель та збуту. Нове життя (Первомайськ). 1941.
23 серпня (№ 18). С. 4.
25. Товариство для заготівлі та переробки старих матеріалів і відходів на Україні. Світанок.
1943. 25 березня (№ 12). С. 2.
65
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

26. Текстильні підприємства Білостоку. Вінницькі вісті. 1943. 10 січня (№ 3). С. 2.

27. Полтавська облспоживспілка. Голос Полтавщини. 1943. 17 червня (№ 239). С. 2.
28. Сьогодні-утиль, завтра-крам! Голос Дніпра. 1943. 20 липня (№ 87). С. 2.
29. Звернемо й на це увагу. Вільна Україна (Дніпропетровськ). 1941. 18 жовтня (№ 11). С. 2.
30. Збирати утильсировину! Дніпропетровська газета. 1942. 15 січня (№ 12). С. 2.
31. Збирайте утильсировину! Вірним шляхом. 1943. 29 червня (№ 25). С. 4.
32. Реклама. Кам’янські вісті. 1942. 12 травня (№ 55). С. 2.
33. Реклама. Нове українське слово. 1942. 28 травня (№ 120) С. 2.
34. Збирання старих речей. Новий час (Вознесенськ). 1943. 30 червня (№ 52). С. 2.
35. Сьогодні – утиль. Завтра – крам. Хабнівські вісті. 1943. 18 липня (№ 53). С.4.
36. Сьогодні-утиль, завтра-крам! Голос Дніпра. 1943. 20 липня (№ 87). С. 2.
37. У школах міста Запоріжжя закінчується учбовий рік. Нове Запоріжжя. 1943. 24 липня
(№ 59). С. 2.
38. Учні збирають металевий брухт. Нове українське слово.1942. 14 липня (№ 160). С. 4.
39. Гніда В. Культура освіта і фронт під час окупації. Розділ 3. По інший бік фронту. URL:
http://history.org.ua/LiberUA/978-966-00-1063-5/23.pdf
40. Металолом для боротьби з більшовизмом. Кам’янські вісті. 1942. 9 червня (№ 67). С. 2.
41. Реклама. Кам’янські вісті. 1942. 12 травня (№ 55). С. 2.
42. Оголошення. Дзвін (Біла Церква). 1942. 28 червня (№ 33). С. 2.
43. Збір металевого утилю. Нове українське слово. 1943. 2 липня (№ 153). С. 4.
44. Подолянин. Кам’янець-Подільський. 1942. 4 жовтня (№ 81). С. 4.
45. Кольорові метали. Нове українське слово. 1942. 9 травня (№ 105). С. 4.
46. По Україні. Заготівля відходів. Наше слово. 1942. 24 грудня (№ 51). С. 4.
47. Роздрібнені кістки – на корм птахам. Павлоградська газета. Обласні вісті. 1943. 26 травня
(№ 20). С. 3.
48. Для вигоди господині! Кістки на юшку й споживчі порошки. Львівські вісті. 1942.
11 грудня (№ 282). 1942. С. 3.
49. Кістка – важлива сировина. Дунаєвецькі вісті. 1943. 2 грудня (№ 94). С. 4.
50. За війни й старий папір що велике господарське значення. Голос Волині. 1942. 31 грудня
(№ 1114). С. 3.

References
1. Ukrayina v Druhiy svitoviy viyni. (2015). Kyyiv: Ukrayinsʹkyy instytut natsionalʹnoyi pamʺyati.
[Online]. Available from: https://old.uinp.gov.ua/sites/default/files/userupload/broshura-ukr-
sait.pdf [In Ukrainian].
2. Kovalʹ, M.V. (1999). Ukrayina v Druhiy svitoviy i Velykiy vitchyznyaniy viynakh (1939-1945 rr.).
Kyyiv: Vydavnychyy dim “Alʹternatyvy”. [In Ukrainian].
3. Shaykan, V. (2010). Povsyudzhennya ukrayintsiv u roky nimetsʹkoyi okupatsiyi. 1941-1944 roky.
Kyyiv. [In Ukrainian].
4. Diter Polʹ. Nimetsʹka okupatsiya Ukrayiny 1941-1944 u konteksti podiy Druhoyi svitovoyi viyny.
[Online]. Available from: https://www.historians.in.ua/index.php/uk/doslidzhennya/1547-diter-
pol-nimetska-okupatsiia-ukrainy-1941-1944-u-konteksti-podii-druhoi-svitovoi-viiny
[In Ukrainian].
5. Weber, H. (2022). Nazi German waste recovery and the vision of a circular economy: The case of
waste paper and rags. Business History, 64(5), pp. 882-903. [Online]. Available from:
DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2021.1918105 [In English].
6. Tooze, A. (2006). The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy.
London and New York: Allen Lane for Penguin. [In English].
7. Berg, A. (2015). The Nazi rag-pickers and their wine: the politics of waste and recycling in Nazi
Germany. Social History, 40(4), pp. 446–472. [Online]. Available from: DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071022.2015.1076124 [In English].
66
Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

8. Oldenziel, R., Weber, H. (2013). Introduction: Reconsidering Recycling. Contemporary European

History, 22.(3), pp. 347–70. [Online]. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43299390
[In English].
9. Denton, C.B. Weber, H. (2018). Bones of contention: The Nazi recycling project in Germany and
France during World War. Coping with Hunger and Shortage under German Occupation in
World War II. Springer International Publishing. [Online]. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77467-1_7 [In English].
10. Denton, C., Weber, H. (2022). Rethinking waste within business history: A transnational
perspective on waste recycling in World War II. Business History, 64(5), pp. 855-881. [Online].
Available from: DOI: 10.1080/00076791.2021.1919092 [In English].
11. Mędykowski, W.W. (2018). Macht Arbeit Frei?: German Economic Policy and Forced Labor of Jews
in the General Government, 1939-1943. Boston: Academic Studies Press. [Online]. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv75d8v5 [In English].
12. Mints, I.O. (1932). Kistky. Kharkiv: NarodnyyKomisariattorhivli URSR. [In Ukrainian].
13. Perga, T. (2022). Waste Recycling in the Early Soviet Union Period: The Success Story of
Ukrutilzbir JSC. Scientific Notes of the VDPU named after Mikhail Kotsiubinsky. Series: History,
39, pp. 26-31. [In Ukrainian].
14. Denton, C. (2013). ‘Récupérez!’ The German Origins of French Wartime Salvage Drives, 1939–
1945. Contemporary European History, 22 (3), pp.399-430. [Online]. Available from:
DOI:10.1017/S0960777313000210. [In English].
15. Dobri naslidkyzibrannyatekstovohoutylyu. (1942). Nove ukrayinsʹke slovo, 161. S. 4.
[In Ukrainian].
16. Vyetrov, I.H. (1995). “Finansova viyna” tretʹoho reykhu na okupovaniy terytoriyi Ukrayiny v
1941 – 1944 rr. UIZH, 3, pp. 96–100. [In Ukrainian].
17. Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law
No. 10, Nuremberg, October 1946-April (1949). Case 11: U.S. v. von Weizsaecker (Ministries
case). U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949. Nuremberg War Crime Trials, Nuremberg,
Germany, 1946-1949. [In English].
18. Metalolom dlya borotʹby z bilʹshovizmom. (1942). Kam'yansʹki visti, 67. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
19. Postanova Kyyivsʹkoyi oblasnoyi upravy. (1941). Vidrodzhennya (Tarashcha), 23. S. 2.
[In Ukrainian].
20. Postanova Kyyivsʹkoyi oblasnoyi upravy №4. (1941). Ukrayinsʹke slovo (Kyyiv), 63. S. 4.
[In Ukrainian].
21. Kontora “Zahotutilʹ”. (1942). Vidrodzhennya (Myrhorod), 84. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
22. Zahotovka kontora promyslovoyi syrovyny. (1941). Nove ukrayinsʹke slovo, 5. S. 4.
[In Ukrainian].
23. Reklama. (1943). Nove ukrayinsʹke slovo, 33. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
24. Pervomaysʹka raykontora iz zahotivelʹ ta zbutu. (1941). Novezhyttya (Pervomaysʹk), 18. S. 4.
[In Ukrainian].
25. Tovarystvo dlya zahotivli ta pererobky starykh materialiv i vidkhodiv na Ukrayini. (1943).
Svitnok, 12. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
26. Tekstylʹni pidpryyemstva Bilostoku. (1943). Vinnytsʹki visti, 3. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
27. Poltavsʹka oblspozhyvspilka. (1943). Holos Poltavshchyny, 239. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
28. Sʹohodni-utylʹ, zavtra-kram! (1943). Holos Dnipra, 87. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
29. Zvernemo y na tse uvahu. (1941). Vilʹna Ukrayina (Dnipropetrovsʹk), 11. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
30. Zbyraty utylʹsyrovynu! (1942). Dnipropetrovsʹka hazeta. 12. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
31. Zbyrayte utylʹsyrovynu! (1943). Virnym shlyakhom. 25. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
32. Reklama. (1942). Kam'yansʹki visti, 55. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
33. Reklama. (1942). Nove ukrayinsʹke slovo, 120. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
34. Zbyrannya starykh rechey. (1943). Novyy chas (Voznesensʹk), 52. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
67
 Проблеми всесвітньої історії. 2024. № 1(25)

35. Sʹohodni – utylʹ. Zavtra – kram. (1943). Khabnivsʹki visti, 53. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
36. Sʹohodni-utylʹ, zavtra-kram! (1943). HolosDnipra, 87. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
37. U shkolakh mista Zaporizhzhya zakinchuyetʹsya navchalʹnyy rik. (1943). Nove Zaporizhzhya, 59.
S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
38. Uchni zbyrayutʹ metalevyy brukht. (1942). Nove ukrayinsʹke slovo,160. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
39. Hnida, V. Kulʹtura osvity i front pidchas okupatsiyi. Rozdil 3. Po inshyy bik frontu. [Online].
Available from: http://history.org.ua/LiberUA/978-966-00-1063-5/23.pdf [In Ukrainian].
40. Metalolom dlya borotʹby z bilʹshovizmom. (1942). Kam'yansʹki visti, 67. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
41. Reklama. (1942). Kam'yansʹki visti, 55. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
42. Oholoshennya. (1942). Dzvin (Bila Tserkva), 33. S. 2. [In Ukrainian].
43. Zbir metalevoho utylyu. (1943). Nove ukrayinsʹke slovo, 153. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
44. Podolyanyn. (1942). Kamʺyanetsʹ-Podilʹsʹkyy, 81. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
45. Kolʹorovi metaly. (1942). Nove ukrayinsʹke slovo, 105. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
46. Po Ukrayini. Zahotivlya vidkhodiv. (1942). Nashe slovo, 51. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
47. Rozdribneni kistky – na korm ptakham. (1943). Pavlohradsʹka hazeta. Oblasni visti, 20. S. 3.
[In Ukrainian].
48. Dlya vyhody hospodyni! Kistky na yushku y spozhyvchi poroshky. (1942). Lʹvivsʹki visti, 282.
S. 3. [In Ukrainian].
49. Kistka – vazhlyva syrovyna. (1943). Dunayevetsʹki visti, 94. S. 4. [In Ukrainian].
50. Za viynu y staryy papir shcho velyke hospodarsʹke znachennya. (1942). Holos Volyni, 1114. S.3.
[In Ukrainian].

Перга Т.Ю. Ресурсна політика Третього Рейху в Райхскомісаріаті «Україна»: вторинне

використання відходів у 1941-1943 рр.
Ця стаття досліджує асортимент і головні методи збирання відходів на території
Рейскомісаріату «Україна» під час окупації нацистськими військами. Джерельною базою
статті є українська окупаційна преса. У статті показано, що видобуток різноманітних
ресурсів і розкрадання матеріальних цінностей був спрямований на підтримку економічної та
військової могутності Третього рейху, а політика збирання відходів була одним з її напрямів.
Для налагодження цієї діяльності в цій царині нацисти використали існуючу на території
України інфраструктуру – склади, фабрики та офіси «Союзутиля», створені напередодні
Другої світової війни, а також інфраструктуру системи споживчої кооперації.
Продемонстровано, що специфікою України є покладання обов’язків збирання відходів на
споживчі товариства, які перетворились на основних акторів постачання різної сировини для
потреб Третього Рейху. До цієї справи активно долучалися місцеві адміністрації та окремі
кооперативи, також створювалися спеціальні товариства. Також окупаційна влада
намагалась залучити школярів і широкі верстви населення, розробляючи для цього різні
системи заохочення, однак участь цих акторів була незначною. Розглянуто особливості
пропаганди збирання відходів на території Рейсхкомісаріату «Україна», яка полягала в
ідеологічних мотивах – вдячності за визволення від радянської влади, та економічних – потребі
відходів для виробництва підприємствами нацистського режиму товарів народного
споживання для місцевого населення. Стверджується, що головну увагу було приділено
збиранню брухту чорних і кольорових металів, а також кісткам, паперу та ганчіркам. Автор
припускає, що масштаби економічного пограбування України були набагато більшими ніж
прийнято вважати, однак визнає, що це потребує подальших глибоких досліджень із
залученням широкого кола архівних джерел.
Ключові слова: відходи, вторинне використання, Друга світова війна, нацистська
Німеччина, окупаційна преса, євреї, метали, папір, ганчір’я, кістки.

68