Maja Arament, student, University of Amsterdam
A smartphone for future generations
The electrical and electronics sector is growing rapidly, but it generates huge amounts of waste and consumes valuable resources. The future of the circular economy requires technological, cultural, and regulatory changes to ensure that electrical and electronic devices such as phones, washing machines, and refrigerators are durable, repairable, and have a reduced negative impact on the environment.
The electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) sector is one of the fastest growing and most problematic industries in terms of sustainable development. Devices such as smartphones, laptops, and household appliances play a key role in everyday life, but their lifespan is short and the amount of waste they generate is enormous (EEE, 2023).
Scenario studies suggest a future in which societies and the planet thrive together, and another in which both fall apart (Arup, 2019). Electronics play a key role in this dilemma. They enable connectivity and innovation, but they also consume critical raw materials and generate electronic waste at a rate that threatens environmental and social stability (EEE, 2023).
Meeting these challenges requires more than just policy and technology; it requires a cultural shift, especially among younger generations who will shape and inherit this future.
Governments can regulate the lifespan of products, their reparability, and recycling obligations (EEE, 2023). However, large technology companies often have a greater influence on consumer behavior than governments (Bauwens et al., 2020). Apple, Samsung, and Dell decide how long devices will receive updates, how easy they are to repair, and whether spare parts are available. For the circular economy to succeed, responsibility must be shared. Policymakers need to create a framework, but companies also need to move away from business models based on endless consumption. Younger generations should also adopt a mindset that prioritizes quality over quantity. Without this grassroots change, regulations alone will not suffice. All these changes must happen simultaneously for societies to feel the difference.
Technologically advanced solutions are likely to form the basis of the circular economy in electronics. The scenario framework describes this as “cyclical modernism,” in which centralized, technology-based systems such as digital product passports, modular design, and AI-based recycling play a leading role (Bauwens et al., 2020). These tools increase supply chain transparency, facilitate device repair, and optimize resource recovery. EU policy is moving in this direction by introducing requirements for the right to repair and minimum product lifespan (EEE, 2023). However, progress depends on cooperation from businesses. Too often, companies oppose repair systems or limit the availability of spare parts (Bauwens et al., 2020). A better approach would be internal repair networks, exchange programs that truly repurpose devices, and subscription models that extend product life rather than accelerating replacement. Technology must be consistent with the values of the circular economy, not reinforce linear consumption.
Another path, “peer-to-peer circularity,” envisions a more decentralized system (Bauwens et al., 2020). Community repair spaces linked to digital platforms, where spare parts are shared or 3D-printed and supported by transparent product data, could become mainstream. Younger consumers are familiar with this model, as peer-to-peer economies such as Vinted and Airbnb are already widely used. The difference is that this system would change the way society manages its most resource-intensive devices. This model is effective because it combines environmental benefits with personal incentives. Local repairs and upgrades should be cheaper and faster than buying new products, making participation in this system attractive not only for sustainability reasons. This aligns with the values of transparency, empowerment, and authenticity, but it cannot remain just a passing greenwashing trend. To be successful, the perception of electronics must change, with repairability and durability becoming the norm. Without strong standards and open data, such networks risk remaining niche, and thus small initiatives cannot scale up to larger systems.
Even with the best technology, the circular economy cannot succeed without cultural change. If younger consumers continue to buy the latest iPhone model every year, demand will overwhelm the system. Younger generations are more aware of sustainability than older ones, but the desire for novelty remains strong (EEE, 2023). For the circular economy to work, the social meaning of electronics must change: owning fewer devices, choosing durability, and taking pride in the ability to repair should become the social and behavioral norm. This is reflected in the “grassroots sufficiency” scenario, in which communities embrace sufficiency as a way of life (Bauwens et al., 2020). Although this change is slower, it may prove more resilient to market and geopolitical changes.
To imagine this concretely, let's consider a “what if” scenario. What if, by 2035, every large technology company had to offer not only recycling programs but also services related to giving products a second life? Old phones could be converted into IoT devices, donated to schools, or turned into laptops for communities. A prototype could be a “second life lab,” run jointly by companies and local repair cafes, where devices would be collected, refurbished, and redistributed to NGOs or public institutions. This model would extend the life of products, reduce waste, and create new value, while holding companies accountable for the entire life cycle of their devices.
Ultimately, no single entity can solve the EEE problem on its own. Governments can set standards, companies can redesign business models, and technology can enable repairability and transparency (Bauwens et al., 2020). However, without cultural change, these efforts may remain superficial solutions. The future of electronics must be based on advanced technologies and policies, but it will only succeed if younger generations adopt an approach that prioritizes quality over quantity and companies use their power to promote circular methods rather than continuous consumption. The most optimistic vision is one in which electronics are durable, repairable, and long-lasting, supported by fair policies, responsible corporations, and a culture that no longer equates novelty with value.
References
Arup. (November 2019). Scenarios for 2050: Four plausible futures. Arup. arup.com/insights/2050-scenarios-four-plausible-futures/
Bauwens, T., Hekkert, M., & Kirchherr, J. (2020). The future of the circular economy: What will it look like? Ecological Economics, 175, 106703. doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106703
EEE. (2023). Sustainable development – workshop. Materials from internal workshops.
Scenario studies suggest a future in which societies and the planet thrive together, and another in which both fall apart (Arup, 2019). Electronics play a key role in this dilemma. They enable connectivity and innovation, but they also consume critical raw materials and generate electronic waste at a rate that threatens environmental and social stability (EEE, 2023).
Meeting these challenges requires more than just policy and technology; it requires a cultural shift, especially among younger generations who will shape and inherit this future.
Governments can regulate the lifespan of products, their reparability, and recycling obligations (EEE, 2023). However, large technology companies often have a greater influence on consumer behavior than governments (Bauwens et al., 2020). Apple, Samsung, and Dell decide how long devices will receive updates, how easy they are to repair, and whether spare parts are available. For the circular economy to succeed, responsibility must be shared. Policymakers need to create a framework, but companies also need to move away from business models based on endless consumption. Younger generations should also adopt a mindset that prioritizes quality over quantity. Without this grassroots change, regulations alone will not suffice. All these changes must happen simultaneously for societies to feel the difference.
Technologically advanced solutions are likely to form the basis of the circular economy in electronics. The scenario framework describes this as “cyclical modernism,” in which centralized, technology-based systems such as digital product passports, modular design, and AI-based recycling play a leading role (Bauwens et al., 2020). These tools increase supply chain transparency, facilitate device repair, and optimize resource recovery. EU policy is moving in this direction by introducing requirements for the right to repair and minimum product lifespan (EEE, 2023). However, progress depends on cooperation from businesses. Too often, companies oppose repair systems or limit the availability of spare parts (Bauwens et al., 2020). A better approach would be internal repair networks, exchange programs that truly repurpose devices, and subscription models that extend product life rather than accelerating replacement. Technology must be consistent with the values of the circular economy, not reinforce linear consumption.
Another path, “peer-to-peer circularity,” envisions a more decentralized system (Bauwens et al., 2020). Community repair spaces linked to digital platforms, where spare parts are shared or 3D-printed and supported by transparent product data, could become mainstream. Younger consumers are familiar with this model, as peer-to-peer economies such as Vinted and Airbnb are already widely used. The difference is that this system would change the way society manages its most resource-intensive devices. This model is effective because it combines environmental benefits with personal incentives. Local repairs and upgrades should be cheaper and faster than buying new products, making participation in this system attractive not only for sustainability reasons. This aligns with the values of transparency, empowerment, and authenticity, but it cannot remain just a passing greenwashing trend. To be successful, the perception of electronics must change, with repairability and durability becoming the norm. Without strong standards and open data, such networks risk remaining niche, and thus small initiatives cannot scale up to larger systems.
Even with the best technology, the circular economy cannot succeed without cultural change. If younger consumers continue to buy the latest iPhone model every year, demand will overwhelm the system. Younger generations are more aware of sustainability than older ones, but the desire for novelty remains strong (EEE, 2023). For the circular economy to work, the social meaning of electronics must change: owning fewer devices, choosing durability, and taking pride in the ability to repair should become the social and behavioral norm. This is reflected in the “grassroots sufficiency” scenario, in which communities embrace sufficiency as a way of life (Bauwens et al., 2020). Although this change is slower, it may prove more resilient to market and geopolitical changes.
To imagine this concretely, let's consider a “what if” scenario. What if, by 2035, every large technology company had to offer not only recycling programs but also services related to giving products a second life? Old phones could be converted into IoT devices, donated to schools, or turned into laptops for communities. A prototype could be a “second life lab,” run jointly by companies and local repair cafes, where devices would be collected, refurbished, and redistributed to NGOs or public institutions. This model would extend the life of products, reduce waste, and create new value, while holding companies accountable for the entire life cycle of their devices.
Ultimately, no single entity can solve the EEE problem on its own. Governments can set standards, companies can redesign business models, and technology can enable repairability and transparency (Bauwens et al., 2020). However, without cultural change, these efforts may remain superficial solutions. The future of electronics must be based on advanced technologies and policies, but it will only succeed if younger generations adopt an approach that prioritizes quality over quantity and companies use their power to promote circular methods rather than continuous consumption. The most optimistic vision is one in which electronics are durable, repairable, and long-lasting, supported by fair policies, responsible corporations, and a culture that no longer equates novelty with value.
References
Arup. (November 2019). Scenarios for 2050: Four plausible futures. Arup. arup.com/insights/2050-scenarios-four-plausible-futures/
Bauwens, T., Hekkert, M., & Kirchherr, J. (2020). The future of the circular economy: What will it look like? Ecological Economics, 175, 106703. doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106703
EEE. (2023). Sustainable development – workshop. Materials from internal workshops.
