4.7 Review

Bibliometric analysis of studies involving e-waste: a critical review

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 28, Issue 35, Pages 47773-47784

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-15420-1

Keywords

Sustainability; Waste; E-waste; Electronic waste; Sustainable development; Recycling

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Research shows that electronic waste is highly toxic and has a rapid growth rate, emphasizing the need for more studies on environmentally friendly waste disposal. China, the USA, and India are the countries with the highest publication rate on this topic, whereas Brazil has a relatively low research output in this field.
The correct destination of waste is an essential factor for sustainable development. Electronic waste, which is very toxic, is the type of waste with the highest rate of increase in its generation. For these reasons, the amount of research on this topic increases year by year, as shown by the literature review carried out by this study. This review aims to identify the main characteristics and proposals of the main study on electronic waste and verify how Brazil is inserted globally in the research on e-waste. Another objective is to suggest a path for researchers who want to start research on e-waste by identifying the keywords most used in the analyzed articles. The results evidenced that the most published countries on the subject are China, the USA, and India. Brazil is in a position of little prominence concerning its research production on the subject. Most of the central studies we analyzed use case study and literature review as the research method. Among the 44 articles analyzed, only one proposed a destination for e-waste. It highlights the need for more research focusing on the environmentally correct destination of e-waste. A good way to start a search on electronic waste is to use the keywords identified in this study, especially those used most frequently in the analyzed articles.

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