Erik Hagelskjær Lauridsen, Assoc.Prof. ehl@ipl.dtu.dk Ulrik Jørgensen, Prof. uj@ipl.dtu.dk

1. Sustainable transition ofelectronic products:WEEE and RoHS linking innovation to governance policies on electronic wastepresentation at the workshopPolitics and governance in sustainable socio-technical transitions19 – 21 September 2007, Blankensee, Berlin Erik Hagelskjær Lauridsen, Assoc.Prof. ehl@ipl.dtu.dk Ulrik Jørgensen, Prof. uj@ipl.dtu.dk Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby

2. The promise of WEEE I am particularly happy that we could convince Member States to strengthen the individual responsibility of producers for the waste from their products. This will be an important incentive to producers to take the environmental consequences into account already when they stand around the design table. (Environment Commissioner Margot Walström, 2002)

3. WEEE directive • Waste Electronics and Electrical Equipment • anticipated transition processes merged: - waste handling systems aligned across Europe - sustainable innovation in electronic products • distributing agency among the actors involved in the life cycle of electronic and electrical products • configuring environmental governance • case study of the implementation of the directive

4. Electronic waste • the background for the WEEE directive is the growing amount of electronic waste • originating from industry and even more from private consumption • electronic waste is complex and involves heavy metals, plastics, precious metals, and glass – all the elements from the periodic table • miniaturization and integration makes it difficult to separate the waste besides extracting the precious metals

5. Waste as a socio-technical system • previously electronic waste was defined and handled in rather different ways in Europe • some countries had implemented extended public collection and treatment systems, while others had almost no separate electronic waste handling • alignment of waste handling in EU25 was foreseen as a large problem (4% of GDP) • today WEEE gives a common definition of electronic waste and places the responsibility for handling it on the producers and importers

6. The impact of WEEE • producers and importers are responsible for funding and organizing a waste handling system • used products and re-used components and materials are not defined as waste • large amounts of ‘waste’ are exported as products to third world countries • waste has been transformed into potentially marketable products • while parts of the waste handling system itself has been transformed into commercial activities

7. RoHS - a top-down policy • almost in parallel to WEEE the EU has introduced a stringent regulation on hazardous substances in electronic products • the background being their toxic impact both in use but especially when discharged as waste • commonly used compounds banned: lead, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, and two bromated flame retardant • conventional command and control policy heavily influential on producers all over the world

8. WEEE as EPR • extended producer responsibility (EPR) • technical analysis of electronic products demonstrate that the environmental impacts of waste stem from their design • the challenge of addressing this problem is to enroll the companies responsible for the design • located outside the EU which motivates the idea of giving producers the responsibility

9. The concept of EPR • concept inspired by theories originating from environmental economics • a policy principle that integrates a life cycle perspective - deposit refund systems - take back schemes • satisfies the polluter pays principle • is expected to induce a mechanism of continuous improvements

10. EPR in real life • electronics is characterized by a distributed chain of production • recycled materials – besides precious metals – have virtually no value compared to original product • experiments demonstrate that difference in dismantling good and bad designs is small • tracing and registering products is complicated

11. Innovative impact of WEEE • few indications of innovative activities induced by WEEE, • while RoHS has demonstrated great impact • EPR is based on a simplistic idea of the working of economic incentives and the producer being a rational (principal) agent • the producer as Machiavellian prince (Latour)

12. WEEE as transition policy • can be seen at an attempt to induce radical innovation through transition by command • multiple and conflicting interests in government • acceptance of only the producers economic responsibilities • specifications of design criteria were taken out of the directive • leads to rather large changes in the structure and responsibilities of the waste handling system

13. WEEE configuring governance • the concept of inducing sustainable innovation is core in the understanding of governance • the focus on innovation legitimizes WEEE • the structuring of actors and the distribution of agency is based on a central government action • little recognition of bottom up developed goals and visions • the transformation of the electronic waste into tradable products produces unanticipated results

14. Environmental governance • the outcomes of environmental governance is shaped by: - the materiality of products - the structure and distribution of supply chains - other policies (either conflicting or counter programs) - dominant concepts of environmental policy measures