4.7 Article

Success factors and barriers in re-use of electrical and electronic equipment

Journal

RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND RECYCLING
Volume 80, Issue -, Pages 21-31

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.07.009

Keywords

Re-use of electrical and electronic equipment; Re-use barriers; Re-use success factors; Re-use; WEEE

Funding

  1. StEP Initiative's Seed Funding programme

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper aims to identify specific and generic success factors and barriers in the re-use of electrical and electronic equipment for a variety of different operating models. The scope of the study is information and communication technologies (ICT) and large household appliances. Success factors and barriers for reuse were identified through the conducting of semi-structured interviews with 28 case study partners representing the different models. A list of generic success factors and barriers was identified. From this generic list, the re-use success factors and barriers were ranked by the interviewees with regards to their importance. On the one hand, the difficulty in accessing sufficient volumes of good quality used equipment and the lack of legislations, which support, incentivize and - if necessary - enforce this access, were identified as most impactful barriers. On the other hand, the control and securing of product and process quality were ranked as most important success factors. Re-use organisations, which adhere to good re-use practices, differentiate themselves through quality guarantee from non-compliant, informal competitors. Moreover, proven quality strengthens confidence in re-use of important stakeholders like suppliers, customers, authorities and the general public. Differences in reuse barriers and success factors were also explored for varying geographical regions, product category and operating models. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available