E-WASTE MANAGEMENT

This book offers an extensive review of e-waste management in India, the world’s third-largest
producer of waste from electrical and electronic equipment.With a focus on the evolution of legal
frameworks in India and the world, it presents impacts and outcomes; challenges and opportunities;
and management strategies and practices to deal with e-waste. First of its kind, the book examines
relevant concepts and issues from across 15 disciplines and six areas of policy making and will
serve as a comprehensive knowledge base on electronic waste in India. It links key themes to the
global context of Sustainable Development Goals and explores the convergence with technologi-
cal, infrastructural, and social initiatives in e-waste management.
A range of topics are discussed, such as resource efficiency policies; circular economy; toxicity;
technicalities and complexities of e-waste management including role of the informal sector and
need for recognising social and human costs in policy making. The book deals with the role of
statistics; legal trends and reforms; linkages with green Agenda 2030 and UN initiatives; implemen-
tation of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR); environmental factors; business prospects; con-
sequences on human health; Life Cycle Impact Assessment; the ‘six Rs’ (Responsible use, Repair,
Refurbish, Recycle, Recover and Reuse); recycling practices and problems, material flow and
informal sector in trade value chain; fostering partnership between formal-informal sectors; safe
disposal; alternatives to landfilling; role of jurisprudence and regulatory bodies; and education and
awareness. It also includes a survey of pan-India initiatives and trajectories of law-driven initiatives
for effective e-waste management along with responses from industries and producers.
Timely and essential, this volume will be useful to scholars and researchers of environment
studies, digital waste management, waste management, development studies, public policy, politi-
cal ecology, sustainable development, technology and manufacturing, design and instrumentation,
environmental and international law, taxation, commerce, electronic industry, economics, business
management, metallurgy, and engineering, labour studies, as well as to policymakers, nongovern-
mental organisations, and interested general readers.

Varsha Bhagat-Ganguly is Professor at Institute of Law, Nirma University, Ahmedabad, India.

She has been Professor at Centre for Rural Studies, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of
Administration, Mussoorie, and Fellow at Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla. She has
worked in the education and development sector as a development sociologist and has conducted
research studies on various social and developmental issues. She focuses on linking field-based
and academic research with its versatile applications, including ground-up public policy regime,
strategic action plan for social change, and raising awareness and communication. Among her
publications are 15 books and 22 research articles/book chapters. She has been an editor of three
academic journals. Her areas of interest are research for development, land question, citizen’s rights
and collective actions, process of marginalisation and Gujarat.
E-WASTE
MANAGEMENT
Challenges and Opportunities
in India

Varsha Bhagat-Ganguly
First published 2022
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2022 Varsha Bhagat-Ganguly
The right of Varsha Bhagat-Ganguly to be identified as author of this work has
been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording or in any
information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the
publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered
trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent
to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A catalog record has been requested for this book
ISBN: 978-0-367-14724-2 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-0-367-24998-4 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-0-429-28542-4 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9780429285424
Typeset in Bembo
by SPi Technologies India Pvt Ltd (Straive)
To Hirak and Isha
CONTENTS

List of illustrations viii

Preface x
Acknowledgements xv
List of abbreviations xviii

Chapter 1 Sustainable development and e-waste management 1

Chapter 2 Extended producer responsibility: a mainstay for

e-waste management 49

Chapter 3 Toxicity and impacts on environment and

human health 68

Chapter 4 Treating e-waste, resource efficiency, and circular

economy 93

Chapter 5 E-waste management through legislations in India 108

Chapter 6 Strategies and initiatives for dealing with e-waste

in India 133

Chapter 7 Moving towards horizons 165

Bibliography 183
Index 199
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figures
1.1 Life cycle of an e-product 4
1.2 Hazardous and non-hazardous substances in e-products 5
1.3 Components of e-waste management 7
1.4 Tackling e-waste 31
1.5 E-waste generation in India (2005–2019) 36
1.6 Essentials of cohesive e-waste management thinking in India 38
1.7 E-waste flow and recycling scenario in India 40
3.1 Toxicity, environmental, and health impacts 69
3.2 Toxicity, EoL solution, and environmental concerns 71
3.3 Environmental mapping of a smart phone manufacturing 73
4.1 Recycling, resource efficiency, and circular economy 94
4.2 Linear economy model versus circular economy model 99
4.3 Recycling, circular economy, and improvement in environment 100
4.4 Number of recycling units in India (2010–2021) 104
6.1 Overview of pan-Indian initiatives for dealing with e-waste during
2000 and 2020 146
6.2 Policy issues for e-waste management before 2010 148
7.1 Way ahead for e-waste management in India 166

Tables
1.1 E-waste generation between 2013 and 2019 across the globe 3
1.2 E-waste quantities as per its categories – comparing 2016 and 2019 10
1.3 E-waste generation, collection, and recycling across regions –
comparing 2016 and 2019 data 10
 Illustrations ix

1.4 Environmental, health, and economic data from undocumented

flows of e-waste (2019) 13
1.5 Countries having legislation or policy for e-waste management (2019) 17
1.6 Overview of RoHS 1,2,3 22
1.7 Multi-lateral environmental agreements signed by different regions 25
1.8 UN initiatives to tackle e-waste across different regions during 2004
and 2017 34
2.1 An overview of EPR implementation under legislation/policy in
different countries 55
3.1 Emissions from primary production of metals used in a
personal computer 72
3.2 Comparison of use of energy and water consumption in
production of metals from e-waste and ores 72
3.3 Three tier treatment processes for recycling e-waste 76
3.4 Pollutants and their occurrence in WEEE, and impact on
human health 82
4.1 Constituents of e-waste 96
4.2 Metal recovered from 1,000 kg of PCBs and perception value
based on prevalent market rate (2009) 102
4.3 Comparative of recycling processes, recovery, and cost calculations 105
5.1 Overview of Indian regulations under which e-waste was managed 113
5.2 An overview of E-waste (Management) Rules, 2016 and Amendment
Rules, 2018 117
5.3 EPR as regulatory, enforcement, and awareness creation strategy
under the Rules, 2016 120
5.4 State’s initiatives for implementation of EPR for e-waste
management 122
5.5 Recycling facility in India as on 24 March 2021 123
5.6 CAG reporting performance of CPCB for e-waste
management (2015) 125

Boxes
1.1 SDGs and e-waste related targets and indicators 32
3.1 PCBs as a resource and as a hazardous object 76
3.2 Mapping health hazards of cell phones 81
PREFACE

The usual way of introducing the Indian electronic waste (e-waste) sector is through
three highlights: extent of e-waste generation and India ranking fifth in 2017 (rank-
ing third in 2020), the dominant presence of the informal sector across the value
chain (collection, dismantling, recycling, and resale of the recovered materials) of
e-waste, and rudimentary methods for recycling which are creating challenges of
environment and health hazards, and legal provisions that have created opportuni-
ties for scientific recycling and operationalising e-waste management in a formal
manner.There is a long way to go, as most Indians are not aware of the facts and the
dangers the hazards that e-waste can create. As a development sociologist, I under-
stood that the informal sector is inferred with its multiple connotations, including
cash economy, the units engaged in collection and recycling are not registered and
not covered under the existing law/s, consequently not complying on minimum
wages, not providing safe working environment, employment of child labour would
be rampant, unsafe way of recycling, and no accountability for throwing away the
residues, cash transactions between different actors engaged in these operations, and
so on. This means that the informal sector is either unaware of the consequences of
adverse impact on health and environment, or that there exists a wide gap between
the ‘desirables’ and the ‘doings’, on the counts of accountability, legal compliance,
subsidising costs of labour, human health, and environment, etc. between the gov-
ernment and these informal operations. I started understanding the contrasts at
every level, existing polarity in the discourse, i.e, dominant presence of informal
economy across the value chain of e-waste, and compromising on environment
protection, human health concerns versus the government’s need and urge for regu-
larisation of e-waste through regulations, and pushing it towards formal and circular
economy without recognising human and social costs. In between these two poles,
the following dimensions of e-waste are becoming linked sporadically, repeatedly,
such as, need for spreading awareness across consumers and enforcement of ‘E-waste
 Preface xi

Management Rules’, 2016; need for fostering informal and formal sector’s partner-
ships; policy dialogues with the concerned authorities in each state, especially the
regulatory bodies; understanding EPR and its non-effective implementation due to
‘leakage’ of e-waste, and how legal binding is counter-productive for e-waste man-
agement; and role of different stakeholders, and nitty-gritties of legal compliance.
While working with Urmul Trust as an ecosystem partner to the ‘E-waste
Management Program in India’, launched by International Finance Corporation
(IFC), and a producer responsibility organisation (PRO), Karo Sambhav Pvt. Ltd.,
in four states of western India for almost 20 months, I learnt about different macro-
miso-micro aspects, dimensions, processes linked to e-waste management. My aca-
demic and catalytic mind promoting people-centric policy and initiatives motivated
me to write about these experiences. Thus, this publication is a combination of
academic, entrepreneurial and policy pursuits that signals ground realities, and cap-
tures and communicates comprehensive discourse on e-waste management, shar-
ing technicalities and complexities of e-waste which require special attention in
its management, and spreading awareness among users – students, academics, and
researchers, policy makers at national and international levels, and conveying soli-
darity as a potential actor for the e-waste management.
Organising different aspects of e-waste has been a very challenging task, as it
combines at least 15 academic disciplines across the globe, and each disciplines
has created specific literature, they are: management; technology – instrumenta-
tion, complying with international standards, cost-effectiveness, and indigeneity;
medicine; toxicity and bio-chemistry/medical; design of an electronic product
(e-product); electronics/electronic engineering or computer engineering, that is,
selection of components – hazardous, non-hazardous and their assembly; environ-
ment engineering; chemical engineering; metallurgy; law – national and inter-
national legislations/regulations, treaties, covenants, bi-lateral or multi-lateral
agreements, etc; commerce – revenue and tax regime including advance fee, busi-
ness models, producer’s responsibilities and costs; public policy/administration;
circular economy (CE) and resource efficiency (RE) cutting across many sectors;
waste management; development studies; community development/labour studies/
civil society engagement; statistics; and international relations. Each discipline has
its specific knowledge pool and resources, which are overlapping and/or closely
linked with other disciplines. Due to these characteristics of e-waste, several points
are repetitively talked about, yet every person looks at from own academic dis-
cipline. For example, ‘recycling’ of e-waste is spread across ten disciplines, which
include toxicity; chemical engineering; technology; high-cost recycling infrastruc-
ture; recycling standards and REs; resource recovery and resale of recovered mate-
rials across the world; legal provisions/bindings across the nation and the world
for movement or sale of materials (especially metals – basic, precious, rare earths,
etc.) for e-products; use of water, energy, fossils, etc. during the production of an
e-product; impact on living being including humans, and environment; treatment
for the health problems or health care required; and protection measures – adhering
to landfilling standards (avoiding leaching), safety measures for the workers, and so
xii Preface

on.Therefore, ‘recycling’ as an end-of-life (EoL) solution appears across every chap-

ter, with specific reference to legal provisions, impact on health and environment,
CE, technological innovations, etc.
As multiple disciplines are linked to the e-waste and its management, each dis-
cipline highlights its view on e-waste but linking different disciplines with other is
challenging. I have consciously built bridges between different disciplines for evolv-
ing a picture of e-waste management thinking in India. For example, ‘sustainable
development’ remains a common concern for e-waste management. Historically,
environment protection has been a major concern for ‘sustainable development,’
which led to focus on ‘Design for Environment’ (DfE) aspects of e-waste, such as
use of materials, assembly and dismantling of the materials, life span, potential for
increasing life span through repair/refurbish, etc. as well as legal binding on move-
ments of e-waste within a country or to the other countries. The WEEE Directives
and Basel Convention are repeatedly referred to as part of e-waste management.
GHG emissions while treating e-waste contributing to global warming; contami-
nation of air, water and soil, etc; indiscriminate use of natural resources during
production of e-products; etc. are major concerns expressed for safe environment.
Along with legal/regulatory framework, Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
is considered to be a core part of ‘sustainable development,’ with a reference to ‘who
bears the cost for environment protection?’ and each country is expected to evolve
tax regime for the producer and the users for collection to disposal of e-waste in
environmentally sound manner. These are the reasons for the engagement of United
Nations (UN) and its different agencies (StEP Initiative, UNEMG, UNU, UNU-
ViE SCYCLE) in undertaking special programmes for e-waste management across
different regions, including standardising methods for creating harmonised statistics
on e-waste, Carbon emission, collection and recycling, and legal/regulatory frame-
work across the world; entered partnership with other international agencies; capac-
ity building measures; and linking e-waste to different Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) as part of the Agenda 2030. Similarly, the concepts of CE and REs
have become policy buzzwords and concepts for operationalisation across many
sectors in the context of waste management in general, specifically applicable to
e-waste, with inherent limitation of overlooking human and social costs.
With this overview of strategies, approaches for dealing with e-waste and key
concepts/terms, an outline of the chapters is shared here. Every chapter covers one
important aspect/theme of e-waste management, connecting aspects with other
chapters; each chapter has India-specific details in the context of a topic under dis-
cussion and global scenario. Thus, the entire book comprehensively covers different
aspects of e-waste management. Three chapters exclusively focus on India, they are:
on pan-India initiatives; legislative framework; and way forward sharing how the
law-driven initiatives have started rolling the ball, and has created several opportuni-
ties, and potential areas for further exploration for effective e-waste management.
The first chapter introduces the reader to the existing discourse on e-waste
and its management with its development of definition in the world, statistics
across the world, opportunities, and challenges that are articulated as part of legal/
 Preface xiii

regulatory framework, SDGs, CE, and LCIA (Life Cycle Impact Assessment) and
MFA (Material Flow Analysis) followed by introducing Indian scenario. Chapter 2
comprehensively discusses EPR as a concept, a strategy, a regulatory framework for
achieving specified goals across different countries; the Indian scenario is discussed
in detail in this chapter. Chapter 3 focuses on toxicity and its impacts on environ-
ment and human health. The recycling chain, three-tier treatment processes for
recycling e-waste, and technology are described to map recycling risks (release of
different toxins, extent of toxicity), linking with hazardous impact of e-waste on
human health described with types of pollutants and which pollutant affect which
part of human body, in which form are described. Chapter 4 is brief, focusing on
recycling-resource efficiency-CE themes in the context of resource use and sustain-
able development. Urban mining, informal sector operations and need for resource
use policy, financial support for recycling infrastructure building, etc. are discussed
in Indian context. Chapter 5 presents Indian policy regime and examines how – and
to what extent – different aspects of e-waste management have been incorporated
in the existing regulatory framework. After presenting historical deliberations on
e-waste as hazardous waste and legal framework, it discusses the E-waste Management
Rules, 2016 and the Amendment Rules 2018 in detail including assessing EPR as a
strategy and its enforcement, and role and performance of regulatory body. There
is a separate section on evolving jurisprudence on e-waste management, which
is in very nascent state, and towards the end, the chapter briefly compares Indian
legislation with international legislatures. Chapter 6 encompasses pan-Indian initia-
tives dealing with e-waste management in detail, ranging from building knowledge
base through research and social action by different stakeholders to technological
and legal advancements, and industrial initiatives. All these initiatives are organised
on time scale, in a manner, to capture every initiative in its context with its evo-
lutionary journey. Throughout the chapter, roles played by different Indian actors
– government agencies, industry actors, non-government agencies, research institu-
tions, and the judiciary – and how each one interacted with bi-lateral, multi-lateral
and international actors/agencies on individual or collective basis are mapped out.
The initiatives include measures awareness raising; educational initiatives; conduct-
ing research on various topics, such as, formal-informal partnership, gap analysis in
e-waste management based on multi-stakeholder views, etc; preparing roadmap for
the Agenda 2030; experimentation for REs and working out its economics as part
of CE and bringing in standardisation; and launching academic courses on e-waste
management. Chapter 7, being the last chapter, summarises the e-waste scenario,
opportunities and challenges around four domains: legal and judicial domain; eco-
nomic concerns; recycling culture/society; and environment concerns.
A few points on stylistics are shared here. As the existing vast, repetitive lit-
erature on e-waste covers different disciplines, bringing uniformity is necessary.
First, in most literature, names of the metals are written with chemical names and
in small letters; I have continued the same style here, by writing the name of the
metal, followed by its chemical name in parenthesis if required, for example, silver
(Ag). Second, sometimes, one report is cited in two ways, one with its author’s
xiv Preface

name another with its publisher’s name, for instance, ‘StEP Green Paper 2015’ and
‘McCann and Wittmann 2015’. In such cases, name/s of the authors are preferred
over the agency. Third, regarding references, original sources are cited rather using
‘quoted in’; only in cases where the original source is not accessible, the phrase
‘quoted in’ is used. This is one of the reasons that some sources are of 1980s and
1990s, especially related chemical methods used in recycling and toxicity, resource
recovery, etc. Use of such references also indicates that either the newer methods
and results are not developed or there is a possibility of repetitive use references are
in circulation, which is one of the characteristics of the literature related to e-waste.
Fourth, most tables and illustrations are prepared based on more than one sources,
and wherever it is based on one source, the material is revised or reorganised or
compiled rather than reproduced. All the legislations are presented in italics, e.g.,
E-waste Management Rules, 2016, and Environment Protection Act, 1986.
By covering e-waste management in India in its totality, from multiple perspec-
tives and academic disciplines, this book will serve as a guide to understanding
e-waste management and benefit everyone.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Anshul Ojha and Pranshu Singhal are the first to be acknowledged, having intro-
duced me to the e-waste sector and e-waste challenges in India. Both as e-waste
sector practitioners, Anshul exposed me to the entire value chain and human inter-
face at every stage, starting from the role of last mile collectors (LMCs) in e-waste
collection to the repair, refurbishing, recycling, and final disposal. As Pranshu is a
veteran practitioner of e-waste management, I could learn from and discuss industry
perspective with him, providing exposure to possible solutions, and vast opportu-
nities and potentials of e-waste management. This book was to be written with
Pranshu, a founder of a PRO – Karo Sambhav Pvt. Ltd. (‘Karo’ henceforth); how-
ever, he could not continue his journey as a co-author because of the exponential
growth of ‘Karo’ and adopting different ways of knowledge management. My sin-
cere gratitude to Anshul and Pranshu for being co-travellers all these days.
As a partner of the ecosystem created by the IFC and Karo under the ‘E-waste
Program in India’, I was exposed to several industry actors, practitioners, policy
makers, and practitioners, senior bureaucrats, media persons, and others. Each one
of them has been a co-traveller in knowledge-based advocacy, action, and policy
pursuit, and has contributed to my learning about e-waste management across the
globe and India-specific thinking and practices. Among them, I thank Mr Sanjit
Rodrigues who provided me an opportunity and support for understanding e-waste
scenario in Goa state, and for chalking out e-waste management plan.This exposure
has helped me tremendously in reflecting ground reality, linking them to technical
and technological solutions, and policy spaces. In the same spirit, I am thankful to
team members, late Arvind Ojha, late Ravi Mishra, Sudheer Pillai,Vipin Upadhyay,
Abhijit Sonavane, Shabbir and Dinesh Sharma for providing me exposure to ground
reality through different operations across e-waste sector.
Very special thanks to Dr Satish Sinha, Toxics Link, Ms. Rachna Arora, GIZ,
Mr Naresh Thakar, engineer (retired), Gujarat State Pollution Control Board and
xvi Acknowledgements

associated with Nisarg Community Science Centre, Gandhinagar; and Mr Devang

Thakar, engineer in charge for e-waste management, Gujarat State Pollution
Control Board for sharing their pioneering work experiences on e-waste man-
agement, provided necessary reading materials, discussed different policy points
of e-waste management, and recent initiatives on standardisation in e-waste sec-
tor. Along with seeking information about e-waste sector from them, I could gain
major insights, developed knowledge and policy pursuits and their operationalisa-
tions. Dr Satish Sinha went through the last chapter and abstracts of all the chapters
at the last minute, and we could together scan the entire manuscript from human,
institutional, and toxicity perspectives. The last-minute value additions could take
place with this interaction, and we sincerely hope that such changes in e-waste sec-
tor can take place with this spirit.These interactions make me humbler and grateful
to Satish Ji, Nareshbhai, Devangbhai, and all other who have contributed to the
process of academic deliberations and policy pursuits for efficient e-waste sector.
I have interviewed important industrial actors including Dr S Parthasarathy,
Managing Director of E-Parisaraa; Dr Sandip Chatterjee, Director, Ministry of
Electronics Information Technology (MeitY), Government of India; Ms. Wilma
Rodrigues, founder and member of SAAHAS Zero Waste; Ms. Smita Rajabali rep-
resenting Swachh, Pune; Mr Nivit Kumar Yadav, Down to Earth magazine, Centre
for Science and Environment, New Delhi; Ms Pallavi Joshi working with waste
aggregators in Maharashtra state; and Mr Bablu, Rongjeng Technologies working
for e-waste management in the north-eastern states of India. I am extremely thank-
ful to all of them for their interactions with me, sparing time for the interviews,
sharing their work experiences and chalking out policy points for dealing with
e-waste efficiently in India. Interactions with them have helped in building up a
complex jigsaw puzzle of e-waste sector and management in India, incorporating
global perspectives, processes, and practices.
Ms. Rejitha Nair, a law teacher, my friend and former colleague at Nirma
University, requires special thanks. She read the entire chapter on Indian legislative
initiatives and gave feedback. Discussions with her from a legal perspective – on
legal framework, jurisprudence, and linking legal provisions with the ground reality
– have been meaningful in building up the discourse on legislative driven imple-
mentation for e-waste management in India. Special thanks to Ms. Reena Banerjee
for her unconditional support in organising the manuscript, meticulous checking
and verification and ensuring flawless lists and boxes, figures, and tables, abbrevia-
tions, and more than 250 references. Managing such academically important yet
cumbersome, tedious tasks through a friend’s help is highly valued and I express
here my gratitude for the assistance received. Often, I used to feel overwhelmed
with multiple, technical facets of e-waste and its management, and spent sleepless
nights. I am grateful to many of my friends, relatives, and supporters for their cheers
and encouragement at every stage of this book, among them, Nirav Mahadevia,
Nupur, Rasila Kadia, and Shilpa Vasavada deserve special mention. The reviewer of
the book deserves special mention and thanks; based on the reviewer’s comments,
I reorganised the entire manuscript – the chapters, content of every chapter, added
 Acknowledgements xvii

special section presenting Indian scenario, and added comparisons between other
countries vis-à-vis India in the contexts of legislations, and strategies and actions
dealing with e-waste. I thank each and every one who has helped in completion of
this book, whether named or not named.
I wish to thank Ms. Shoma Choudhury, Ms. Rimina Mohapatra, and the team of
Routledge for their support for this book. Almost three years ago, when Shoma sug-
gested to submit a proposal for writing this book, e-waste as a sector was not much
explored by academics and policy makers. She could foresee the importance of this
book, and has been supportive throughout, at every stage of the publication process.
I cannot thank enough Hirak, my son, and Isha, my daughter-in-law, who have
supported me wholeheartedly in the completion of this book. It took almost 30
months to complete; more intensively during last 14 months (pandemic time). On
one hand, the lockdown and no socialisation provided special opportunity to work
on the book, but on the other hand, we as a family faced pandemic associated uncer-
tainties, additional burden of house chores, sleepless nights, etc. Both ensured my
intensive working on this book during this very challenging, testing time. Moreover,
Hirak, as a practicing lawyer, helped me extensively in identifying, organising legal
materials, and explaining every legal case on e-waste, difference between different
courts, and bearing of the judgement/order of the respective Court on the e-waste
management, and so on.
ABBREVIATIONS

Ag Silver
Al Aluminium
As Arsenic
Au Gold
ARF Advanced Recycling Fee
Ba Barium
BAT Best available technologies
Be Beryllium
Bi Bismuth
BAN Basel Action Network
BCRCSEA Basel Convention Regional Centre for South-East Asia
BER Brand Environmental Responsibility
BFR Brominated flame retardants
BIS Bureau for Indian Standards
BMZ German Ministry of Economic Co-operation and Development
Br Bromine
CAG Comptroller and Auditor General
CAGR Compound Annual Growth Rate
Cd Cadmium
CD Compact disc
CE Circular Economy
C&F Cooling and freezing
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CII Confederation of Indian Industries
Co Cobalt
CO2 Carbon dioxide
COP Conference of the parties
 Abbreviations xix

CPCB Central Pollution Control Board

CPR Collective Producer Responsibility
CPU Central Processing Unit
CRM Critical Raw Material
CRS Compulsory Registration Scheme
CRT Cathode Ray Tube
CSO Civil society organisation
Cu Copper
DFE Design for Environment
DGFT Directorate General of Foreign Trade
DPCC Delhi Pollution Control Committee
DRF Deposit Refund Scheme
DRS Deposit Refund Scheme
DVD Digital Versatile Disc
ECHA European Chemicals Agency
EEE Electrical and electronic equipment
ELCINA Electronic Industries Association of India
EMG Environment Management Group
EMPA Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research / Swiss
Federal Institute for Materials Science and Technology
ENVIS Enrichment of Environmental Information System
EOL End-of-life
EPA Environment Protection Agency, USA
EPR Extended Producer Responsibility
ESM Environmentally sound management
ESDM Electronics System Design and Manufacturing
EU European Union
EUR Euro
FDES Framework for the Development of Environment Statistics
Fe Iron
GEM Global E-waste Monitor
GESP Global E-waste Statistics Partnership
GHG Greenhouse gas
GIZ German International Co-operation
GOI Government of India
GPS Global positioning system
Hg Mercury
HS CODE Harmonised Trade System code
Ir Iridium
IT Information technology
JICA Japan International Co-operation Agency
IC Integrated Circuit
ICT Information and Communication Technology
ILO International Labour Organisation
xx Abbreviations

In Indium
IPR Individual Producer Responsibility
Ir Iridium
ISIC International Standard Industrial Classification
ISWA International Solid Waste Association
IT Information Technology
ITU International Telecommunication Union
Kg Kilogram
Kg/inh Kilogram per inhabitant
Kt Kiloton
LCIA Life Cycle Impact Assessment
LCD Liquid Crystal Display
LED Light Emitting Diode
LMC Last mile collector
LOW List of Wastes
MAIT Manufacturers Association of Information Technology
MEITY Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology
MEA Multi-lateral environmental agreement
MFA Material Flow Analysis
Mg Magnesium
MJ Megajoule
Mn Manganese
MPCB Maharashtra Pollution Control Board
MSTC Metal Scrap Trading Corporation
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
MT Metric ton
Mt Million Metric Tonne
NASSCOM National Association of Software and Services Companies
NEP National Environment Policy
NEAP National Electronics Action Plan
NGO Non-government organisation
Ni Nickel
NITI AAYOG National Institution for Transforming India
NSDC National Skill Development Corporation
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OEM Original equipment manufacturer
OSH Occupational safety and health
PACE Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy
PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Pb Lead
PBB Polybrominated biphenyls
PBDE Polybrominated diphenyl ethers
PC Personal computer
PCB Printed circuit boards
 Abbreviations xxi

PCB Polychlorinated biphenyls

PCC Pollution Control Committee
Pd Palladium
PGM Platinum Group Metals
PIAP Pan-India Awareness Programme
PIC Prior informed consent
PICT Pacific Island countries and territories
PIP Person in the Port
POP Persistent Organic Pollutant
PRO Produce Responsibility Organisation
Pt Platinum
PUM Put on market
PVC Poly vinyl chloride
PWB Printed wiring board
RE Resource Efficiency
REACH Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation, and Restrictions of Chemical
Substances
Rh Rhodium
ROHS Restriction of Hazardous Substance
Ru Ruthenium
SAICM Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management
Sb Antimony
SECO Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs
SCYCLE Sustainable Cycles
SCP Sustainable consumption and production
Se Selenium
SEEA System of Environmental-Economic Accounting
SCGJ Skill Council for Green Jobs
SME Small and Medium Enterprise
SNA System of National Accounts
Si Silicon
Sn Tin
SO2 Sulphur dioxide
SR Strontium
STEP Solving the E-waste Problem
SVHC Substances of Very High Concern
TBBPA Tetrabromobisphenol A
Te Tellurium
TGEW Task Group on Measuring E-Waste
TV Television
UK United Kingdom
UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
UNEMG United Nations Environment Management Group
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
xxii Abbreviations

UNSD United Nations Statistics Division

ULB Urban Local Body
UNU United Nations University
UPPCB Uttar Pradesh State Pollution Control Board
US-EPA United States Environment Protection Agency
USD United States Dollar
VCSS Voluntary consensus sustainability standards
WEEE Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
WEF World Economic Forum
1
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND
E-WASTE MANAGEMENT

Tackling particular e-waste issues often requires the consideration of a wide

range of perspectives, including interactions with labour, health, environment,
logistics, management practices, regulations, chemicals, consumer preferences
and cultures etc… In considering these perspectives when tackling e-waste,
the strengthening of collaboration and partnerships among UN entities and
other stakeholders, may be an important step forwards in addition to the shar-
ing of knowledge, data and information, expertise and monetary resources.
United Nations Environment Management Group (2017: 42)

Importance of electrical and electronic equipment in a nation's

development, and e-waste as toxic companion of digital era
A country’s development or any modern society is often epitomised with the com-
munication revolution of 1980s and the digital revolution since the 1990s. The
communication revolution has brought enormous changes in the way we organise
our lives, our economies, industries, and institutions. The revolution is observed
in form of development, comfort, technological advancement and ever-increasing
sale of these products. The digital technology facilitates transformation of informa-
tion, communication, transportation, energy supply, health, and security systems,
making a country more productive and developed. This technology is proliferated
with different electrical and electronics equipment (EEE) or e-products, such as
PCs, the Internet, Satellite TV, standardised containers, fibre-optic cables, electronic
barcodes, and global supply chains, making human lives more convenient and work
more efficient (Steger and Roy 2010; Parajuly et al. 2019). A broad range of goods
is classified as EEE, which include large and small household appliances (consumer
appliances) such as refrigerator, washing machine, air conditioner, microwave oven,
DOI: 10.4324/9780429285424-1
2 Sustainable development

etc; information technology (IT) equipment including computers, computer games

and peripherals; cellular telephones and other telecommunication equipment; por-
table electronic devices such as, video and audio equipment and their peripherals;
and electrical tools.
E-waste (electronic waste) as the fastest growing waste stream is now recognised
as ‘tsunami’ by the United Nations (UN). E-waste is also described as ‘the toxic
companion of digital era; one cannot escape it in the present gadget loving age’
(Haldar 2020). The rapid growth of technology, upgradation of technical innova-
tions, and a high rate of obsolescence in the electronics industry have led to one
of the fastest growing waste streams in the world, which focuses on the Life Cycle
Impact Assessment (LCIA) as well as end-of-life (EoL) solutions. In the waste man-
agement parlance, optimal and efficient use of natural resources, minimisation of
wastes, development of cleaner products, environmentally sustainable recycling, and
disposal in environmentally friendly manner of wastes are some of the issues which
need to be addressed by all concerned while ensuring the economic growth and
enhancing the quality of life (LARRDIS 2011: 2). In addition to this, it is hoped
that better e-waste data eventually contributes to cohesive, effective e-waste man-
agement. Statistical database is looked upon as a useful tool in expanding discourse
on e-waste management; along with toxicity, improvement in environment and
human health, legislative and extended producer responsibility (EPR) related ini-
tiatives, statistics added newer dimensions of resource efficiency, circular economy,
livelihood opportunities or job creation, right to repair and so on.
In Global E-waste Monitors (GEM) 2017, 44.7 Mt e-waste described as equivalent
to 4,500 Eiffel Towers (Baldé et al. 2017: 4). The PACE and WEF report (2019: 9)
describes that about 50 million tonnes of e-waste is produced every year, which is
equivalent to the mass of 125,000 Jumbo Jet aircrafts. If London’s Heathrow Airport
has to clean this amount of e-waste, it would take up to six months to clear that
many aircraft from its runways. If you find that difficult to envisage, then try the
mass of Jets, jam them all in one space, side by side and they would cover an area the
size of Manhattan city, USA (United States of America).
The latest, GEM 2020, informed that in 2019, the world generated 53.6 million
metric tonnes1 (Mt) (7.3 kg/inh2), of this, 17.4% was officially documented as prop-
erly collected and recycled. In 2016, the world generated 44.7 million metric tonnes
(Mt) e-waste or an equivalent of 6.1 kilogram per inhabitant (kg/inh) annually; in
2014, 41.8 Mt/5.8 kg/inh e-waste was generated. As against total e-waste genera-
tion increased by 9.2 Mt, addition of 1.8 Mt in collection and recycled is observed
since 2014. This indicates that the recycling activities are not keeping pace with the
global growth of e-waste (Forti et al. 2020). Safe and sustainable disposal of e-prod-
uct as e-waste in the context of generation and recycling is also a major concern, as
‘only 35% of this waste is recycled, while the remaining 65% is exported, illegally
recycled, or simply thrown into common landfills’ (Pont et al. 2019: 2). ‘Globally,
volumes of e-waste are estimated to be increasing by approximately 3 to 5% annu-
ally since the 1990s and it continues to grow three times faster than municipal solid
waste.’ (Ledwaba and Sosibo 2017: 2) (Table 1.1)
 Sustainable development 3

TABLE 1.1 E-waste generation between 2013 and 2019 across the globe

E-waste related details

No. of country
having national
Intrinsic value of legislation (% of
Year of e-waste Generated in Formally secondary materials world population
No. data, source Mt (kg/inh) treateda (%) estimated covered)
1. 2013 41.8 Mt 6.5 Mt Approx. 48 61
(GEM 2014) (5.8 kg/inh) (15.5%) billion EUR (44%)
2. 2016 44.7 Mt 8.9 Mt Approx. 55 67
(GEM 2017) (6.1 kg/inh) (approx. billion EUR (66%)
20%)
3. 2019 53.6 Mt 9.3 Mt Approx. 57 78
(GEM 2020) (7.3 kg/inh) (17.4%) billion USD (71%)
(48 billion
EUR)

Source: Baldé et al. (2015); Baldé et al. (2017); Forti et al. (2020). Compiled by the author.
aThe ‘formally’ connotes activities usually fall under the requirements of national e-waste legislation/

regulation/policy. E-waste is collected by designated organisations, producers and/or the government;

e-waste is treated by designated/authorised recyclers.

It is important to know that the generation of e-waste and its ‘distribution is

uneven: richer countries produce more. Norway, for example, produces 28.5 kg
per person per year, compared to an average of less than 2 kg in African countries’
(Parajuly et al. 2019: 8). Also, that although the GEMs (2014, 2017, 2020) provide
e-waste generation and estimate of intrinsic value of secondary materials recovered
from the e-waste generated, they do not provide statistics on production of EEE and
their contribution to nation’s development or development index of a nation. This
is the intrinsic limitation of the e-waste statistics.

I: Let's understand e-waste

Every electrical and electronic product (e-product) has stipulated life. Once any
e-product reaches its end of its useful life, it becomes e-waste. Before any e-product
reaches EoL or stops functioning or a new technology makes the e-product obso-
lete, however, the e-product could be repaired or refurbished. The lifespan of any
e-product could be increased with repair and refurbishing,3 and could be brought
to reuse (Figure 1.1).
Among varied definitions of e-waste, the following are the most accepted: ‘An
e-product becomes EEE waste (e-waste) when its owner discards the whole prod-
uct or its parts without an intention to reuse it’ (Miliute-Plepiene and Youhanan
2019: 5); and ‘anything with a plug, electric cord or battery (including EEE) that has
reached the end of its life, as well as the components that make up these end-of-life
4 Sustainable development

Raw material input

End-of-life /
Production Sales Consumption t
Treatment Disposal
Generation

Resale/ Repair,
Refurbish Landfill
Reuse

FIGURE 1.1 Life cycle of an e-product

products’ (PACE and WEF 2019: 7). Broadly, e-waste means any EEE, whole or in
part discarded as waste by the consumer or bulk consumer as well as rejects from
manufacturing, refurbishment, and repair processes (Bhardwaj 2016: 1). Based on
lifespan, usability of the product, and obsoleteness of the technology, the waste has
been defined. International Labour Organisation (ILO) (2019a: 2) opined, ‘the term
“e-waste” itself can be misleading since it overlooks the inherent value of the dis-
carded products’. The terms WEEE (waste EEE) and e-scrap are used interchange-
ably for e-waste in the existing literature including legal frameworks. E-waste is a
casual name for electronic waste generated after helpful life of e-products.
WEEE is different from any other waste (solid, liquid, bio-medical, and construc-
tion waste) on two counts: first, e-waste contains hazardous waste, thus, is considered
as a toxic waste stream.Toxicity of hazardous substance get leached to soil and water
and contaminate,4 which can cause serious environmental and health problems;5
and improper management of e-waste contributes to global warming.6 Second,
WEEE is a complex waste flow in terms of variety of products, composed of differ-
ent materials and components, contents in hazardous substances and growth pattern.
Any e-product is a complex composition of different elements (valuable and haz-
ardous); though the largest part of them by weight is represented by metals and plas-
tics, the materials used in e-products can be classified into four main groups: metals,
rare earth elements,7 plastics and other petroleum-based materials, and minerals and
non-metallic materials8 (Miliute-Plepiene and Youhanan 2019: 7).Therefore, proper
treatment of e-waste (mainly EoL solution / dismantling / recycling) and its discard
are stressed upon, to prevent its adverse effects on the environment and human
health on one hand while resource recovery and reuse on the other (Figure 1.2).
E-waste contains several toxic additives or hazardous substances, such as, hazard-
ous (highly toxic), and non-hazardous; both types have potential negative envi-
ronmental impacts. Hazardous substances are – Beryllium (Be), Cadmium (Cd),
Chromium (Cr), Lead (Pb), Mercury (Hg), Brominated Flame Retardants (BFRs),
Chlorofluorocarbon (CFCs), Hydro chlorofluorocarbon (HCFCs), PVC (Poly Vinyl
Chloride) and phosphorus compounds. Many organic pollutants such as polyaro-
matic hydrocarbons (PAHs), Poly Chlorinated Biphenyl, BFRs, Poly Brominated
 Sustainable development 5

Beryllium (Be), Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr), Lead (Pb),

Hazardous
Mercury (Hg), Brominated Flame Retardants (BFRs),
substances
Chlorofluorocarbon, PVC (Poly Vinyl Chloride), phosphorus
compounds, and many more

Non-hazardous Base metals and precious metals (Copper, Selenium, Zinc,

substance and Gold, Silver, and Platinum respectively)

FIGURE 1.2 Hazardous and non-hazardous substances in e-products

Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs), and polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin furans (PCDD/

Fs)) are released into the environment during improper e-waste processing (Awasthi
et al. 2016: 259). A total of 50 tonne of mercury and 71 kt (kilo tonne) of BFR
plastics are found in globally undocumented flows of e-waste annually, which is
largely released into the environment and impacts the health of the exposed work-
ers (Forti et al. 2020). Non-hazardous substances are base metals (Copper, Selenium,
and Zinc) and precious metals (Gold, Silver and Platinum).
Safe environment and health concerns are closely linked to preventing contamina-
tion of air, soil and water, harming micro-organisms, disrupting ecosystems and enter-
ing food chains though complex bio-accumulation mechanisms. Thus, other than
proper disposal by the users, treatment, and management of WEEE in environmen-
tally sound manner (ESM) is stressed upon. The ESM refers to scientific methods for
resource recovery, doing away from largely prevalent rudimentary methods of recy-
cling of e-waste, such as, acid bath, open burning of wires and cables, etc. and manual
scrapping/dismantling to certain extent. Different care aspects against improper recy-
cling and disposal processes used for treating e-waste pose serious threats to human
health (failure of organs, diseases, and adverse impact on skin and other parts of human
body), and environment in order to prevent health hazards are critical.
Every government aims at optimal and efficient use of natural resources, mini-
misation of waste, development of products having longer life and lesser use of
hazardous substances, and environmentally sustainable recycling, and disposal system
of waste are some of the issues which need to be addressed by all concerned while
ensuring the economic growth and enhancing the quality of life, as part of e-waste
management (LARRDIS 2011). Usually, the municipal solid waste (MSW) manage-
ment considers the framework of 3Rs – reduce, reuse, recycle; its recycling is associ-
ated with energy generation and other by-products related benefits. E-waste requires
additional considerations in this existing framework of waste management, mainly
because of presence of hazardous substances, metals, glass, plastics and other elements.
Deriving from other wastes management strategy (‘waste management hierar-
chy’),9 e-waste management has started recognising need for adding three more Rs
(repair, refurbish, resource recovery) to the existing 3Rs framework (reuse, recy-
cling, and recovery) for waste management, making 6R framework for e-waste
6 Sustainable development

management. Pont et al. (2019: 18) has suggested another model focusing on
e-product users/consumers, by adding 3Rs, that is, release (spread the information,
awareness), realise (know the importance of e-waste management), and responsibil-
ity (assume your role in 3Rs framework plus recycling and resource recovery). The
components of recycling and resource recovery in e-waste management are seen as
a process of ‘problem to resources’, bringing circular economy (CE) and resource
efficiency (RE) to centre-stage along with safe environment and human health.The
CE and RE are associated with social and economic benefits including job creation,
investment in technology development and infrastructure building.

E-waste management thinking across the globe

The ILO (2019a: 2) sets the tone by narrating approaches to e-waste, as follow:

Since the 1990s, discussion of e-waste has focused on actual and potential
environmental damage; on major risks to human health, workers and com-
munities; and on the flows of e-waste from developed to developing coun-
tries. Past policy recommendations have focused overwhelmingly on the
introduction of environmental legislation and regulation. However, there is
growing recognition that enterprises, employers, workers, cooperatives and
other social and solidarity organizations, as well as ministries of labour or
employment, and labour market policies all have a key role to play in advanc-
ing decent work in the management of e-waste.

In the existing literature, mostly, the need for ‘e-waste management’ arises referring
to its regulation and treatment, along with e-waste definition, classification, gen-
eration, and its flow with a policy/regulatory framework/legislation is the general
trend. Until 2010, e-waste was closely associated with safe environment and human
health through legislation or its management under the EPR as a strategy, adopting
waste management framework. In the last five years or so, this thinking has added
two more aspects: first, the consumer is the purchaser of electronics as well as the
generator of e-waste; and second, in the digital era, e-products are epitome of devel-
opment, efficiency, and comfort and transforming entire production and market
system of various products as well as activities in various sectors, such as, education,
healthcare, entertainment and so on.Therefore, consumption of electronic gadgets is
likely to increase multiple folds, and in turn increase in e-waste generation. Higher
rates of e-waste generation are caused by shorter life cycles of e-products, and fewer
repair options. Thus, introducing resource recovery, REs and CE link with recy-
cling/treating e-waste. Spreading awareness among users of e-products, user roles
in minimising e-waste, and contribution to tax regime/fees for recycling also have
become the agenda of e-waste management.
The dominant discourse on governance of e-waste includes increasing e-waste
collection and recycling; generating and harmonising statistics on e-waste across the
world; existing regulatory/legislative framework, expansion of legal net and legal
 Sustainable development 7

Prevent
impacts on
environment,
Increase health
lifespan Regulation
through on reduce
Repair, RoHS, safe
Refurbish, treatment
Reuse
E-waste
management
Affordable Producer,
technology Design,
for RE, EPR, Business,
strengthen fee for
CE Users' disposal
awareness,
responsibility
for safe
disposal

FIGURE 1.3 Components of e-waste management

compliance; urban mining; economic potentials – resource recovery and reduc-

ing use of virgin materials; and protecting health of workers exposed to hazard-
ous e-waste in improper working conditions; adhering environmental concerns.
Different components of e-waste management thinking are presented in Figure 1.3.
To be more accommodative and able to incorporate the evolving ideas and practices
regarding e-waste, the term is used, ‘e-waste management thinking’.

Evolution of legal definitions of e-waste

Until 2007, there was no globally accepted standard definition of e-waste, though
a few countries had developed their own definitions, interpretations and usage
of the term “e-waste/WEEE”. With evolution of legal frameworks, e-waste has
been defined based on its characteristics, such as use of hazardous elements, chemi-
cals, and organic persistent pollution; and therefore, transboundary movements of
e-waste have been under vigil through regulations.
Internationally, three sets of legislation/regulatory frameworks exist mainly for
management of e-waste: (i) EU (European Union) legislations applicable to EU
countries, such as Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive10 and WEEE
Directive11 – and a regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction
of Chemicals (REACH) (Registration, Evaluation, and Authorisation of Chemical
Substances);12 (ii) multi-lateral environmental agreements including The Basel
Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their
Disposal13 (henceforth Basel Convention), Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed
Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade
(1998), and Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (2001); and (iii)
Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). Of these,
WEEE Directives, RoHS Directive and the Basel Convention are frequently referred
8 Sustainable development

regulatory frameworks. As names of the regulations suggest, they aim to regulate

hazardous substances, chemicals and transboundary movements of the e-waste.
At first, definition of WEEE has been described as per the WEEE Directives and
the Basel Convention as mentioned by Inventory Assessment Manual by UNEP (2007:
12). The Manual describes definition under the WEEE Directive along with ten
categories of WEEE and items covered under the categories as follow:

(2002/96/EC) The definition of e-waste as per the WEEE Directive

“Electrical or electronic equipment which is waste including all compo-
nents, subassemblies and consumables, which are part of the product at the
time of discarding.”
The Directive 75/442/EEC, Article 1(a) defines “waste” as “any substance
or object which the holder disposes of or is required to dispose of pursuant to
the provisions of national law in force.”
(a) ‘electrical and electronic equipment’ or ‘EEE’ means equipment which
is dependent on electrical currents or electromagnetic fields in order to work
properly and equipment for the generation, transfer and measurement of such
current and fields falling under the categories set out in Annex IA to Direc-
tive 2002/96/EC (WEEE) and designed for use with a voltage rating not ex-
ceeding 1,000 volts for alternating current and 1,500 volts for direct current.
(UNEP 2007: 13)

The Basel Convention covers all discarded/disposed materials that possess hazard-
ous characteristics as well as all wastes considered hazardous on a national basis. The
Annex VIII refers to e-waste, which is considered hazardous under Art. 1, para. 1(a)
of the Convention (UNEP 2007: 21). The Article 2 (“Definitions”) of the Basel
Convention, defines waste as “substances or objects, which are disposed of or are
intended to be disposed of or are required to be disposed of by the provision of
national law” (quoted in Forti et al. 2020: 17).The waste ‘…includes all components,
subassemblies and consumables, which are part of the product at the time of discard-
ing.’ It further clarifies that ‘national provisions concerning the definition of waste
may differ, and the same material that is regarded as waste in one country may be
non-waste in another country.’ (op. cit.)
The Solving the E-waste Problem (StEP) initiative14 in its White Paper (UNU/
StEP 2014: 4) establishes importance of definition of e-waste, mentioning that

There is global inconsistency in the understanding and application of the

term “e-waste” in both legislation and everyday use. This has resulted in
many definitions contained within e-waste regulations, policies and guide-
lines…To provide a foundation to support the definition of e-waste, it is
necessary to first define electrical and electronic equipment (EEE).The StEP
definition of EEE is: “Any household or business item with circuitry or elec-
trical components with power or battery supply…”The term “e-waste” itself
is self-explanatory, in the sense that it is an abbreviation of “electronic waste.”
 Sustainable development 9

A key part of the definition is the word “waste” and what it logically implies
–that the item has no further use and is rejected as useless or excess to the
owner in its current condition.

The definition of e-waste that has been agreed by StEP is:

‘E-Waste is a term used to cover items of all types of electrical and electronic
equipment (EEE) and its parts that have been discarded by the owner as waste
without the intention of reuse.’

Three terms are explained as part of the definition in StEP White Paper (2014: 5):

As there is no room for regional variance or preference in a global definition;

the fact that the item in question meets the definition “with circuitry or elec-
trical components with power or battery supply” qualifies it for inclusion.
The inclusion of “parts” within the definition refers to parts that have been
removed from EEE by disassembly and are electrical or electronic in nature…
The use of the term “discarded” meaning to throw away or get rid of as use-
less. The term implies that the item in question is considered excess or waste
by the owner. It is the critical point at which the potential nature of the item
changes from a useful product to that of waste.

The StEP Paper (2014: 6–7) defines reuse,15 preparation for reuse,16 recycle,17 and
disposal;18 also continue to explain perception of e-waste by the owner and sub-
jectivity in the definition, ‘the point at which EEE becomes e-waste: when it is
discarded as waste by the owner without the intention of reuse.’ This is the most
elaborated, inclusive definition of e-waste, developed by StEP in 2014.
The concept of e-waste or e-scrap has evolved from different types of devices
and their classification as per the WEEE Directive19 (enforced in the EU states),
and the recast of the WEEE Directive from 15 August 2018. The recast of the WEEE
Directive comprise of six categories of e-waste were evolved; at present these cat-
egories are followed in the GEMs – 2014, 2017 and 2020.They are: (i) temperature
exchange equipment; (ii) screens and monitors; (iii) lamps; (iv) large equipment; (v)
small equipment; and (vi) small IT and telecommunication equipment (Forti et al.
2020: 14–15).

II: E-waste statistics: quantities, collection and recycling

The GEM published by the UNU (United Nations University) in 2014, 2017 and
2020 are the most important documents that capture e-waste statistics from all
the countries across the world since 2009 and considered to be the only authentic
source for quantity of e-waste.20 At present, 54 EEE product categories are grouped
into six general categories that correspond closely to their waste management cat-
egories (Forti et al. 2020: 18–19).21 Based on these categories, e-waste generation,
10 Sustainable development

collection, recycling, intrinsic value, number of countries having e-waste legisla-

tions, etc. statistics are generated and harmonised across the world.

E-waste categories and harmonising statistics

In 2016, global e-waste volume was collected from 190 countries, and in 2019, from
193 countries. The Table 1.2 provides and overview on e-waste quantities, recycling
and flow in each region, also describing the trends and characteristics of each region
in dealing with e-waste.
The highest amount of e-waste comprises small equipment followed by large
equipment, temperature exchange equipment. The lamps are the smallest portion
among the e-waste.
Table 1.3 presents data on e-waste generated (in Mt and in kg/inh) and formally
collected and recycled, comparing across five regions in 2016 and 2019.

TABLE 1.2 E-waste quantities as per its categories – comparing 2016 and 2019

Amount of e-waste (in Mt)

Quantity
E-waste category 2016 2019 change (%)
Small equipment 16.8 17.4 +4
Large equipment 9.1 13.1 +4
Temperature exchange equipment 7.6 10.8 +7
Screens and monitors 6.6 6.7 −1
Lamps 0.7 0.9 +4
Small IT and telecommunication equipment 3.9 4.7 +2
Total 44.7 53.6
Source: Baldé et al. (2017), Forti et al. (2020). Compiled by the author.

TABLE 1.3 E-waste generation, collection and recycling across regions – comparing 2016
and 2019 data

Total e-waste Total e-waste Documented e-waste – to be

generated (in Mt) generated kg/inh collected, recycled (in Mt) (in %)
Continent / No. of
region countries 2016 2019 2016 2019 2016 (in %) 2019 (in %)
Africa 53 2.2 2.9 1.9 2.5 0.004 (0.0) 0.03 (0.9)
Americas 34 11.3 13.1 11.6 13.3 1.9 (17.0) 1.2 (9.4)
Asia 46 18.2 24.9 4.2 5.6 2.7 (15.0) 2.9 (11.7)
Europe 39 12.3 12 16.6 16.2 4.3 (35.0) 5.1 (42.5)
Oceania 12 0.7 0.7 17.3 16.1 0.04 (6.0) 0.06 (8.8)
Total 184 44.7 53.6 8.944 (73.0) 9.29 (83.3)

Source: Baldé et al. (2017), Forti et al. (2020: 25). Compiled by the author.
 Sustainable development 11

The comparison between the data of 2016 and 2019 across the regions reveals
the following: there is an increase in e-waste generation across in Africa, Americas,
and Asia regions while Europe reported minor drop, and Oceania reported status
quo (reduction in per capita e-waste). As against e-waste generation, Americas and
Asia observed drop in formal collection and recycling. The significant increase in
Asia matches with China producing maximum 10,129 kt (10.2 Mt) e-waste. Based
on these statistics, Europe’s performance is better compared to the others – drop in
e-waste generation along with per capita and increase (7.5%) in formal recycling. As
against e-waste generated, collection rate is much lower; absence of legislation and
influential presence of informal sector are two reasons given repeatedly by various
observers.
The GEM 2020 reported that despite the relatively high environmental aware-
ness in the EU), e-waste is still disposed of in residual waste, and the small e-waste
ends up in residual waste bins. This comprises approximately 0.6 Mt of the EU’s
e-waste (Forti et al. 2020: 77). Central Asia reported most e-waste being landfills
or illegal dumping sites. PACE and WEF (2019: 9) shared, ‘Of this total amount, 40
million tonnes of e-waste are discarded in landfill, 21 burned or illegally traded and
treated in a substandard way every year.’
The difference of e-waste generated in developed versus developing countries is
quite large. The richest country in the world in 2016 generated an average of 19.6
kg/inhabitant, whereas the poorest generated only 0.6 kg/inhabitant (MeitY &
NITI Aayog 2019: 29).

Africa region
Total 2.9 Mt e-waste was generated in Africa in 2019, which is 5% of total e-waste
generated in the world. This data is collected from 53 countries with 1.2 billion
population: among them, Egypt (0.58 Mt), Nigeria (0.46 Mt) and South Africa
(0.41 Mt).The highest e-waste generation per inhabitant is Southern African coun-
tries with 6.9 kg/inh. South Africa, Morocco, Egypt, Namibia and Rwanda have
some facilities in place for e-waste recycling, but those co-exist with the existence
of a large informal sector. Nigeria, Ghana and Kenya are reliant on informal recy-
cling. Of 53 countries, 13 countries have a national legislation, regulation or policy
in place (Forti et al. 2020: 71).

Americas (north and south) region

In Americas, total e-waste generation was 13.1 Mt in 2019, which is almost 25%
of total e-waste generated in the world. Of this, almost half of it is generated by
America (6.9 Mt), 20.9 kg/inh in North America followed by Brazil (2.1 Mt);
Jamaica is the least e-waste generating country with 18 kt. A total of 1.2 Mt is
documented to be collected and recycled, mostly coming from North America.The
geographical distribution and e-waste management characteristics are very different
12 Sustainable development

across the continent. Of 34 countries, 10 countries have a national legislation/

regulation/policy in place.

Asia region
In Asia, the total e-waste generation was 24.9 Mt (5.6 kg/inh) from 46 countries
with 4.45 billion population in 2019, its proportion is almost 40% of the e-waste
generated in the world. Three countries generating the highest e-waste in Asia
are: China (10.1 Mt), India (3.2 Mt, Japan (2.6 Mt), and Indonesia (1.6 Mt) while
Kyrgyzstan produces the least (10 kt). Western Asia generates 2.6 Mt (9.6 kg/inh)
e-waste. Of 46 countries, 17 countries have a national legislation, regulation or
policy in place.
The sub-region includes both high-income countries, such as, Qatar and Kuwait
while 6% of e-waste is reported to be collected and recycled, mainly by Turkey,
negligible from Cyprus and Israel (Baldé et al. 2017: 70).
The Regional E-waste Monitor: East and Southeast Asia provided country profiles,
which throws lights on extent of e-waste generated:

e-waste arising found in Hong Kong of 21.7 kg/capita in 2015, followed by

Singapore (19.95 kg/capita) and Taiwan, Province of China (19.13 kg/capita).
Of the countries studied for this report, Cambodia (1.10 kg/capita),Vietnam
(1.34 kg/capita) and the Philippines (1.35 kg/capita) had the lowest e-waste
arising per capita in 2015.
(Honda et al. 2016: 59)

Europe region
In Europe, the total e-waste generation was 12.0 Mt from 39 countries with 0.74
billion population in 2019, its proportion is little more than one-fourth of the total
e-waste generated in the world. Total 5.1 Mt (42.5%) documented to be collected
and recycled e-waste. Germany generated 1.6 Mt the highest quantity of e-waste in
Europe, followed by Great Britain (1.6 Mt), and Italy (1.0 Mt). Europe, Switzerland,
Norway and Sweden show the most advanced e-waste management practices across
the globe. However, other countries are still catching up with Northern Europe,
whose collection rate is 59% and western Europe with 54%, are the highest in the
world. Of 39 countries, 37 countries have a national legislation, regulation or policy
in place (Forti et al. 2020: 76).

Oceania region
In Oceania, the total e-waste generation was 0.7 Mt from 13 countries with popula-
tion of 0.042 billion in 2019. The collection rate is 6%; consequently 0.06 Mt was
documented to collected and recycled. The top country with the highest e-waste
 Sustainable development 13

generation in absolute quantities is Australia (0.55 Mt, 21.3 kg/inh) followed by

New Zealand with 96 kt. Of 12 countries, one country has a national legislation,
regulation or policy in place (Forti et al. 2020: 78).
The Australian government implemented its National Television and Computer
Recycling Scheme in 2011. Official data shows that only 7.5% of the e-waste gener-
ated in Australia is documented to be collected and recycled while in New Zealand
and the rest of Oceania, the official collection rate is nil. The e-waste is now mostly
landfilled. Across the Pacific Island countries, e-waste management practices are
predominantly informal. The Pacific Island sub-region, consisting of 22 countries
and territories (PICTs) faces unique challenges due to their geographical spread
regarding e-waste collection and recycling (Baldé et al. 2017: 76).
The GEM 2020 provided environmental and health concerns/data from undoc-
umented flows of e-waste (e.g. potential release of GHG emission, amount mercury,
and amount of BFRs), and economic concern / data (e.g. value of raw materials in
e-waste). Table 1.4 presents these details across different regions.22
The data from undocumented flows of e-wastes revealed substantial emission of
CO2 and BFRs, and deposition of mercury. The link between emission of CO2 and
global warming leading to climate change is well-established. Mercury is persistent
and bio-accumulative in the environment and retained in organisms. Most of the
mercury found in the environment is inorganic mercury, primarily entering the
environment through emissions to the air from several sources.
The GEM 2020 has presented a list of suggestion, which are purely curative
waste management aspects (collection and recycling), such as, implementation of
EPR, strengthen monitoring for legal compliance, creating favourable investment
conditions for recyclers, incentivising informal sector to give away e-waste to for-
mal recyclers, evolving financing models (upfront fee by the producers, making
consumers responsible for disposal of e-waste, and adopting market share approach
for financing operational costs), and so on.

TABLE 1.4 Environmental, health, and economic data from undocumented flows of
e-waste (2019)
Economic concern/ data
Environment concerns/data from undocumented flows of from undocumented
e-waste flows of e-waste

Continent / Potential release of GHG Amount of Amount of Value of raw materials

region emissions (in Mt CO2) mercury (in kt) BFR (in kt) (in billion USD)
Africa 9.4 0.01 5.6 3.2
Americas 26.3 0.01 18.0 14.2
Asia 60.8 0.04 35.3 26.4
Europe 12.7 0.01 11.4 12.9
Oceania 1.0 0.001 1.1 0.7
Total 110.2 0.091 71.4 57.4

Source: Forti et al. (2020: 70–76). Compiled by the author.

14 Sustainable development

The occupational health and conditions of workers, especially children that are
getting exposed to hazards of e-waste have been reported by the GEM 2020. The
associations between exposure to informal e-waste recycling and health problems,
such as, adverse birth outcomes (stillbirth, premature birth, lower gestational age,
lower birth weight and length, and lower APGAR scores), increased or decreased
growth, altered neurodevelopment, adverse learning and behavioural outcomes,
immune system function, lung function and DNA damage, changes in gene expres-
sion, cardiovascular regulatory changes, rapid onset of blood coagulation, hearing
loss, and olfactory memory are reported (Forti et al. 2020: 65).
GHG emissions, contribution of e-waste to global warming, contamination of
air, water and soil are major concerns expressed for safe environment. The prevalent
scenario has become a part of discourse on e-waste management across the globe.

E-waste flow and data on transboundary movements

Transboundary movement is considered to be a way of dumping waste / e-waste
from one country to another. Lundgren (2012) has provided examples to show
substantial internal and regional trade; e-waste is shipped from developed to devel-
oping countries is not always true. For example, in 2001, Africa exported most of
its e-waste to Korea and Spain, and since 2006, the growth in global trade overall
has been primarily in two areas: in internal markets, and in Asia becoming the
dominant recipient of global exports. ‘E-waste recycling operations have been iden-
tified in several locations in China and India. Less-investigated locations are in the
Philippines, Nigeria (in the city of Lagos), Pakistan (Karachi) and Ghana (Accra)’
(Lundgren 2012: 14). The issue of transboundary movement is closely linked with
shipping of e-waste to developing countries where rudimentary techniques are
often used to extract materials and components. ‘Global trading of electronics and
substandard recycling in developing countries has led to environmental catastrophes
in places like Guiyu, China and Agbogbloshie, Ghana, to name two examples’ (Baldé
et al. 2015: 4).
The following statistics show gradual decrease in transboundary movement of
e-waste, for ten years; that is, 2002 to 2012. During the period 2004 to 2006, over
10 million tonnes of export per year was reported, with an increase of 15% in 2006
compared with 2004. This is mainly due to changes in wastes defined as hazardous
wastes according to Article 1.1.b of the Basel Convention. Transboundary move-
ments of hazardous wastes as defined under Article 1.1.a of the Convention show an
increase of only 4% in the same period. Transboundary movements of ‘other wastes’
are decreasing (Wielenga 2010: 12).
Based on a case study of ‘person-in-the port’ project in Nigeria in 2015–2016,
Baldé et al. (2017: 45) provides data on transboundary movements:

Around 71,000 tonnes of WEEE were imported annually into Nigeria

through the two main ports in Lagos. WEEE imported in containers, with
and without vehicles, contributed around 18,300 tonnes of WEEE per year
 Sustainable development 15

with 52% imported in containers with vehicles. In total, most imported

WEEE originated from ports in Germany (around 20%) followed by the UK
(around 19.5%), and Belgium (around 9.4%). The Netherlands (8.2%) and
Spain (7.35%), followed by China and the USA (7.33% each), are next in the
ranking of main exporters, followed by Ireland (6.2%). Overall, these eight
countries account for around 85% of WEEE imports into Nigeria. EU mem-
ber states were the origin of around 77% of WEEE imported into Nigeria.

In 2012, EU exported 0.09 Mt was exported for reuse out of 1.5 Mt e-waste of
screens; 0.03 Mt was exported for reuse out of approximately 1.4 Mt of e-waste
cooling and freezing equipment (Baldé et al. 2016: 10).23
In 2010 in USA, approximately 258.2 million units (equivalent to approximately
1.6 Mt) of used electronics (computers, monitors, TVs and mobile phones) were
generated; of which 171.4 million units (0.9 million tonnes) were collected, and
14.4 million units (0.027 million tonnes) used electronic products were exported to
the developed and developing countries) (Duan et al. 2013: 10–11). Mobile phones
dominate generation, collection and export on a unit basis, but TVs and monitors
dominate on a weight basis. Regarding flow, Latin America and the Caribbean is a
common destination for products, along with North America. Asia represents the
next largest destination. Africa is the least common destination (Duan et al. 2013:
12–13).
The ILO report (Lundgren 2012: 14–17) has described important observations
about transboundary movements of e-waste; wherein four aspects or phenom-
ena are described: (i) illegal trade which has intensified corporate, or ‘white collar’
crime; (ii) use of ‘second hand goods’ label – to disguise mislabel containers and mix
waste with legitimate consignment, and lack of reliable data on illegal waste activ-
ity; (iii) recent emergent field of ‘green criminology’ – e-waste trade as an example,
which poses environmental risk and expected to be compliant to regulatory norms,
though not criminalised as such; and (iv) security implications – more research is
needed in order to find out more about the networks behind the illegal export that
is taking place.

Creating and updating statistics, datasets: opportunities and

challenges
An overview of the existing statistics reveals that macro level data have begun to
emerge and throw light on different aspects and trends of e-waste management,
namely, standard definition of e-waste, quantity of e-waste generated and treated,
methodology, flow of e-waste including transboundary movements, and initiatives
towards achieving 2030 Development Agenda.
Three GEMs (2014, 2017 and 2020) at the regular interval of three years is con-
sidered to be trendsetting and promising initiative for statistics and exploring exist-
ing e-waste scenario. Advantages and disadvantages of every method are elaborated,
challenges of creating and updating data are also articulated – gaps are identified,
16 Sustainable development

processes that lead to misinformation or wrong labelling and misleading data (espe-
cially on transboundary movements) are identified – are avenues to improve upon.
The GEM 2020 has begun build up to data on three important aspects of e-waste
management – CE, toxicity and impact on children and workers. More information
on different aspects of environment and human health could be built up further,
either through national registry or micro studies, for example, on extent of toxicity,
types of toxicity, every aspect of environment (energy in LCIA approach to e-waste,
fossil use, carbon prints, contamination of air, soil and water). As more countries are
adopting e-waste legislation/regulatory policy, it is important to provide data that
facilitate the complexities of decision-making, for example, whether to treat e-waste
domestically or through export, issues that are of environmental, political, economic
and ethical nature and how to address them by legal framework.

III: An overview on status of e-waste related legislation across the

globe
Most legislative instruments aim at resource recovery through recycling and focus
on countermeasures against environmental pollution, and adverse impacts on human
health, at the EoL of products. The reduction of e-waste volumes and substantive
repair and reuse of EEE has been limited so far (Forti et al. 2020: 52).
The laws and policies concerning the proper management of electronic devices
are continuing to evolve in different parts of the globe. The legislation does not
imply complete legal compliance, as in many countries, policies are non-legally
binding strategies, but only programmatic ones (Forti et al. 2020). The legisla-
tion largely focusses on regulating guidelines for collection, reuse and recycling of
e-waste, except New York city of USA which has introduced landfill bans of scrap.
Other initiatives include setting up take-back channel, initiating programmes for
collection and recycling and appointing private companies for recycling (Baldé et
al. 2017: 60), or regulating e-waste through a directive or administrative regulation.
The following table presents law related information in different regions of the
world (Table 1.5).
In 2014, 61 countries were covered by legislation/ regulation/policy with 44%
of world’s population; in 2017, 67 countries were covered by legislation/policy/
regulation with 66% of world’s population; and in 2019, 78 countries were covered
by legislation/policy/regulation with 71% of the world’s population (Forti et al.
2020: 26). Less than half of the countries (78 out of 193) in the world covered by
e-waste legislation, regulation or policy framework; this is an increase by 5% from
66% in 2017. This also means that 11 countries (including the state of Alabama in
the USA, Argentina, Cameroon, Nigeria, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Zambia) enacted
legislation or introduced policy/regulation on e-waste in last three years; and more
countries may be in the process of enacting legislation or policy to tackle e-waste.
EPR is a common feature in these legislations in most countries; much more
responsibility is put on producers to deal more effectively with the e-waste and
e-products they produce. Chapter 2 discusses EPR in detail. Producers are tasked
TABLE 1.5 Countries having legislation or policy for e-waste management (2019)

Continent / Name of country where the legislation in existence, year Legislation underway / % of population covered by
region absent legislation per sub-region

Africa Madagascar (2015), Kenya (2016), Ghana (2016), Uganda, Rwanda, Cameroon, Nigeria, South Eastern 33
Africa, Zambia, Middle 7
Western 33
Northern 21
Southern 6
North United States Environment Protection Agency has taken some generic measures – Electronics USA – Ohio, and North 39 (including
America Action Plan in 2005; Sustainable Materials Management (SMM); managing domestic e-waste Massachusetts Caribbean)
through the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; regulations for recycling CRTs; and Canada – states have Central 18
the National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship framework. USA, state & provincial laws local regulation
Puerto Rico and DC (consumer take-back law); New York City has banned landfill. except the Yukon
Alabama and Nunavut
South South / Latin America – Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico Brazil, Panama and Approx. 43
America and Peru. California, Massachusetts, Maine and Minnesota states have imposed regulation on Uruguay
design, manufacture, reuse, recovery, disposal of e-waste
Asia China (2007), India (2011 onward), Japan, South Korea,Vietnam (2015), Cambodia (2016), Eastern 36
Singapore, Taiwan, Sri Lanka Central 0.7
South-eastern 15
Southern 42

Sustainable development 17
Western 6
Europe The EU enacted RoHS and WEEE Directive (2003), REACH (2007). Moldova Eastern 39
Balkan sub-region – Albania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Macedonia, Northern 14
Serbia, and Slovenia are covered. UK national law has adopted WEEE Directive in 2006 Southern 21
Western 26
Oceania Australia (2011) New Zealand Australia, New
Zealand – 75
Melanesia, Micronesia
& Polynesia – 25

Source: This table is compiled by the author based on data available from Baldé et al. (2017: 48); LARRDIS (2011: 87–90); Ram Mohan et al. (2019: 176–181); Patil and
Ramakrishna (2020: 6–8); and Forti et al. (2020: 105–116).
18 Sustainable development

with extensive reporting and monitoring procedures to demonstrate compliance

with the regulation. The waste hierarchy has been extended and prioritised as pre-
vention, reuse, recycle, recovery and, as a last resort, disposal of waste.
Of 78 countries having legislation to regulate e-waste management, more than
half reported dominant presence of the informal sector; i.e. from collection to recy-
cling of e-waste. In many countries, government control of e-waste sector is mini-
mal, and infrastructure for recycling is non-existent or grossly mixed; overall the
informal sector is dominant in collection, refurbishing and repairing e-waste.
Regarding recycling and legislation, Patil and Ramakrishna (2020: 2–5) observed
that, as there is no uniformity in e-waste legislation across all the countries, it is dif-
ficult to monitor e-waste recycling on a global scale. Eastern European countries
(Russia, Ukraine, and Moldova) are not as advanced as EU countries; in Poland,
Czech Republic, Hungary and Bulgaria, e-waste collection and recycling are mainly
led by the private sector. In North America, e-waste is well managed by the govern-
ment. The California Electronic Waste Recycling Act, 2003 shifts financial burden
of recycling on consumer since 2005. Asian continent represents a mix of countries
at different stages of economic development.The economic condition of the coun-
tries influences their domestic e-waste production and management. In East-Asia,
the official collection rate is close to 25% but in Central and South Asia, it is still nil
(informal sector). China levies penalty on non-compliance of the administration of
e-waste. Overall, not many countries reported more than 25% of e-waste collection
and recycling across the world.
In the case of Africa, particularly western Africa (e.g. Ghana and Nigeria) as
a dumping yard destination for e-waste from various regions of the world is dis-
cussed in the context of legal framework, and two concerns are highlighted: first,
illegal import of e-waste, and second, recycling activities carried out in informal
basis and the residues are landfilled, impacting the health of recycling workers and
local environment. If both practices are properly regulated and managed, recycling
e-waste can help to develop local economies and reduce poverty (Baldé et al.
2015: 38).

Relevance of international legislative frameworks across the

globe: trends and challenges
Internationally, mainly three sets of legislation/regulatory frameworks exist for
management of e-waste: (i) EU) legislations applicable to EU countries; (ii) multi-
lateral environmental agreements; and (iii) SAICM.

(i) EU legislations applicable to EU countries

The legislations / treaties founded by the EU are applicable to EU and its member
states. The European Parliament is the only body in the EU to which EU citizens
directly elect members to represent them. The Parliament has a term of office for
five years; with the Council of the European Union, both are the main legisla-
tors of the EU. The treaties instruct domestic courts that priority is given to EU
References
Agarwal, Arpit . 2016. ‘E-waste management in India: New rules, old problems’. Sustainability
outlook, April 29. Retrieved from http://www.sustainabilityoutlook.in/content/e-waste-
management-india-new-rules-old-problems-756361 accessed on 4 July 2020 .
Agarwal, Richa , and Arupendra Nath Mullick . 2014. E-waste management in India – The
corporate imperative. Mumbai: YES Bank Ltd. and New Delhi: TERI-BCSD (Business Council
for Sustainable Development). Retrieved from
http://cbs.teriin.org/pdf/researchreports/EWasteManagementReport.pdf accessed on 23 April
2020 .
Ali, Lafir , and Y.C. Chan . 2008. ‘Impact of RoHS/WEEE- on effective recycling- electronics
system integration’. 2008 2nd Electronics System integration Technology Conference. DOI:
10.1109/estc.2008.4684403.
Anand, Kumar . 2019. ‘Implementation experience of current Indian legislation – E-waste
(Management) Rules, 2016’. Presented at Electronic Waste Policy Awareness Workshop. New
Delhi: Central Pollution Control Board. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Regional-
Presence/AsiaPacific/SiteAssets/Pages/Events/2019/Policy-awareness-workshop-on-E-
waste/27-11-
2019%20Implementation%20experience%20of%20current%20%20Indian%20Legislation.pdf
accessed on 28 April 2020 .
Arora, Rachna , Ulrike Killguss , Ashish Chaturvedi , and David Rochat . 2019b. ‘Wither e-waste
in India – the Indo-Germen-Swiss initiative’. In Johri Rakesh (ed.). E-Waste: Implications,
regulations, and management in India and current global best practices (pp. 69–87). New Delhi:
TERI press (second reprint).
Arora, Rachna , Katharina Paterok , Abhijit Banerjee , and Manjeet Singh Saluja . 2017.
‘Potential and relevance of urban mining in the context of sustainable cities’. IIMB Management
Review, xx: 1–15. DOI: 10.1016/j.iimb.2017.06.001.
Arora, Rachna , Reva Prakash , Pranav Sinha , and Gautam Mehra . 2019a. ‘Resource
efficiency and circular economy paradigms towards e-waste management’. In Neeta Mishra ,
Sarina Bolla , and Kalyan Bhaskar (eds.). E-waste roadmap 2030 for India: A compilation of
thought pieces by sector experts (pp. 68–73), Delhi: IFC and Karo Sambhav Pvt. Ltd.
ASSOCHAM-cKinetics . 2017. ‘Electronic waste management in India’. Associated Chambers of
Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM). Retrieved from
https://www.assocham.org/newsdetail.php?id=5725 accessed on 8 August 2019 .
ASSOCHAM-NEC . 4 June 2018a. ‘India among the top five countries in e-waste generation:
ASSOCHAM-NEC study’. Retrieved from https://www.assocham.org/newsdetail.php?id=6850
accessed on 4 September 2019 .
ASSOCHAM-NEC . 2018b. Electricals and electronics manufacturing in India. Retrieved from
https://in.nec.com/en_IN/pdf/ElectricalsandElectronicsManufacturinginIndia2018.pdf accessed
on 6 July 2020 .
Awasthi, Abhishek Kumar , Xianlai Zeng , and Jinhui Li . 2016. ‘Environmental pollution of
electronic waste in India: A critical review’. Environmental Pollution, 211: 259–270.
DOI:10.1016/j.envpol.2015.11.027.
Babu, Balakrishnan Ramesh , Anand Kuber Parande , and Chiya Ahmed Basha . 2007.
‘Electrical and electronics waste: A global environment problem’. Waste Management
Research, 25: 307–318. DOI: 10.1177/0734242X07076941.
Baldé, C.P. , V. Forti , V. Gray , R. Kuehr , and P. Stegmann . 2017. The global e-waste
monitor: Quantities, flows, and resources. United Nations University-Institute for the Advanced
Study of Sustainability. Retrieved from https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Climate-
Change/Documents/GEM%202017/Global-E-waste%20Monitor%202017%20.pdf accessed on
20 November 2018 .
Baldé, C.P. , F. Wang , and R. Kuehr , 2016. Transboundary movements of used and waste
electronic and electrical equipment. United Nations University, Vice Rectorate in Europe –
Sustainable Cycles Programme (SCYCLE). Bonn, Germany. Retrieved from http://www.step-
initiative.org/files/_documents/other_publications/UNU-Transboundary-Movement-of-Used-
EEE.pdf accessed on 9 April 2020 .
Baldé, C.P. , F. Wang , R. Kuehr , and J. Huisman . 2015. The global e-waste monitor – 2014.
Bonn, Germany: United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE. Retrieved from
https://i.unu.edu/media/unu.edu/news/52624/UNU-1stGlobal-E-Waste-Monitor-2014-small.pdf
accessed on 20 November 2018 .
Bastein, Ton , Elsbeth Roelofs , Elmer Rietveld , and Alwin Hoogendoorn . 2013. Opportunities
for circular economy in the Netherlands. Netherlands: TNO Innovation for life. Retrieved from
https://www.tno.nl/media/8551/tno-circular-economy-for-ienm.pdf accessed on 21 June 2020 .
Basu, Shubhankar . 2019. ‘E-waste generation, mitigation, and a case study, Delhi’. In Johri
Rakesh (ed.). E-Waste: Implications, regulations, and management in India and current global
best practices (pp. 45–68), New Delhi: TERI press (second reprint).
Berners-Lee, Mike . 2010. ‘What’s the carbon footprint of…using a mobile phone?’. The
Guardian, 9 June. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-
blog/2010/jun/09/carbon-footprint-mobile-phone accessed on 10 August 2020 .
Bharadwaj Rai, Shruti . 2016. ‘Extended producer responsibility in e-waste perspective: Indian
perspective’. International Workshop on Extended Producer Responsibility in India:
Opportunities, challenges and lessons from international experience, May 12–13, 2016.
Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/environment/waste/Session_1-EPR-in-E-waste-
management-Indian-Prospective-Shruti_Rai.pdf accessed on 20 November 2018 .
Bhaskar, Kalyan . 2019. ‘E-waste management and business in India – What Lied ahead?:
Colloquium – E-waste management in India: Issues and strategies’. VIKALPA, 44(3): 154–157.
DOI: 10.1177/0256090919880655.
Bhaskar, Kalyan , and Ram Mohan Turaga . 2017. ‘India’s e-waste rules and their impact on e-
waste management practices: A case study’. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 22(4): 930–942.
DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12619.
Bhat, Viraja , and Yogesh Patil . 2014. ‘E-waste consciousness and disposal practices among
residents of Pune city’. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 133(2014): 491–498.
DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.216.
Borthakur, Anwesha , and Madhav Govind . 2017. ‘How well are we managing E-waste in India:
Evidences from the city of Bangalore’. Energy, Ecology, and Environment, 2(4): 225–235. DOI:
10.1007/s40974-017-0060-0.
Brandl, H. , R. Bosshard , and M. Wegmann . 2001. ‘Computer-munching microbes: Metal
leaching from electronic scrap by bacteria and fungi’. Hydrometallurgy, 59(2): 319–326. DOI:
10.1016/S0304-386X(00)00188-2.
Brigden, Kevin . 2008. Waste recycling and disposal sites in Accra and Korfuridua, Ghana.
Amsterdam: Greenpeace Research Laboratories, Technical note 10/2008.
Brigden, K. , I. Labunska , D. Santillo , and M. Allsopp . 2005. ‘Recycling of electronic wastes in
China and India’. Work Place & Environmental Contamination, pp. 1–56. Amsterdam:
Greenpeace. Retrieved from https://www.greenpeace.to/publications/chemical-contamination-
at-e-wa.pdf accessed on 23 February 2020 .
Buchert, Matthias , Andreas Manhart , Daniel Bleher , and Detlef Pingel . 2012. Recycling
critical raw materials from waste electronic equipment. Freiburg, Germany: Öeko-Institute.
Retrieved from https://www.oeko.de/oekodoc/1375/2012-010-en.pdf accessed on 12 May 2020
.
CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) . 2015. ‘Chapter 7, Ministry of Environment and
Forests, Compliance Scientific department report’. Report no. 30 of 2015. New Delhi:
Government of India. Retrieved from
https://cag.gov.in/sites/default/files/audit_report_files/Union_Compliance_Scientific_Departmen
_Report_30_2015_chap_7.pdf accessed on 23 July 2020 .
Cao, Jian , Bo Lu , Yangyang Chen , Xuemei Zhang , Guangshu Zhai , Gengui Zhou , Boxin
Jiang , and Jerald L. Schnoor . 2016. ‘Extended producer responsibility system in China
improves e-waste recycling: Government policies, enterprise, and public awareness’. Renew
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62: 882–894. DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.078.
CENELEC . 2017. European standards for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE):
Collection, transport, re-use, treatment. Brussels: CENELEC. Retrieved from
https://www.cencenelec.eu/news/publications/publications/weee-brochure.pdf accessed on 23
June 2020 .
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) . 2004. Report of the national workshop on Electronic
Waste Management. Retrieved from https://www.mpcb.gov.in/sites/default/files/electronic-
waste/related-documents/archives/weee.pdf accessed on 10 July 2020 .
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) . 2016. Implementation guidelines for E-waste
(Management) Rules, 2016. New Delhi: Government of India. Retrieved from
http://www.wbpcb.gov.in/writereaddata/files/GUIDELINES_E%20WASTE_RULES_2016.pdf
accessed on 17 November 2017 .
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) . 2019. List of authorised e-waste dismantler /recycler
as on 27.06.2019. Retrieved from http://greene.gov.in/wp-
content/uploads/2019/09/2019091881.pdf accessed on 28 April 2020 .
Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) . 2014. Strengthen institutions, reform laws and
streamline processes. New Delhi: Centre for Science and Environment. Retrieved from
http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/strengthen-institutions-reform-laws-and-
streamline-processes_0.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2020 ).
Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) . 2015. Recommendations to address the issue of
informal sector involved in e-waste handling: Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh. New Delhi: Centre for
Science and Environment. Retrieved from https://cdn.downtoearth.org.in/pdf/moradabad%20-e-
waste.pdf accessed on 26 May 2020 .
Chatterjee, S. , and Krishna Kumar . 2009. ‘Effective electronic waste management and
recycling process involving formal and non-formal sectors’. International Journal of Physical
Sciences, 4(13): 893–905. Retrieved from
https://academicjournals.org/article/article1380705620_Chatterjee%20and%20Kumar.pdf
accessed on 25 May 2020 .
Chatterjee, Sandip , and Priyanka Porwal . 2019. ‘Awareness about electronic waste in India’. In
Neeta Mishra , Sarina Bolla , and Kalyan Bhaskar (eds.). E-waste roadmap 2030 for India: A
compilation of thought pieces by sector experts (pp. 58–63). Delhi: IFC and Karo Sambhav Pvt.
Ltd.
Chaturvedi, Ashish , Rachna Arora , and Sharon Ahmad . 2010. ‘Mainstreaming the informal
sector in e-waste management’. Paper presented for Workshop on Urban, Industrial and
Hospital Waste Management on 7–8 May 2010 . Ahmedabad: Saket Projects and Gujarat
Pollution Control Board. Retrieved from
http://nswai.com/docs/Mainstreaming%20the%20Informal%20Sector%20in%20E-
Waste%20Management%20(1).pdf accessed on 25 June 2020 .
Chaturvedi, Ashish , and Jay Kumar Gaurav . 2016. ‘E-waste management in India: Key issues
and recommendations’, paper presented at symposium on E-waste to no waste, Mumbai:
Bombay Chamber of Commerce & Industry. Retrieved from
http://bombaychamber.com/admin/uploaded/Reference%20Material/Paper%20on%20E-
Waste%20Management%20in%20India.pdf accessed on 4 May 2020 .
Chaturvedi, Ashish , Gautam Mehra , Sonal Chaturvedi , and Jai Kumar Gaurav . 2016b. E-
waste awareness for bulk consumers: Manual for training of trainers. New Delhi: Ministry of
Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India. Retrieved from
http://greene.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Day-1_manual_final-ilovepdf-compressed-
ilovepdf-compressed.pdf accessed on 21 January 2020 .
Chaturvedi, Ashish , Gautam Mehra , Sonal Chaturvedi , and Jai Kumar Gaurav . 2016c. E-
waste awareness for manufacturers: Manual for training of trainers. New Delhi: Ministry of
Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India. Retrieved from
http://greene.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Manufacturers_Manual_v8-2-1.pdf accessed
on 23 July 2020 .
Chaturvedi, Ashish , Gautam Mehra , Sonal Chaturvedi , and Jai Kumar Gaurav . 2016d. E-
waste awareness for government officials: Manual for training of trainers/1 Day. New Delhi:
Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India. Retrieved from
http://greene.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Day-1_manual_final-ilovepdf-compressed-
ilovepdf-compressed.pdf accessed on 21 June 2020 .
Chaudhary, Nivedita . 2018. ‘Electronic waste in India: A study of penal issues’. ILI Law Review,
II (Winter Issue): 1–25. Retrieved from http://ili.ac.in/pdf/env.pdf accessed on 8 July 2020 .
Chen, Yu , Chen Mengjun , Li Yungui , Wang, Bin , Chen Shu , and Zhonghui Xu . 2018.
‘Impact of technological innovation and regulation development on e-waste toxicity: A case
study of waste mobile phones’. Scientific Reports, pp. 1–9. Retrieved from
www.nature.com/scientificreports
Committee on Subordinate Legislation (2015–2016). Rules on e-waste management (Presented
to Lok Sabha on 10.8.2-16) (Sixteenth Lok Sabha) Fifteenth report. New Delhi: Lok Sabha
Secretariat. Retrieved from
http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/RULES%20ON%20E-
WASTE%20MANAGEMENT.pdf accessed on 3 April 2020 .
Darnall D.W. , B. Greene , M.T. Henzl , J.M. Hosea , R.A. McPherson , J. Sneddon , and M.D.
Alexander 1986. ‘Selective recovery of gold and other metal ions from an algal biomass’.
Environment Science Technology, 20(2): 206–208. DOI: 10.1021/es00144a018.
Darshan, P.C. , and S. Vidhya Lakshmi . 2016. ‘Global and Indian e-waste management –
methods & effects’. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310442485
accessed on 3 April 2020 .
Debnath, Biswajit , Ranjana Chowdhury , and Sadhan Kumar Ghosh . 2018. ‘Sustainability of
metal recovery from e-waste’. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 12(6): 1–13.
DOI: 10.1007/s11783-018-1044-9.
Dimitrakakis, Emmanouil Evangelos Gidarakos , Subhankar Basu , K.V. Rajeshwari , Rakesh
Johri , Bernd Bilitewski , and Matthias Schirmer . 2006. ‘Creation of optimum knowledge bank
on e-waste management in India’. Retrieved from
https://www.iswa.org/uploads/tx_iswaknowledgebase/3b_-_1145_-_P_-_Gidarakos_et_al_-
_Uni_GR.pdf accessed on 28 June 2020 .
Down To Earth . 28 June 2015. ‘Tricks of the e-waste trade’. Down To Earth. Retrieved from
https://www.downtoearth.org.in/coverage/tricks-of-the-ewaste-trade--325 accessed on 24
December 2019 .
Duan, H. Miller, T.R. Gregory, J. and Kirchain, R. 2013. Quantitative Characterization of
Domestic and Transboundary Flows of Used Electronics, Analysis of Generation, Collection,
and Export in the United States. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Retrieved from http://www.step-initiative.org/files/_documents/other_publications/MIT-
NCER%20US%20Used%20Electronics%20Flows%20Report%20-%20December%202013.pdf
accessed on 9 April 2020
Dwivedy, Maheshwar , and R.K. Mittal . 2010a. ‘Estimation of future outflows of e-waste in
India’. Waste Management, 30(3): 483–491. DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2009.09.024.
Dwivedy, Maheshwar , and R.K. Mittal . 2010b. ‘Future trends in computer waste generation in
India’. Waste Management, 30(11): 2265–2277. DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.06.025.
Dwivedy, Maheshwar , and R.K. Mittal . 2012. ‘An investigation into e-waste flows in India’.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 37 (2012): 229–242. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.07.017.
ELCINA Electronic Industries Association of India . 2007. Country report on the Indian electronic
sector: Issues and capacity building needs in relation to international and national product-
related environmental regulations and other requirements. EuropeAid Cooperation Office.
Retrieved from https://cfsd.org.uk/Indian_AEDE_Report.pdf accessed on 13 April 2020 .
Elia, Valerio , and Maria Grazia Gnoni . 2015. ‘How to design and manage WEEE systems: A
multi-level analysis’. International Journal of Environment and Waste Management, 15(3):
271–294. DOI:10.1504/ijewm.2015.069165.
Ellen Macarthur Foundation . 2013. Towards the circular economy: Economy and business
rationale for an accelerate transition. United Kingdom: Ellen Macarthur Foundation. Retrieved
from https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-MacArthur-
Foundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf accessed on 31 March 2020 .
‘Joint statement – 15th EU-India Summit, 15 July 2020’, European Commission News, 15 July
2020. Available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2020/07/15/joint-
statement-15th-eu-india-summit-15-july-2020/
European Union (EU) . 2018. Report on critical materials and circular economy, Brussels
16.1.2018 SWD (2018) 36 final PART 1/3. Brussels: European Union. Retrieved from
https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/27327/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/nativ
e accessed on 16 December 2019 .
EXPRA . (2013). Extended Producer Responsibility at a glance. Retrieved from
www.expra.eu:www.expra.eu/uploads/downloads/EXPRA%20EPR%20Paper_March_2016.pdf
accessed on 23 December 2019 .
Ffact, Recupel, and UNU-ISP (United Nations University-Institute for Sustainability and Peace) .
2013. (W)EEE mass balance and market structure in Belgium, Delft: Ffact and UNU-ISP.
Retrieved from http://i.unu.edu/media/unu.edu/news/39523/Recupel-Report-FINAL.pdf
accessed on 12 May 2020 .
Forti, Vanessa , Baldé Cornelis Peter , Kuehr Ruediger , and Bel Garam . 2020. The Global E-
waste Monitor 2020: Quantities, flows and the circular economy potential.
Bonn/Geneva/Rotterdam: United Nations University (UNU)/United Nations Institute for Training
and Research (UNITAR) – co-hosted SCYCLE Programme, International Telecommunication
Union (ITU) & International Solid Waste Association (ISWA). Retrieved from
http://ewastemonitor.info/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/GEM_2020_def_july1_low.pdf# accessed
on 7 July 2020 .
Gaikwad, Vaibhav . 2019. A very short policy brief: Improving e-waste management in India,
Vol. 11 (January). Australia: Australia India Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.aii.unimelb.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/26912-AII-Very-Short-Policy-Brief-
VOL-11-p2.pdf accessed on 23 April 2020 .
GIZ . 2017. Building the link: Leveraging formal-informal partnerships in the Indian e-waste
sector. Bonn and Eschborn, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. Retrieved from https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz2017-en-
formal-informal-partnerships-e-waste-india.pdf accessed on 3 April 2020 .
GIZ . 2018. Creating successful formal-informal partnerships in the Indian e-waste sector:
Practical guidance for implementation under the Indian E-waste Rules. Bonn and Eschborn,
Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH.
GIZ and MESTI (Ministry of Environment, Science, Technology and Innovation) . 2019. E-waste
training manual. Bonn and Eschborn, Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale
Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. Retrieved from https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/giz2019-e-
waste-management.pdf accessed on 20 February 2020 .
Greenpeace . 2005. Recycling of electronic wastes in China & India: Workplace &
environmental contamination. UK: Greenpeace International.
GTZ . 2010. The waste experts: Enabling conditions for informal sector integration in solid
waste management. Germany: GTZ.
GTZ . 2011. Recovering resources, creating opportunities: Integrating the informal sector into
solid waste management. Germany: GTZ.
Gui, Luyi , Atalay Atasu , Özlem Ergun , and L. Beril Toktay . 2013. ‘Implementing extended
producer responsibility legislation’. Journal of Industrial Ecology, DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-
9290.2012.00574.x.
Ha, Nguyen Ngoc , Tetsuro Agusa , Karri Ramu , Nguyen Phuc Cam Tu , Satoko Murata ,
Keshav A. Bulbule , Peethmbaram Parthasaraty , Shin Takahashi , Annamalai Subramanian ,
and Shinsuke Tanabe . 2009. ‘Contamination by trace elements at e-waste recycling sites in
Bangalore, India’. Chemosphere, 76(1): 9–15. DOI:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2009.02.056.
Haldar, P. C. 2020. ‘Foreword’. In Manika Malhotra (ed.). E-waste management: Policy analysis
and implementation (p. vii). New Delhi: The PPF – Centre for Cohesive Society Studies.
Retrieved from https://www.ppf.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Final-E-Waste-
Management_Feb-2020-PPF.pdf accessed on 23 July 2020 .
Henam, Sonia . 23 March 2018. ‘Centre amends e-waste management rules 2016 yet again’.
Down to Earth. Retrieved from https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/waste/centre-amends-e-
waste-management-rules-2017-yet-again-60021 accessed on 24 December 2019 .
Honda, Shunichi , Deepali Sinha Khetriwal , and Ruediger Kuehr . 2016. Regional E-waste
Monitor: East and Southeast Asia. Bonn, Germany: United Nations University andTokyo:
Japanese Ministry of the Environment. Retrieved from http://ewastemonitor.info/pdf/Regional-E-
Waste-Monitor.pdf accessed on 7 April 2020 .
Inagaki, Hiromi . 2008. The myth of ‘Environmentally Sound’ management of e-waste: A case
study from computer recycling activities in Delhi, India. Research paper for partial fulfilment of
Masters of Arts in Development Studies, The Hague: Institute of Social Studies. Retrieved from
https://thesis.eur.nl/pub/7117/Hiromi%20Inagaki%20ESD.pdf accessed on 11 April 2020 .
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) . 2012. ‘Applying EPR in developing
countries’. Rio+20 towards and beyond, Vol 3, March, UN conference on Sustainable
Development. Retrieved from http://www.iges.or.jp/en/rio20/ accessed on 25 May 2020 .
IIML (Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow) . 2010. Evaluation of Central Pollution Control
Board (CPCB), New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India. Retrieved
from http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/Rpt_CPCB.pdf accessed on 1 May 2020 .
International Labour Organisation (ILO) . 2014. Tackling informality in e-waste: The potential of
cooperative enterprises in the management of e-waste. Sectoral Activities Department
(SECTOR), Cooperatives Unit (COOP) – Geneva: ILO. Retrieved from
https://www.ilo.org/public/libdoc/ilo/2014/114B09_165_engl.pdf accessed on 12 January 2020 .
International Labour Organisation (ILO) . 2019a. Decent work in the management of electrical
and electronic waste (e-waste), Issue paper for the Global Dialogue Forum on Decent Work in
the management of Electrical and Electronics Waste (E-Waste), 11–12, April. Geneva: ILO.
Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---
sector/documents/publication/wcms_673662.pdf accessed on 18 June 2020 .
International Labour Organisation (ILO) . 2019b. From waste to jobs: Decent work challenges
and opportunities in the management of e-waste in India, Working Paper No. 323, International
Labour Office, Sectoral Policies Department, Geneva: ILO. Retrieved from
https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---
sector/documents/publication/wcms_732426.pdf accessed on 3 April 2020 .
International Solid Waste Association (ISWA) . 2014. Extended producer responsibility, Vienna,
Austria: ISWA. Retrieved from
https://www.iswa.org/index.php?eID=tx_bee4mememberships_download&fileUid=235 accessed
on 28 April 2020 .
IRG Systems South Asia Pvt. Ltd. (IRG) 2016. E-waste inventorisation of Bastar Division, New
Delhi: IRG Systems South Asia Pvt. Ltd. Retrieved from
http://enviscecb.org/Reports/Technical%20Report/E-Waste%20Inventorization%20Report.pdf
accessed on 25 May 2020 .
Isernia, Raffaele , Renato Passaro , Ivana Quinto , and Antonio Thomas . 2019. ‘The reverse
supply chain of the e-waste management processes in circular economy framework: Evidence
from Italy’. Sustainability, 11: 2430: 1–19; doi:10.3390/su11082430
Islam, Md Tasbirul , and Nazmul Huda . 2019. ‘Material flow analysis (MFA) as a strategic tool
in E-waste management: Applications, trends and future directions’. Journal of Environmental
Management, 244: 344–361. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.05.062.
Iyer, Lakshmi Shankar . 2014. ‘A study on the attitude towards e-waste collection and safe
management in academic institutions in Bangalore’. (January 1): 1–15. DOI:
10.2139/ssrn.2480323.
Jain, Amit . 2010. ‘E-waste management in India: Current status, emerging drivers &
challenges’. Presented at regional workshop on E-waste/WEEE management, July 8, Osaka,
Japan. Retrieved from https://gec.jp/gec/jp/Activities/ietc/fy2010/e-waste/ew_1-2.pdf accessed
on 9 July 2020 .
Jain, Amit . 2019. ‘Global e-waste growth’. In Johri Rakesh (ed.). E-Waste: Implications,
regulations, and management in India and current global best practices (pp. 3–22), New Delhi:
TERI press (second reprint).
Jutting, Johannes , and Juan R. de Laiglesia . 2009. ‘Dealing with informal employment:
Towards a three-pronged strategy’. In Johannes Jutting and Juan R. de Laiglesia (eds.). Is
informal normal?: Towards more and better jobs in developing countries (pp. 143–163).
Development Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. DOI:
10.1787/9789264059245-8-en.
Kawakami, Tsuyoshi . 2019a. ‘Improving safety, health and working conditions of e-waste
workers’. In Mishra, Neeta , Sarina Bolla , and Kalyan Bhaskar (eds.). E-waste roadmap 2030
for India: A compilation of thought pieces by sector experts (pp. 49–73), Delhi: IFC and Karo
Sambhav Pvt. Ltd.
Kapil, Shagun . April 05, 2019. ‘Recycling e-waste: ‘CPCB’ competence must be raised’. Down
to Earth. Retrieved from https://www.downtoearth.org.in/interviews/waste/recycling-e-waste-
cpcb-s-competence-must-be-raised--63853 accessed on 29 April 2019 .
Karo Sambhav Pvt. Ltd . 2019. ‘Planning 2020–2022’. unpublished. Gurugram: Karo Sambhav
Pvt. Ltd.
Kaur, Banjot . 16 July 2018. ‘Can India manage its toxic e-waste?’. Down To Earth, 16–30 Jun
2018, Retrievd from https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/waste/can-india-manage-its-toxic-e-
waste--60891 accessed on 24 December 2019 .
Kawakami, Tsuyoshi . 2019b. ‘Improving safety, health and working conditions of e-waste
workers’. In Mishra, Neeta , Sarina Bolla , and Kalyan Bhaskar (eds.). E-waste roadmap 2030
for India: A compilation of thought pieces by sector experts (pp. 49–73). Delhi: IFC and Karo
Sambhav Pvt. Ltd.
Khan, Anish , Inamuddin , and Abdulla M. Asiri (eds.). 2020. E-waste recycling and
management: Present scenarios and environmental issues. Switzerland: Springer.
Khattar, Vivek , Jaspreet Kaur , Ashish Chaturvedi , and Rachna Arora . 2007. E-Waste
assessment in India: Specific focus on Delhi. New Delhi: GTZ. Retrieved from
http://www.nswai.com/docs/e-Waste%20Assessment%20in%20India%20-
%20Specific%20Focus%20on%20Delhi.pdf accessed on 16 February 2020 .
Khetriwal Sinha, Deepali . 2019a. ‘Financing e-waste management: A producer perspective:
Colloquium – E-waste management in India: Issues and strategies’. VIKALPA, 44(3): 142–145.
DOI: 10.1177/0256090919880655.
Kopacek, Bernd . 2019. ‘A Note on Best Practices and the European Experience’. In Neeta
Mishra , Sarina Bolla , and Kalyan Bhaskar (eds.). E-waste roadmap 2030 for India: A
compilation of thought pieces by sector experts (pp. 74–76). Delhi: IFC and Karo Sambhav Pvt.
Ltd.
Kuehr Ruediger, Velasquez German T. , and Eric Williams . 2003. ‘Computers and the
Environment – An Introduction to Understanding and Managing their Impacts’. In R. Kuehr and
E. Williams (eds.). Computers and the Environment: Understanding and Managing their Impacts
(Vol. 14, pp. 1–15). Eco-Efficiency in Industry and Science. Dordrecht: Springer.
DOI:10.1007/978-94-010-0033-8_1.
Kuntz, Valerie . 7 April 2020. ‘What is “EU RoHS3?”’ Retrieved from
https://help.assentcompliance.com/hc/en-us/articles/360001203047-What-is-EU-RoHS-3 –
accessed on 21 February 2020 .
Kuyucak, N. , and B. Volesky . 1988. ‘Biosorbents for recovery of metals from industrial
solutions’. Biotechnology Letters, 10(2): 137–142. DOI: 10.1007/BF01024641.
Kwatra, Swati , Suneel Pandey , and Sumit Sharma . 2014. ‘Understanding public knowledge
and awareness on e-waste in an urban setting in India’. Management of Environmental Quality:
An International Journal, 25(6): 752–765. DOI:10.1108/meq-12-2013-0139.
LARRDIS . 2011. E-Waste in India. New Delhi: Rajya Sabha Secretariat. Retrieved from
https://rajyasabha.nic.in/rsnew/publication_electronic/E-Waste_in_india.pdf accessed on 20
November 2018 .
Ledwaba, Pontsho , and Ndabenhle Sosibo . 2017. ‘Cathode ray tube recycling in South Africa’.
Recycling, 2(1): 4. DOI: 10.3390/recycling2010004.
Lepawsky, Josh . 2015. ‘The changing geography of global trade in electronic discards: Time to
rethink the e-waste problem’. The Geographical Journal, 181(2): 147–159. DOI:
10.1111/geoj.12077.
Lepawsky, Josh , and Chris McNabb . 2010. ‘Mapping international flows of electronic waste’.
The Canadian Geographer, 54(2): 177–195. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-0064.2009.00279.x
Levinson, Tzvi , Christina Folman , and Julia Lietzmann . 2019. ‘E-waste legislation in the
European Union and the Basel Convention’. In Johri Rakesh (ed.). E-Waste: Implications,
regulations, and management in India and current global best practices (pp. 151–168), New
Delhi: TERI press (second reprint).
Lindhqvist, Thomas . 2000. Extended Producer Responsibility in Cleaner Production: Policy
Principle to Promote Environmental Improvements of Product Systems. Lund, Sweden: IIIEE
(The International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics), Lund University. Retrieved
from https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/ws/files/4433708/1002025.pdf accessed on 28 April 2020 .
Lundgren, Karin . 2012. The global impact of e-waste: Addressing the challenge. Geneva:
International Labour Organisation Office, Programme on Safety and Health at Work and the
Environment (SafeWork), Sectoral Activities Department (SECTOR). Retrieved from
http://www.saicm.org/Portals/12/Documents/EPI/ewastesafework.pdf accessed on 11 April 2020
.
Magazine Monitor . 2014. ‘Who what why: How much gold can we get from mobile phones?’. 16
August. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-28802646
accessed on 10 August 2020 .
Mahesh, Priti . 2007. EPR: Sustainable solution to electronic waste. Toxics Link. Retrieved from
http://toxicslink.org/docs/06167_EPR_Sustainable_solution_to_ewaste.pdf accessed on 6 June
2019 .
Malhotra, Manika . 2020. E-waste management: Policy analysis and implementation. New
Delhi: The PPF – Centre for Cohesive Society Studies. Retrieved from
https://www.ppf.org.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Final-E-Waste-Management_Feb-2020-
PPF.pdf accessed on 23 July 2020 .
Manda, Krishna B.K. 2008. E-waste management policy in India: Stake holders’ perceptions
and media attention, thesis for Master of Science in Environmental Sciences, Policy &
Management. Sweden: Lund University. Retrieved from
https://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=1413818&fileOId=1413825
accessed on 25 June 2020 .
Manomaivibool, Panate . 2011. Advancing the frontier of extended producer responsibility: The
management of waste electrical and electronic equipment in non-OECD countries (doctoral
dissertation). Sweden: International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund
University. Retrieved from https://portal.research.lu.se/ws/files/3115417/2156616.pdf accessed
on 1 July 2020 .
Manomaivibool, Panate , and Jong Ho Hong . 2014. ‘Two decades, three WEEE systems: How
far did EPR evolve in Korea’s resource circulation policy?’. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 83: 202–212. DOI:10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.10.011.
McCann, Duncan , and Annelaure Wittmann . 2015. E-waste prevention, take-back system
design and policy approaches (Solving the e-waste problem (Step) Green paper). United
Nations University – Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability (UNU-IAS). Retrieved
from http://www.step-
initiative.org/files/_documents/green_papers/Step%20Green%20Paper_Prevention%26Take-
backy%20System.pdf accessed on 7 April 2020 .
Mehra, Harish C. 2004. ‘PC wastes leaves toxic taste’. The Tribune, March 22. Retrieved from
https://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040322/login/main1.htm accessed on 28 June 2020 .
MeitY and NITI Aayog . 2019. Strategy on resource efficiency in electrical and electronic
equipment sector. New Delhi: Government of India.
Miliute-Plepiene, Jurate , and Lena Youhanan . 2019. E-waste and raw materials: From
environmental issues to business models. Stockholm, Sweden: IVS Swedish Environmental
Research Institute. Retrieved from
https://www.ivl.se/download/18.2299af4c16c6c7485d0c39/1567678533720/E-
waste_190905.pdf accessed on 7 June 2020 .
Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and NITI Aayog . 2019. Strategy on
resource efficiency in electrical and electronic equipment sector. New Delhi: Government of
India.
Ministry of Environment and Forests . 2006. National Environment Policy. New Delhi:
Government of India. Retrieved from
https://ibkp.dbtindia.gov.in/DBT_Content_Test/CMS/Guidelines/20190411103521431_National
%20Environment%20Policy,%202006.pdf accessed on 1 July 2020 .
Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) .
2008. Guidelines for environmentally sound management of e-waste, Delhi: Government of
India. Retrieved from https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/read/6274477/guidelines-for-
environmentally-sound-management-of-e-waste accessed on 7 April 2020 .
Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) and Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) .
2011. Implementation of E-waste Rules, 2011 – Guidelines, New Delhi: Government of India.
Retrieved from http://toxicslink.org/docs/rulesansregulation/E-waste-rule-guidelines.pdf
accessed on 20 April 2020 .
MPCB (Maharashtra Pollution Control Board) . 2007. Report on assessment of electronic waste
in Mumbai-Pune area. Mumbai: Maharashtra Pollution Control Board.
Mudur, G.S. 22 September 2009. ‘Not rubbish! India buys e-garbage – Centre allows e-waste
imports for recycling, activists cry foul’. The Telegraph. Retrieved from
https://www.telegraphindia.com/india/not-rubbish-india-buys-e-garbage-centre-allows-e-waste-
imports-for-recycling-activists-cry-foul/cid/591946 accessed on 11 July 2020 .
Mujezinovic, Davor . 2019. ‘Electronic waste in Guiyu: A city under change?’ Environment &
Society Portal, Arcadia, no. 29. Rachel Carson Center for Environment and Society.
doi.org/10.5282/rcc/8805.
Nath, Bhola , Ranjeeta Kumari , Valendu Gupta , N.D. Vaswani , and Seema Lekhwani . 2018.
‘A community based study on e-waste disposal in Srinagar, Uttarakhand: Assessment of
awareness and practices’. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health, 5(8):
3429–3434.
NITI Aayog and EU . 2017. Strategy on resource efficiency. New Delhi: Government of India.
Niu, H ., and B. Volesky . 1999. ‘Characteristics of gold biosorption from cyanide solution’.
Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 74(8): 778–784. DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1097-
4660(199908)74:8<778::AID-JCTB99>3.0.CO;2-Q.
OECD . 2001. Extended Producer Responsibility: A guidance manual for governments. Paris,
France: OECD. Retrieved from
https://www.wastenet.net.au/assets/documents/content/information/epr-guide_for_govt-
2001.pdf accessed on 14 April 2019 .
OECD . 2016. Extended Producer Responsibility: Updated Guidance for Efficient Waste
Management. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264256385-en.
Oers, Lauran Van and Arnold Tukker . 2016. Development of a resource efficiency index of
nations. Illustrative calculations, Switzerland: World Resources Forum WRF. Retrieved from
http://www.wrforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Resource-efficiency-indicators-WRF-
calculations_FINAL.pdf accessed on 8 July 2020 .
Ogushi, Yasuhiko , and Milind Kandlikar . 2007. ‘Assessing extended producer responsibility
laws in Japan’. Environmental Science & Technology, 41(13): 4502–4508.
DOI:10.1021/es072561x.
Oteng-Ababio, Martin . 2012. ‘Electronic Waste Management in Ghana – Issues and Practices’.
In Sime Curkovic (ed.). Sustainable development: Authoritative and leading edge content for
environmental management (pp. 149–166). Kalamazoo: Western Michigan University. DOI:
10.5772/2562
PACE (Platform for Accelerating the Circular Economy) and WEF (World Economic Forum) .
2019. A circular vision for electronics: Time for a global reboot. Switzerland: PACE and The E-
waste Coalition. Retrieved from
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_A_New_Circular_Vision_for_Electronics.pdf accessed on
3 April 2020 .
Parajuly, K. , R. Kuehr ; A.K. Awasthi , C. Fitzpatrick , J. Lepawsky , E. Smith , R. Widmer , and
X. Zeng . 2019. Future e-waste scenarios. Bonn, Germany: StEP Initiative, Bonn: UNU ViE-
SCYCLE, and Osaka: UNEP IETC. Retrieved from http://www.step-
initiative.org/files/_documents/publications/FUTURE%20E-
WASTE%20SCENARIOS_UNU_190829_low_screen.pdf accessed on 11 April 2020 .
Patel, Lakshmi . November 24, 2017. Electronic waste collection: AMC, why don’t you fix your
digital dump first? Times of India. Retrieved from
https://ahmedabadmirror.indiatimes.com/ahmedabad/cover-story/electronic-waste-collection-
amc-why-dont-you-fix-your-digital-dump-first/articleshow/61774594.cms accessed on 15 July
2020 .
Patil, Rashmi Anoop , and Seeram Ramakrishna . 2020. A comprehensive analysis of e-waste
legislation worldwide. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. DOI:10.1007/s11356-
020-07992-1.
Pont, Ana , Antonio Robles , and Jose A. Gil . 2019. ‘e-waste: Everything an ICT scientist and
developer should know’. IEEE Access, 7: 1–22. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2955008.
Puckett, Jim , Leslie Byster , Sarah Westervelt , Richard Gutierrez , Sheila Davis , Asma
Hussain , and Madhumitta Dutta . 2002. Exporting harm: The high-tech trashing of Asia. The
Basel Action Network (BAN) and Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC). Retrieved from
http://svtc.org/wp-content/uploads/technotrash.pdf accessed on 20 May 2020 .
Radulovic, Verena . 2018. Gap analysis on responsible e-waste management efforts in India:
Institutional, economic, and technological and the potential role of a sustainability standard to
build capacity and help foster solutions. Centre for Responsible Business and Green Electronics
Council. Retrieved from https://greenelectronicscouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/GEC-
CRB-Gap-Analysis-Report-FINAL-Oct-2018.pdf accessed on 25 July 2020 .
Raghupathy, Laxmi , Ashish Chaturvedi , Rachna Arora , and Vinnie Mehta . 2010. ‘E-waste
management in India’. E-Scrap, May.
Rajya Sabha Secretariat . 2008. Department related parliamentary standing committee on
science and technology, environment and forests – Hundred and ninety second report on
functioning of Central Pollution Control Board. New Delhi: Parliament of India, Rajya Sabha.
Retrieved from
http://wwfenvis.nic.in/files/Environment,%20Forest%20and%20Climate%20Change/192.pdf
accessed on 23 April 2020 .
Ram Mohan M P , Iti Garg , and Gayatri Kumar . 2019. ‘Regulating e-waste: A review of the
international and national legal framework on e-waste’. In Johri Rakesh (ed.). E-Waste:
Implications, regulations, and management in India and current global best practices (169–188).
New Delhi: TERI press (second reprint).
Rohrig, Brian . 2015. Smartphones: Smart chemistry. Retrieved from
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/education/resources/highschool/chemmatters/past-
issues/archive-2014-2015/smartphones.html accessed on 12 April 2020 .
Sander, Knut , Naoko Tojo , and Jan Vernon . 2007. The producer responsibility principle of
WEEE Directive. Germany: Ökopol GmbH Institute for Environmental Strategies, Sweden: The
International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics Lund University, and United
Kingdom: Risk & Policy Analysts. Retrieved from
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/weee/pdf/final_rep_okopol.pdf accessed on 8 June
2020 .
Schinner, F. , and W. Burgstaller . 1989. ‘Extraction of zinc from industrial waste by a
Penicillium sp’. Applied Environment Microbiology, 55(5): 1153–1156. DOI:
10.1128/aem.55.5.1153-1156.1989.
Shamsuddin, M. 1986. ‘Metal Recovery from Scrap and Waste’. Journal of Metals, 38(2):
24–31. doi:10.1007/bf03257917.
Shah, Anuj . 2014. An assessment of public awareness regarding e-waste hazards and
management strategies. Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection, 1820. Retrieved from
https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/isp_collection/1820 accessed on 12 November 2020 .
Sharma, Hitesh . 2019. ‘EPR for e-waste management in India: A producer perspective:
Colloquium – E-waste management in India: Issues and strategies’. VIKALPA, 44(3) 158–160.
DOI: 10.1177/0256090919880655.
Shevchenko, Tetiana , Kirsi Laitala , and Yuriy Danko . 2019. ‘Understanding consumer e-waste
recycling behavior: Introducing a new economic incentive to increase the collection rates’.
Sustainability, 11(9), 2656: 1–20. DOI: 10.3390/su11092656.
Shivathanu, Brijesh . 2016. ‘User’s perspective: Knowledge and attitude towards e-waste’.
International Journal of Applied Environmental Sciences, 11(2): 413–423. Retrieved from
https://www.ripublication.com/ijaes16/ijaesv11n2_06.pdf accessed on 13 June 2020 .
Singh, Narendra , Huabo Duan, Oladele A. Ogunseitan, Jinhui Li , and Yuanyuan Tang . 2019.
‘Toxicity trends in e-waste: A comparative analysis of metals in discarded mobile phones’.
Journal of Hazardous Materials 380: 1–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.120898
Singh, Pooja and Shanu Thomas . 2016. ‘E-waste management and environment protection: A
critical legal analysis’. Bharti Law Review, January–March: 27–35. Retrieved from
http://elibrary.azimpremjifoundation.org:2103/pers/Personalized.aspx accessed on 15 August
2020 .
Singhal, Pranshu . 2010. ‘Shaping consumers’ behaviour for responsible recycling’. Paper
presented at the Going Green – Care Innovation 2010, Vienna.
Singhal, Pranshu . 2012. ‘Crafting environmental change agents: An ecosystem approach’.
Paper presented at the Electronics Going Green, Berlin.
Singhal, Pranshu . 2019a. ‘Disrupting the status quo via systematic transformation-PROs and e-
waste’. In Neeta Mishra , Sarina Bolla , and Kalyan Bhaskar (eds.). E-waste roadmap 2030 for
India: A compilation of thought pieces by sector experts (pp. 15–25). Delhi: IFC and Karo
Sambhav Pvt. Ltd.
Singhal, Pranshu . 2019b. ‘Disrupting the status quo via systematic transformation-PROs and e-
waste: Colloquium – E-waste management in India: Issues and strategies’. VIKALPA, 44(3)
151–153. DOI: 10.1177/0256090919880655.
Sinha-Khetriwal, D. , P. Kraeuchi , and M. Schwaninger . 2005. A comparison of electronic
waste recycling in Switzerland and in India. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 25(5):
492–504. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2005.04.006.
Sinha Khetriwal Deepali . 2019b. ‘The informal sector in e-waste management: Colloquium – E-
waste management in India: Issues and strategies’. VIKALPA, 44(3) 142–145. DOI:
10.1177/0256090919880655.
Sinha, Satish . 2019a. ‘Dark shadows of digitization on India horizon’. In Johri Rakesh (ed.). E-
Waste: Implications, regulations, and management in India and current global best practices
(23–44). New Delhi: TERI press (second reprint).
Sinha, Satish . 2019b. ‘The informal sector in e-waste management’. VIKALPA, 44(3) 133–135.
DOI: 10.1177/0256090919880655.
Sjödin, Andreas , Carlsson Hakan , Thuresson Kaj , Sjölin Sverker , Bergman, Åke , and Conny
Östman . 2001. ‘Flame retardants in indoor air at an electronics recycling plant and at other
work environments’. Environmental Science & Technology, 35(3): 448–454.
DOI:10.1021/es000077n.
Sjödin, Andreas , Patterson Donald Jr. , and Åke Bergman . 2003. ‘A review on human
exposure to brominated flame retardants?particularly polybrominated diphenyl ethers’.
Environment International, 29(6): 829–839. doi:10.1016/s0160-4120(03)00108-9.
Skinner, Alexandra , Dinter Yvonne , Lloyd Alex , and Philip Strothmann . 2010. ‘The
Challenges of E-Waste Management in India: Can India draw lessons from the EU and the
USA?’. ASIEN, 117:S. 7–26. Retrieved from http://asien.asienforschung.de/wp-
content/uploads/sites/6/2014/04/ASIEN_117_Skinner-Dinter-Llyod-Strothmann.pdf accessed on
28 April 2020 .
Socolof, Maria Leet , Jonathan G. Overly , and Jack R. Geibig . 2005. ‘Environmental life-cycle
impacts of CRT and LCD desktop computer displays’. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(13-14):
1281–1294. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.05.014.
Sohail, Sadia . July 04, 2015. ‘E-waste management: Nokia sets example’. Down to Earth.
Retrieved from https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/ewaste-management-nokia-sets-example--
41799 accessed on 26 November 2019 .
Statista.com . 2020. ‘Number of smartphones sold to end users worldwide from 2007 to 2020’.
February 28. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/263437/global-smartphone-
sales-to-end-users-since-2007/ accessed on 27 September 2019 .
Steger, Manfred B. and Ravi K. Roy . 2010. Neoliberalism: A very short introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Stewart R. , 2012. ‘EU legislation relating to electronic waste: The WEEE and RoHS Directives
and the REACH regulations’. In Vannessa Goodship and Ab Stevels (ed.). Waste electrical and
electronic equipment (WEEE) handbook (pp. 17–51), Woodhead Publishing (eBook). DOI:
10.1533/9780857096333.1.17.
Subramanian, Logakanthi . 2014. Management of electronic waste by bulk consumers: The
case of India’s IT service sector. Doctoral thesis, Faculty of Humanities. North Manchester:
University of Manchester. Retrieved from
https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/54553713/FULL_TEXT.PDF accessed on 13
July 2020 .
Takale, K.R. , S.M. Gawande , and P.J. Rangari . 2015. ‘Electronic waste & its present scenario
for Pune city’. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology, 4(6): 4238–4244. DOI:10.15680/IJIRSET.2015.0406089.
Telangana Sate Pollution Control Board (TSPCB) . 2016. Inventorisation of e-waste for
Telanagana state: The inception report. Hyderabad: Telangana Sate Pollution Board. Retrieved
from http://tspcb.cgg.gov.in/CBIPMP/Consultancy%20Services/E-waste/Inception_Repot.pdf
accessed on 27 May 2020 .
The Gazette of India . 2011. E-waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011. Retrieved from
https://www.ecsenvironment.com/images/rules/E-waste(M&H)Rules,2011.pdf accessed on 2
July 2020 .
Toxics Link . 2003. Scrapping the high-tech myth: Computer waste in India. New Delhi: Toxics
Link. Retrieved from
http://toxicslink.org/docs/Scrapping_The_Hitech_Myth_Computer_Waste_in_India_mail.pdf
accessed on 4 July 2019 .
Toxics Link . 2004a. E-waste in India: System failure – Take action NOW!. New Delhi: Toxics
Link. Retrieved from http://toxicslink.org/docs/06040_repsumry.pdf accessed on 25 June 2020 .
Toxics Link . 2004b. E-waste in Chennai: Time is running out. New Delhi: Toxics Link. Retrieved
from http://toxicslink.org/docs/06033_reptchen.pdf accessed on 25 November 2019 .
Toxics Link . 2014a. Impact of e-waste recycling on water and soil. Delhi: Toxics Link. Retrieved
from http://toxicslink.org/docs/Impact-of-E-waste-recycling-on-Soil-and-Water.pdf accessed on 2
February 2020 .
Toxics Link . 2014b. Time to reboot. New Delhi: Toxics Link. Retrieved from
http://toxicslink.org/docs/Time-to-Reboot.pdf accessed on 4 September 2019 .
Toxics Link . 2015. Time to reboot II. New Delhi: Toxics Link. Retrieved from
http://toxicslink.org/docs/Time-to-Reboot-2-Full-report.pdf accessed on 4 September 2019 .
Toxics Link . 2016. What India knows about e-waste. New Delhi: Toxics Link. Retrieved from
http://toxicslink.org/docs/What-India-knows-about-e-waste.pdf accessed on 4 September 2019 .
Toxics Link . 2019a. Time to reboot III e-waste rules: Assessing EPR compliance. New Delhi:
Toxics Link. Retrieved from http://toxicslink.org/docs/Time%20to%20Reboot%203.pdf accessed
on 4 September 2019 .
Toxics Link . 2019b. Informal e-waste recycling in Delhi: Unfolding impact of two years of E-
waste (Management) Rules 2016. Delhi: Toxics Link. Retrieved from
http://www.toxicslink.org/?q=content/informal-e-waste-recycling-delhi accessed on 2 February
2020 .
Turaga, Rama Mohana R. 2019. ‘Public policy for e-waste management in India: Issues and
strategies’. VIKALPA, 44(3) 130–132. DOI: 10.1177/0256090919880655.
Turaga, Rama Mohana R. , and Kalyan Bhaskar . 2019. ‘Introduction: Colloquium – E-waste
management in India: Issues and strategies’, VIKALPA, 44(3) 127–129. DOI:
10.1177/0256090919880655.
UN ESCAP (United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific) . 2012.
Fact sheet – Extended Producer Responsibility. Retrieved from
https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/25.%20FS-Extended-Producer-Responsibility.pdf
accessed on 1 September 2019 .
United Nations Environment Management Group (UNEMG) . 2017. United Nations System-wide
response to tacking e-waste. Geneva: United Nations. Retrieved from
https://unemg.org/images/emgdocs/ewaste/E-Waste-EMG-FINAL.pdf accessed on 7 April 2020
.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) . 2007. E-waste Volume I: Inventory
assessment manual. Osaka/Shiga: United Nations Environmental Programme. Retrieved from
http://greene.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/E-waste-Vol-I-Inventory-Assessment-
Manual.pdf accessed on 3 April 2020 .
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) . 2009. Recycling – From e-waste to
resources. Berlin: UNEP & UNU. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278849195 accessed on 20 March 2020 .
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) . 2010. Assessing the Environmental Impacts
of Consumption and Production: Priority Products and Materials. United Nations Environment
Programme. Retrieved from https://www.resourcepanel.org/reports/assessing-environmental-
impacts-consumption-and-production accessed on 30 May 2020 .
UNU/StEP Initiative . 2014. One global definition of e-waste. Solving the E-Waste Problem
(Step) Initiative White Paper. UNU/StEP Initiative 2014. Retrieved from
https://collections.unu.edu/eserv/UNU:6120/step_one_global_definition_amended.pdf accessed
on 7 April 2020 .
Walls, Margaret . 2003. The role of economics in extended producer responsibility: Making
policy choices and setting policy goals. Discussion paper 03-11. Retrieved from
https://media.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-03-11.pdf accessed on 30 April 2020 .
Waste 360 . ‘The benefits of a hub and spoke recycling system’. Retrieved from
https://www.waste360.com/business/benefits-hub-and-spoke-recycling-system accessed on 2
August 2020 .
Wath, Sushant B. , P.S. Dutt , and T. Chakrabarti . 2011. ‘E-waste scenario in India, its
management and implications’. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 172:249–262.
DOI:10.1007/s10661-010-1331-9.
Widmer, Rolf , Oswald-Krapf, Heidi , Sinha-Khetriwal, Deepali , Schnellmann, Max , and Heinz
Böni . 2005. ‘Global perspectives on e-waste’. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,
25(5): 436–458. DOI:10.1016/j.eiar.2005.04.001.
Wielenga, Kees . 2010. Waste without frontiers: Global trends in generation and transboundary
movements of hazardous wastes and other wastes. Geneva: The Secretariat of the Basel
Convention. Retrieved from http://www.basel.int/Portals/4/Basel%20Convention/docs/pub/ww-
frontiers26Jan2010.pdf accessed on 8 April 2020 .
Yadav, Shiv Shankar , and Asit Bandyopadhayay . 2015. ‘The e-waste legislation and
contemporary sustainability issues in India: A critical analysis’. Asia-Pacific Journal of
Management Research and Innovation, 11(3): 245–250. DOI:10.1177/2319510x15588384.
Yadav, Sudesh , Yadav Satyamanyu , and Pawan Kumar . 2014. ‘Metal toxicity assessment of
mobile phone parts using Milli Q water’. Waste Management, 34: 1274–1278.
DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.02.024
YES Bank Ltd. And TERI-Business Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD) . 2014. E-
waste management in India – The corporate imperative, Mumbai: YES Bank and New Delhi:
TERI-BCSD. Retrieved from
http://cbs.teriin.org/pdf/researchreports/EWasteManagementReport.pdf accessed on 23 April
2020 ).
Yu, Jinglei , Eric Williams , and Meiting Ju . 2010. ‘Analysis of material and energy consumption
of mobile phones in China’. Energy Policy, 38: 4135–4141. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.041.
Zeng, Xianlai , John Mathews , and Jinhui Li . 2018. ‘Urban mining of e-waste is becoming more
cost-effective than virgin mining’. Environmental Science & Technology, 52(8): 4835–4841.
DOI:10.1021/acs.est.7b04909.