Environmental impact of consumer electronics by Chris Barnes

Environmental impact of consumer electronics Chris Barnes

Figure 1 Self-made collage to show the extent of e-waste

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

Nottingham Trent University SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE, DESIGN AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Disclaimer

fpd4 Module: Critical Theory PROD30154

pd4

STUDENT’S NAME:

Chris Barnes …………………………………………….

This submission is the result of my own work. All help and advice (other than that received from tutors) has been acknowledged, and primary and secondary sources of information have been properly attributed. Should this statement prove to be untrue, I recognise the right and duty of the Board of Examiners to recommend what action should be taken in line with the Academic Board’s Policy and Procedures governing Student Assessment.

Signed ………………………….. 08/03/2021 Date ………………………….....

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

School of Architecture, Design and the Built Environment

Environmental impact of consumer electronics Reducing the environmental impact of consumer electronics by: reducing consumption, production, diminishing obsolescence, improving processing of e-waste, and offering services.

Author: Chris Barnes (N0734834) Supervisor: Lisa Shawgi

Submitted in support of the degree of BA (Hons) Product Design PROD30154: Critical Theory March 2021

I confirm that this work has gained ethical approval and that I have faithfully observed the terms of the approval in the conduct of this project.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

Acknowledgement

I would first of all personally like to thank Lisa Shawgi for her supervision and support throughout. Thank you to all academics, industrial professionals, and participants who took their time to contribute towards this study. But also support given by friends and family during restricted times of Covid-19 throughout the journey.

Abstract

This paper explores what is currently being done and what can be done about the throwaway culture of consumer electronic waste (e-waste) and or prolonging the life of products to reduce their environmental impact - Today UK communities are made clear of the environmental consequences our throwaway culture has. Thus action is being taken to help reduce its environmental footprint. However, we are nowhere near achieving what should be done. Throughout the dissertation, research questions narrow to get a focused understanding of these problems and search for achievable solutions to dramatically reduce consumer electronics environmental impacts but also build a critical yet directed conclusion. This study explores the issues consumer electronics have on the environment by focusing on exploring key stakeholders responsibility: consumers, companies, designers, and governments. A review of the literature highlighted the importance of changing consumers' behaviour and how other stakeholders need to help. Interviews were conducted, questioning stakeholders relating to their area of expertise alongside a focus to gain insights into the consumers' behaviour. Analysis of the responses clearly showed how reluctant most consumers are to change their behaviour without personal gain. Despite how important it is to achieve, it’s importance that all stakeholders need to act in order to effectively change their behaviour. The results indicate a correlation between the speed of technological innovation in the product and the consumers' behaviour associated. Concluding that the product type should dictate what should be done to reduce its environmental impact. For example, on the non-innovative end such as a toaster, it should be designed for repair and longevity, on the other end such as a mobile phone, it should be designed for disassembly and recycling. However, unlikely achievable without government intervention and/ or a system to dictate what stakeholders should do with the applicable product.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

Table of contents

Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................... 4 Abstract ......................................................................................................................... 4 List of Figures .............................................................................................................. 6 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 1.2 Aims and objectives .......................................................................................................................................... 8

2. Literature review ................................................................................................. 10 2.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 The role of the company .............................................................................................................................. 10 2.3 The role of the designer ................................................................................................................................ 11 2.4 The role of the consumer ............................................................................................................................. 15 2.5 What’s being done............................................................................................................................................ 17 2.6 Summary .............................................................................................................................................................. 18

3. Research Methodology ....................................................................................... 19 3.1 Focus group ........................................................................................................................................................ 19 3.2 Semi-structured interviews......................................................................................................................... 20

4. Research findings ................................................................................................. 21 4.1 Focus group ......................................................................................................................................................... 21 4.2 Interviews ............................................................................................................................................................. 24

5. Discussion ............................................................................................................... 29 5.1 Very innovative .................................................................................................................................................. 30 5.2 Non-innovative .................................................................................................................................................. 30

6. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 32 6.2 Future work ......................................................................................................................................................... 32

7. References ............................................................................................................... 33 8. Appendix ................................................................................................................. 37 8.1 Focus group with young adopters – 18/01/2021............................................................................. 37

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

8.2 Focus group consent forms ....................................................................................................................... 40 8.3 Interview with Industry expert – 18/01/2021..................................................................................... 49 8.4 Interview with Professor of Sustainable Design and Consumption – 26/01/2021 ......... 51 8.5 Interview consent forms .............................................................................................................................. 53 8.6 Process of analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 56

List of Figures Figure 1 Self-made collage to show the extent of e-waste ..................................................................... 1 Figure 2 Child searching for valuable materials to sell amongst e-waste in Africa (Zhang, 2016) ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 3 Project Ara, Modular phone, by Google (Dezeen, 2016) ....................................................... 13 Figure 4 Repair work (right) on Mishima ware hakeme-type tea bowl with kintsugi gold lacquer, 16th century (My Modern Met, 2019) ............................................................................................... 14 Figure 5 The T 3 Pocket Radio, pocket-sized mini radio, by Dieter Rams for Braun, 1958 (HighSnobiety, 2020) ................................................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 6 What participants do with unwanted electronics (Author generated table 2021) .. 22 Figure 7 Participants opinions on adopting second-hand electronics (Author generated table 2021) ....................................................................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 8 Common behaviours, by willingness to adopt second-hand electronics (Author generated table 2021) ................................................................................................................................................ 24 Figure 9 Example label showing product energy efficiency (Archyde, 2020) ............................. 27 Figure 10 Diagram showing what governmental enforcement should be put in place based on products speed of innovation (Author generated table 2021) ....................................................... 29 Figure 11 Example label showing product energy efficiency ............................................................... 64

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

1. Introduction 1.1 Background Lotzof (2020) states that E-waste is the world’s fastest-growing household waste stream, negatively affecting the planet and draining global resources; 53.6 million metric tons of e-waste was generated worldwide in 2019. When dumped in landfills, toxic substances like mercury or lead can leach into the Earth but also exposure is dangerous to human health. But most importantly disposing of precious non-renewable materials from inside the electronics (Lotzof, 2020). These hazardous substances can spread through the air and sea to other continents – widening the impact of the problem. Current recycling solutions either mix e-waste with residual waste in landfills, incinerate the waste or exports it and the problem attached to vulnerable countries like Africa or India. In these countries, people make a living by selling valuable materials extracted from the e-waste like gold, silver, copper, platinum, and other recoverable metals (TCO Certified, 2020). “[Products are manually disassembled and] burned in the open air or dissolved in acid by local labourers including children, without adequate protective equipment — possibly leading to severe health problems” (see TCO Certified, 2020). In 2016 scarce material valued at 55 billion Euros weren’t recovered from e-waste, which could have had a positive economic impact. Materials such as iron and aluminium, along with plastics can be recycled and profitable if sold as secondary raw materials (Baldé, 2017).

Figure 2 Child searching for valuable materials to sell amongst e-waste in Africa (Zhang, 2016) The UK produces one of the leading amounts of e-waste every year (The global e-waste statistics partnership, 2020). Fueled by high consumption rates of electricals and

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

electronic devices, and few actions taken at the end of a products life to prevent it from ending up in a landfill. The concept of planned obsolescence (Deliberately planning a product's lifespan to be finite, so it will become obsolete or non-functional after a certain period) is only one idea, which puts blame on the companies who produce the products. Other concepts discussed include developing a circular business, working with recycling centres, and consider that designers, government and consumers could also have responsibility. Almost everything we buy ends up being thrown away. Ends up in landfill, pollutes our oceans, creates greenhouse gases, or harms the planet in other ways. WWF (2018), Macarthur (2018) and Shukman (2019) all agree that this has a frightening impact on our environment and society creating a global problem that needs to be fixed. The environmental consequences of our throw-away culture are made clear in today’s communities and yet only a small percentage of people consider it when making a purchasing decision. However, more and more people are being considerate. Overconsumption of short-lived disposable items ‘throw-away society’ is a term first used in Life magazine (1955) as a positive attribute to a product, purely applying to Western cultures however no longer seen as a good thing with its outlook being flipped. The businesses producing products to high standards that consider their environmental impacts and design for longevity are being undercut by other companies selling at a much more competitive price who are less concerned and sell lower quality products (Cooper, 2010).

1.2 Aims and objectives Attenborough (2020) iterates how we have negatively impacted Earth and future consequences that lead to a non-inhabitable planet. “We have a finite environment—the planet. Anyone who thinks that you can have infinite growth in a finite environment is either a madman or an economist.” (see David Attenborough: A life on our planet, 2020). Consumer behaviours’ towards disposing of and the need for the latest technology contribute towards e-waste (Hadhazy, 2016). The need for action is greatly emphasized and that involves dramatically reducing the production of e-waste. Research in this area has been completed extensively since 1960 (Packard, 1960) and will be explored. Consumer awareness in today’s economy is growing and adaptations to the development process of products mean the environmental impact of new electronics is slowly reducing, however, more can be done (United Nations, 2021). Consumers and companies need to be motivated to reduce e-waste and its environmental impact, it is crucial for stakeholders to take the products full life cycle into consideration including its afterlife.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

The aim was to develop a set of feasible ideas either to reduce the amount of consumer e-waste going to landfill or improving the longevity of the product, achievable on an appropriate time scale. Therefore, this dissertation aims to investigate obsolescence, potential change to consumer behaviour, and reducing and recycling consumer e-waste based on a better understanding of companies motives and consumer habits on the topic. This will be done by exploring existing literature and conducting primary research to create an in-depth understanding of what’s being done and what can be. The objectives of this dissertation are: 1.

Discover literature that discusses ideas around this chosen topic.

Explore the responsibilities of stakeholders to understand the challenges of reducing consumer e-waste.

Identify the key idea that suggests how to improve longevity also identifying their barriers.

Get an in-depth understanding of what can be done and the achievability of the ideas.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

2. Literature review

2.1 Overview Over the last decade, the impact of obsolescence and consumer e-waste on our environment has been highlighted frequently. An estimated total of more than 150 million tonnes of plastic drifts in the world's oceans causing the deaths of over one million birds and 100,000 sea mammals each year (Shukman, 2019). Attenborough (see Shukman, 2019) describes it as "vile" and "horrid", however, went on to say there is a growing awareness and understanding of the damage it can do and the actions being done about it. The Ocean Clean Up (2021) is a great example of people acting and aims to collect 90% of the oceans plastic pollution. This body of literature was used to grasp a further understanding of what the problem is, considering the customer, companies, governments, and designers’ responsibilities, and what can be done. Books, reports, articles, journals, and websites have been used to facilitate a broader understanding to conclude realistic solutions to achieve the goal of the dissertation.

2.2 The role of the company The throw-away culture (short-lived disposable items) is unsustainable and needs to be challenged due to the environmental impacts and the depleting global resources (Cooper, 2010). Companies benefit from planned obsolescence and the economic gains from their desire for profit, reduced production costs, and the creation of jobs. While potentially compromising the product quality, the potential for repair, and therefore product longevity. Psychological obsolescence is the premise that companies encourage consumers to replace their working products because the change in its aesthetical appearance is a fashionable and desirable trait, by concealing the negative connotation with doing so for profit and making it socially acceptable (Packard, 1960). “If ever there was true obsolescence, it’s in technology, […] “It’s almost as if the technology takes care of itself – this will obsolete itself whether you like it or not.” (Tullman cited in Hadhazy, 2016). There is undoubtedly a correlation between technology and planned obsolescence. An example is when Apple admitted that older iPhone models were deliberately slowed down through software updates. However, it went on to discuss how updates were designed to extend the life of older phones as their batteries became less capable of providing the power for high-speed operations. On the other hand, Hadhazy (2016) goes on to discuss how constant sales promote innovation and improvements to the quality of production,

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p10

making products cheaper and easily accessible. Meaning, obsolescence being psychological or planned promotes economic growth, provides jobs, and therefore betterliving standards. Hardy (2020) discusses how the upcoming industry of smart textiles have a shortened lifetime as an increased breakage chance of either the electronics or textile components can lead to product failure alongside being unrepairable. As well as this, systems haven’t been put in place for disassembly or recycling, making it difficult for the consumer to dispose of the product correctly. Being an example of how industry overlooks its responsibility and their environmental impact. In order for companies to tackle the negative implications of planned obsolescence, they must have a profitable business model. Possibly achieved by providing products that are designed for aftercare and or repair service that would continue a consumers’ investment in the brand.

2.3 The role of the designer

Design attributes “A circular economy is based on the principles of designing out waste and pollution, keeping products and materials in use […]” (see Ellen Macarthur foundation, 2017). A circular economy means products that reach the end of their life have valuable resources extracted and used to manufacture new products. Design is key to achieving this. It should be possible to take products apart and replace components but also delete personal data securely, so the product can be reused by a second owner or within a rental service. More so it should be possible to easily recycle consumer electronics, requiring hazardous substances to be reduced or better yet eliminated. Designers follow traditional linear design and manufacturing processes that do not consider the full circular life cycle of the product due to their learnings and limitations from their company. Change in the design process considering, upgradeability, repairability, reusability, and disassembly are easy feasible and all increase longevity in the product but also offer benefits like remanufacturing and recycling. All could be considered profitable services that could unlock new value for businesses and their customers. Park (2010) provided a comprehensive review of design attributes that have an effect on products obsolescence. This is supported by Nes (2010) that concludes that to effectively extend the life of a product you have to successfully match the consumers’ replacement motives. In general, consumers want well-functioning and up to date products that meet their changing needs. It goes on to imply it’s the designers’ responsibility to think about what happens to the product during its lifetime and preparing the product for future repairs or upgrades. This is biased as none of the responsibility is on the companies or consumers' action of disposing of the product but shifts all blame to before production.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p11

This, however, might be as consumers don’t have knowledge of what to do other than landfill and therefore dividing up responsibility even more to include government. Materials chosen Firstly, compromising for low-prices due to little understanding of materials could result in functional degradation such as cracking, warping, or colour bleaching (Park, 2010). Which is often the case in cheap products with small production budgets. Higher quality products are often more expensive due to material costs and development time required but perceived as longer-lasting, likely to outlive their cheaper competitors. Silent performing Discreet products only draw attention to themselves when they fail. Making them not susceptible to going out of fashion or rapid technology change. For example, smoke detectors are often hidden or unnoticeable in the home, although this doesn’t easily apply to readily used products. A product that archives this well would be the ‘Google Home Mini’, a hands-free voice-controlled assistant as it would be used often but not necessarily seen. Upgradability Another way Park (2010) suggests an adaptation to a product is designing for upgradability, increasing the chance of the user not being motivated to replace it with a newer model as money could be saved. Upgradability allows for the replacement of certain parts to allow it to keep up with the latest technology. However, the upgrading of complex hardware might be difficult for the inexperienced. 

One option would be modularization. For example, upgrading the graphics card in a laptop would improve its overall performance. This concept could also be applied to the aesthetics of a product to personalise its look or replace worn surfaces just like what a phone case is used for. However, when this concept was applied to a phone by Google (image below) it did not commercialise. The phone contained modular components making the phone undesirably bigger due to the extra housing required (Dezeen, 2016).



Another way that is suggested is piggybacking, this is the means of adding or attaching an adjacent device or component. This offers a way to keep up with advancing technologies. An example of this would be an addition of a chrome cast to a TV, allowing movies to be streamed without a DVD (outdated technology).

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p12

Figure 3 Project Ara, Modular phone, by Google (Dezeen, 2016)

Practising durable design Timeless design can extend the life of a product by reducing the frequency at which products are replaced. However, it is difficult to reliably create aesthetically timeless work and consider all of the variables affecting the consumers’ decisions. Lobos (2014) argues that timeless design consists of aspects related to the functionality and appearance of the product. A product can be made timeless in a functional way by making it repairable and upgradable. Achieving timelessness in appearance, however, is achieved by creating a product either unique or by disconnecting it from popular aesthetic cues that serve as indicators of time. Alongside Park’s (2010) idea of silent performing products, Heaton & McDonagh (2017) suggests three ideas for designing a product appearance timeless. Beautiful forms Beautiful forms are said to create an emotional response based on pleasure and passed experiences. Seeing the form as an experience may accentuate the formal beauty from the conceptual identity of the product, rendering it more sculptural than functional. However, will vary across individuals and their personal tastes. Nostalgia Values such as craftsmanship, innovation, and nostalgia can all contribute to aesthetic timelessness. Nostalgia can have a great influence on someone’s aesthetic perception as there is a connection with their past. However, may not be possible or difficult to apply to mass-produced products. One way could be Kintsugi, the Japanese art of repairing broken

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p13

pottery by mending the areas of breakage (Seen in the image below). “As a philosophy, it treats breakage and repair as part of the object’s history, rather than something to disguise”, rendering it unique and personal (My Modern Met, 2019). The ethics of this philosophy could potentially be applied to massed produced consumer electronics to help tackle the throw-away culture.

Figure 4 Repair work (right) on Mishima ware hakeme-type tea bowl with kintsugi gold lacquer, 16th century (My Modern Met, 2019)

Simplicity A timeless aesthetic may be more easily found by seeking simplicity without losing the nature of the product’s function. Balanced in proportions, symmetry, ordering of features, little contrast in colour, and the use of warm and cold materials are suggested to make a design independent of cultural and time-related cues. Hence, a product’s lifetime can be extended by its visually simplistic appearances. These features can easily be identified in the work Dieter Rams did with Braun between 1961 and 1995, an example can be seen in the image below. Lobos (2014) also suggested that simplistic design could be ‘classical’

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p14

and strongly preferred over time as it doesn’t follow fast trend cycles.

Figure 5 The T 3 Pocket Radio, pocket-sized mini radio, by Dieter Rams for Braun, 1958 (HighSnobiety, 2020)

2.4 The role of the consumer There are generally five ways people can help reduce products going to landfill which are discussed in detail at (52 Climate Actions, 2020) and aims to educate people on what they can do.

Reduce/ refuse Reducing your overall consumption of consumer goods by questioning significant purchases and resisting impulse buys reduces the potential number of products to landfills but also saves the consumer money. Always carrying a reusable shopping bag and choosing stores that allow you to bring your containers to fill up will help reduce single-use plastics. These options are becoming more readily common as companies evolve their approach due to the consumer changing purchasing habits.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p15

Reuse Using a reusable coffee cup instead of a paper one can make a significant difference over time. “Globally 16 billion disposable coffee cups are used every year and they are extremely difficult to recycle due to the paper inside being coated with plastic” (see 52 Climate Actions, n.d.). Companies are changing their practices as customers make purchase changes like considering products that are built for longevity or those with less plastic packaging. This can be difficult when consumers are unknowingly unwilling to pay a premium for highquality long-lasting products and instead prefer to spend the money saved on other items or services (Cooper, 2010). Moreover, consumers should look for products made of recycled materials or with a more sustainable approach like organic, fair trade, or locally made products. However, the difficulties lie not in knowing what we need to consider as consumers but in educating, reminding, and convincing people to act.

Recycle Products made from metal, wood, paper, most plastics, and electronics are likely to be recyclable and should also be considered when buying goods. Recycling processes have their own carbon footprint making it unfortunately not the most sustainable or environmentally friendly option. However, is profitable and responsible for keeping 15% of e-waste out of landfills in 2019. Although only works if products are disposed of correctly.

Repair Products are readily thrown away as people don’t know how to fix them. Especially prevalent in technology such as laptops or phones. Evans & Cooper (2010) says people are influenced by the low cost of a replacement product in comparison to repair. Curran (2010) backs this up but says that exchanging items such as at car-boot sales or street charities could result in less waste but also social benefits. Knowledge, skills, and confidence are major barriers to attempting home repairs despite there being sources such as iFixit.com, which offer more than 10,000 online repair guides (iFixit, 2020), alternatively, repair cafes are an option. Lack of knowledge of existing repair cafes and/ or trust in commercial repairers are major issues that exist especially amongst young adaptors. Shapley et al, (2018) talks about the Restart Project, a community-based repair initiative that seeks to extend the lifetime of electrical and electronic devices and reduce consumer e-waste. However, a survey from Shapley et al, (2018) of 99 attendees from Restart Party’s found that there was an increased engagement in repair activities, fostered new knowledge and skills. Positively changing respondents’ attitudes and/or behaviour towards repair and

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p16

obtaining electrical or electronic devices. However, this might be restricted to a pacific demographic.

2.5 What’s being done Companies have little incentive to lengthen the life cycle of their products and reduce their revenue. Yet, more companies are thinking about doing so based on their changing customer purchasing decisions. Esposito et al, (2016) conducted a survey of 54 leading brands and found that almost all of them reported consumers showing increased care about sustainability and the environmental impacts of their purchases, which can have only increased since it was conducted in 2016. This is partly driven by the rising price of raw materials and therefore product price, and partly due to both consumers and companies becoming more and more aware of the need to protect our planet. An increasing number of people are looking for environmental, packaging recyclability, and ethical claims when making a purchasing decision. The 2019 report from Shoppercentric reveals that being ‘green’ has become a norm: “80 percent of UK shoppers now describing themselves as being ‘environmentally friendly’ and 82 percent claiming to consider ‘environmentally friendly’ labelling within their purchase decisions. A further 59 percent also claim to actively avoid particular types of packaging” (see Banks, 2019). This is consistent with their belief that brands should make their packaging more environmentally responsible to protect the environment and society. However, Council (2020) states this has only come about because of benefits to the companies. Reduced energy, waste and travel costs, creation of jobs, and importantly customer loyalty and their company perception. Governments are also acting: UN environment programme, 2018 discusses this including stating that “more than 50 countries have signed a UN Environment Clean Seas campaign, making it the largest global compact for fighting marine litter” (UN environment programme, 2018). The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive is an EU legislation passed in 2003 that set collection, recycling and recovery targets (European Commission, 2012). However, a lot more could be done to enforce and monitor companies’ actions on their environmental impacts and reducing consumer e-waste. Governments could enforce new legal requirements by communicating and engaging with companies. Naming and shaming businesses that violate standards. Heavy fines for repeatedly noncompliant companies could all prove to be effective steps. Governments are wary of adopting an approach to encouraging longer product life-spans due to the current benefits of technological advancements and economic growth but also the risk of rising product prices (Cooper, 2010). Governmental action is heavily influenced by what the public wants and in turn, influenced by what governmental campaigns promote. However,

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p17

awareness and concerns are being raised, slowly influencing this harsh cycle and thus actions being done.

2.6 Summary It’s generally cheaper for customers to buy a replacement product than to prolong the product’s life. If it costs slightly more, it’s often worth the additional cost due to the undesired effort required to research how to repair it, find a new owner, or face the awkward situation of interacting with a commercial repairer. On one hand, technological reasons for discarding electronics, such as outdated or non-compatible technology is an explanation for consumer e-waste. However, reasons like fashionable rebuying or planned/ psychological obsolescence lead to more. Although people are made aware of the environmental consequences with 82 percent claiming to consider it when making a purchasing decision (Banks, 2019). More action can be done, however, due to not being affected first hand, as the issues are often sold and shipped to low-income countries to deal with but also a lack of social awareness in the matter means that actions taken by consumers are small and limited to what’s available. Companies overlook considerations for their product’s life cycle and the environment purely because of their desire for profit and business growth. It’s more cost-effective to persuade customers to turn an eye or convince them of greenwashing (conveying a false impression or providing misleading information about how a company's products are more environmentally friendly). However, businesses are slowly doing something as people change their purchase habits. On the other hand, some level of obsolesces is important for economic growth and innovation, which wouldn’t be possible without profit. Design attributes can successfully be implemented by the designer that increases the lifespan of the product however this does not stop the consumer from disposing of the product ones it becomes outdated technology. If successful a combination of concepts could be applied to discourage the consumer from disposing of the product once new technology is available. Upgradability, repair, and personalisation could be a service provided by the company to help create a personal attachment with the product. However, a more effective approach would include circular design, by making the product easy for disassembling, recycling, and reuse of the materials.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p18

3. Research Methodology

The aim of the primary research undertaken was to continue understanding what can be done by key stakeholders, consumer behaviour, and professional thoughts and opinions on the topic. This in-depth understanding allowed for a realistically achievable set of ideas to be proposed that considered how easily adopted they would be by the consumer, designer, companies, and governments. Qualitative data was collected by using a focus group and two semi-structured interviews with experts. Using a focus group allowed multiple analytical methods to be used as arguments can be explored and information gathered from participants could be compared against literature to build a substantial amount of insights. The focus group provided a comprehensive body of data about consumer behaviours among young adopters, quantitative data wouldn’t have produced such data and only back up what was already found with states and statistics. Which is one reason as to why other research methods’ weren’t used alongside the restrictions of covid-19.

3.1 Focus group The focus group consisted of two unstructured questions and seven discussion points that the attendees had to develop and debate, however, it was important that the convocation was informal and attendees were still entitled to state their own opinion. The aim was to conduct the focus group with five attendees around the ages of 21 and 25 on the 17 t h of January 2021 however, ended up involving seven participants. The theme revolved around attendee’s behaviour with consumer electronics and relied upon their ability to represent all young adopters within the UK. A young adopter was defined as a young person who purchases the latest electronics for themselves with heavy use in mind in the last six months and therefore should have little motive to replace them. Participants were given six minutes to discuss their thought and opinions around each question to ensure it didn’t take longer than an hour in total. As the moderator, it was my job to ensure the discussion was kept on topic but also to make notes. To make this easier the session was also recorded. After being conducted key points that weren’t fully noted where transcribed using the recording. Key themes where identified and categorised while being analysed to gain a deeper understanding of participants’ perceptions and motivations. A focus group was a chosen method as insights into people’s thoughts and opinions on the topic were needed. These results generally could not be produced beyond a sample group such as a questionnaire as quantitative data would have been produced. However, would have the advantage over a focus group of easily getting more responses. This limitation was outweighed by the need for qualitative information.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p19

3.2 Semi-structured interviews Interviews were conducted with both an academic and industrial professional. Openended questions posed were largely the same with minimal change considering the participants' areas of expertise. The interviews were conducted online via Zoom and planned to take 30 minutes however, ended up being 40 minutes leaving 5 minutes to discuss each question with eight in total. A Principle Designer was chosen as an industry professional with 30 years of experience designing consumer electronics and known through a previous internship. The Professor of Sustainable Design and Consumption was found through research into relevant literature and happened to work at Nottingham Trent University. The interview was constrained to 30 minutes and ended up building on what was found in the previous interview and focus group. The interviews were recorded with note-taking and filmed with consent to insure information was retained and could be transcribed afterwards. The information was prepared for analysis by converting the discussions into insights before grouping them into key themes. The benefits of interviews are similar to that of a focus group. Participants are more likely to openly discuss their knowledge and opinions around a topic than give a short answer. Questions can be guided based on what they say and have the advantage over a focus group of participants potentially being over talked by someone with a louder voice.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p20

4. Research findings

4.1 Focus group

Awareness of the environmental consequences of consumer e-waste Responses from what was stopping participants from doing more with old electronics other than disposal and responsibility felt were limited. Suggesting there is little awareness of the environmental consequences of consumer e-waste and or motive to act. “I imagine it affects the environment but I couldn’t explicitly tell you how” The environmental impact was never a concern to the participants or thought about when making an electronic purchasing decision. When asked, respondents were only concerned about quality and price, even after raising environmental concerns. Indicating that increased consumer awareness might have little effect. Banks (2019) states consumers are making more ethical purchases, however, might not extend into consumer electronics. “Only ever think about the quality and technology and if it’s the latest model. On electronics you just assume there is nothing you can do.” “There is no association with technology being green or advertisement about it.” Points raised emphasise how little of an association consumer electronics have with being environmentally friendly. Suggesting that it might be hard to do so or that brands should be doing more (Gibbs, 2020).

What is done with unwanted electronics When asking participants about their unwanted electronics it was clear more is done than just disposal. A popular answer was storage, as participants suggested they wanted to keep what was theirs. One respondent noted their concern about stored digital information: “I keep old phones because they contain personal data and photos, everything else I just bin.”

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p21

Figure 6 What participants do with unwanted electronics (Author generated table 2021)

Headphones or earphones

Internet router box

Electric razor

Broken

Mobile device

Discarded

Computer webcam

Bluetooth or smart speaker

Device type

Got a newer better one or no longer compatible with the latest devices

Finished fulfilling its purpose

Kept

Donated

Other

Used as backup

Stored somewhere

Use at a social occasion where it doesn’t matter what happens to it

Given to a family member

Put in communal space

2 1

It's requested its send back to the provider Sold for money towards the newest device

2 1

Boxes are highlighted grey to show what participants discussed they do with unwanted electronics. The number inside indicates how many participants agreed with that statement. The results of this analysis (see figure 5) shows behaviour around discarding and storing unwanted electronics is more popular than other options but more so because of losing its financial value than having a sentimental attachment. “If it became easier to donate my old electronics, I wouldn’t because I would still want to keep them as backups.” Some environmentally friendly options suggested by 52 Climate Actions (2020) weren’t mentioned at all. Responses included putting in communal spaces or to be used in situations more likely for it to be lost or stolen. All participants agreed that products are designed so they can’t be taken apart or fixed, consistent with Cooper (2010). Most responses included that they felt as if there is a lack of accessibility to facilities for recycling of electronics and didn’t know where to go, consistent with what Shapley et al,

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p22

(2018) states. However, one respondent knew about where to go to sell unwanted electronics. “Always sell my unwanted electronics to make some money towards buying a newer one.” There is a clear lack of knowledge shown amongst participants motivation towards sustainability as electronic products are inevitably disposed of rather than other more sustainable options. However, the above has shown it's mostly after the product is either broken or become outdated technology. Making it clear that behaviour towards unwanted electronics is mainly driven by personal gain, potentially requiring incentives like cashback to be more responsible. It is clear the price of the product and disposable income played a factor in determining what is done. As the price of the electronic goes up the more reluctant someone is to dispose of it.

Reusing electronics When attendees were asked their opinions on adopting second-hand electronics their opinions made were mostly backed up with strong reasoning’s. For example, one technology enthusiast in the group said they would always pre-order the latest phone. On the other end, participants suggested they would be willing to adopt a second-hand camera only based on the reduced price because of their lack of knowledge or experience with that technology. Figure 7 Participants opinions on adopting second-hand electronics (Author generated table 2021)

Category

All products would be fit for further use Would never consider it (%)

Would be willing to (%)

Actively seek it out (%)

Bluetooth or smart speaker

Headphones or earphones

Mobile device

Camera

While results found look mixed, more participants might result in a wider defined split. However individual reasoning’s might not differ considerably. Some types of products respondents were more willing to buy second-hand but mostly wanted to buy new.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p23

Attendees reasonings could be grouped, more so towards ‘would never considering it’ reflecting the results shown in figure 6. Figure 8 Common behaviours, by willingness to adopt second-hand electronics (Author generated table 2021)

Would never consider it

Would be willing to

Actively seek it out

Private or personal information saved on such device

Quality and condition needs to be proven before purchase

Limited expertise would not be able to tell the difference between it and the latest technology

Cheap enough to just replace Hygiene concerns I am a fanatic about always having the latest technology

Increased concerns in the ‘would never consider it’ section of figure 7 are reasons as to why people don’t buy second-hand electronics but not necessarily of concern if acquired from friends or family. An increased perception of being new, knowledge of the previous owner, or where the product has come from might increase willingness to adopt secondhand from a store. An improvement to such system might be a solution to Cooper (2010) idea that consumers will not pay a premium for high-quality long-lasting products.

4.2 Interviews When asked whose responsibility it is to help reduce consumer e-waste, both the professor and industrial expert agreed that everyone has some level of responsibility and expressed empathy for the consumers, aligning with what was said in the focus group. Comments said echoed the literature by Park (2010) suggesting consumer have less of a part to play in the reduction of e-waste than previously thought. Other thoughts expressed highlight the responsibility brands and their supply chain have. “Companies have a responsibility to manage their products at the end of life […]” “Manufacturers have a responsibility to design products to last longer […]” “Consumers have a responsibility to be good citizens and not be wasteful and sensible in the disposal of products.” It is clear from the responses that everyone can do more, consistent with evidence from the literature review - some actions might be easier to achieve than others and should be acted on first. Ultimately the consumer is at the forefront of the problem but heavily influenced by other stakeholders. Both interviews suggested that consumers’ are unlikely to change their behaviour without other stakeholders intervening.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p24

What can designers do

Limitations The interview with the industrial expert outlined that designers put effort towards implementing sustainable methods in the design process but unfortunately unimpactful as it’s often not a major part of the design brief set by their bosses or client, therefore have little they can do past offering advice. “In a consultancy your working to find maximin value by developing a product that makes the client money by pleasing their customers. If we are practising sustainable design it’s often of our own back without adding any cost to the project.” Building upon but limiting Park (2010) set of design attributes that can only be incorporated by saying it can only be achieved if the client or company signs off on it. On the other hand, sustainability is mostly aligned with saving production costs and implemented in small details like removing paint finishes, simplifying assembly by combining components and reducing material used. “It’s the designer's job to inform and offer advice to the client about what tools and options are available to be more sustainability. However, can become very difficult to persuade them if it isn’t in the clients best interests at the time.” However, if employers’ moral views on sustainability are different the designer and all employees need to decide if they want to stay involved or move on. Longevity It was stated longevity and obsolescence are best applied to certain types of products, conflicting with Park (2010) by suggesting consumers want the latest technology that’s designed for performance in the smallest form and therefore not designed for longevity. “Longevity only works in certain formats and isn’t always the right responses to reducing e-waste. A toaster hasn’t changed much over the last decade so makes sense to be designed tough, durable and repairable. However, technology in headphones for example is still developing at a rapid pace so doesn’t make sense to implement longevity as the technology quickly goes out of date.” “Space inside products is optimised by compacting components tightly and space required for screws and fastenings are saved by using glue {…}” After discussing project ‘Ara’ by Google, the modular smartphone concept (Dezeen, 2016) it was agreed that modularity creates interchangeable components to keep up with this changing technology, however, might not optimise space or performance and therefore not matching the consumers’ needs, aligning with Nes (2010). Designing for longevity is

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p25

suitable for technology that is no longer innovative or producing annual models. Therefore, difficult to apply to readily consumed consumer electronics.

What can company’s do The opinion that a circler business needs to be implemented more frequently is consistent within both interviews and the writing in the Ellen Macarthur Foundation (2017). However, said to be an extensive tricky piece of work that has to be costed into the project. Although a circular business wouldn’t come without increased development and manufacturing costs as a product is no longer just being designed but an entire supply chain. After discussing the types of profitable services a company could offer, it was said that take-back schemes have been around for years. “The problem is that it’s a collective scheme rather an individual one.” Collective schemes allow brands to follow guidelines by paying retailers to take responsibility on their behalf – making a just about profitable business model for the retailer. However, recalling the individual product after use isn’t profitable as modern consumer electronics are made in such a way that it’s too expensive to collect or disassemble. Nevertheless, be an effective implementation of sustainability as the material is kept in continuous use. One difficulty discussed is how hard it is to communicate sustainability and brands efforts to consumers in a simple effective way that isn’t greenwashing. “Consumers are often convinced of companies efforts without them actually doing the right thing [greenwashing]. Like Starbucks changing from plastic to bioplastic lids. This doesn’t necessarily mean it is a particularly sustainable thing and even has a worse impact on the environment. There are still lots of things they are doing that are very unsustainable.” This is easier said than done with electronics as its currently seen as removing a competitive edge and therefore likely require governmental intervention to insure companies take action. Unfortunately, this is the case with a lot of action businesses could take as enforcing brands to act at the same time ensures no one loses a competitive edge.

The government Ideas that the government are essential were discussed. It was said a combination of laws to stop low performing products being put on the market and signalling to the consumer to choose longer-lasting higher quality products and buy fewer of them. People will gravitate towards products that have the reassurance of lasting longer. Making consumers choose higher quality longer lasting electronics that have a better environmental impact. The WEEE directive (European Commission, 2012) requires the performance of the

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p26

products to be labelled, including energy efficiency which is always marginal but outdated (see in the image below).

Figure 9 Example label showing product energy efficiency (Archyde, 2020)

“John Lewis will tell you on their labels how much it will cost in electricity to use per year. Communicating ownership costs to the consumer makes it in their economic interest to do the right thing because they aren’t going to make decisions based on how waste full a product is.” Labelling has been proven to have a positive effect on consumer purchasing decisions in a study done by the European Economic and Social Committee (2016). However, more could be added to labels to effectively change consumers purchasing decisions but also needs to be made mandatory by governments. Evaluating the performance of a product against the social and environmental implications of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was suggested. However, labels won’t be enough because not all consumers would adhere to them. Some initiatives could be fairly easy to be implemented by governments to reduce consumer consumption and the amount of e-waste produced. It was suggested that modulated fees could help force companies take responsibility. “Modulated fees could be put in place so companies pay more for certain types of products they put on the market. So they will find it more in their interest to design for longevity and recyclability.” The downside would be the huge cost and difficulty to change to a new way of working. Environmental impact charges could be added to products to shift buying towards more

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p27

sustainable brands. For example, when buying petrol, you’re not paying for the hidden cost it has on the planet. The introduction of new regulations could force businesses attitudes to adapt to what the consumers want, be more honest about their efforts, and take responsibility for what they produce – consistent with what Cooper (2010) says. “The government can help by producing legislation requiring thorough sustainability standards then everyone would just have to adhere to as a minimum and increase the sustainable practices undertaken by designers.” On the other hand, how can companies make a profit if they produce fewer products. Which is why it was said that we need to be ‘pro-industry’ to help them do the right thing. Companies need to find new ways of encouraging consumers to be more responsible but also ways of capturing value. Forcing brands to offer more in terms of replacement or repair services. Companies that try to do the right thing struggle. An example given was an ethical phone brand Fair Phone: “Fair Phone produces phones that are more ethical (longer-lasting, modular, recycled plastic…) but very hard for the brand to break out the small niche of people that want an environmentally friendly phone but also the entire culture of an annual changing model. But also they can’t make all their own components so have to buy in mainstream parts that are not designed for longevity.” This difficulty is common in products that regularly release new models because of fast technological innovation that consumers inevitably want to be up to date with. Another way the government could intervene is the products afterlife. Systems need to be improved to help prevent consumers from wrongfully disposing of their consumer electronics. Be this an improved collection system or call-back service. “While recycling plants are good now at separating out electronics they can’t do anymore as consumers are putting electronics in mixed waste that goes to landfill.” It is clear there is a lot of ways the government can intervene, however, being a solution that could quickly be implemented and effective is another question. Whatever the case, intervention needs to improve now as businesses action towards becoming more environmentally friendly is slow to none. Governmental enforcement wouldn’t just speed this up but also improve the consumers' behaviour.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p28

5. Discussion

This section suggests a new strategy of reducing the amount of consumer e-waste going to landfill and improving the longevity of products from the findings and literature. Ideas are no longer grouped by key stakeholders but consider how integrated they are and reliant on changing the consumers' behaviour. This study shows to effectively extend the life of a product you have to successfully match the consumers’ replacement motives as both interviewees agreed and expressed the difficulty in doing so, agreeing with literature like Nes (2010). However, in some situations, this might not mean increasing the products lifetime but improving the recycling systems instead. As ideas suggested through both interviews all came across as being best applied to certain product types due to being either restricted by the consumers' replacement motives or purchasing decisions. Through the investigation, it’s clear there is a correlation between the speed of innovation in technology and the consumers' behaviour (or product lifetime ‘psychological obsolescence’) (Hadhazy, 2016). As with some products, consumers want the most up to date technology but with others they just want it to be long lasting. This allows us to determine what should be done to reduce the products environmental impact and produce the least amount of consumer reluctance.

Collection service/product recall

that should be taken

Environmental impact actions

Figure 10 Diagram showing what governmental enforcement should be put in place based on products speed of innovation (Author generated table 2021)

Design for disassembly Modulation or upgradability Improved longevity and increased product labelling Repairability services or replacement warranty offered Non-innovative

Very innovative

Speed of innovation All consumer electronics should have reduced environmental impact. This table demonstrates the minimal action that should be taken based on the product type. Potentially suggesting to change consumers purchasing behaviour, product services offered, or improved product afterlife. For example, a mobile phone would fall into the lightest section on the chart as annual models are produced. A toaster would fall under

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p29

the darkest section as often only replayed when broken. This doesn’t mean more can’t do done past what is suggested and further research and interviews with key stakeholder experts might uncover more achievable and appropriate ideas. However, enforcing such actions would be difficult without governmental intervention. As the speed of innovation or the frequency consumers replace the product so does the cost it takes to implement the suggested actions on the chart, therefore encouraging businesses to consider designing more sustainably and allowing designers to do more.

5.1 Very innovative Physical attributes Hadhazy (2016) states annual sales promote innovation due to constant profit. Suggesting that planned and psychological obsolesce is ok on the far right side of the chart as the benefits outweigh the negatives. Also, evidence of consumer behaviour shown in figure 5 that fast innovating electronics are replaced with fast trend cycles. Therefore designing these products for longevity doesn’t make sense as you can’t change the consumers purchasing behaviours, Nevertheless, there are still actions that can be taken to improve their impact on the environment such as improving its disassembly for recycling and reuse of materials.

Improved regulations As stated by both interviews that changing the companies requirements towards a circular business would increase what designers can do including implementing collective or disposal systems. Focus on improving the recyclability of e-waste could increase incentives and make it more convenient for the consumer to return the product. Government policies should be implemented firstly towards achieving a circular economy to ensure companies are acting as no one wants to act first and lose their competitive edge.

5.2 Non-innovative Physical attributes Non-innovative products are often not used frequently matching aspects of silent performers by Park (2010). If the product isn’t seen when interacted with, it won’t become psychologically obsolete and might outlive technology advancements or the latest models. Suggesting that non-innovative products don’t want to be replaced often, therefore, should be designed for longevity, repairability, and aftercare to reduce their environmental impact.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p30

Improved regulations Alongside governmental campaigns or implementation of initiatives, increased labelling and or product warranties is said to be most effective in changing consumer behaviour in favour of longer-lasting higher quality products but also more environmentally friendly brands. Communicating information suggested by the Professor of Sustainable Design and Consumption to the consumer on the products lifespan cost per year, environmental performance, and yearly energy cost would all have a positive effect and perhaps see increasing adoption of second-hand goods.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p31

6. Conclusion

The research aimed to identify effective feasible ideas of reducing the amount of consumer e-waste going to landfill or improving the longevity of the product in order to help reduce the environmental impact of consumer electronics. Qualitative data suggested that focusing on changing consumer behaviour would be practically impossible without other stakeholders acting. The research illustrates how reluctant consumers are to change, but also how other stakeholders can effectively change their behaviour to be more sustainable based on what the product is. It was first thought that the throw-away culture needed to stop, consumption of new technology should reduce, and products should be used of else how rather than being disposed of. However, this still being the case, research shows how much more of a challenge this is to achieve due to consumer purchasing decisions around electronics and companies need for sales, profit, but also benefits to the economy. A more feasible solution is for the throw-away culture to evolve, by key stakeholders taking responsible more so at the end of the products life to stop it going to landfill or prolonging its life. There is no one person to blame for the e-waste crisis but action needs to be taken now. Throughout the research, I expected to gain a grasp of how much more designers can do due to the amount of literature on the subject suggesting so (Park, 2010, Lobos, 2014, Nes, 2010), but additionally found how limited they are and the importance of other stakeholders. The methodology was effective in answering the research question and identifying a correlation between the effectiveness of ideas and their dependency on the type of product they were applied to. Therefore, the research findings suggest that new strategies should be implemented based on a products innovative attribute to reduce its environmental impact (see figure 9). However, without government intervention and support, it's going to be very difficult for companies to implement these new strategies suggested without losing a competitive edge.

6.2 Future work This study offers the idea as to how stakeholders should act based on the product type but there is still more they can do. Including governmental labelling, consumer education of environmental effects, and increased collection and disposal of e-waste. The implementation of this strategy would mean designers could implement timeless design and repairability for products in the non-innovative section but also disassembly in the most innovative section on the chart (see figure 9). But also push for and advice clients on these aspects based on where that product sits on the chart. Continued investigation could be done to show everything designers can do in the specific sections of the chart and how they can be effectively implemented including methods found in the literature

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p32

review by Park (2010) and Lobos (2014). Possibly leading to designers specialising in these sections and aspects of design. Based on what Shapley et al (2018) concluded, more investigating into what a bigger involvement in repair cafes and education-based programmes could result in larger community benefits and responsibility taken. However, best applied to non-innovative electronics as innovative products are often now not designed for disassembly and have safety risks like exposure to dangerous substances. Therefore improved knowledge in the correct disposable methods, selling second-hand, or collection services would prove more helpful and should be investigated instead.

7. References 52 Climate Actions, 2020. Refuse, reduce, reuse, repair & recycle. [Online] Available at: www.52climateactions.com/refuse-reduce-reuse-repairrecycle/full#:~:text=Most%20people%20are%20familiar%20with,take%20first%2C%20which% 20is%20Refuse [Accessed 09 December 2020]. Anon., 2013. 2013 Cone Communications Green Gap Trend Tracker, Boston: Cone. Archyde, 2020. The EU introduces new energy labels. The A, A +, A +++ classes will disappear. [Online] Available at: www.archyde.com/the-eu-introduces-new-energy-labels-the-a-a-aclasses-will-disappear/ [Accessed 25 January 2021]. Baldé, C. P. F. V. G. V. K. R. S. P., 2017. The Global E-waste, Shibuya: ITU. Banks, S., 2019. Sustainabilty takes effort. In: ShopperCentric, ed. WindowOn. Elmfield: Touchstone, p. 5. Cooper, T., 2010. Policies for Longevity. In: T. Cooper, ed. Longer lasting products. Surry: Gower, pp. 215-236. Cooper, T., 2010. The significance of product longevity. In: T. Cooper, ed. Longer lasting products. Farnham: Gower, pp. 3-28. council, B. a. H. c., 2020. Making sustainable purchasing decisions. [Online] Available at: www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/content/council-and-democracy/contracts-tenders/makingsustainable-purchasing-decisions [Accessed 17 December 2020]. Curran, A., 2010. Extending Product Life-Spans: Household Furniture and Appliance Reuse in the UK. In: T. Cooper, ed. Longer lasting products. Farnham: Gower, pp. 393-413.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p33

David Attenborough: A life on our planet. 2020. [Film] Directed by Alastair Fothergill, Jonnie Hughes, Keith Schgoley. Globel: Netflex. Dezeen, 2016. Google to start shipping modular smartphone Project Ara. [Online] Available at: www.dezeen.com/2016/05/26/google-project-ara-modular-smartphoneshipping-developers-consumers-product-design-technology-news/ [Accessed 19 January 2021]. Ellen Macarthur foundation, 2017. What is circular economy?. [Online] Available at: www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/circular-economy/what-is-the-circulareconomy [Accessed 12 January 2021]. Esposito, M., Tse, T. & Soufani, K., 2016. Harvard Business Review. Companies Are Working with Consumers to Reduce Waste, 07 June, p. 2. European Commission, 2012. Waste Electrical & Electronic Equipment (WEEE). [Online] Available at: ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/weee/index_en.htm [Accessed 13 December 2020]. European Economic and Social Committee, 2016. The Influence of Lifespan Labelling on Consumers, Bruxelles: Visits and Publications. Evans, S. & Cooper, T., 2010. Consumers Influences on Product Life-Spans. In: T. Cooper, ed. Longer lasting products. Farnham: Gower, pp. 319-345. Flood Heaton, R. & McDonagh, D., 2017. Can Timelessness through Prototypicality Support. The Design Journal, 06 September, p. 110–121. Gibbs, S., 2020. How we are changing the way we rate sustainability of consumer electronics. [Online] Available at: www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/dec/29/how-we-arechanging-the-way-we-rate-sustainability-of-consumer-electronics [Accessed 3o January 2021]. Hadhazy, A., 2016. Here’s the truth about the ‘planned obsolescence’ of tech. [Online] Available at: www.bbc.com/future/article/20160612-heres-the-truth-about-the-plannedobsolescence-of-tech [Accessed 02 December 2020]. Hadhazy, A., 2018. Apple investigated by France for 'planned obsolescence'. [Online] Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42615378 [Accessed 02 December 2020]. Hardy, D., 2020. Electronic textile reparability, Nottingham: s.n.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p34

HighSnobiety, 2020. Five iconic Braun products that changed the game. [Online] Available at: www.highsnobiety.com/p/best-braun-products-design/ [Accessed 21 January 2021]. iFixit, 2020. iFixit. [Online] Available at: www.ifixit.com/ [Accessed 16 December 2020]. Kuehr, R., Bogdan-Martin, D. & Mavropoulos, A., 2020. The Global E-waste Monitor 2020. [Online] Available at: ewastemonitor.info/ [Accessed 15 December 2020]. Life, 1955. The summit. New York: Time Life. Lobos, A., 2014. Timelessness in Sustainable Product Design. 06 October, p. 169–176. Lotzof, K., 2020. What is e-waste and what can we do about it?. [Online] Available at: www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-is-ewaste-and-what-can-we-do-aboutit.html?gclid=Cj0KCQiA2uHBRCCARIsAEeef3nQyuaVNHgD2I8Rfb7wkM1CR_ZTwnFayrqT_qeC88n4ZmmevIIPC88aAue hEALw_wcB [Accessed 15 December 2020]. Macarthur, E., 2018. Why our throwaway culture has to end. [Online] Available at: www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-andconservation/2018/06/why-our-throwaway-culture-has-end [Accessed 10 December 2020]. My Modern Met, 2019. Kintsugi: The Centuries-Old Art of Repairing Broken Pottery with Gold. [Online] Available at: mymodernmet.com/kintsugi-kintsukuroi/ [Accessed 12 January 2021]. Nes, N. n., 2010. Understanding Replacement Behaviour and Exploring Design Solutions. In: T. Cooper, ed. Longer lasting products. Farnham: Gower, pp. 107-130. Packard, V., 1960. The waste maker, s.l.: David McKay. Park, M., 2010. Defying obsolescence. In: T. Cooper, ed. Longer lasting products. Farnham: Gower, pp. 82-91. Shapley, M. et al., 2018. How does attending pop-up repair events impact on individuals understanding and behaviour towards repair?, Nottingham: s.n. Shukman, D., 2019. Attenborough: World 'changing habits' on plastic. [Online] Available at: www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50419922 [Accessed 10 December 2020]. TCO Certified, 2020. E-waste — a toxic waste stream where valuable finite resources are lost. [Online] Available at: tcocertified.com/ewaste/?utm_term=%2Be%20%2Bwaste&utm_campaign=E-waste+++spring2020&utm_source=adwords&utm_medium=ppc&hsa_acc=6451387163&hsa_cam=952

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p35

2124036&hsa_grp=100698315281&hsa_ad=421524612214&hsa_src=g&hsa_tgt=kwd299053005101&hsa_kw=%2Be%2 [Accessed 20 December 2020]. The global e-waste statistics partnership, 2020. In-depth review of the WEEE Collection Rates and Targets, Shibuya: C.P. Baldé, M. Wagner, G. Iattoni, R. Kuehr. The ocean cleanup, 2021. The largest clean up in history. [Online] Available at: theoceancleanup.com/ [Accessed 11 January 2021]. UN environment programme, 2018. What are businesses doing to turn off the plastic tap?. [Online] Available at: www.unenvironment.org/news-and-stories/story/what-arebusinesses-doing-turn-plastic-tap [Accessed 16 December 2020]. United Nations, 2021. Sustainable Development Goals. [Online] Available at: www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/ [Accessed 21 January 2021]. WWF, 2018. OUR THROW-AWAY CULTURE HAS TO CHANGE. [Online] Available at: www.wwf.org.uk/updates/our-throw-away-culture-has-change [Accessed 10 December 2020]. Zhang, Y., 2016. Blog. [Online] Available at: blogs.bsg.ox.ac.uk/2016/08/17/the-advent-ofsouth-south-cooperation-in-dealing-with-global-e-waste-challenge/ [Accessed 14 December 2021].

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p36

8. Appendix

8.1 Focus group with young adopters – 18/01/2021 The following is a partial transcript and key points made while the focus group Q1: What do you do with your small unwanted electronics? (keep them, bin, repair)    

Everything gets put in a draw including old phones and old chargers. I keep old phones because they contain personal data and photos, everything else I just bin If my phone cables are broken they get binned but I normally would sell them on even if it’s just for parts. Often expensive products are more expensive to repair then it is to buy a new one

Q2: What do you do when you no longer want your Bluetooth speaker/smart speaker?      

Would have to be if really broken, but if the sound quality isn’t very good I’ll still use it Old one gets repurposed by friends or family who would use it and cares less about sound quality. Put it in a social space so everyone can use it I generally good at keeping my products for a long amount of time Use it when I go to a beach or something so if it gets stolen it doesn’t really matter Quality is no longer good enough and technology is out of date so would bin it

Q2: Computer webcam  

My parents have one and they still use it on that old computer Never owned one

Q2: Internet router box   

Binned it in the past If they get left behind when moving into a new flat I would bin it They request that it gets sent back

Q2: Mobile phone   

Give it to someone else, tend to know a family member who needs one I tend to break my phone a lot so tend to need a backup Always sell it to make some money towards buying the next one

Q2: Electric razor  

I’ve never had to throw one out I would throw it out when the motor is worn out. Wouldn’t give it to anyone due to hygiene and don’t think anyone would want it

Q2: Headphones or earphones  

Just chuck them when they break I’ve always brought new headphones because I’ve broken my last pair

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p37



Only bin them if they stop working or their no longer compatible with my new phone

Q3: What’s stopping you from doing more at the end of an electronic products life to help prevent it going to landfill? (effort, knowledge?)     

Accessibility to facilities, I wouldn’t know where to go CEX will except old technology to be broken down I’ve changed the battery in my laptop ones For speakers and such, there designed so there so complicated that you can’t take them apart Donating or disassembly is something I’ve never been aware of

Q4: What would help prevent you from disposing of unwanted electronics? (education, making it a social norm)    

Making products easier to repair and including a guide in the box If it became easier to donate my old electronics, I wouldn’t because I would still want to keep them for backups If I got cash back for recycling my old product that would motivate me If the consequences of not doing so are advertised more

Q5: Are you aware of the environmental consequences of e-waste?   

I imagine it effects the environment but I couldn’t explicitly tell you how Yea I’m aware, but I still do it anyway No I don’t

Q6: Who’s responsibility do you think it is to reduce e-waste?     

Bit of everyone, everyone’s got to play their part Can’t just blame one group but if I had to I would pick the produces The consumer should be deciding if they want to help reduce e-waste or not Don’t really think there is a way to stop people from buying new electronics I think shopping ethically becomes a lot easier when you have the money to do so

Q7: What are purchasing decisions you make when buying new electronic products? Do you consider the environmental impact or aftercare?    

On electronics you just assume there is nothing you can do Only ever think about the quality and technology There is no association with technology being green or advertisement about it Don’t even think about what I will do with it when I no longer want it

Q8: How willing would you be to adopt a “Bluetooth speaker/smart speaker” as a second hand product? Not at all: 4 Maybe if I see it in a store: 3 Yes I would actively seek it: Why:

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p38

   

I like to be up to date with technology Depends on its condition, there all the same There cheap enough to just get a new one Would have to be a lot cheaper

Q8: headphones or earphones Not at all: 6 Maybe if I see it in a store: 1 Yes I would actively seek it: Why:  

Not at all due to hygiene If they are really expensive brand then I would consider it got the lower price

Q8: Mobile phone Not at all: 2 Maybe if I see it in a store: 3 Yes I would actively seek it: 2 Why:  

Quality has to be proved to be good I like to have a new one because they tend to slow down during use

Q8: Camera Not at all: 1 Maybe if I see it in a store:4 Yes I would actively seek it: 2 Why:  

Cameras are expensive I don’t enough about cameras to want the news version

Q9: If you had to travel to allow unwanted electronics to be recycled, would you?   

If it was in a reasonable distance Save them all up and do them all at ones If there was a personal gain I would, if not why should I

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p39

8.2 Focus group consent forms

Information consent form

Project Title: E-waste, it’s consequences and what can be done about it

What is the project about? What is currently being done about the throwaway culture of consumer electronics and the build-up electronic waste (e-waste). Effecting our environment but also the earth it’s dumped in and the people around it. Whose responsibility is it? And what can be actually be done on a reasonable time scale?

Approach? You have been selected to take part in the interview because of your professional experience. The interview is one-on-one in nature and will last approximately 30 minutes over Teams.

Data collection The interview will be recorded by audio for data collection purposes and the interviewer may also take notes. Data necessary will be collect for the Project, including where necessary your details which may include your name and, your views and opinions. The data will be used for the purposes of the dissertation project.

Consent You have the right to revoke your consent for the study to use the information collected from you at any time up to the completion of the interview. Participation in this study is voluntary, you may withdraw from the study at any time and request deletion of your contributions up to the completion of the interview. Withdrawal of consent will not affect your receiving an honorarium.

How can I find out more about this project? Find out more contact me, Chris Barnes, – N0734834@ntu.ac.uk or contact the adviser on the project Lisa Shawgi, - lisa.shawgi2015@my.ntu.ac.uk. We are both happy to answer any questions you might have.

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p40

1. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

2. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

3. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

4. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

5. I am over the age of 18.

6. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Matthew Eisenhower Date

18.1.21

Signature M

Chris Barnes

18/01/2021

Signature

Eisenhower Student’s name

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

Date

p41

Find out more contact me, Chris Barnes, – N0734834@ntu.ac.uk or contact the adviser on the project Lisa Shawgi, - lisa.shawgi2015@my.ntu.ac.uk. We are both happy to answer any questions you might have

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

7. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

8. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

9. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

10. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

11. I am over the age of 18.

12. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Alex Bucur

Date

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

18.1.21

Signature A A Bucur

p42

Student’s name

Chris Barnes

Date

18/01/2021

Signature

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

13. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

14. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

15. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

16. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

17. I am over the age of 18.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p43

18. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Molly Haslam Date

18.1.21

Student’s name

Chris Barnes

Date

Signature M E Haslam

18/01/2021

Signature

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

19. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

20. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

21. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

22. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p44

23. I am over the age of 18.

24. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Ben Pugh

Student’s name

Chris Barnes

Date

18.1.21 Date

Signature B J Pugh

18/01/2021

Signature

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

25. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

26. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p45

27. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

28. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

29. I am over the age of 18.

30. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Josh Hope

Student’s name

Chris Barnes

Date

18.1.21 Date

Signature J Hope

18/01/2021

Signature

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

31. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p46

32. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

33. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

34. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

35. I am over the age of 18.

36. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Henry Browne

Date

18.1.21

Signature H F

Chris Barnes

Date

18/01/2021

Signature

Browne Student’s name

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p47

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

37. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

38. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

39. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

40. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

41. I am over the age of 18.

42. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Zoe Donaldson

Date

18.1.21

Signature Z E

Donaldson

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p48

Student’s name

Chris Barnes

Date

18/01/2021

Signature

8.3 Interview with Industry expert – 18/01/2021 The following is a partial transcript and key points made form the interview How do you practice sustainability in electronic design? Have you got any examples?   



Sustainability often isn’t a major part of the design brief set by clients. If we are practising sustainable design it’s often of our own back without adding any cost to involve it in the project. Often talk about sustainability through saving production costs and often implemented in small details like removing paint finishes, gluing processes, and simplify assembly by combining components and reducing material used. BT handsets – was an object to reduce part count and finishes to make the product more cost effective to produce but the brief was disguised as a sustainability objectives.

What’s your stance on circler design and longevity? 

Circler design needs to be considered and implemented in the design process but often an extensive tricky piece of work that has to be costed into the project.



Longevity only works in certain formats and isn’t always the right responses to reducing e-waste. A toaster hasn’t changed much over the last decade so makes sense to be designed tough, durable and repairable. However, technology in headphones for example is still developing at a rapid pace so doesn’t make sense to implement longevity as the technology quicky goes out of date. People now days want the best preforming product in the smallest form. Space inside products is optimised by compacting components tightly and space required for screws and fastenings are saved by using glue. Modularity however might not optimise space but make the opportunity of interchange components to keep up with this changing technology.



Are there any pros to your company or the client by incorporating circler deign?  



There is an increasing amount of consumers that are driven by ethics If the materials reverted back to the company’s ownership at the end of the products life manufactures would have to take back the products to be reprocessed and reused. Being an effective implementation of sustainability as material is kept in a continuous use loop. The company would be providing is a service instead of the product. Companies that consider this should become better places to work as they should be one that the employees are looked after.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p49

Are there any cons to your company or the client by incorporating circler deign?   



Short answer is increased development and manufacturing cost as your no longer just designing a product, your now designing an entire supply chain. It’s very difficult to change to a new way of working and the cost of doing so A circular business is the only way it could work at the moment but only feasible if everything is done themselves from manufacturing, distributing, and recycling that all work together because excising processes and supply chains aren’t set up to handle sustainability as they aren’t interconnected. It is difficult to communicate sustainability to consumers in a simple way as they are often convinces of companies efforts without them actually doing the right thing. Like Starbucks changing from plastic lids to bioplastic. This doesn’t necessarily mean it is a particularly sustainable thing and may even have a worse impact on the environment. There is still lots of things they are doing that are very unsustainable (green washing).

Whose responsibility do you think it is to help prevent small electronic products going to landfill?  



Everybody has a part to play. At the moment the focus has been on changing the consumers behaviour, which is unfair and imposable to be fully sustainable. Product brands need to take much more responsibility as they pay for the designers and manufacturers pay checks. The designer can try and push sustainability but the brand has the decision if they go for it or not. Everyone up the supply chain have a part to play from mining the materials to shipping the product.

How much of a products full life is considered in projects your involved in (considering birth, extended use and afterlife)? What are the challenges you face? 

The default position in the brief will be to design the product for the user at a certain price point. There maybe some requirement for the products end of life like recyclability but briefs never go any deeper. Disassembly is nearly never in the brief but can be something we convince the client to add like involving clips instead of glue for example.

How much else do you think can be done by designers to help towards this? 

 

It’s the designers job to inform and offer advice to the client about what tools and options are available to be more sustainability. However can become very difficult to persuade them if it isn’t in the clients best interests at the time. In a consultancy your working to find maximin value by developing a product that makes the client lots of money by pleasing their customers. One of the best things we can do as designers is making sure we have lots of informal presentations available to share with them that offers advice that keeps track of sustainable trends and key demographics.

What’s else can be done? 



Designers are under pressure from clients and need to design within their requirements. The more consumers are informed the more motivated brands are to make products that are sustainable. When buying petrol you’re not paying for the hidden cost it has on the planet. Environmental impact charges could be added to products to move peoples decisions towards more sustainable brands. The government can help by producing legislation requiring fura sustainability standards then everyone would just have to adhere to it as a minimum and increase the sustainable practices undertaken by designers.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p50

8.4 Interview with Professor of Sustainable Design and Consumption – 26/01/2021 The following is a partial transcript and key points made from the interview In a focus group, it was brought up that electronic brands have little association with their products being green. In fact they actively hide their efforts if any at all. Therefore consumers don’t have purchasing decisions other than performance and price. Who’s responsibility is it to help reduce e-waste?    

Responsibly in the law is that components have to follow the WEEE directive. Compony have a responsibility to manage their products at the end of life Manufactures have a responsibility to design products to last longer Consumers have a responsibility to be good citizens and not be wasteful and sensible in disposal of them

It is clear that consumers have a responsibility. What do you think can be done to help them change their electronic purchasing decisions towards being greener and reducing ewaste? 



Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) considers social and environmental implications of electronic purchasing. For example Africa using child laber in to dig minerals (Blood minerals). The WEE directive from the 1990 is out of date and needs to change. Product performance labelling are quite effective out of date but could be more. How long the product last for is going to have an impact of the environmental performance of a product. Where the energy efficiency is quite marginal. Make it clear with labels how long the product is designed to last. John Lewis will tell you on their labels how much it will cost in electricity used a year. Communicating ownership costs to the consumer makes it in their economic interest to do the right think because they aren’t going make decisions based on how waste full a product is. Amount of rare earth and recyclability of the product labels could be added. It’s a combination of relational laws to stop products being put on the market and signalling to the consumer to buy longer lasting higher quality products and buy fewer of them.

In an interview conducted with an industrial designer, it was stated that sustainability is often only implemented through the client’s request of reducing production costs. Techniques like removing paint finishes and gluing processes, and simplifying assembly by combining components and reducing material used are small ways of implementing sustainability. Do you think there is more the designer can do or are they always limited by the client?   

There usually is more the designer can do but they ultimately face constraints The designer same as all employees have to decide if they want to stay involved with an employer if their views on sustainability is different. They should think about moving on if their employer doesn’t meet their moral requirements.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p51

One way e-waste could be reduced is if companies provided a service instead of a product by taken if back after the technology is out of date or the use no longer wants it. Making companies remanufacture the materials and take responsibility for what they produce. Other ways include providing a repair or upgrade service. Are there any other ways a circular business could successfully be used to reduce e-waste?  

Take-back schemes have been around for years. The problem is that it’s a collective scheme rather an individual one. Modulated fees could be used to put an incentive in place for companies to pay more for certain types of products put on the market. So companies will find it more in their interest to design for longevity and recyclability.

Through my literature review, I have found that a lot of solutions end up back at the government acting first. To enforce what development decision brands make and help change consumer purchasing decisions. Do you think this is true and where do you think more effort should be put?  



I wrote a chapter for a book on Mobile phones in the circular economy for Oxford University Press Mobil Communications. Fair Phone produces phones that are more ethical (longer lasting, modular, recycled plastic…) but very hard for them to break out the small niche of people that want an environmentally friendly phone but also the entire culture of an annual changing model. But also they can’t make all their own components so have to buy in mainstream parts that are not designed for longevity. Governments are essential because small companies will try and do the right think but cant.

Brands like Apple are currently working with electronic recycling plants to help make it easier for their products to be recycled. However, progress is slow. Where could the least amount of effort be put in that could result in the biggest impact towards reducing ewaste?  

 

Some initiatives could be fairly easy to be implemented. Putting a guarantee on small appliances with a minimum lifespan of 5 years would be the first thing I do. To reduce the amount of waste you need to improve collection systems. While recycling plant are good now at separating out electronics they can’t do anymore as consumers are putting electronics in mixed waste to go to landfill. Get consumers to put products in the correct waste European economic and social committee on lifespan labeling 2016 Lifespan labeling – people will gravitate towards products that have reassurance of lasting longer

Through research it has been identified that brands don’t advertise consumer electronics as being green. Therefore consumers don’t factor the environmental impact into their purchasing decision. What can be done to help consumers consider this?   

We also need governments to make it mandatory to put a label on the product. But labels won’t be enough because not all consumers will go for it. There is an annual culture where companies work to product something new every year. Companies need to find new ways of encouraging consumers to be more responsible but also finding ways of capturing value. So offering repair services for example.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p52



How can companies make a profit if they produce fewer products? We need to be pro industry to help them do the right thing.

8.5 Interview consent forms

Information consent form

Project Title: E-waste, it’s consequences and what can be done about it

Approach? You have been selected to take part in the interview because of your professional experience. The interview is one-on-one in nature and will last approximately 30 minutes over Teams.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p53

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

43. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

44. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

45. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

46. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

47. I am over the age of 18.

48. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

Tom Shirley

Date

18.1.21

Signature T J

Shirley

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p54

Student’s name

Chris Barnes

Date

18/01/2021

Signature

Please read and confirm your consent to being interviewed for this project by ticking the appropriate boxes and signing and dating this form.

49. I confirm that the purpose of the project has been explained to me and I have been given information about it in writing. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about the project and these have been answered satisfactorily.

50. I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time until a week after the interview is conducted without giving any reason and without any negative implications.

51. I give permission for the interview to be audio recorded, and understand that the recording will be destroyed at the end of the project.

52. I waive my right to anonymity and wish for my name to be included in this study. I understand that quotations from my interview may be used in the student’s dissertation and that I will be identified by name.

53. I am over the age of 18.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p55

54. I agree to take part in this project.

Participant’s name

T.H.Cooper

Student’s name

Chris Barnes

Date

26.1.21

Signature

Date

Signature

26/01/2021

8.6 Process of analysis

Focus group Awareness of the environmental consequences of consumer e-waste Participants awareness of the environmental consequences of consumer e-waste was limited but agreed that the responsibility of reducing it wasn’t just on them the consumer, but shared between everyone and that the producer should do more. “I imagine it effects the environment but I couldn’t explicitly tell you how” Respondents that were, said it does not affect purchasing decisions or how they dispose of unwanted products. Suggesting that an increased consumer awareness will not affect their purchasing decisions. One argument suggested that it’s easier to shop more ethically when you have the money to do so.

What is done with unwanted electronics When asked about unwanted electronic product it was clear participants do more than just dispose of them. A more popular answer was around storage as participants

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p56

suggested they wanted to keep what was theirs. One respondent noted their concern about personal information: “I keep old phones because they contain personal data and photos, everything else I just bin.” The results of this analysis (see Table 1) show that behaviour around discarding and keeping unwanted electronics is more popular than other options, some environmentally friendly options were not even mentioned. It was also clear that the price of the product and disposable income played a factor in determining what was done. Table 1 What participants do with unwanted electronics

Headphones or earphones

Internet router box

Electric razor

Broken

Mobile device

Discarded

Computer webcam

Bluetooth or smart speaker

Device type

Got a newer better one or no longer compatible with the latest devices

Finished fulfilling its purpose

Kept

Donated

Other

Used as backup

Stored somewhere

Use at a social occasion where it doesn’t matter what happens to it

Given to family member

Put in communal space

Its requested its send back to the provider Sold for money towards the newest device

2 1 2 1

Boxes are highlighted grey to show what participants discussed they do with unwanted electronics. The number inside the box is how many participants agreed with that statement. Results from Table 1 show participants will actively try to stop certain products being disposed off but more so because of losing its perceived value than having a sentimental attachment.

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p57

“Everything gets put in a draw including old phones and old charging cables.” The results show a clear lack of knowledge amongst participants or motivation towards sustainability as electronic products are mostly disposed of by the first owner or if not eventually later down the line. It was noted that one respondent knows about where they can go for selling electronics or disposal of them: “Always sell my unwanted electronics to make some money towards buying a newer one.” This attitude might be because of the respondents financial circumstance or behaviour towards e-waste.

Preventions towards helping to reduce consumer e-waste Responses into what was stopping participants from doing more were very limited, suggesting there is a lack of knowledge in that area. All participants agreed that products are designed so they can’t be taken apart of fixed. One respondent stated he knew how to change the battery in a laptop but still agreed with the previous statement. Most responses included that they didn’t know where to go, and felt as if there is a lack of accessibility to facilities for recycling of electronics. When asked about what would help, the answers from their preventions where mostly rephrased like making products easier to repair and including a guide. Some felt they would become more motivated if made aware of the consequences and be willing to travel a reasonable distance to do so. However, others disagreed by saying it would require personal gain like cash-back or saying even then they wouldn’t. “If it became easier to donate my old electronics, I wouldn’t because I would still want to keep them as backups.” This shows consumers have little motive or persuasion to do anything other than disposing of their unwanted electronics.

Purchasing decisions made when buying new electronic products The environmental impact of an electronic was never a concern to the participants or thought about when making a purchasing decision. When asked what was considered when making purchasing decisions involving electronics respondents where only concerned about quality and price. “Only ever think about the quality and technology and if it’s the latest model.” After raising the point of environmental concerns, it was said that people assume there is nothing that can be done. One respondent made the point that they don’t even think about what they would do with it when they no longer want the product. “On electronics, you just assume there is nothing you can do.”

Environmental impact of consumer electronics

p58

“There is no association with technology being green or advertisement about it.” These points raised emphases how little of an association consumer electronics have with being environmentally friendly. Suggesting that it might be hard to do so or that brands could do more.

Willingness to adopt second-hand electronics When attendees were asked their opinions on adopting second-hand electronics their decisions made were mostly backed up with strong arguments. For example, a technology enthusiast in the group said they would always pre-order the latest phone. On the other end, participants suggested they would be willing to adopt a second-hand camera only based on the lowered price of an expensive brand. Participants were asked about their willingness to adopt second-hand electronics, however, this is different from actions actually taken. Table 2 Participants opinions on adopting second-hand electronics