See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/258379577

Electronic Waste: A Growing Concern in Today's Environment

Article in Economics Research International · January 2011

DOI: 10.1155/2011/474230

CITATIONS READS

186 24,573

3 authors, including:

M. Khurrum S. Bhutta
Ohio University
59 PUBLICATIONS 2,403 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by M. Khurrum S. Bhutta on 27 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Economics Research International
Volume 2011, Article ID 474230, 8 pages
doi:10.1155/2011/474230

Research Article
Electronic Waste: A Growing Concern in Today’s Environment

M. Khurrum S. Bhutta,1 Adnan Omar,2 and Xiaozhe Yang3

1
Department of Management Systems, College of Business, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701, USA
2 MIS Department, College of Business, Southern University of New Orleans, New Orleans, LA 70126, USA
3
Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Russ College of Engineering and Technology,
Ohio University OH 45701, Athens, USA

Correspondence should be addressed to M. Khurrum S. Bhutta, [email protected]

Received 3 December 2010; Revised 18 March 2011; Accepted 5 April 2011

Academic Editor: Yew-Kwang Ng

Copyright © 2011 M. Khurrum S. Bhutta et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.

Over the recent past, the global market of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) has grown exponentially, while the lifespan
of these products has become increasingly shorter. More of these products are ending up in rubbish dumps and recycling centers,
posing a new challenge to policy makers. The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of the e-Waste problem and to put
forward an estimation technique to calculate the growth of e-Waste.

1. Introduction (iii) In China, approximately 20 million refrigerators and

more than 48 million TVs were sold in 2001, and
Over the past two decades, the global market of electrical and nearly 40 million PCs were sold in 2009 [6]. Further-
electronic equipment (EEE) continues to grow exponentially, more, the growth rate is increasing every year [7].
while the lifespan of those products becomes shorter and
shorter. Therefore, business as well as waste management
officials are facing a new challenge, and e-Waste or waste Consequently, the volume of WEEE grows rapidly every
electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) is receiving year and is also believed to be one of the most critical waste
considerable amount of attention from policy makers. disposal issues of the twenty-first century. To be precise,
Predictably, the number of electrical devices will continue to United Nation University estimates that 20 to 50 tons of e-
increase on the global scale, and microprocessors will be used Waste is being generated per year worldwide [8] and suggests
in ever-increasing numbers in daily objects [1, 2]. that there is an urgent need to develop an estimation techni-
que [3].
(i) In the United States (US) market, less than 80 million Compared to conventional municipal wastes, certain
communication devices were sold in 2003; the num- components of electronic products contain toxic substances,
ber was expected to exceed 152 million by 2008 [3], which can generate a threat to the environment as well as to
a growth of over 90 percent in 5 years. Meanwhile, in human health [9, 10]. For instance, television and computer
2006, more than 34 million TVs have been exposed monitors normally contain hazardous materials such as lead,
in the market, and roughly 24 million PCs and 139 mercury, and cadmium, while nickel, beryllium, and zinc
million portable communication devices have been can often be found in circuit boards. Due to the presence of
produced [4]. these substances, recycling and disposal of e-Waste becomes
(ii) In the European Union (EU), the total units of an important issue.
electronic devices placed on the market in 2009 were Most people are unaware of the potential negative impact
more than 3.8 billion units, including 265 million of the rapidly increasing use of computers, monitors, and
computers, roughly 245 million in home consumer televisions. When these products are placed in landfills or
electronics, and 197 million consumer appliances incinerated, they pose health risks due to the hazardous
(major), [5]. materials they contain. The improper disposal of electronic
2 Economics Research International

products leads to the possibility of damaging the envi- products. Furthermore, surveys have indicated that much
ronment. As more e-Waste is placed in landfills, exposure exported US e-Waste is disposed of unsafely in developing
to environmental toxins is likely to increase, resulting in countries, leaving an environmental and health problem
elevated risks of cancer and developmental and neurological in these regions [18]. The European Union has legislation
disorders. requiring manufacturers to put in place e-Waste disposal
A major driver of the growing e-Waste problem is the mechanisms (Wanjiku, [19]). Due to the difficulty and
short lifespan of most electronic products—less than two cost of recycling used electronics, as well as, lackluster
years for computers and cell phones [11, 12]. In a 2006 enforcement of legislation regarding e-Waste exports, large
report, the International Association of Electronics Recyclers amounts of digital discards are transported internationally
projected that, with the current growth and obsolescence from various industrialized countries to certain destinations
rates of the various categories of consumer electronics, where lower environmental standards and working condi-
somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 billion units would be tions make processing e-Waste more profitable [17]. Impacts
scrapped by 2010 or an average of about 400 million units a from those countries, especially Asia, have already been
year. reported. Meanwhile, recycling and disposal of e-Waste are
In this paper, we delineate the e-Waste problem and also growing in regions beyond Asia, particularly in certain
provide an estimation of the amount of e-Waste produced African countries.
and recycled every year, our estimates lead us to believe that Force of an international accord, known as the Basel
by the year 2015, over 500 million units will be disposed off Convention, has banned the export of hazardous waste to
and slightly over 113 million units will be recycled. poorer countries since 1992, but the practice continues as
The paper is organized as follows: in Section 1 we pointed out by Chris Carroll (Woodell, [9, 10]). Commonly,
introduce and define the concept of e-Waste; Section 2 the term “bridging the digital divide” is used when old WEEE
enumerates the current challenges and regulations related are exported to developing countries. They are often labeled
to e-Waste; Section 3 provides an estimation technique as “second-hand goods” since export of reusable goods is
to calculate the amount of e-Waste created and recycled; allowed. However, EU Commission estimates that anywhere
Section 4 outlines a case from the Swiss system of how between 25–75 percent of second-hand goods exported to
to manage and recycle e-Waste; Section 5 provides the Africa are broken and cannot be reused [20]. On the other
summary and limitations of this study. hand, most WEEE that do work on arrival only have a short
second life and/or are damaged during transportation. On
the other hand, illegal disposal sometimes occurs in the
2. Definition of e-Waste name of charitable donation according to United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP). Recently, a report from
As a popular and informal term, electronic waste (e-Waste)
Toxics Link reveals that 70 percent of WEEE disposed in New
is loosely refers to any white goods, consumer and business
Delhi of India was imported from developed countries.
electronics, and information technology hardware that is in
the end of its useful life. Specifically, Puckett et al. [13] define
e-waste as “a broad and growing range of electronic devices
ranging from large household devices such as refrigerators, 4. Current Challenges for e-Waste Elimination
air conditions, cell phones, personal stereos, and consumer
In many cases, the cost of recycling e-Waste exceeds the
electronics to computers which have been discarded by their
revenue recovered from materials especially in countries
users”. According to Sinha-Khetriwal [14], “e-Waste can be
with strict environment regulations. Therefore, e-Waste
classified as any electrical powered appliance that has reached
mostly ends up dumped in countries where environmental
its end-of-life”. As there does not seem to be a standard
standards are low or nonexistent and working conditions are
definition for e-Waste, we have for the purposes of this
poor. Historically Asia has been a popular dumping ground,
paper adopted the definition offered by Sinha-Khetriwal
but as regulations have tightened in these countries, this
et al. [14]. Meanwhile, a list of prevalent definitions has been
trade has moved to other regions, particularly West Africa
provided by Widmer et al. [15]. Widmer et al. [15] and
[22]. Most developing countries lack the waste removal
Sinha-Khetriwal et al. [16] use the terms “WEEE” and “e-
infrastructure and technical capacities necessary to ensure
Waste” synonymously.
the safe disposal of hazardous waste. And e-Waste has been
linked to a variety of health problems in these countries,
3. Global Significance of e-Waste including cancer, neurological and respiratory disorders,
and birth defects [23]. Therefore, the fight against illegal
e-Waste has raised concerns because many components in imports of WEEE has become one of the major challenges.
these products are toxic and do not biodegrade easily if From another perspective, some regulations, which have
at all. Based on these concerns, many European countries been established to handle e-Waste, are often limited since
banned e-Waste from landfills in the 1990s [17]. Ming Hong they exclude many hazardous substances that are used
et al. [18] found alarming levels of dioxin compounds, in electronics. Moreover, many regulations simply fail to
linked to cancer, developmental defects, and other health address the management of e-Waste.
problems; in samples of breast milk, placenta, and hair, these Osibanjo [24] states that in Africa, for example, there is
compounds are linked to improper disposal of electronic a highly ineffective infrastructure for e-Waste management.
Economics Research International 3

More precisely, there is no well-established system for Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and
separation, sorting, storage, collection, transportation, and Pesticides in International Trade, and the Ban Amendment of
disposal of e-Waste. Even worse, there is little or no effective the UN Basel Convention [25]. Despite the existence of those
enforcement of regulations related to e-Waste management conventions, there is still a relatively high flow of WEEE from
and disposal. Under these circumstances, practical e-Waste the US, Canada, Europe, Japan, and Korea to developing
management in Africa is unregulated, and rudimentary countries such as China, India, Pakistan, and several African
techniques are widely used. These techniques include manual countries [13, 29, 31], while some of those developing
disassembly of WEEE without concern of the hazardous countries themselves are becoming the fastest growing
chemicals, heating printed circuit boards (PCBs) to recover markets for EEE and are currently generating large amount
solder and chips, melting and extruding flame-retardant of WEEE [15]. Looking at South Africa as an example,
plastics, and burning plastics to isolate metals; generating there is no specific legislation currently to deal with e-Waste.
an average of US $6 worth of material from each computer However, the new National Environmental Management
(Basel Action Network). This value is not much especially Waste Bill includes implications for e-Waste management,
considering the environmental and health costs of burning aiming to reform waste management legislation in South
plastic, sending dioxin and other toxic gases into the Africa in order to protect public health and the environment
air and the large volumes of worthless parts dumped in [32]. Furthermore, a national waste information system is
nearby landfills, allowing the remaining heavy metals to envisaged as well.
contaminate the area and harm life. In addition to these legislative- and convention-based
initiatives, another policy option is to extend the WEEE
5. Regulations and Market Mechanism producers’ responsibility for their products over the entire
lifecycle, of the product, from design—to use—to disposal.
So far, legislation on WEEE is mainly driven by certain The concept of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is
European countries and the European Directive on WEEE. defined as “the producer’s responsibility for a product is
Most developing nations are lagging in the development extended to the postconsumer stage of a product’s life cycle”
of similar regulations and especially in their enforcement [33]. EU is a good example of this. For instance, Switzerland
[25]. In most developed countries, legislations and policy has a decade-long experience of applying EPR to manage its
guidelines have been developed and established in order to e-Waste [16].
control the use of hazardous chemicals in those products,
and the management of e-Waste after they are discarded. 6. Current Approaches
Among these, the most well known is European Union
(EU) restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances When it comes to e-Waste, recycling faces a number of chal-
in electrical and electronic equipment (RoHS) Directive lenges, including dealing with hazardous materials such as
[26], which currently addresses only limited amount of haz- CRT glass and finding markets for flame-retardant plastics.
ardous chemicals commonly used in WEEE, including heavy Furthermore, no technology currently exists for recycling
metals of cadmium, lead, hexavalent chromium (VI), and certain EEE in an environmentally friendly manner.
mercury and certain brominated flame retardants (BFRs). In the US, the US EPA estimates that as much as three
Furthermore, the EU WEEE Directive requires producers quarters of the computers sold are stockpiled in garages and
to set up systems for the treatment of WEEE. However, closets. When thrown away, they either end up in landfills or
even with these regulations, all hazardous materials that incinerators or are exported to Asia. Table 1 enumerates a few
are used in newly manufactured products cannot be fully places where e-waste ends up.
controlled, and management of e-Waste within the supply In 2005, more than 2 million tons of e-Waste were
chain cannot be fully addressed. According to one estimate, generated in the US alone (US EPA), but only 17 to 18
only 25 percent of the e-Waste in EU is properly collected percent of that was collected for recycling. The rest, more
[27]. And in the US this figure is even lower at only 20 percent than 80 percent, was disposed of, largely in local landfills. The
[28]. e-Waste legislation in the US is primarily set at the hazardous materials in e-Waste can leach out of the landfills
state level with a few stalled efforts in the US Congress [17]. into groundwater and streams, and if the plastic components
Normally, unaccounted e-Waste in both regions is exported are burned, dioxins are emitted into the air [34]. Moreover,
to non-OECD countries. Although it is illegal in EU, such it is estimated that 50–80 percent of the e-Waste collected
exports have been classified as legal recycling by US EPA for recycling in the US is actually exported to developing
[29]. countries, even though it is illegal for most of those countries
Similar e-Waste legislation has been introduced in China to accept this toxic waste stream. Much of this illegally traded
and other countries as well. For instance, China has estab- waste is going to the informal recycling sectors in many
lished administrative measures to control the pollution of Asian and West African countries, where it is dismantled
WEEE [30]. Meanwhile, several multinational collaboration or disposed of using very primitive and toxic technologies
agreements are currently taking shape to prohibit or limit [34].
the shipment of hazardous waste, including e-Waste, from On the other hand, cost is another big issue for e-
industrialized to developing counties. Those include the Waste management. Cost of logistics and transportation is
Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants a challenge faced by most recyclers, preventing the flow of
(POPs), the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed waste volumes in the country.
4 Economics Research International

Table 1: Places where e-Waste ends up.

Landfill: According to the US EPA, more than 4.6 million tons of e-Waste ended up in landfills in 2009. Toxic chemicals in electronics
products can leach into the land over time or be released into the atmosphere, impacting nearby communities and the environment.
Incineration: This process releases heavy metals such as lead, cadmium, and mercury into the atmosphere and which can bioaccumulate
in the food chain, particularly in fish, which is the major source of exposure for the general public.
Reuse: This is a good way to increase a product’s lifespan. Many old products are exported to developing counties. Although the benefits
of reusing electronics in this way are clear, the practice is causing serious problems because the old products are dumped after a short
period of use in areas that are unlikely to have hazardous waste facilities.
Recycle: Although recycling can be a good way to reuse the raw materials in a product, the hazardous chemicals in e-Waste mean that
electronics can harm workers in the recycling yards, as well as their neighboring communities and the environment.
Export: E-Waste is routinely exported by developed countries, often in violation of the international law. Inspections of 18 European
seaports in 2005 found that as much as 47 percent of waste destined for export, including e-Waste, was illegal. At least 23,000 metric tons
of undeclared or “grey” market electronic waste was illegally shipped in 2003 to the Far East, India, Africa, and China. In the USA, it is
estimated that 50–80 percent of the waste collected for recycling is being exported in this way. This practice is legal because the USA has
not ratified the Basel Convention.
Source: Greenpeace International.

Process
in the US

Process
outside
Reuse of the US
Bring to
(give/sell to
Product recycling
family/others
collection Process New
purchase and/or
in the US products
put in
storage)
Process
outside Residual
of the US disposal
Dispose

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4

First use Second use/ Reach EOL Recycling processing/

storage management resale for reuse

Figure 1: Framework for modeling the product lifecycle, source [21].

7. e-Waste Estimation Techniques in Phase 3 of Figure 1: “Dispose” or “Bring to Recycling

Collection.” Disposal was estimated as the difference between
In order to predict the number of units and the tons of e- what was generated for EOL management and what was
Waste for the targeted years, Microsoft Excel was used to recycled [35].
apply linear regression technique. Framework for modeling
the product lifecycle is illustrated in Figure 1. For Phase 1, we
assembled product sales data, as well as data on the average 7.2. Estimating the Portion of EOL Electronics Recycled. Re-
weight of products by year. The model considered product cycling of consumer electronics includes the recovery of
sales from 1980 through 2007 and predicted the annual products by municipal and other collection programs for
quantity needing end-of-life (EOL) management through materials separation and recovery, as well as reuse in both
2007 [35]. domestic and foreign end markets. It also includes businesses
and institutions contracting directly with electronic recyclers
7.1. Estimating the Quantity of EOL Products Generated That for recycling services of their EOL equipment. Donation
Are Recycled versus Disposed. The modeling effort resulted organizations also collect EOL electronic equipment for
in estimates of the quantity of products that are generated reuse or recycling. The term “reuse” in the EOL management
annually for EOL management. EOL management consists stage refers to products entering the recycling materials
of recycling or disposal. This corresponds to the two options management system that are in working order and can be
Economics Research International 5

Manufacturer/ Distributor/ As shown in Figure 2, the solid black line indicates the
importer retailer material flow in the e-Waste management system. In order
ARF to optimize the closed loop of material flow, raw materials
Producer Recycling are first converted into EEE products by manufacturers,
funds Consumer
(raw materials) then end-of-life products after going through retail and
consumption are collected and recycled to produce new
goods. Besides recycling, other materials which cannot be
Recycler Carrier Collector
recycled go to incineration for energy recovery, and a small
portion goes to landfill, approximately 2%. Payments as well
as recycling fees, shown as green and red lines, respectively,
Disposer indicate financial flow of the system. Producer responsibility
Organizations (PROs), such as SWICO and SENS, collect
Materials advanced recycling fees (ARF) from producers on their sale
Payments or import of an appliance. Then, ARF are passed down
Recycling fees to retailers or distributors who invoice consumers for their
purchase of new appliance. This ARF is used to pay for
Figure 2: Flow of materials and finances in the Swiss e-Waste
the whole e-Waste recycling system, including collection,
management system, source [16].
distribution, dismantling, sorting, decontamination, and
recycling of the disposed EEE products [16].
According to a study by Hewlett-Packard (HP), the
resold “as is” or refurbished for resale by electronics recyclers
Global Digital Solidarity Fund (DSF), and the Swiss Federal
and dismantlers. The reuse of consumer electronics before
Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research (Empa),
they enter the management system (i.e., products that pass
most countries in Africa lack legislative mechanisms to tackle
between individual users) is assumed to occur prior to EOL
the problem of e-Waste and have not yet recognized it as a
management [35].
hazardous waste stream. However, several pilot projects have
been initiated in Africa to show that recycling can provide
7.3. Estimating the Portion of EOL Electronics Disposed. both employment opportunities for local communities and
To estimate the portion of the estimated EOL electronics act as a step towards a sustainable solution for tackling
generated every year that is disposed, we subtracted the e-Waste (Wanjiku, [19]) . For instance, a pilot project in
amount estimated to be recycled from the estimated amount Cape Town initiated by HP processed 60 metric tons of
generated for EOL management. Table 2 includes the dis- electronic equipment in 10 months in 2008, generating an
posal estimates for 1999 through 2007. income of about $14,000 and creating direct employment
According to this analysis, 18.4 percent, by weight, of for 19 people. This project also tried to incorporate informal
the EOL electronics generated in 2007 were collected for processing activities that proved highly effective in dealing
recycling. During the time period 1999 through 2005, even with waste. This team is expected to launch the second phase
though the amount of material being recycled increased, the of this project, to engage corporate and government partners
amount of EOL products generated kept pace such that to further extend e-Waste management programs to other
the percentage of material being recycled remained relati- countries and to tackle the problem in the entire continent
vely constant. A larger gain in the recycling rate has been esti- (Wanjiku, [19]).
mated for 2006 and 2007. Implementation of state electronics
Gregory et al. [37] proposed an e-Waste take-back sys-
recovery and disposal regulations has provided a boost to the
tem, whose main functions are collection, processing, system
electronics recycling industry. The majority of EOL material
management, and financing scheme. Meanwhile, several
that is not being recycled is probably mostly going into
examples of current system models have been presented
landfills [35].
including California, Maine, and Minnesota in the US, and
Table 3 shows the prediction of EOL through 2015. As
Belgium, France, and Germany, in the EU. Even though some
can be seen, EOL grows from a meager 159 million units in
successful stories of e-Waste take-back system currently exist,
1999 to a 615.2 million units in 2015,emphasizing the need
but several challenges still remain including
to seriously tackle this issue.
(i) how to balance the harmonization between man-
8. e-Waste Management in Industry ufacturers and recyclers with respect to finance,
operations, technologies, and so forth,
For e-Waste management systems, some of the most success-
ful examples can be found in countries such as Switzerland (ii) how to deal with different business models of stake-
and the Netherlands [16]. Experience of the Swiss e-Waste holders from various industries,
management system is shown as an example in this paper. (iii) how to determine the amount of policy in law, leaving
Generally, the Swiss e-Waste management system can be others to be industrial standards,
viewed as an ERP-based system, where each stakeholder
has their own clear definition of role and responsibilities as (iv) how to ensure that obligations are met by the
shown in Table 4. stakeholders.
6 Economics Research International

Table 2: Distribution of used and EOL products.

Total EOL products Total recycled Total disposed

Year Units (mill) Tons(000) Units (mill) Tons (000) Ton (%) Units (mill) Tons (000) Ton (%)
1999 159 1,056 23.6 157 14.9 135.4 899.2 85
2000 161.6 1282 24 190 14.8 137.7 1092 85
2001 193.6 1447.6 28.1 210 14.5 165.5 1237.6 85
2001 225.2 1634 34.6 250 15.3 190.7 1384 85
2003 273.8 1944.7 40.8 290 14.9 232.9 1654.7 85
2004 310.7 2043.5 48.6 320 15.7 262 1723.5 84
2005 342.1 2172.6 54.3 345 15.9 287.8 1827.6 84
2006 342.9 2107.8 61.3 377 17.9 281.5 1730.8 82
2007 372.7 2251.7 68.5 414 18.4 304.2 1837.7 82
Source [36].

Table 3: Prediction of EOL using forecast function.

Total EOL products Total recycled Total disposed

Year Units (mill) Tons (000) Units (mill) Tons (000) Ton (%) Units (mill) Tons (000) Ton (%)
1999 159 1,056 23.6 157 14.9 135.4 899.2 85
2000 161.6 1282 24 190 14.8 137.7 1092 85
2001 193.6 1447.6 28.1 210 14.5 165.5 1237.6 85
2001 225.2 1634 34.6 250 15.3 190.7 1384 85
2003 273.8 1944.7 40.8 290 14.9 232.9 1654.7 85
2004 310.7 2043.5 48.6 320 15.7 262 1723.5 84
2005 342.1 2172.6 54.3 345 15.9 287.8 1827.6 84
2006 342.9 2107.8 61.3 377 17.9 281.5 1730.8 82
2007 372.7 2251.7 68.5 414 18.4 304.2 1837.7 82
2008 412.6 2527.1 72.4 441.2 18 340.1 2088 83
2009 441.5 2674.7 78.2 471.9 18.4 363.2 2205.4 82
2010 470.5 2822.9 84 502.6 18.8 386.3 2322.8 82
2011 499.4 2970.5 89.8 533.3 19.2 409.4 2440.3 82
2012 528.4 3118.7 95.6 564 19.1 432.5 2557.7 82
2013 557.3 3266.3 101.5 595.3 19.9 455.6 2675.1 81
2014 586.3 3414.5 107.3 626 20.3 478.7 2792.5 81
2015 615.2 3562.1 113.1 656.7 20.7 501.8 2909.9 81

Table 4: Stakeholders and their role in Swiss e-Waste management system.

Stakeholders Roles and responsibilities

Federal government The federal government oversees the whole process and initiates basic guidelines and regulations.
Manufacturers/importers Manufacturers have the physical responsibilities of managing daily operation of the system.
Distributors/retailers Retailers are also part of the physical responsibility of the EEE products besides manufactures.
Consumers Consumers are responsible for returning discarded EEE to retailers or collectors.
Collection locations collect all kinds of WEEE free of charge, and are responsible for the safety of the
Collector (collection points)
disposed products to prevent illegal exports.
Administration from government is required to operate a recycling facility. Recyclers must follow
Recyclers
minimum standards on emissions and concern employee’ health.
Source [16].
Economics Research International 7

9. Summary [5] Euromonitor from Trade Sources/national statistics, Euro-

monitor International, 2010.
According to the electronics waste management of the EOL, [6] J. Watts, “China orders PC makers to install blocking
no more than 19 percent by weight of the EOL electronics software,” 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/
generated in 2007 were collected for recycling, and at least 08/web-blocking-software-china.
81 percent goes to the landfill [11, 35]. Recycling is the key [7] W. He, G. Li, X. Ma et al., “WEEE recovery strategies and
to reduce the e-Waste. Recycling has environmental benefits the WEEE treatment status in China,” Journal of Hazardous
at every stage in the life cycle of a computer product—from Materials, vol. 136, no. 3, pp. 502–512, 2006.
the raw material from which it is made to its final method [8] UNEP, E-waste: The Hidden Side of IT Equipment’s Manufac-
of disposal. Aside from reducing greenhouse gas emissions, turing and Use: Early Warnings on Emerging Environmental
which contribute to global warming, recycling also reduces Threats no. 5, United Nations Environment Programme, 2005.
air and water pollution associated with making new products [9] D. Woodell, “GeoPedia: e-waste,” National Geographic, 2008,
from raw materials. By utilizing used, unwanted, or obsolete http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/geopedia/E-Waste.
materials as industrial feedstock or for new materials or [10] D. Woodell, “High-tech trash,” National Geographic, pp. 72–
products, we can do our part to make recycling work. 73, 2008.
One more aggressive but challenging approach to min- [11] W. J. Denga, P. K. K. Louieb, W. K. Liuc, X. H. Bid, J. M.
imizing illegal dumping of electronics is to impose tougher Fud, and M. H. Wonga, “Atmospheric levels and cytotoxicity
laws. Some States in the US govern e-Waste to ensure a of PAHs and heavy metals in TSP and PM2.5 at an electronic
much greater enforcement. Strictly enforcing these laws is waste recycling site in southeast China,” Atmospheric Environ-
strongly suggested as a way to prevent those who make a ment, vol. 40, no. 36, pp. 6945–6955, 2006.
certain kind of “donations” to developing countries. Future [12] M. Macauley, K. Palmer, and J. S. Shih, “Dealing with elec-
tronic waste: modeling the costs and environmental benefits of
efforts to minimize illegal dumping will undoubtedly include
computer monitor disposal,” Journal of Environmental Man-
a combination of aggressive legislation, new technological agement, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 13–22, 2003.
solutions, and increased public awareness through more
[13] J. Puckett, L. Byster, S. Westervelt et al., Exporting Harm: The
education on e-Waste. Present laws should be evaluated and High-Tech Trashing of Asia, The Basel Action Network (BAN)
modified periodically to allow proper progression. and Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC), 2002, http://www
Educating people about how to recycle, reuse, and .ban.org/E-waste/technotrashfinalcomp.pdf.
dispose electronics at all levels will teach them and their [14] D. Sinha-Khetriwal, The management of electronic waste: a
communities how to behave more responsibly towards the comparative study on India and Switzerland, M.S. thesis,
environment. Indeed, electronic waste is a global problem University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland, 2002.
requiring a global solution. [15] R. Widmer, H. Oswald-Krapf, D. Sinha-Khetriwal, M. Schnell-
One of the limitations of this work is that it is limited to mann, and H. Böni, “Global perspectives on e-waste,” Environ-
looking at the e-waste issues and we have not considered the mental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 436–458,
persistent organic pollution (POPs) issues. POPs negatively 2005.
impact human and wildlife [38, 39]. Other significant [16] D. Sinha-Khetriwal, P. Kraeuchi, and R. Widmer, “Pro-
research on airborne as well as water-/ground based con- ducer responsibility for e-waste management: key issues for
tamination exists. Researchers (e.g.: [11, 40–42] have focused consideration—learning from the Swiss experience,” Journal of
on various contaminants such as Polybrominated Diphenyl Environmental Management, vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 153–165, 2009.
Ethers, Polychlorinated Biphenyls, and Organochlorine Pes- [17] CBC News, “How much e-waste do you dump? Cheryne’s
ticides. Diary,” 2007, http://cheryne.blog.ca/2008/05/21/e-waste-
4200920/.
[18] Science Daily, “Recycling of e-waste in China may expose
Acknowledgment mothers, infants to high dioxin levels, science news,” 2007,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071022094520
The authors like to thank the reviewers for their comments
.htm.
in helping us improve our paper.
[19] R. Wanjiku, “HP and partners tackle Africa e-waste problem,”
Computerworld Kenya, 2009, http://www.computerworld.co
References .ke/articles/2009/02/20/hp-and-partners-tackle-africa-e-
waste-problem.
[1] L. M. Hilty, “Electronic waste—an emerging risk?” Environ- [20] K. Herten, Recycling Magazine Benelux no. 2, 2008.
mental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 431–435,
[21] US EPA, Fact Sheet: Management of Electronic Waste in the
2005.
US, 2008.
[2] L. M. Hilty, C. Som, and A. Köhler, “Assessing the human, so-
cial, and environmental risks of pervasive computing,” Hu- [22] J. Kuper and M. Hojsik, Poisoning the Poor Electronic Waste in
man and Ecological Risk Assessment, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 853–874, Gahana, Greenpeace International, Amsterdam, The Nether-
2004. lands, 2008.
[3] UNEP, Recycling—From e-Waste to Resources: Sustainable [23] C. Davis, “Why is electronic waste a problem? Earthtrends,”
Innovation and Technology Transfer Industrial Sector Studies, 2006, http://earthtrends.wri.org/updates/node/130.
United Nations Environment Programme, 2009. [24] O. Osibanjo, “Electronic waste: a major challenge to sustain-
[4] Consumer Electronics Association, “US consumer electronics able development in Africa,” in Proceedings of the R’09 World
sales and forecast, 2003–2008,” 2008. Congress, Davos, Switzerland, September 2009.
8 Economics Research International

[25] A. Sepúlveda, M. Schluep, F. G. Renaud et al., “A review of ethers, polychlorinated biphenyls, and organochlorine pesti-
the environmental fate and effects of hazardous substances cides in south China,” Environment Science and Technology,
released from electrical and electronic equipments during vol. 41, no. 16, pp. 5647–5653, 2007.
recycling: examples from China and India,” Environmental [41] I. Kalantzi Olga, F. L. Martin, G. O. Thomas et al., “Different
Impact Assessment Review, vol. 30, pp. 28–41, 2010. levels of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and chlo-
[26] EU, “Directive 2002/95/EC of the European parliament and rinated compounds in breast milk from two U.K. regions,”
of the council of 27 January 2003 on the restriction of the Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 112, no. 10, pp. 1085–
use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic 1091, 2004.
equipment,” Official Journal of the European Union, pp. 19–23, [42] J. Kristina, K. Thuresson, L. Rylander, A. Sjodin, L. Hagmar,
2003. and A. Bergman, “Exposure to polybrominated diphenyl
[27] J. Huisman, F. Magalini, R. Kuehr et al., “2008 Review of ethers and tetrabromobisphenol A among computer techni-
Directive 2002/96 on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equip- cians,” Chemosphere, vol. 46, no. 5, pp. 709–716, 2002.
ment (WEEE),” Final Report 07010401/2006/442493/ETU/
G4, United Nations University, Bonn, Germany, AEA Technol-
ogy, Didcot UK, Gaiker, Bilbao, Spain, Regional Environmen-
tal Centre for Central and Eastern Europe, Szentendre, Hun-
gary, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands,
2007.
[28] S. Schwarzer, A. De Bono, G. Giuliani, S. Kluser, and P.
Peduzzi, “E-waste, the hidden side of IT equipment’s manu-
facturing and use,” UNEP DEWA/GRID-Europe Environment
Alert Bulletin 5, 2005, http://www.grid.unep.ch/product/pub-
lication/download/ew ewaste.en.pdf.
[29] M. Cobbing, Toxic Tech: Not in Our Backyard: Uncovering the
Hidden Flows of e-Waste, Greenpeace International, Amster-
dam, The Netherlands, 2008.
[30] “Administrative measures on the control of pollution caused
by electronic information products,” in Proceedings of the
4th Plenary Session of the 10th National People’s Congress
(NPC ’06), Beijing, China, 2006.
[31] A. Terazono, S. Murakami, N. Abe, B. Inanc, Y. Moriguchi, and
S. I. Sakai, “Current status and research on e-waste issues in
Asia,” Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, vol.
8, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2006.
[32] Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, National
Environmental Management: Waste Bill, Republic of South
Africa, 2007.
[33] OECD, Extended Producer Responsibility: A Guidance Manual
for Governments, OECD, Paris, France, 2001.
[34] SVTC, “Poison PCs and Toxic TV’s,” 2011, http://svtc.org/wp-
content/uploads/ppc-ttv1.pdf.
[35] EPA, Electronics Waste Management in the United States
Approach 1 Final, Office of Solid Waste US Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, USA, 2008, http://www
.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/materials/ecycling/docs/app-1
.pdf.
[36] US EPA, Statistics in the Management of Used and End of Life
Electronics, 2008.
[37] J. Gregory, F. Magalini, R. Kuehr, and J. Huisman, “E-waste
take-back system design and policy approaches,” Solving the
e-Waste Problem (StEP), White Paper, 2009.
[38] W. R. Kelce, C. R. Stone, S. C. Laws, L. Earlgray, J. A. Kem-
ppainen, and E. M. Wilson, “Ego boost for toxicology else-
where—persistent DDT metabolite P,P -DDE is potent andro-
gen receptor antagonist—comment,” Human & Experimental
Toxicology, vol. 14, p. 850, 1995.
[39] G. Winneke, J. Walkowiak, and H. Lilienthal, “PCB-induced
neurodevelopmental toxicity in human infants and its poten-
tial mediation by endocrine dysfunction,” Toxicology, vol. 181-
182, pp. 161–165, 2002.
[40] Bi Xinhui, G. O. Thomas, K. C. Jones et al., “Exposure of
electronics dismantling workers to polybrominated diphenyl

View publication stats