The Electronics Reuse Crisis: Why Working Devices Risk Becoming Waste Without the Right Data

An electronic device can power on, appear undamaged and still be impossible to certify for reuse. The obstacle may have little to do with its physical condition. Missing operating histories, inaccessible safety procedures and unavailable technical specifications can prevent recovery operators from establishing whether a product is suitable for another period of service.

This information deficit is examined in "Supporting Circular Economy Strategies in Electronics: Data Characterization for R-Strategy Decision Making," published in the journal Sustainability. Researchers Tugce Turkbay-Romano, Thecle Alix and Jean-Christophe Crebier investigate how incomplete product information affects decisions involving reuse, repair, refurbishment, remanufacturing, repurposing and recycling.

Using four end-of-use laptop power adapters, the researchers identify the information required at successive stages of product assessment. Their analysis reveals a pronounced imbalance: identification and regulatory information were generally obtainable, while operating histories, lifetime estimates, testing procedures and diagnostic records were frequently inaccessible. The resulting uncertainty prevented several formal assessments, despite encouraging observations about the adapters' physical condition.

Electronics recovery faces an information problem that recycling alone cannot solve

Global electronic waste generation reached 62 million tonnes in 2022, but only 22.3% was documented as formally collected and recycled. The research cites projections of 82 million tonnes annually by 2030, reflecting growing pressure on resource management and the systems responsible for handling discarded electrical and electronic equipment.

Recycling recovers materials, but circular economy strategies extend beyond material recovery. Products may retain value through continued use, repair or refurbishment, while components can potentially serve additional applications. Determining which option is appropriate requires evidence about technical condition, safety, market demand, remaining service life and the costs of intervention.

Information availability becomes particularly complicated after products leave manufacturers. Design specifications and identification records may remain accessible, whereas details about usage, previous repairs, operating conditions and maintenance can become fragmented across owners and service providers. Recovery organizations consequently face decisions involving products whose histories they cannot establish.

The researchers approach this problem by examining information requirements within a structured sequence of assessments. Rather than compiling a general inventory of useful product data, they identify the records and technical evidence needed for specific recovery decisions and examine the consequences when those requirements cannot be satisfied.

Their framework distinguishes mandatory information from data needed for reliable assessment and optional information that improves accuracy or context. Missing optional records may reduce detail, while the absence of mandatory evidence can leave an entire assessment unresolved. This distinction helps explain why seemingly minor documentation gaps can obstruct otherwise promising recovery options.

Four laptop adapters reveal how usable products become difficult to assess

The researchers examined four laptop power adapters collected from a research institute following periodic equipment replacement. The products represented different models and electrical specifications, making them suitable examples for examining identification, inspection, functional testing and recovery requirements.

Initial assessments produced encouraging observations. Product identities, model information, recall details and relevant market-entry requirements could be established. Comparable market information also enabled preliminary resale-value estimates, indicating that the earliest assessment activities were supported by accessible information.

The difficulties increased when evaluation required knowledge of previous operating conditions. Usage histories, maintenance records and information about potential faults were unavailable. Costs associated with implementing recovery strategies and expected sales duration were also missing, reducing confidence in economic assessments.

Estimating remaining useful life proved particularly problematic. Cumulative operating time, environmental exposure, operational parameters and service histories could not be obtained. Without adequate lifetime evidence, the researchers could not determine whether the adapters could reliably meet the service requirements of another use period.

Physical inspection created a different contrast. All four adapters were generally in good condition, with only minor scratches or stains observed. Their cables appeared sound, and each adapter powered on without observed abnormalities. Basic voltage measurements also indicated stable operation.

Those results were insufficient for formal reuse qualification. Standardized inspection guidance, manufacturer-specific acceptance criteria and detailed testing procedures were inaccessible. Safety testing could not be completed, while basic functional measurements fell short of the evidence needed to establish full compliance with technical requirements.

The researchers did not establish that the adapters were unsafe or unsuitable for reuse. They found that the required information was insufficient to make those determinations. Positive observations about appearance and basic operation could not replace formal technical and safety assessments.

Why repair decisions fail when technical knowledge cannot follow the product

Information barriers became more substantial when the researchers examined repair, refurbishment, remanufacturing and alternative recovery pathways. These activities require more detailed knowledge than preliminary identification or visual inspection, particularly when internal components must be examined or product performance restored.

Disassembly instructions, diagnostic documentation, safety guidance and fault-identification procedures were unavailable. Without these mandatory requirements, systematic diagnosis could not be completed, preventing the researchers from generating the evidence needed to evaluate repair-oriented interventions formally.

Recovery assessments also depend on whether an intervention can extend service life sufficiently to justify its implementation. Technical feasibility alone cannot establish an appropriate recovery option; expected lifetime gains, intervention effort, economic viability, market conditions and regulatory compliance must also be considered.

Repurposing presented comparable difficulties. Adapting equipment for another application requires technical specifications, evidence of market demand and applicable regulatory information. None of the necessary datasets could be obtained for the illustrative assessment, leaving suitability for alternative uses undetermined.

Component reuse remained similarly uncertain. Basic observations of cables and connectors were possible, but adequate information about component functionality, compatibility and intended applications was missing. Hence, the researchers could not establish whether individual parts met the requirements for subsequent use.

An additional finding concerns the location of product information. Literature-based evidence indicated that several technical datasets may be available to manufacturers even when recovery operators cannot retrieve them. Information can therefore exist within the product lifecycle without being accessible to the organization responsible for the next decision.

This separation between information availability and practical accessibility is central to the research. Some records may already exist but require better sharing arrangements, while other information must be generated through inspection, testing or monitoring. The appropriate response depends on the source and nature of the missing evidence.

Digital Product Passports need decision-ready information, not larger databases

The findings offer a more precise basis for developing Digital Product Passports, which are intended to improve product transparency and information exchange throughout product lifecycles. The European Union's Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation provides a regulatory framework for these systems.

The researchers caution against treating product passports as static repositories containing every conceivable dataset. Information requirements differ according to product characteristics, intended recovery strategies and the decisions being evaluated. A product's identification details may remain unchanged, while maintenance records, condition assessments and test results require periodic updates.

Manufacturers, service providers, users and recovery operators may each generate or maintain different records. Making those records useful requires interoperable systems, clear access arrangements and defined responsibilities for updating information. Commercial sensitivity, privacy, data quality and implementation costs further complicate information exchange.

Economic considerations also influence the appropriate level of documentation. Maintaining extensive operating histories for relatively low-value equipment may not always be justified. Higher-value, safety-critical or repair-intensive products may support more comprehensive information systems, particularly where monitoring and maintenance records already exist.

For manufacturers and recovery businesses, the proposed framework offers a method for prioritizing information according to its operational value. Governments and organizations developing circular economy information systems could similarly use decision-specific requirements to distinguish essential records from information offering supplementary benefits.

The analysis nevertheless remains illustrative rather than industrially validated. Four laptop adapters cannot establish how widely these information problems occur across electronics categories. The study also does not determine optimal recovery strategies, quantify potential waste reductions or assess the financial returns from improved information sharing.

More investigation is needed to distinguish information that never existed from records retained elsewhere or evidence that could be generated through additional testing. Larger product samples, expert evaluations and industrial applications could establish whether the framework performs consistently across different electronic products and recovery environments.

The researchers also identify opportunities to examine Digital Product Passports alongside connected monitoring, digital twins and product lifecycle management systems. Such investigations could clarify how changing product information can remain accurate and accessible as equipment moves between organizations and uses.