8-170667a.jpg

CircularElectronics
Roadmap 2.0
An industry strategy towards circularity
April 2024

Introducing the CircularElectronics Partnership
The Circular Electronics Partnership (CEP) is a coordination platform,
established to bring together partners, industry members and the wider
stakeholder network. It helps drive collective action on global initiatives forcircular electronics, aligning CEP partners and members behind the visionof a circular electronics industry by 2030. 1
This is the vision of an industry that maximizes the fullvalue of components, products and materials, uses
safe, fair labor, depends only on circular resources andgenerates economic value and more positive socialand environmental impact.
This roadmap, originally published in 2021, acts as anindustry strategy for realizing the circularity vision.
It identifies what is needed across key stages of theelectronics value chain to drive systemic transformationand invites the industry and its stakeholders tocollaborate in addressing these actions.

Partners

Scope
Our vision for circular electronics includes all types ofelectronic and electrical equipment as defined by the
EU Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)
Directive. This includes devices and equipment from six
product categories: temperature exchange equipment,
screens and monitors, lamps, large equipment, small
equipment and small IT. 2
Within this product scope, our activities follow the interest
and expertise of our members. From a market perspective,
circular electronics include business-to-consumer (B2C)
and business-to-business (B2B) equipment, sold both inbulk and individually.

SupportAccenture2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 2

The need for action

The findings of the Global E-waste Monitor 20243 are clear; the growth ofglobal e-waste generation is continuing to rise. In 2022, humankind generated
62 million tonnes of e-waste – a concerning rise from 53 million tonnes in 2019.
Since publication of the original CEP Roadmap, the challenges associated witha historically linear industry have become increasingly pertinent.

•

While e-waste is one of the fastest-growing waste streams in the world,its disposal
is not well managed
In 2020, e-waste represented 2% of solid waste
streams, yet 70% of hazardous waste that ended up in
landfill. 5 Demand for electronics persists due to several
key driving forces, including greater affordability indeveloping economies, the integration of electronics
into traditionally non-electronic goods and the
propagation of electronics in everyday life. While thedocumented formal collection and recycling rate are•Electronic goods represent a substantial proportion of an organization’s
carbon emissions
The use of electronic goods contributes to anorganization’s carbon footprint – both in terms of
upstream and downstream emissions. The metal andmineral mining necessary for manufacturing devices,and the energy consumption related to using anddisposing of them, all contribute towards the total
CO2 footprint.7 Depending on the specific product,these emissions can make up 50% to 90% of total GHG
emissions. Besides direct emissions from business
operations (Scope 1 and Scope 2), reporting companies
will also need to disclose indirect carbon emissions
across their value chain8 (Scope 3).9•

also increasing, from 9.3 million tonnes in 2019 to
13.8 billion kg in 2022, this still only represents 22.3%
of total e-waste.6 Without corrective action, we cananticipate further acceleration of e-waste generation,
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions output and natural
resource consumption.

According to the 2024 Global E-Waste Monitor,
e-waste management globally prevents 93 billion kg of
CO2-equivalent emissions in the form of refrigerants intemperature exchange equipment (41 billion kg) andthrough the lower greenhouse gas emissions obtainedby recycling metals versus mining (52 billion kg).10
Considering this equals over 40 million gasoline
cars11 off the road (all passenger cars in France in2023),12 this represents a substantial opportunity
for further emissions reduction through increased
e-waste management.

Supply chain interruptions and skyrocketing raw material prices challenge the stablesupply of crucial raw materials for the electronics industry
In 2022, the value of metals in global e-waste wasapproximately USD $91 billion, mainly coming fromiron, copper and gold.13 This presents an economic
opportunity for the electronics industry to invest
in circular electronics. In particular, the COVID-19
pandemic highlighted the risks of linear supply chains,with spikes in demand exacerbating existing supply
chain disruptions. One example is lithium, an essential

component of battery production, which experienced
a price increase of 500% between 2021 and 2022
due to supply shortages.14 Demand for materials likelithium are only increasing due to their indispensablerole in our global clean energy transition. A circularmodel for the industry would not only help mitigate
such supply chain shortages, but also create
economic opportunities.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 3

The need for action•

Labor conditions and health impacts are key social issues associated with improperand informal e-waste recycling
While soil and water contamination are known
environmental issues, the global sanitary impactsof e-waste have still not been fully quantified.
However, examples exist that clearly show the healthimpacts of improper and informal e-waste recycling.
These include skin diseases, adverse effects onbirth outcomes, cardiovascular effects and alteredneurodevelopment or adverse learning outcomes.15

In India, for example, it is estimated that over 1 million
people involved in informal, manual recycling are
exposed to hazardous substances (heavy metals,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons (PAHs) and brominated flame retardants(BFRs)) – presenting a real human health risk
associated with informal electronics disposal.16

Overall, shifting to a circular economy for electronics can help address
major challenges around climate, nature and human capital, as well as
business continuity. Yet, despite efforts by individual stakeholders, progress
seems to be reversing. In the past six years, according to the 2023 Circularity
Gap Report,17 global circularity decreased from 9.1% to 7.2%, with progressoffset by rising material extraction and use. A radical transformation isneeded – one in which all stakeholders need to collaborate beyond theirorganizational remits.
•

Fostering multi-lateral actions increases the global opportunity ofcircular electronics
Despite their market power, individual electronics
companies cannot act alone in transitioning towards
responsible circularity. Given the global nature of theelectronics supply chain, a “coalition of the willing” isneeded across companies and value chain segments.
The companies that demonstrate a willingness to act
early and embrace circularity will ultimately be better
positioned for tomorrow’s market. Beyond the private

sector, the collective transition towards a circularelectronics industry will require partnerships with the
public sector and civil society.
This updated roadmap was created to guide collective
progress throughout the electronics value chain towards
a more circular industry. The time for coordinated action,at scale, is now.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 4

A roadmap towards circularity

In 2020, the CEP launched an extensive stakeholder
engagement project to inform this first-of-its-kind roadmap.
CEP mobilized the six founding partners, and more than
80 experts from 40 companies, industry associations
and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Following
six months of collaboration, they identified the barriers,
enablers and necessary interventions across six Pathways
that would help drive progress in key stages of theelectronics value chain.
Since then, the CEP has served as a coordination andcollaboration platform, bringing together expertise andresources to remove industry-wide barriers for companies
in their circular transition.
The CEP Roadmap is an invitation to industry peers andstakeholders to join forces and make collective progress.
Combining the actions defined across the Pathways
provides us with a comprehensive picture of what is needed
to enable systemic transformation towards a more circularelectronics industry.
Organizations that are already active in driving thisshared agenda are welcome to contact the CEP on
info@cep2030.org to explore collaboration on any of the
topics in the roadmap. We look forward hearing from you!

Why this roadmap update?
Since 2020, the world and our understanding of circularelectronics has evolved. To keep the CEP roadmap relevant,current members and founding partners initiated aholistic review in 2023. We collectively reviewed each of
the Pathways and their respective 40 actions, adjustingthem as needed. While these changes reflect the latest
developments in the landscape of circular electronics, therevised roadmap maintains the level of ambition and insightgathered during development of the initial document.

What has changed in this edition?
This edition includes an update on overall trends, challenges,
data points, policies and standards underpinning theindustry transition to circularity. As a result of this, someactions have been refreshed, merged, removed or added.
The newly included actions (Pathway 1.4, P3.3 and P0.1)
reflect the need for circular transition tools within companies
and the importance of assessing the Scope 3 GHG emission
benefits of circular solutions. They also include our evolving
understanding of data exchange and its role in enabling
circularity, which is the roadmap’s first cross-pathway action(0.1), showing the potential impact of data exchange on all
six Pathways. As the circularity space matures further, it ispossible other cross-pathway actions will be introduced.
With this update, a refined roadmap structure was also
introduced (see below). This supports navigation of theactions and gives clearer guidance to the industry and its
stakeholders on how they can contribute to the circularelectronics vision. At the same time, the new structure
provides a logical approach and framework for measuring
progress.
The scope and overall content of this roadmap and its
actions, including the six Pathways, have not changed. We
are still working towards the ambitious timeline of 2030 but,on our current trajectory, it is unlikely we will achieve a fulloperational circular electronics sys tem by then. However,by 2030, most collective industry barriers to the circulartransition should be addressed through the roadmap
actions. This will pave the way for companies throughout
the value chain to accelerate their circular transition.

Refined roadmap structure
The new CEP Roadmap will help position the industry
actions towards circular electronics in three dimensions:• Pathways• Action levels• Prioritization of actions

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 5

Figure 1. The six Pathways

Pathways
The CEP vision outlines clear
objectives for the six Pathways,
covering the different phasesof a circular electronics
value cycle.18> Desig
n
uts
>
Inp

Reve

Vision for
CircularElectronics

P

n >
ctio
du
ro

> Rec
ove
ry

>

<

rse
Lo

tic

g

is

s

Drive demandfor circular
products andserviceseAggregate forreuse andrecycling

Design forcircularity

S a le s

Scale secondary
material marketss<

C o ll e c t i o n

Increase oﬃcial
collection rate

Action levels
Three action levels define what context the action should be
addressed in (see Figure 2):<

U

Scale responsible
business models

Determining these action levels helps us understand how
to address the actions, as well as how to measure them. It
is important to note that all stakeholders have a role to playin almost every action, regardless of the level. The actionlevel should therefore not be understood as addressing asiloed audience.

• Collective actions: Interventions that require
collaborative industry action; no company can develop
Since all stakeholders play their own, but interdependent,
a circular economy on its own. Action is needed onrole, the action levels have an equal priority to be
an industry level to define a common, consistentaddressed and reinforce each other in driving impact.
understanding of how circularity is discussed,organized, measured, reported and assured, etc.
Scale secondry
Design forCollective progress will help individualmaterial
companies
markets
circularity
accelerate their own transition.
D
>
e
s
s
ign
ut
>
Inp
• Company actions: Interventions for individual valueP>
chain players, i.e., companies; ultimately, industry
The sequence of actions within a Pathway indicate eachtransformation is driven by individual companies making
action’s relationship to the others in that same Pathway.
the switch from linear to circular business. Individual
A logical order would be to start at the top and work down.
company actions are calls for companies to continue
However, experience teaches us this may not always be
making that shift, supported by the outcomes of collective
required and there is a flexibility in the order that can
Aggregate
for
Driveofdemandactions and enabled by thewider stakeholder
ask.
respond to the dynamics
stakeholder priorities. Actions
reuse andfor circular
that
have
a
notableinterlinkage
with other Pathways have
• Wider stakeholder ask: Interventions
for governments,
recycling
products andbeen
identified
andhighlighted.
services
NGOs and research organizations. It is the view of CEPssthat businesses should not wait for regulation to tcome
ic sWith theUrestructuringof actions, some renumbering has<
into effect before acting. Rather, the industry should < C
occurredcomparedtotheoriginal.
no ll ec ti opioneer and use its experience to help policymakers
develop effective and productive policies. Front runners
will have a competitive advantage over those companies
that wait for regulation to be imposed upon them before
Increase the oﬃcial
Scale Responsible
acting. However, the asks in this section will help level thecollection ratebusiness models
playing field and enable companies to transition fasterand more effectively.
gi

s

e

Lo

<

rs

S ale

Reve

Vision for
CircularElectronics

n >
ctio
du
ro

> Rec
ove
ry

Prioritization and interdependenciesof actions

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 6

Figure 2

Explore the six roadmap Pathways
Collective actions

Company actions

Wider stakeholder ask

Pathway 1
Design for circularity
1.1	D efine what constitutes the design of acircular product and service
1.2

 et up an industry knowledge repository forS
circular electronics

1.3

 evelop and roll out an education program andDtools for circular electronics design

1.4 D evelop and implement
circular transition tools
within companies

1.5 Createan enabling regulatoryenvironment for the sale ofcircular products and services

2.5 C ommit to meeting thedemand for circular
products and services

2.7 D evelop and harmonize circular
procurement global reporting
standards

Pathway 2
Drive demand for circular products and services
2.1

 evelop guidance for circular electronics
Dprocurement

2.2	
Stimulate circular procurement of electronics
at global scale uantify and communicate the value of circularQ
products and services

2.4

 rain and reward knowledge and the consistentTapplication of circular procurement

Pathway 3
Scale responsible business models
3.1
Exploreconsumer needs on circularity to drive
demand and generate business value

3.2

Consistently
measure and communicate toinvestors about the performance of circularbusiness models

3.3

 ssess Scope 3 GHG emission benefits of circularAsolutions3.4

A dapt accounting for circular electronics

Pathway 4
Increase official collection rate
4.1

Strengthen convenient take-back and collection

4.2

 onsolidate historic e-waste mapping andCassess recoverability

Pathway 5
Aggregate for reuse and recycling
5.1

Accelerate
progress towards the digitization of
the PIC procedure under the Basel Convention

5.2


Pilot
“trusted trader agreements” that easethe complexity of moving waste electronics tocertified recyclers

5.3


Plan
sorting, pre-processing and recycling
operations at the regional and global level

2.6 Reporton company circular
procurement data
0.1 Explore the implementation of value chain data exchange mechanisms to enable circularity

2.3

3.5 Invest

in circular businessmodels with social andenvironmental impact
3.6 Utilizebest practices ondata sanitization
3.7 Enable independent repair
providers and consumers
to conduct appropriate
repairs safely

3.8 Ensure legal clarity on theliability for product defects andaccess to insurance for repair
and refurbishment
3.9 Enforcelabor rights and enable
the formalization of companies
and workers

4.3 Engage
informal actors andsupport their transition toformalized entrepreneurs

4.5 H armonize definitions andreporting for WEEE/EEE take-backand collection

4.4 Tie take-back and collection
to the business model

4.6 Increase public-private cooperationin the development of effective
EPR regulation

5.4 Improvethe classification of waste atborders through capacity building
5.5 Move
towards an insurance model for
financial guarantees
5.6 Move
to an opt-out system for transit
countries and allow for flexibility

Pathway 6
Scale secondary material markets
6.1


Developdata standards and definitions forsecondary materials

6.2


Createan EHS assurance scheme forsecondary materials

6.3

 tandardize material tracking and provide
S
traceability and sourcing transparency

6.4 Commit
to scale secondary
material use in thelong term

6.5 Incentivize technology investments
for meeting future secondary
material demand
6.6 Incentivizethe sale ofsecondary materials

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 7

Pathway 1:

Design for circularity
Embedding circularity into product design is crucial to enabling a circular
economy for electronic devices and equipment. This means designing
for dematerialization, longevity, reuse and recyclability, and adopting
specifications for sustainable materials and components, enabling value
generation at each stage of a product’s life cycle.
Since 2020, we have observed progress on Pathway 1.
This includes a growing interest in circular design fromboth producers and customers, as well as maturing
collaborations between organizations. Nevertheless,work in this area remains important.
The key barriers to circularity at this stage include:• Lack of consistent, coherent industry-wide standards
and definitions implementation for circular electronic
products and services.

• Lack of collaboration between product development
stakeholders and life cycle partners.
• Insufficient actionable training for designers
and engineers.
• Limited accessibility of best practices and case studies
for circular product design at scale to serve as inspiration
for companies to go beyond minimal compliance.

• Lack of a mandate for circular product design fromcompany leadership.

As product design is interlinked with all stages of the value
chain, several barriers and actions discussed within other
Pathways are equally relevant for driving responsible
product design.

• Lack of demand for circular electronic products
and services.

The following actions have been prioritized for advancing
circularity through design.

Collective action

P1.1 Define what constitutes the design of a circular product and service
A common vocabulary across stakeholders is vitalfor implementing and evaluating a circular economy.
Generally agreed and achievable principles for whatcircular design is are needed to drive harmonization efforts
in standards, government policies, procurement practices
and certification schemes. This will help bring consistency
across the sector to achieve circularity-related goals.
Value chain stakeholders are going to collaborate topropose principles for evaluating circularity in products
and services. These stakeholders include producers,
retailers, refurbishers, product service and disposition
companies, recyclers, importers, resellers and relevantpublic sector entities. Together, they can develop a
North Star vision of what the industry transformation
towards a circular economy should look like, creating abase reference for further standard, certification andregulatory development.
Based on this model, standardization institutions candevelop industry-wide standards to define and assess
circularity – incorporating product design and businessmodel perspectives. This North Star should consider
the context and associated characteristics of different
electronics categories.

Collective action

P1.2 Set up an industry knowledge repository for circular electronics
To accelerate circular product design practices, an NGO
or industry association can set up, curate and maintainan online repository of circular design materials. This can
include standards, references and definitions on circularelectronic products and services, eco-design policies andregulation for different regions. Beyond this, the repository

can hold information and case studies on industry design
best practices.
The repository should encourage and enable designers,
marketers, distributors and other relevant actors toprioritize circular design criteria by providing themwith accessible information on available tools.
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 8

Pathway 1:

Design for circularity

Collective action

P1.3 D evelop and roll out an education program and tools for circularelectronics design
During product development, designers and otherstakeholders are required to balance various requirements.
Design for circularity can take many different forms,
depending on the intended life cycle and recovery at endof life (e.g., durability, repairability, recyclability, use ofrecycled content, etc.) and often requires different, evencontradicting, design solutions. In addition, requirementsfor product safety (e.g., flame retardancy), customer
preferences (e.g., usability) and economic requirements(e.g., production cost) are also important.

It is critical to provide designers and product developers
with the tools and capabilities to effectively evaluate
circular design criteria as part of the product development
process. To overcome the lack of industry-specifictraining on product design for circularity, businesses
can collaborate with NGOs and education institutions todevelop tools and training for designers and engineers.
These can be rolled out as corporate training programsfor professionals and consumers, or as part of relevant
study programs at universities.

Company action

P1.4 Develop and implement circular transition tools within companies
A company transformation to a circular business is
extraordinarily complex. Certain starting principles, suchas “use of circular resources”, “design for circularity” and“ensuring material recovery”, are helpful. However, byspecifying and translating what this means for a particular
product, these principles can lose meaning if the fullintended circular life cycle of the product is not considered.
Without an in-depth strategy for how products will besold, used, collected, repaired, reused, refurbished or
recycled, designers have very little context when it comesto developing circular design solutions. Therefore, rather
than starting with design, producers need to approachcircularity by carefully considering how products will

perform on circularity throughout their life cycle,balanced with other key parameters such as cost, safety
and performance.
The development and implementation of business tools,
like a “circular value proposition canvas”, could help toplevel management structurally consider how to practice
circular business. It could further help them engage anddirect all relevant company stakeholders, including design
teams, to contribute within their capacity to the central
circular business transformation. These tools could either
be developed by companies internally or through industry
collaboration for subsequent individual use.

Wider stakeholder ask

P1.5 Create an enabling regulatory environment for the saleof circular products and services
Demand is the primary driver for circular product andservice development and is vital to ensuring circularity
is a priority for corporate decision-makers. Policies andregulations that support the development and uptake ofcircular products and services are needed to accelerate
the transition to circular electronics.

a regulatory framework that incentivizes development
and uptake of circular products and services while notover‑regulating the detailed execution. This can include, but
is not limited to, value‑added tax (VAT) reductions, extended
product support periods or modulated extended producer
responsibility (EPR) fees – where not already in place.

Governments can build on the momentum of the EU
Green Deal and the new Circular Economy Action plan –under which legislation is currently proposed. Globally,
governments need to further develop and implement�nterdependent action:
P6.6 – Incentivize the sale of secondary materials

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 9

Pathway 2:

Drive demand for circular
products and services
Public and private sector procurement (B2B and business-to-government (B2G))
are key levers for creating demand for circular products and solutions.
Collectively, the volume of B2B and B2G purchasing helps incentivize
manufacturers to scale existing circular solutions and business models andinnovate. These models can then serve as trailblazers for more complex anddiffuse B2C markets.
There are some early activities, such as public and private
requests for proposals, that include a circularity andsustainability in the bidding process; however, there arestill many barriers that need to be addressed.
The key barriers to circularity in private and public sector
procurement include:• Limited understanding of circularity, its benefits and how
circular procurement differs from – and complements –existing sustainable procurement requirements.
• Limited integration of circular requirements into
organizational procurement guidelines.
• Lack of organizational commitment to a circular
economy, leading to exclusion of circular targets
for procurement departments.

• Lack of industry-wide commitment to selling circular
products and services.
• Misconceptions about inferior performance, data
security, warranty limitations and a “new is best” attitude.
• Missing tools and language to quantify and communicate
the benefits of circular procurement (and complexity todevelop these).
• Lack of integration into global environmental, social andgovernance (ESG) reporting metrics.
• Lack of training for procurement professionals.
The following actions have been prioritized for increasing
demand for circular products and services.

Collective action

P2.1 Develop guidance for circular electronics procurement
Integrating circularity criteria into organizational
procurement processes can drive major purchasersof electronic products and services towards increased
circularity, influencing overall market demand. NGOs,
together with academic and standards organizations,can apply the definition of circular products and services
to the procurement context, defining circular products
and services for purchasers. This includes developing
globally applicable purchasing preferences, standards
and guidelines (aligned with the joint definitions as
per Pathway 1).

This guidance will help public and private sector
procurement specialists integrate circularity criteria intheir organization’s procurement processes. It will also
help them reconsider specifications that prevent circularity,
such as those that only allow tendering of new devices andequipment. In line with the Circular Electronics System
Map, asset disposition can also play a critical role forcircular procurement to avoid linear practices at end of life.
Guiding principles could either be included in procurement
guidance or developed separately in tandem.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 10

Pathway 2:

Drive demand for circular products and services

Collective action

P2.2 Stimulate circular procurement of electronics at global scale
Clear commitments to circular procurement bygovernments, companies and other large buyers canstimulate circular procurement by demonstrating relevanceand creating momentum for other organizations to raise
their ambitions. Commitments also provide direction for
employees and create a sense of urgency around defining
clear responsibilities and developing implementation plans.
NGOs could launch a global campaign for countries andprivate sector leaders to commit to circular procurement.

Commitments could include setting a defined annual
percentage spend on circular information technology(IT) products and services; they should highlight the
impact of circular procurement on the global UN
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In addition,
governments and companies should consider integrating
circular procurement into strategies for supply chain
continuity, climate resiliency and in upcoming policies(e.g., the EU Green Deal).

Collective action

P2.3 Quantify and communicate the value of circular products and services
Fact-based communication about the climate, social,environmental and economic benefits of circular
procurement helps raise awareness. It also creates a senseof urgency for changing mindsets from the status quo of alinear model towards one of circularity.
NGOs, with support from research organizations, candevelop tools that help quantify the environmental, socialand economic benefits of circular products and services.

They can also highlight the value case and associatedorganizational benefits for buyers. Increased awarenessamong consumers supports uptake of organizational andgovernmental policies that stimulate circular electronics.
In addition to clarifying and quantifying benefits, thesetools should include guidance on terminology used tocommunicate these benefits to consumers.

Collective action

P2.4 T rain and reward knowledge and the consistent application of circular
procurement
Training and knowledge sharing can support purchasers
to integrate guidance on circular electronics procurement
into their own organizational processes. This includes
category management, process improvement anddemand management.
NGOs, industry associations and manufacturers can offer
training resources to increase uptake. This could include

training for procurement specialists on the definition of
circular products and services, the modification of sourcing
strategies and the application of circularity preferences
and requirements in procurement decisions. A circular
procurement certification and recognition program could
highlight and reward best practices, incentivizing wider
uptake of circular electronics procurement.

Company action

P2.5 Commit to meeting the demand for circular products and services
A clear commitment to circular electronics fromproducers, especially manufacturers, is vital. It will signal
to purchasers that a wide range of products and services
will exist that meet circular procurement requirements.
To meet demand, producers need to integrate circularity
into their corporate strategies, adopt circular design andsourcing policies, and partner with purchasers on circular
products and services (e.g., via take-back programs).

Purchasers should be encouraged to explore innovative
commercial models that promote mutual benefits withproducers (e.g., multi-year performance-based service
contracts for hardware assets). NGOs should be preparedto support producers’ commitments, where consideredappropriate and helpful (e.g., featuring case studies,speaking opportunities on transitional progress, sharedtarget-setting, etc.).
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 11

Pathway 2:

Drive demand for circular products and services

Company action

P2.6 Report on company circular procurement data
ESG reporting is growing increasingly relevant with regard
to stakeholder engagement and investment decisions.
Annually, ESG factors are systematically included infinancial analysis on USD $2.5 billion worth of investing
assets – a 143% growth since 2016.19 To attract and retain
investors, as well as satisfy stakeholders, companies
will increasingly need to show sustainable, and circular,
procurement progress.

Companies cannot manage what they do not measure.
It is important to track and report data related to circular
procurement goals and policies. Reporting would include
both the procurement of materials necessary for finishedproducts sold, as well as internal procurement practices
for business operations on technology purchased. Bothmeasurements will facilitate tracking of progress against
goals and allow for planning and/or course corrections
where needed.

Wider stakeholder ask

P2.7 Developand harmonize circular procurement global reporting standards
Circularity in raw material sourcing and product andservice procurement is currently not integrated into
existing ESG reporting guidelines – leading to a lack ofglobal reporting. The integration of circular sourcing andprocurement in ESG accounting standards (e.g., GRI, SASB)
and protocols by ESG reporting organizations (e.g., CDP)
would lead to more informed assessments of the progressor, lack thereof, towards circularity. Regular reporting
would enable setting, tracking and achieving circularity
goals at scale.

To support this process, consideration could be given to
initiatives such as the collaborative efforts between CDP,CDSB, GRI, IIRC and SASB. 20 It could also include existingguidance or policies on non-financial reporting, such as
the CSRD or the Disclosure and Engagement Guidance
to Accelerate Sustainable Finance for a Circular Economy
in Japan. 21

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 12

Pathway 3:

Scale responsible
business models
Responsible business models for circularity determine the ability of thecompany or value chain to unlock the full economic potential of circularelectronics. They create and orchestrate the ecosystem that realizes thebenefits of products and services designed for circularity.
These include the longer, more efficient use of products
and materials, as well as the implementation of effective
strategies to ensure respect for human rights throughout
the value chain. This Pathway focuses on responsible
circular business models for electronics, especially in theuse phase. This includes product use extension, sharing
platforms and product-as-a-service. 22
The key barriers to responsible circular business models
for the use phase of electronics include:• Missing transparency on demand, opportunity andbusiness value.

• Limited access to repair and refurbishment
for consumers.
• Knowledge gap with users and end users on safe,
simple data sanitization options, resulting in hoarding of
unsanitized devices.
• Lack of harmonized procurement policies and due
diligence requirements across international and national
value chains.
The following actions have been prioritized to scale
responsible, circular business models for the usephase of electronics.

• Limited access to financing.

Collective action

P3.1 E xplore consumer needs on circularity to drive demand and generatebusiness value
Enhancing current and developing value propositions ofcircular products and services is vital to driving demandand ensuring circular business models offer businessvalue. The key will be to center this development aroundconsumer needs. The consumer research and marketing
teams of electronics manufacturers and retailers will play
an important role in exploring and understanding thoseneeds and translating them into opportunities. Marketing
teams will also require training on how to drive the appeal
and market position of such products and services, andon how to substantiate green claims. NGOs could workwith research organizations to generate industry-wide
consumer insights to support a larger transition towards
circular business models.

Collective action

P3.2 C onsistently measure and communicate to investors about the performance of
circular business models
To support the transition to a circular electronics industry,
investors are adapting their understanding of value
creation, risk and short-term versus long-term profits.
It is the task of producers to consistently measure andcommunicate circular product and service performance
to investors, demonstrating the financial success ofcircular electronics to attract and sustain investment.
Standardized definitions and metrics for circular products
and services (see Pathway 1) can help producers set growthtargets for more circular portfolios and underpin financial
performance with metrics such as percentage of revenue
and profits from responsible circular offerings.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 13

Pathway 3:

Scale responsible business models

Collective action

P3.3 Assess Scope 3 GHG emission benefits of circular solutions
By 2040, the ICT sector is expected to produce around
14% of emissions globally. 23 Depending on the product,
Scope 3 emissions can constitute 50%–90% of anorganization’s total GHG emissions. 24 Though it is widely
accepted that Scope 3 emissions must be addressed, they
are also the hardest to measure and tackle.
Further efforts are needed to establish a common baselineand better understand the GHG emission contribution ofelectronic devices in different industries. Focus should be on
naming and quantifying the reduction potential of circularsolutions on an organization’s Scope 3 emissions. This will
involve development and use of corresponding emission
and circularity standards, including industry-specificguidance on harmonized reporting methods. Another focus
area could be the question of how to best verify or audit
these findings. Development work is ongoing in both areas
across and beyond the CEP partner organizations, such as
the Scope 3 Guidance for Telecommunications Operators, 25
developed by GSMA, GeSI and ITU, as well as the PACT
Pathfinder Framework, 26 powered by WBCSD.

Collective action

P3.4 Adapt accounting for circular electronics
Circular business models and circular electronics
procurement can lead to an abrupt change in cash flow
statements and balance sheets when introduced. This
becomes particularly clear with the example of productas-a-service models that have increased working capitaldemand and cash flows spread across a longer period oftime. In addition, rules on depreciation and residual value
estimation are biased towards a linear economy. They
can, for example, incentivize large buyers of electronics toregularly replace used IT equipment with new products to

exploit tax benefits. They can also present a biased pictureof the financial health of providers of second-hand andrefurbished products or products-as-a-service. Adaptationof current accounting practices through changes to the
U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) andInternational Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) canfurther support circular business models. For example,
this can include guidance for estimating residual values ofassets or for sizing the cost of repair and refurbishment.

Company action

P3.5 Invest in circular business models with social and environmental impact
More investment in responsible, circular business models isneeded to improve the social and environmental impact of
the electronics industry and help accelerate the transition
to circular electronics. Producers can invest in, or partner
on, the development of alternative business models thatprioritize design for circularity, sourcing circular materials
and exploring alternative take-back and collection models
that facilitate reuse, use life extension or recycling.

Public producer commitments to circularity can help drive
demand (see Pathway 2). Financial institutions need toact responsibly and increase financing options for circularbusiness models. This can be achieved by holisticallyintegrating circularity and human rights into assessmentsof financial and ESG performance.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 14

Pathway 3:

Scale responsible business models

Company action

P3.6 Utilize best practices on data sanitization
Reuse, refurbishment, remanufacturing and high-valuematerial recycling depends on the timely take-back of unused
electronic devices and e-waste. Fears surrounding data misuse
and insecurity through collected end-of-life devices is a serious
deterrent for users or end users when it comes to handing
over their old electronics. Standards and certifications are inplace to ensure sanitization processes with reliable technology
are carried out through certified facilities. However, the selfeducation for consumers that is required to fully understandwhich sources to trust leads to many devices being kept but
not used by consumers, or being disposed of in ways that offer
little or no value retention.

Electronics manufacturers can integrate a safe data
sanitization solution in all electronics that store personal
data. Users should be enabled to perform the data
sanitization themselves. Clear communication about
available data sanitization options can promote their use
and reduce insecurities.
Across jurisdictions globally, risks regarding unreliable data
sanitization are addressed through voluntary frameworks,
standards and guidelines, such as EPEAT, TCO, IEEE 2883 or
NIST SP800-88r1. Engagement of the private sector in thesepolicy developments is critical to ensure they are effective
and constructive.

Company action

P3.7 E nable independent repair providers and consumers to conduct appropriate
repairs safely
Electronics manufacturers need to support product use
extension by partnering with independent repair andrefurbishment providers. They can provide training andcertification of technical competence to professionals
to enable effective, accessible provision of repair andrefurbishment services to customers.
Leveraging the existing right-to-repair movement and circular
product design, there may also be certain types of repairsthat could be safely performed by the consumer. Electronics
manufacturers will need to determine which products are
suitable for this. Based on their assessment, repair manuals
and replacement parts can be produced to help consumers
perform simple and safe repairs themselves.

Since the launch of CEP, legislative developments havetaken place in both options for repair, such as the Digital
Fair Repair Act 27 in New York State and the Repairability
Index 28 in France. It is important that governments engage
the private sector in these policy developments to ensure
they contribute to productive solutions and avoid stalling
progress for companies who are ahead of legislation.
�nterdependent action:
P3.8 – Ensure legal clarity on liability for product defects
and access to insurance for repair and refurbishment

Wider stakeholder ask

P3.8 Ensure legal clarity on the liability for product defects and access to insurance
for repair and refurbishment
Repair providers play a key role in the circular economy,
providing fast, straightforward product services tolocal customers. Professional refurbishment providers,
including manufacturers, complement these services at
the regional, or even global, level. Currently, there is alack of clarity about who is responsible for repairs underthe manufacturer’s warranty, the voiding of warranty, thesafety of repairs, and repairs conducted by individuals
outside of warranty. This includes not only physical defects,
but also digital defects, such as malware. In addition, poorly
repaired products reflect primarily on the brand owner.
These structural problems limit the growth of the repair
and refurbishment sector and accessibility of these

services for customers. The European Commission’s plans
to establish a “right to repair” for electronics will require
the definition of responsibilities. 29 Policies clarifying
liability of repair and refurbishment providers andmanufacturers for any social, environmental or financial
damages resulting from a repaired product – as well aswork towards harmonizing product liability regulation
related to product use extension services at the regionaland global level – could help address the issue. The “right torepair” legislation currently in place in some countries andU.S. states can serve as an example. Collective insurance
schemes for repair operators could also be considered tofurther support repair and refurbishment markets.
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 15

Pathway 3:

Scale responsible business models

Wider stakeholder ask

P3.9 E nforce labor rights and enable the formalization of companies and workers
Informal repair providers, collectors and recyclers are
dominating the electronics value chain in many emerging
markets; markets that often have poor working conditions
and low environmental standards. To maximize positivesocial impact and advance decent work in the transition
to circularity, there is a need to promote respect for laborrights. This includes ensuring safe, adequate working
conditions, decent pay and dialogue between actors
ranging from government entities to employers andworkers’ organizations (including informal workers).
To support the formalization of enterprises, governments
can offer incentives such as reduced taxes during transitionor access to social security, etc. Furthermore, consistencyof due diligence requirements across international andnational frameworks is needed to support the development
or reinforcement of assurance processes. All companies inthe electronics value chain need to ensure human rights arerespected throughout their value chains. Calibrating thosestandards and deploying them in the development andscaling of circular business models needs to be a priority.
�nterdependent action:
P4.3 – Engage informal actors and support theirtransition to formalized entrepreneurs
P6.2 – Create an EHS assurance scheme forsecondary materials

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 16

Pathway 4:

Increase official
collection rate
Improving the take-back rate of electronics at the end of their useful lives
is essential for achieving 100% responsible repurposing of sold electricaland electronic equipment. Repurposing includes the reuse of products
and components through repair, refurbishment, remanufacturing, reuse/
reprocessing or parts harvesting and the high-quality recycling of materials
when reuse is not a viable option.
The focus is on increasing the return rate of devices andequipment that have been discarded by consumers,
including bulk consumers/large buyers (B2B, B2G) andindividual consumers/households (B2C). In 2022, thedocumented formal collection rate was 22.3%, with strong
regional variations.30
The key barriers to increased collection and responsible
repurposing include:• Lack of transparency throughout regional take-backecosystems globally.
• Lack of formal take-back infrastructure in developing
countries and emerging markets, connected to a lack offinance for such infrastructure.
• Lack of outcome-oriented policy and regulation, or weak
enforcement of these policies if they exist.

• Lack of legal obligations for retailers when it comes to EPR
provisions in e-waste regulation.
• Limited application of sustainable financing mechanisms
to policy and regulation on e-waste.
• Low uptake of collection and recycling targets being
enshrined in e-waste regulation.
• Lack of global consistency in approaches to regulating
and reporting on e-waste.
• Inconvenience and lack of incentives to encourage
consumers to properly return electronics, which, inturn, increases access to waste costs for collectors
and recyclers.
The following actions have been prioritized to increase theofficial collection rate.

Collective action

P4.1 Strengthen convenient take-back and collection
The actual return of electronics that are no longer used byconsumers (B2B, B2C and B2G) is a critical factor in takeback and collection. In addition to the major barrier ofdata security concerns (see Pathway 3), a lack of clarity on
responsibility for take-back of equipment, and the financial
costs or inconvenience associated with the returns process
limit collection rates.
To address these issues, producers, in collaboration withlocal governments, retailers, non-profit organizations andwaste companies, can incentivize consumers to return
equipment through investing in more convenient drop-off
locations. They can also explore ways to reward correct
behavior. Industry peers can take the lead in collaboratively
exploring how to create appropriate collection pathwaysfor different regions and product types and how to
implement these through pilots and scaling.
Better communication of EEE on specific take‑backopportunities and embedding messaging about takeback opportunities into the customer journey can raiseawareness. Moreover, collection channels need to be explicit
about the guaranteed data sanitization of their subsequentvalue chain partners. This is in relation to product andmaterial recovery and will help assure customers that any
remaining data on their device will be destroyed. To improvetake-back rates from large purchasers, producers canconsider integrating buy-back agreements, or product-as-aservice models, into purchasing contracts. Finally, producers
could make agreements with small, third-party repair
centers to boost collection and take-back of specific boards
and circuits with components that contain precious metals
and protected designs.
In emerging markets, there needs to be a clear focus
on implementing regulation (see P4.6) and boosting
convenient take-back and collection schemes. To articulate
opportunities for (further) development of regional
and local collection and take-back systems, a thoroughmapping and understanding of the current infrastructure
and available channels is recommended.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 17

Pathway 4:

Increase official collection rate

Collective action

P4.2 Consolidate historic e-waste mapping and assess recoverability
Most actions outlined in this roadmap are targeted towards
increasing responsible and efficient resource use, andavoiding dumping of e-waste going forward. However,industry players are aware that a significant amount ofe-waste has been improperly disposed of or accumulated inlarge storage facilities in past decades. With the support ofresearchers, producers can consolidate data about historice-waste to get a better picture of locations and volumes,
and assess recoverability of historic waste. This will be used
to develop regional strategies for efficiently recovering
these resources.

Company action

P4.3 Engage informal actors and support their transition to formalized entrepreneurs
In many developing countries and emerging markets,
informal workers and worker networks dominate WEEE
collection and recycling. While transitioning the informal
sector (see Pathway 3), governments should do more toformalize unofficial take-back activities to ensure decent
labor and environmental standards. In cooperation withgovernments, NGOs and development organization, industry
players can create frameworks for informal workers toparticipate in formal markets. They can also pilot financial
mechanisms for informal actors to formalize their practices
in a decentralized circular system. Increasing their financial
return and the speed of payment will be key to developing aneffective incentive.

These actions support the transition of informal actors toformalized entrepreneurs and enable improvements inhealth and safety practices. Building on successful take-backsolutions, collection networks and logistics developed by the
informal economy can ensure easy access to and availabilityof take-back for many more consumers. In collaboration with
NGOs and international organizations, certified recyclers can
expand current collection work and develop pilot projects
that create business models for buying e-waste frominformal collectors, ensuring safe material processing.
�nterdependent action:
P3.9 – Enforce labor rights and enable the formalizationof companies and workers

Company action

P4.4 Tie take-back and collection to the business model
Integrating solutions for take-back and collection into
the business model is an additional driver of enhanced
collection rates. Circular business models based onownership retention, such as leasing or pay-per-use
models, are one option. However, take-back solutions
can also be added to existing models. Manufacturers canidentify viable solutions (e.g., through agreements with

universities and local research centers) for integratingtake-back and collection into their value propositions.
They can also invest in creating digital solutions thatfacilitate take-back (e.g., reverse vending machines,
product passports, etc.). 31

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 18

Pathway 4:

Increase official collection rate

Wider stakeholder ask

P4.5 Harmonize definitions and reporting for WEEE/EEE take-back and collection
A first step towards harmonizing global approaches totake-back and collection involves improving consistency
in reporting and measurement. International researchand reporting initiatives (e.g., Global E-waste Statistics
Partnership, GRI, OECD, UN Statistics Division, SASB, etc.),

in cooperation with governments, can drive convergenceon definitions and reporting for WEEE/EEE take-back,collection and recycling rates. It is recommended tostart at the national or regional level and move towards
creating global standards.

Wider stakeholder ask

P4.6 Increase public-private cooperation in the development of effective EPR
regulation
EPR has proven to be a successful regulatory framework
in WEEE management. This is true of countries thatlack legislation on e-waste management, and where
private sector-led collection schemes are difficult toestablish. In these geographies, strong public-private
cooperation is needed to develop effective EPR regulationthat encourages the right actions by all stakeholders.
Governments can benefit from support by experienced
producer responsibility organizations, manufacturers andrecyclers. They can learn from models that have beensuccessfully implemented in other developing countries
and roll these out to vastly increase the global coverageof e-waste legislation. Public-private cooperation is
also key to improving enforcement of existing regulationor enhancing regulation to drive better outcomes(e.g., through avoiding inconsistencies or tailoring policies
to the type of equipment.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 19

Pathway 5:

Aggregate for reuse
and recycling
A reverse supply chain moves end-of-use electronics from areas witha surplus to areas with the capacity for high-quality, safe and efficient
repurposing (e.g., repair, refurbishment or recycling).
Aggregating used EEE and WEEE is particularly important,as high-quality repurposing of an increasingly varied arrayof products – from smartphones to capital equipment –requires specialization and investment in all links ofthe value chain. To facilitate repurposing at scale, theresponsible, transboundary movement of used electronics
will need to enable economies of scale based on efficientand globalized reverse supply chains.

International regulation for shipment of circular resources
Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous waste and their disposal
The Basel Convention is a multi-lateral treaty established in 1992 and signed by 188 parties. Members of theconvention have committed to control transboundary movements of hazardous waste and, since December 2019, toban exports from developed to developing countries to prevent illegal dumping. Every transboundary movement of
hazardous waste requires an approval process based on the Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure. PIC processes
are administered by authorities of the importing and exporting country as well as the transit countries, giving all
countries the right to refuse shipments of unwanted waste. The Basel Convention is complemented by other regional
initiatives such as OECD, EU WSD or US special arrangements.

Key barriers to responsible transboundary
movement include:• Lack of capacity and effective implementation of theBasel Convention in various countries.
• Divergent implementation of the Basel Convention at anational level, leading to system complexity.
• Different views around the level of control for the tradeof used EEE and WEEE that persist despite the revisionof Technical Guidelines in the Basel Convention. This
revision aims to provide more clarity on definitions andclassifications for regulatory terms such as “non-waste”(used EEE) and “waste” (WEEE), and “hazardous” and“non-hazardous waste”.

• Largely paper-based permitting process for PIC that makeit challenging to act quickly on minor changes in productor shipping routes.
• Illegal trading of WEEE and continued illegal dumping indeveloping countries.
As a result of these barriers, reverse logistics for usedelectronic products are at least 31% more costly thanoutbound logistics for new products. If classified as“hazardous”, they are up to 190% more costly. 32
The following actions have been prioritized for facilitating
aggregation of EEE or WEEE for reuse and/or recycling.
This will also ensure the highest social and environmental
standards in transboundary shipments, supporting theprinciples and commitments of the Basel Convention.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 20

Pathway 5:

Aggregate for reuse and recycling

Collective action

P5.1 A ccelerate progress towards the digitization of the PIC procedure under the
Basel Convention
Currently, administrative requirements for transboundary
shipments are largely paper based. Original notification
documents must be signed in hard copy and posted tocompetent authorities in the importing, exporting andtransit countries for approval. A strong digitization effort
for PIC processes can significantly streamline processes,
reducing transaction costs for legitimate shipments andpreventing delays. This includes points of import andexport, as well as every point along the reverse supply

chain. Members of the Basel Convention should continue
to prioritize and accelerate planned digitization efforts.i
Partnerships with other international e-government
initiatives, logistics providers and other companies, as wellas groups such as the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitationand the Prevent Waste Alliance can help bring global
best practices to the PIC procedure. Industry can play animportant role in ensuring solutions are made possible byactively engaging in their development.

Collective action

P5.2 Pilot“trusted trader agreements” that ease the complexity of moving waste
electronics to certified recyclers
Waste equipment flows tend to follow a path of least
resistance. Efforts to assure paths lead to a formal
repurposing facility and not to the informal economy are
critical. Based on bilateral arrangements of competent
national authorities, logistics providers, electronics
producers and recyclers can set up “trusted trader
agreements”. These are for shipments that channel usedequipment from pre-approved collectors or processers(including original equipment manufacturers withcollection programs) to pre-approved and certified
recovery facilities under a trusted trader system.
This would cover shipments of waste intended for
reintroduction of materials into the circular economy.
The system enabling this needs to be transparent androbust and could be created through a multi-stakeholderiprocess. Shipments should not be possible to countries
that do not wish to receive waste. Regional agreements,
such as Africa’s Bamako Convention, will need to berespected. Although such agreements are made between
countries, it is the industry that would be obligated tofollow implementation. There is current support for theconcept of such agreements, but no pragmatic modelof what it could look like. A group of experts could cometogether to design a model arrangement for a resource
recovery lane or equivalent, consulting with trade, customs,
business and non-profit leaders. The arrangement will bedelivered as inspiration to champion governments to takeforward. Countries would be able to pursue trusted trader
bilateral or regional agreements under Article 11 of theBasel Convention.

The Basel Convention Secretariat has initiated a working group on exploring electronic approaches to notification and movement of documentsby request of the COP, albeit with a medium priority in the workplan for the period 2022–2023 (Source: UNEP-CHWOEWG.12-14.English.pdf).
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 21

Pathway 5:

Aggregate for reuse and recycling

Collective action

P5.3 Plan sorting, pre-processing and recycling operations at the regional andglobal level
As well as documented challenges with cross-border trade ofcircular goods and materials, the global reverse supply chain
system for electronics could be optimized through strategicplanning of e-waste management infrastructure. National,
or even regional, waste volumes can be too small to attract
investment in specialist recycling facilities, leading to a lack ofcompetitive recycling infrastructure in emerging regions.
Collaboration between regional governments to develop
a strategic perspective on e-waste management could
help address this issue. They can engage with specialist
recyclers to establish local centers for sorting, preprocessing and recycling, combining e-waste volumes fromseveral countries to enable economies of scale and attract

expertise and investment. Where local or regional facilities
are not economically viable, they can consider how to
enable access to international end-processing facilities (seePathway 5). To encourage development of quality recycling
infrastructure in emerging markets and developing
countries, governments will also need to consider
incentivization. This could be through using certified formal
recyclers or minimizing business risks associated withillegal leakage of materials into the informal economy.
Depending and interdependent action:
P6.5 – Incentivize technology investments for meeting
future secondary material demand

Wider stakeholder ask

P5.4 I mprove the classification of waste at borders through capacity building
Collected electronics destined for repair, refurbishment
or recycling are categorized at the border as either“non-waste”, “waste” or “hazardous waste”. Definitions
are often interpreted (or misinterpreted) differently
across jurisdictions, leading to uncertainty around theclassification of waste. International organizations cancollaborate with policymakers and customs officials incountries that are part of the global electronics value chain.

They can provide training and build capacity on the criticalassessment of incoming and outgoing shipments and theapplication of the Basel Convention. The training should
include implementing the new Harmonized System (HS)customs codes for electrical and electronic waste that tookeffect in 2022. More sophisticated traceability systems
could also enhance waste management at granular level.

Wider stakeholder ask

P5.5 Move towards an insurance model for financial guarantees
If a company wants to make a shipment subject to thenotification procedure, they must first provide funds
in escrow to cover the shipment’s storage, return
and/or treatment in case of non-compliant shipments. Thisfinancial guarantee is linked to each individual notification
request. The money must be accessible until the final
certificate of environmentally safe repurposing is given. To
avoid locking up significant amounts of capital and simplify

regulatory procedures, members of the Basel Convention
should consider regulatory adjustments that allow for thefinancial guarantee system to be converted to an insurance
system. Guarantees are only activated at a rate of 0.01%, so
it is likely the insurance sector would be willing to serve thisspace. 33 Currently, updates on the approach for financial
guarantees in the Convention are being discussed, opening
a window of opportunity to advance it. 34

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 22

Pathway 5:

Aggregate for reuse and recycling

Wider stakeholder ask

P5.6 Move to an opt-out system for transit countries and allow for flexibility
The Basel Convention requires that all transit countries
give explicit consent to every transboundary shipment by
undertaking the full PIC procedure. According to company
disclosures, transit countries seem to be the least likely togo through this procedure as they have the least at stakein the process. Members of the Basel Convention need toevaluate an opt-out system for transit countries that should
be notified of planned shipments – retaining the right toblock them. If the country does not block the shipment
within an agreed timeframe, this should be considered
as tacit consent to the transit. There is ongoing work on
this topic. 35

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 2 3

Pathway 6:

Scale secondary
material markets
Increasing the availability, quality and responsible sourcing of secondary
materials and scaling recycled content in new product manufacturing are
key levers for reducing demand for virgin materials and closing the loop on
materials for circular electronics.
Convening the manufacturers who drive demand forsecondary materials with the recyclers and processorsthat supply them will help formalize the sector, achieve
economies of scale and drive market competitiveness of
secondary materials.
Key barriers to increasing high-quality recycling and theuse of recycled content in manufacturing include:• Lack of data standards and definitions forsecondary materials.
• Lack of EHS assurance to responsible labor andenvironmental practices in the recycling sector.
• Lack of transparency on the origin and content ofscrap material.

• Lack of transparency on long-term supply and demand.
• Lack of investment in recycling technology.
• Lack of competitive, quality recycling infrastructure in
emerging markets, which is required to reduce the risk ofpollution and problematic working conditions associatedwith the improper end-of-life handling of WEEE in
informal channels.
Solutions to some of these barriers have been describedthrough actions categorized under Pathways 4 and 5.
The following additional actions have been prioritized
to enable scaling of efficient and responsible secondary
material markets.

Collective action

P6.1 Develop data standards and definitions for secondary materials
Industry-wide standards and definitions on thecharacteristics of secondary materials are critical forrecyclers to provide the same level of material performanceassurance as virgin material suppliers. Categories of focus
should include: material quality and quantity,ii chain ofcustody iii and production characteristics.iv Where limitedalignment on these key definitions was seen as a serious
barrier during development of the original CEP Roadmap,
current perception is that many of the ambiguous
concepts have evolved into more concrete and commonly

understood language. This is reflected in ISO 14021, SCS
Recycled Content Standard. As more standards become
available (such as ISO 59020, currently under development),
these can be compiled and shared for reference.
Where gaps continue to exist, multi-stakeholder taskforces,
including recyclers, designers and sourcing specialists frommanufacturers, can form credible taskforces responsiblefor defining scope, data standards and definitions for
key categories.

ii

i.e., volume, material type, recycled content, material composition including harmful components, performance and purity.

iii

i.e., origin, destination, previous owners, facility and country.

iv

i.e., EHS practices, recycling processes, material handling, workers’ safety and environmental management systems.
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 2 4

Pathway 6:

Scale secondary material markets

Collective action

P6.2 Create an EHS assurance scheme for secondary materials
There is a lack of EHS assurance for the repair,refurbishment, remanufacturing and recycling sector.
It makes the purchasing of secondary materials anoften-unacceptable business risk for many electronics
manufacturers as it bypasses their due diligence processes
in other parts of the value chain. This curbs demand
growth and slows integration of more recycled content into
new electronic products.
Certain EHS standards are available for early stagesof recycling, but they do not provide full life-cycle due
diligence for material procurement. The objective should
be to drive consistency in EHS expectations for therecycling sector, especially in relation to engagementwith the informal sector. The long-term imperative is todesign and implement a validation scheme that provides
onsite due diligence and assurance to EHS practices. Data
standardization and reporting schemes could be expanded
to include verification of EHS assurance in secondary
material sources.
Interdependent action:
P3.9 – Enforce labor rights and enable the formalizationof companies and workers

Collective action

P6.3 Standardize material tracking and provide traceability and sourcing
transparency
Standardized material tracking and traceability can help
overcome the lack of information about origin and routesof recovered materials. It can also improve assurance
on material performance and EHS standards. As a firststep, material suppliers, electronics manufacturers andrecyclers – with the support of standards organizations andauditors – can define standardized technical data sheets.
These can be applied at all tiers of the value chain, using
virgin materials as a benchmark. They can then convene
parties that are interested in the collaboration to define

necessary data,v identify data sources, transferability andconfidentiality, and align on reporting mechanisms andprocesses. The ability to trace recycled content to a level ofassurance that wasn’t sourced from poor EHS practices canbe developed over time.
Depending and interdependent action:
P0.1 – Explore the implementation of value chain dataexchange mechanisms to enable circularity

Company action

P6.4 C ommit to scale secondary material use in the long termLong-term commitments by manufacturers to procure
recycled content would inspire confidence among recycling
industry players to invest in technology that creates
more reliable supply chains. Commitments and targets
for secondary material demand should be long term sothat supply from recyclers, smelters and processers canbe developed to meet demand. Industry associations,
universities and research centers, or NGOs, cansupport in creating space for designers from electronics
manufacturers and recyclers to collaborate. This canallow them to focus on overcoming technical barriersv

related to the use of secondary materials and to increasetransparency on current and future demand for materials –especially scarce and rare earth metals, mass metals
and plastics.
Depending and interdependent action:
P1.3 – Develop and roll out an education program andtools for circular electronics design

e.g., chain of custody, origin, volume, quality, EHS standards.
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 25

Pathway 6:

Scale secondary material markets

Wider stakeholder ask

P6.5 Incentivize technology investments for meeting future secondary
material demand
Certain conditions currently limit the financial viabilityof recycling operations and incentives for investment
in new technologies and infrastructure. These include
unstable scrap material flows (see Pathway 5), decreasing
precious metal contents, increasing material complexity
and the significant costs of compliance and de-pollution.
To ensure future demand for secondary materials can be
met, governments and financial institutions should create
financial support mechanisms. This can be for technology
development in the recycling industry (including chemical
recycling), especially automated sorting, and preprocessing infrastructure that can handle advancing
product and material complexity. Because demand forrecycling is driven by secondary raw material demand fromproducers, it is key to align the two industries. In addition,better enforcement of e-waste regulations would supportcompliant recyclers by preventing undercutting of market
prices by actors not following EHS standards.
Depending and interdependent action:
P2.5 – Commit to meeting the demand for circular
products and services
P5 – All actions (reverse logistics enable economies ofscale in recycling)

Wider stakeholder ask

P6.6 Incentivize the sale of secondary materials
In addition to financial support for investment and better
enforcement of social and environmental regulations,
incentives for the sale of secondary materials can help
accelerate the transition from virgin material production.
This is especially relevant where secondary material
production exceeds that of virgin materials. This canbe caused by value chain complexities (e.g., regulatory
processes related to reverse logistics, see Pathway 5) or
lower economies of scale. Downstream incentives forcircular products should be combined with upstream
incentives for circular materials and supported by policies
that increase the sale of recycled materials (e.g., tax
reductions, subsidies) during the circularity transition.
Depending and interdependent action:
P2.5 – Commit to meeting the demand for circular
products and services

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 26

Cross-pathway theme

This edition of the CEP Roadmap recognizes the field of data exchange
across the value chain as one of substantial public and private sector
development that crosses all pathways.
Digital Product Passports (DPPs), and similar data exchangemechanisms, are expected to increase transparency
across supply chains and for the general public. This will
empower informed decisions by different stakeholders
throughout the product life cycle. Therefore, data exchangemechanisms could become an important lever in theindustry transition to circularity, helping alleviate key
barriers across the six Pathways. They can also support the
emergence and scaling of new circular business models
for electronics.

Collective action

P0.1 Explore the implementation of value chain data exchange mechanisms toenable circularity
Our understanding of potential value chain data exchange
applications to enable electronics circularity is expanding
beyond material tracking, traceability and sourcing
transparency (see action P6.3). This is reflected in major
policy developments, e.g., the EC’s proposal to create DPPs
that make product-related information available across theentire product life cycle among supply chain businesses,
authorities and consumers. The first product groups,
including electronics, are expected to be affected by thisregulation in 2026/27.
Many DPP elements, such as scope, data requirements
and technical requirements, are still under development.
Industry players, supported by NGOs and other relevant
stakeholders, need to continue proactively helping shapesuch elements. They must also address some of theemerging barriers, such as data complexity, availability,
standardization, interoperability and confidentiality.

Companies can then collaborate in testing theoperationalization of data exchange for circularity acrosstheir value chain(s). When doing so, they can build on
existing and/or evolving standards and protocols, sector
guidelines and frameworks and learn from other value
chain data exchange initiatives. Early engagement would
also allow companies to prepare for upcoming regulatory
requirements and identify new business opportunities.
Pre-requisite actions:P6.1 – Develop data standards and definitions forsecondary materials
P6.3 – Standardize material tracking and provide
traceability and sourcing transparency
Depending and interdependent actions:
All other actions

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 27

Measuring progress against
CEP Roadmap actions
The CEP is an action-oriented initiative, seeking ways to measure its contribution
towards a circular electronics industry.
It intends to take a meaningful, yet pragmatic, approachthat acknowledges the limits of what information isrealistically available, as well as the resources needed toacquire reliable and representative data.
The CEP progress measurement framework logicallyfollows the roadmap structure and action levels.

Progress on collective actions
Twenty collective actions are at the heart of CEP’s purpose
as a collaboration and coordination platform. This is where
we can establish whether the identified industry transition
barriers are being relieved on an action-by-action basis,
based on the following principles:1.

All actions on the roadmap contribute equally tooverall progress.

2.

All collective actions have a pre-definedsuccess definition.

3.

For each project it initiates, CEP determines the
expected contribution towards resolving the specificaction. For some projects, this will be 100%, when theypresent a full solution to the action. However, mostprojects will only address a certain part of an action(i.e., a specific product group or one particular stepin the process towards resolve). Given the ambitious
nature of the roadmap actions, most will not be
possible to resolve with just one project.

4.

KPIs are determined on a project level, both forthe output of the project (the direct deliverable,i.e., a report publication) as well as for the outcome(the purpose for which the deliverable was developed,
i.e., number of readers, literature references, adoption
rate, etc.).

5.

As projects get completed, progress on the KPIs drives
a certain percentage point progress on the roadmap
action as a whole.

Progress on company actions
Company data regarding its circular transition is sensitive
and, industry-wide, data sets are currently not aligned oravailable. Until CEP members see value in communicating
shared progress data through CEP, we leave reporting on
individual progress to the companies.
Companies that are not yet preparing for the dataexchange platforms being developed, and on a certain
level becoming regulated, will need to start doing so.
CEP recommends using existing industry frameworks for
progress measurement, such as the Circular Transition
Indicators (CTI v4.0). Developed by WBCSD, it is a simple
objective and quantitative framework that can beapplied at the company, business unit, facility or product(group) level.

Progress on wider stakeholder ask
While the CEP community has a clear view of topics
addressed through the wider stakeholder ask, it would
welcome engagement and conversation with thatstakeholder landscape to further advance them. CEP willkeep a close eye on developments within these actions;however, it recognizes it cannot take responsibility forthe progress of these asks. Progress will therefore be
reported on a case-by-case basis qualitatively rather
than quantitatively.

Measuring the global circulartransition
Progress on the CEP Roadmap enables us to understand
if we are meeting our own objectives. However, the end
goal of the partnership is to accelerate the global industry
transition. Ultimately, CEP’s work helps companies
throughout the electronics value chain accelerate theirindividual circular transition. The success and impact of
our work and industry transition can only be measured
through macro-level data, for which we refer to reports
like the Circularity Gap Report 36 and the Global
E-waste Monitor.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 2 8

Conclusion

In the past three years, the CEP Roadmap has provenitself to provide a valuable source of reference for theelectronics industry and wider stakeholder landscape.
Its comprehensive systemic approach to what is needed
for circular transformation has been widely appreciated.
Keeping the actions clear, accurate and up to dateis essential to continue guiding the industry and its
stakeholders on how they can contribute to the circularelectronics vision.

None of the actions can be achievedby a single stakeholder category
While the roadmap is structured around six Pathways,
no action can be achieved by a single category ofplayers. Cooperation between value chain players andother stakeholders, such as public authorities, researchorganizations and academia, financial institutions, social
enterprises, media and consumers, will be key to executing
the roadmap.
Individual groups can function as catalysts. For example,
defining best practices for data sanitization could be an
action led by manufacturers in collaboration with users;
translating this best practice into policy will require action
by public authorities.

Continuing developing sharedunderstanding and clear definitions
remains key for all actions
While the concept of a circular economy is not new,developing a circular electronic product or service is nota simple process. In just a few years, we have come along way in developing a shared, cross-value chain vision
for what a circular electronics industry could look likein the CEP Circular Electronics System Map: An Industry
Blueprint for Action. 37 This agreed understanding, amongsome of the industry’s biggest and most circular-advanced
companies across the value chain, articulates the criteria
for a circular product – as well as a path towards industry
transformation. On a circularity measurement level,
frameworks like the Circular Transition Indicators (CTI) aredeveloping, with a specific guide for the electronics sector
to be expected soon.
Further establishing a common language will facilitate
increased cooperation between value chain partners andkey stakeholders. As with the sustainable agri-food sector(e.g., organic certification) or clean energy sector (e.g.,guarantee of origins for green electricity), measurable

and verifiable criteria are needed to effectively market
circular products and services. The same applies to highquality secondary materials with assurance to material
performance and EHS practices.

Strengthening and expanding
existing processes will also support
the transition
Changing the existing system requires publicly financed
incentives for the private sector, which could include
encouraging private investment in waste processing
capacities or for secondary material procurement. Without
public support, a “coalition of the willing” will not have thepower or capacity to sustain change with long-term benefits
for society at large.
In addition to direct or indirect economic support,
private-public sector collaboration can ensure effective
and outcome-oriented policies. This includes accounting
practices that favor circular solutions, accelerated PIC
processes for responsible transboundary movement withcircular objectives, the implementation and enforcement oflabor rights and the development of effective EPR regulationthat encourages the right actions by all stakeholders.

Circular electronics is a key
contributor to the UN SDGs
The tech industry is uniquely positioned to raise awarenessof circularity and make it tangible for people around theglobe. Nearly everyone is connected to an ICT device
reflecting the opportunity, but also the responsibility,
the tech sector faces. It has the potential to significantly
contribute to the UN SDGs and enhance people’s lives, but
it also needs to ensure responsible action along the wholevalue chain. Incorporating circular thinking and value into
electronic products and services allows companies to
responsibly maintain the growing prominence of technology
while enabling society to remain resilient, innovativeand sustainable.
This updated roadmap can support the industry and its
stakeholders to identify and implement the concrete
actions needed to enable a circular transition. The
CEP facilitates much-needed collaboration among key
stakeholders and helps track progress to realize the vision
behind each identified Pathway.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 29

AnnexGlossary
Business model

A business model describes how a company creates, delivers and captures value. It is
described through the value proposition, resource requirements, cost structure, revenue
streams, activities, customer segments, communication channels and partners.

Circular economy

A circular economy is an economic model that is restorative and regenerative by design, andaims to keep products, components and materials at their highest utility and value while
minimizing raw materials input into the value chain and reducing waste streams.

Circular electronics

In line with common measurement frameworks for circularity, circular electronic products
are defined by three key attributes: 1. they are made from verified circular resources; 2.
they were designed for use-phase optimization and material recovery; and 3. they are infact used based on circular principles and actually recovered at end of life [based on CEP’s
Circular Electronics System Map].

Circular Electronics
Partnership (CEP)The CEP is a coordination platform for its partners, industry members and the wider
stakeholder network, driving collective and converging action on global initiatives forcircular electronics. See the introduction for further details.

Circular product design

Incorporating elements in the design stage of a product with the aim of enabling acircular economy. These elements include, but are not limited to, designing for reusability,
recyclability, upgradability, durability, modularity, repairability, as well as the energy andwater efficiency of a product, product parts, components and materials. Also referred to as“design for circularity” in this report [based on ITU-T L.1023].

Collection

Both formal and informal collections are grouped together in this report. This is separate
from take-back services conducted by businesses whose operation is to supply, purchase,sell or lease EEE. Collection is the act of collecting something from a place or from people.

ConsumerThis includes individuals and households, but also bulk consumers such as public andcommercial users of EEE. A person or entity who purchases goods and services for
personal use.

Digital ProductPassport (DPP)

A DPP is a structured collection of product related data with pre-defined scope andagreed data ownership and access rights conveyed through a unique identifier and thatis accessible via electronic means through a data carrier. The intended scope of the DPP,
proposed by the European Commission, is information related to sustainability, circularity,
value retention for reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling [definition by CIRPASS].

Electronic products

All types of electronic and electrical equipment as defined by the EU WEEE Directive
2012/19/ EU. This includes devices and equipment from six product categories: temperatureexchange equipment, screens and monitors, lamps, large equipment, small equipment andsmall IT.

Electronics manufacturer

A business manufacturing electronic products, including original equipment manufacturers.
Manufacturers can also be producers if they sell or lease directly to consumers.

E-wasteWaste generated from discarded electronics that can no longer be repaired for reuse.
Products and components that are labeled as WEEE but destined for reuse are not at theend of their life and hence not considered e-waste.

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 30

Extended producer
responsibility (EPR)

Policy principle to promote total life cycle environmental improvements of product systems
by extending the responsibility of the manufacturers of the product to various parts of theentire life cycle of the product, and especially to the take-back, recycling and final disposalof the product [ITU-T L.1021].

�nformal economy

Informal system that operates without clear regulation or quality control and outside theguidelines of governmental authority, labor standards or taxation.

Prior �nformed Consent(P�C) procedure

Under the Basel Convention, transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and othernotifiable wastes must follow a PIC notification process in which the competent authority
in the state of export is to provide a notification to the competent authorities of the Stateof import and any State of transit. The State of import shall respond to the notifier, e.g.,consenting the movement, and a State of transit may provide written or tacit consent.

ProducerAnyone who places electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) on the national market of acountry. This includes legal entities that manufacture EEE or have EEE manufactured andsell it within the country, resell EEE within the country or import EEE into the country.

Raw material

A basic material that can be used to produce components, finished products orintermediate materials. A raw material can result from primary or secondary resources.

Recycled content

Percentage of secondary materials within a raw material, component or product.

Repurposing

Repurposing includes reuse of products and components through repair, reprocessing,refurbishment, remanufacturing or parts harvesting, and the high-quality recycling ofmaterials where reuse is not a viable option.

ReturnDetermined by availability and accessibility of facilities, this term is used mainly inreference to individuals or households who return used or end-of-primary-life EEE to adrop-off point or to an equipment manufacturer or supplier of EEE, either with or without
financial incentives.

Reuse

Used as a broader term in this report to summarize the reuse of products and components
through repair, refurbishment, remanufacturing, reprocessing or parts harvesting.

Reverse supply chain

The process whereby products that are dispossessed by the consumer are collected andmoved to a place where they can be efficiently and safely reused or recycled.

Sourcing

Procurement of products, components or raw materials (whether virgin or
secondary materials).

Stakeholder

Any actor, institution, group or individual – public or private – with an interest or a role toplay in a societal, economic or environmental decision-making process.

Take-backThe return of electronic products that have reached the end-of-primary-life cycle intheir original form and are incapable of performing their original intended function orthat their purchaser or consumers no longer need (B2C, B2B and B2G). Its purpose is tomaintain the life-cycle value of EEE through reuse, repair, reprocessing, remanufacturing or
refurbishment or, as a last resort, through safe and efficient environmental management.

Traceability

The ability to identify, track and trace elements of a product or substance as it moves
along the life cycle, from raw materials to finished products and applications and the otherway around.

Waste Electrical andA term used to cover all EEE that has reached the end of its primary life in its original
Electronic Equipment (WEEE) manufactured form. WEEE is incapable of performing its original intended function but is
not technically waste, rather an asset or resource in the context of a circular economy. But
WEEE is used in this report as a common term understood by the global community (seealso the definition for electronic products).

Disclaimer: This content is provided for general information purposes and is not intended to be used in place of consultation with professional advisors.
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 31

List of acronyms

Acronym

Meaning

Acronym

Meaning

B2B

Business-to-Business

ISOInternational Organizationfor Standardization

B2C

Business-to-Consumer
ISWA

International Solid Waste Association

B2G

Business-to-Government
IT

Information Technology

BMZ

German Ministry of Economic
Cooperation and Development

ITU

International
Telecommunication UnionNGO

Non-Governmental Organization

OECD

Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development

CDP

formerly Carbon Disclosure Project

CDSB

Climate Disclosure Standards Board

CEP

Circular Electronics Partnership

CTI

Circular Transition Indicators

P1, P2, etc.

Pathway

DPP

Digital Product Passport

PAHs

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

EEE

Electrical and Electronic Equipment

PCPs

Polychlorinated Biphenyls

EHS

Environment, Health, Safety

PIC

Prior Informed Consent Regulation

EPEATElectronic Product Environmental
Assessment Tool

SASB

Sustainability AccountingStandards Board

EPR

Extended Producer Responsibility

SDGs

Sustainable Development Goals

ESG

Environmental, Social, Governance

TCO

EC

European Commission

Certification by Swedish
Confederation ofProfessional Employees

EU

European UnionUN

United Nations

GAAP

Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles

UNEP

UN Environment Program

UNU

UN University

GHG

Greenhouse Gas

USD

US Dollar

GRI

Global Reporting Initiative

VAT

Value Added Tax

HSHarmonized System

WBCSD

ICT

Information andCommunications Technology

World Business Council for
Sustainable Development

WEEE

IFRS

International Financial
Reporting Standards

Waste Electrical andElectronic Equipment

WHO

World Health Organization

IIRC

International Integrated
Reporting Council
2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 32

Acknowledgments

We thank all the organizations that contributed to thedevelopment of the initial and revised version of this roadmap:
Accenture

Global Resale, Ltd

Philips

AmazonGlobant

Arcelik

Globe Telecom

Platform for Accelerating the
Circular Economy (PACE)

ATEA

GoogleAverdaGroverBaker & McKenzie LLP

GSMA

Cisco

Hewlett Packard Enterprise

Clariant

HP Inc.

Closing the Loop

HuaweiCurrysiNEMIDell Technologies

International
Telecommunication Union

DustinResponsible Business Alliance(RBA)
Safaricom
Seagate Technology
Security Matters
Sims Lifecycle Services
Solving the e-Waste Problem(StEP)TES
Umicore Precious Metals
Refining

Enel Global Infrastructure
and Networks

Iron Mountain

ERI

Karo Sambhav Private Limited

ERM

Kingfa Sci. and Tech. Co.

Glencore U.S.

KPMG

Global Electronics Council(GEC)

LenovoMicrosoft

World Business Council for
Sustainable Development(WBCSD)

Global Enabling Sustainability
Initiative (GeSI)

NamiGreen

World Economic Forum (WEF)

Nokia

Xerox

Jabil

VeoliaVirgin Media O2
Whirlpool EMEA spa

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 33

Bibliography

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Circular Electronics Partnership. (2021). Our vision of a circularelectronics industry. https://cep2030.org/files/cep-vision.pdf

15European Parliament and Council. (2012). Directive 2012/19/EU on
waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). Official Journal of
the European Union, (197/38).
Cornelis P. Baldé, Ruediger Kuehr, Tales Yamamoto, Rosie McDonald,
Elena D’Angelo, Shahana Althaf, Garam Bel, Otmar Deubzer, Elena
Fernandez-Cubillo, Vanessa Forti, Vanessa Gray, Sunil Herat,
Shunichi Honda, Giulia Iattoni, Deepali S. Khetriwal, Vittoria Ludadi Cortemiglia, Yuliya Lobuntsova, Innocent Nnorom, Noémie
Pralat, Michelle Wagner (2024). International Telecommunication
Union (ITU) and United Nations Institute for Training and Research(UNITAR). 2024. Global E-waste Monitor 2024. (Geneva/Bonn).
Holgate, P. (2018). How do we tackle the fastest growing waste
stream on the planet? World Economic Forum Article. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/02/how-do-we-tackle-thefastestgrowing-waste-stream-on-the-planet/
Forti V., Baldé C.P., Kuehr R., Bel G. (2020). The Global E-waste
Monitor 2020: Quantities, flows and the circular economy potential.
United Nations University (UNU)/United Nations Institute forTraining and Research (UNITAR) - co-hosted SCYCLE Programme,
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) & International Solid
Waste Association (ISWA). (Bonn/Geneva/Rotterdam).
Cornelis P. Baldé, Ruediger Kuehr, Tales Yamamoto, Rosie McDonald,
Elena D’Angelo, Shahana Althaf, Garam Bel, Otmar Deubzer, Elena
Fernandez-Cubillo, Vanessa Forti, Vanessa Gray, Sunil Herat,
Shunichi Honda, Giulia Iattoni, Deepali S. Khetriwal, Vittoria Ludadi Cortemiglia, Yuliya Lobuntsova, Innocent Nnorom, Noémie
Pralat, Michelle Wagner (2024). International Telecommunication
Union (ITU) and United Nations Institute for Training and Research(UNITAR). 2024. Global E-waste Monitor 2024. (Geneva/Bonn.)
Belkhir, L., & Elmeligi, A. (2018). Assessing ICT global emissions
footprint: Trends to 2040 & recommendations. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 177, 448-463. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/abs/pii/S095965261733233X?via%3Dihub

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

WRI & WBCSD. (2011). Background Information: Frequently Asked
Questions (FAQ). Greenhouse Gas Protocol. https://ghgprotocol.org/
calculation-tools-faq

25

WRI & WBCSD. (2011). Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard.
Greenhouse Gas Protocol. https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-valuechain-scope-3-standard

26

Cornelis P. Baldé, Ruediger Kuehr, Tales Yamamoto, Rosie McDonald,
Elena D’Angelo, Shahana Althaf, Garam Bel, Otmar Deubzer, Elena
Fernandez-Cubillo, Vanessa Forti, Vanessa Gray, Sunil Herat,
Shunichi Honda, Giulia Iattoni, Deepali S. Khetriwal, Vittoria Ludadi Cortemiglia, Yuliya Lobuntsova, Innocent Nnorom, Noémie
Pralat, Michelle Wagner (2024). International Telecommunication
Union (ITU) and United Nations Institute for Training and Research(UNITAR). 2024. Global E-waste Monitor 2024. (Geneva/Bonn.)
Calculated based on the Climate Neutral Group’s emissions
calculation: https://www.climateneutralgroup.com/en/news/whatexactly-is-1-tonne-of-co2-v2/
Eurostat. (2024). Passenger cars, by type of motor energy. https://
ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/road_eqs_carpda/default/
table?lang=en
Forti V., Baldé C.P., Kuehr R., Bel G. (2020). The Global E-waste
Monitor 2020: Quantities, flows and the circular economy potential.
United Nations University (UNU)/United Nations Institute forTraining and Research (UNITAR) - co-hosted SCYCLE Programme,
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) & International Solid
Waste Association (ISWA). (Bonn/Geneva/Rotterdam).
Althaf, S., Babbitt, Callie W. (2021). Disruption risks to material
supply chains in the electronics sector. Journal of Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 167. https://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/abs/pii/S0921344920305632

27

28

29

30

31
32

Forti V., Baldé C.P., Kuehr R., Bel G. (2020). The Global E-waste
Monitor 2020: Quantities, flows and the circular economy potential.
United Nations University (UNU)/United Nations Institute forTraining and Research (UNITAR) - co-hosted SCYCLE Programme,
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) & International Solid
Waste Association (ISWA). (Bonn/Geneva/Rotterdam).
Baldé, C. P., Forti, V., Gray, V., Kuehr, R., & Stegmann, P. (2017). The
Global E-waste Monitor 2017. Quantities, Flows, and Resources.
United Nations University (UNU), International Telecommunication
Union (ITU) & International Solid Waste Association (ISWA). (Bonn/
Geneva/Vienna).
Circle Economy. (2023). The Circularity Gap Report 2023. https://www.circularity-gap.world/
Circular Electronics Partnership. (2021). Our vision of a circularelectronics industry. https://cep2030.org/files/cep-vision.pdf
Global Sustainable Investment Alliance. (2020). Global Sustainable
Investment Review 2020. https://www.gsi-alliance.org/wp-content/
uploads/2021/08/GSIR-20201.pdf
CDP, CDSB, GRI, IIRC, SASB. (2020). Statement of Intent to Work
Together Towards Comprehensive Corporate Reporting. https://www.
integratedreporting.org/resource/statement-of-intent-to-worktogether-towards-comprehensive-corporate-reporting/
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) Japan. (2021).
Disclosure and Engagement Guidance to Accelerate Sustainable
Finance for a Circular Economy. https://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2021/0119_004.html
Lacy, P., Long, J., Spindler, W. (2020). The Circular Economy Handbook.
Realizing the Circular Advantage. Palgrave Macmillan London.
Belkhir, L., & Elmeligi, A. (2018). Assessing ICT global emissions
footprint: Trends to 2040 & recommendations. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 177, 448-463. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/abs/pii/S095965261733233X?via%3Dihub
CDP. (2022). Technical Note: Relevance of Scope 3 Categories by
Sector. https://cdn.cdp.net/cdp-production/cms/guidance_docs/
pdfs/000/003/504/original/CDP-technical-note-scope-3-relevanceby-sector.pdf?1649687608
GSMA, ITU & GESI. (2023). Scope 3 Guidance for Telecommunication
Operators. https://www.gsma.com/betterfuture/wp-content/
uploads/2023/07/Scope-3-Guidance-2023.pdf
WBCSD. (2023). Pathfinder Framework Guidance for the Accounting andExchange of Product Life Cycle Emissions (Version 2.0). https://www.
carbon-transparency.com/media/jpslsujn/pathfinder-framework.pdf
The New York State Senate. (2021). Digital Fair Repair Act, S4104A.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/S4104
The Ministry of Ecological Transition and Territorial Cohesion
and the Ministry of Energy Transition. (2023). Repairability Index.
https://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/indice-reparabilite#scroll-nav__6
European Commission. (2020). A new Circular Economy Action Plan:
For a cleaner and more competitive Europe. (Brussels). https://eurlex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:9903b325-6388-11ea-b73501aa75ed71a1.0017.02/DOC_1&format= PDF
Cornelis P. Baldé, Ruediger Kuehr, Tales Yamamoto, Rosie McDonald,
Elena D’Angelo, Shahana Althaf, Garam Bel, Otmar Deubzer, Elena
Fernandez-Cubillo, Vanessa Forti, Vanessa Gray, Sunil Herat,
Shunichi Honda, Giulia Iattoni, Deepali S. Khetriwal, Vittoria Ludadi Cortemiglia, Yuliya Lobuntsova, Innocent Nnorom, Noémie
Pralat, Michelle Wagner (2024). International Telecommunication
Union (ITU) and United Nations Institute for Training and Research(UNITAR). 2024. Global E-waste Monitor 2024. (Geneva/Bonn.)
Ibid.
World Economic Forum. (2018). Harnessing the Fourth Industrial
Revolution for the Circular Economy – Consumer Electronics and Plastics
Packaging. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Harnessing_4IR_
Circular_Economy_report_2018.pdf

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 3 4

Bibliography

33

34

35

36

37

World Economic Forum. (2020). Facilitating Trade Along CircularElectronics Value Chains. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_
Facilitating_Trade_Along_Circular_Electronics_Value_Chains_2020.pdf
Chris Slijkhuis, Lida Stengs. (2020). Fast Tracks: a requirement for a
Circular Economy of Electronic Wastes within the EU. In: Proceedingsof Electronics Goes Green 2020+. (Berlin, Germany).
https://online.electronicsgoesgreen.org/wp-content/
uploads/2020/10/Proceedings_EGG2020_v2.pdf
UNEP (n.n.). Basel convention – Activities 2020-2021 – Insurance,bond and guarantee. http://www.basel.int/Implementation/
LegalMatters/ Compliance/GeneralIssuesActivities/Activities202021/
Insurance,bondandguarantee/tabid/8178/Default.aspx
Circle Economy. (2023). The Circularity Gap Report 2023.
https://www.circularity-gap.world/
Circular Electronics Partnership. (2022). Circular Electronics System
Map: An Industry Blueprint for Action. https://cep2030.org/files/cepsystem-map-2022.pdf

2024 Circular Electronics Roadmap 2.0 35