Measuring the generation and management status of waste office equipment in China: a case study of waste printers

Policy is essential to the management of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). In order to present valuable findings for policy improvement, we performed a quantitative effectiveness assessment of China’s WEEE treatment fund from 2012 to 2015. The achievement of the general goal of the WEEE treatment fund was evaluated with various indicators. We calculated the values of all indicators and analyzed the changes in them. The results show that the WEEE treatment fund was important in promoting WEEE collection and recycling activities and has provided great benefits in the form of resources and the environment. Moreover, the authorized enterprises also experienced progress in their development. In a word, the WEEE treatment fund was effective to some extent. However, because of the limited subsidies and other factors, the WEEE treatment fund had different effects on five categories of WEEE. We found that its approach worked best for the TV set. Although the promotional effects on the other four categories of WEEE have been increasingly significant since 2014, there is room for improvement. Fortunately, the subsidy rates have been adjusted by administrations and new subsidies were provided in 2016. As it is crucial for the effectiveness of the WEEE treatment fund, new subsidy rates should be evaluated regularly.

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Effectiveness Assessment of China’s WEEE Treatment Fund

Zhao

Yang

2018

“…India is among the top 10 countries in the world in e-waste generation after the U.S. and China. It is estimated that three (3) million tons of e-waste were produced in 2018 and is expected to reach five (5) million tons by the end of 2020 [51][52][53]. According to the Confederation of Indian Industries, the Indian electronics industry has a market size of approximately USD 65 billion in 2013, and this is expected to reach USD 400 billion by the end of 2020 [52,54].…”

Section: Indiamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…New regulations are classified as the 2010 "E-waste Management and Handling Rules", which became effective in 2012 [60]. While there are regulations on e-waste management and disposal in India, no regulation has effectively addressed the e-waste problem in India [52,58]. Currently, the majority of the hazardous materials found in e-waste are covered under "The Hazardous and Waste Management Rules, 2011 and the 2016 E-waste Management and Handling Rules" [52].…”

Section: Indiamentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of E-Waste Generation and Environmental Management of Asia Pacific Countries

Andeobu

Wibowo

Grandhi

2021

Due to the rapid increase in the use of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) worldwide, e-waste has become a critical environmental issue for many governments around the world. Several studies have pointed out that failure to adopt appropriate recycling practices for e-waste may cause environmental disasters and health concerns to humans due to the presence of hazardous materials. This warrants the need for a review of the existing processes of e-waste management. In view of the growing e-waste generation in the Asia Pacific region and the importance of e-waste management, this study critically reviews previous research on e-waste generation and management practices of major e-waste producing nations (Australia, China, India, Indonesia, and Malaysia) in the Asia Pacific region, provides an overview of progress made and identifies areas for improvement. To fulfil the aims of this research, previous studies from 2005 to 2020 are collected from various databases. Accordingly, this study focuses on e-waste generation and environmental management of these countries. This study found that e-waste management practices of the selected countries need to be enhanced and recommends several best practices for effectively managing e-waste.

“…China is facing severe environmental problems, especially in solid waste pollution, due to the unprecedented rate of industrialization, urbanization and the continuous improvement of people's living standards [1]. As the second largest economy, China produces the largest amount of solid waste in the world [2,3]. According to the projection of the World Bank, the total amount of solid waste in China will be over 480 million tons in 2030 [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Environmental Regulation on Industrial Solid Waste Pollution in China: From the Perspective of Formal Environmental Regulation and Informal Environmental Regulation

Xiong

Wang

2020

To address the concern of environmental pollution, it is necessary to study the effect of environmental regulation on industrial solid waste emission reduction in China. This paper aimed to analyze the effectiveness of provincial environmental regulation (both formal and informal) on the industrial solid waste emission reduction. The results show that both the effect of formal and informal environmental regulations on industrial solid waste emission intensity present an inverted “U” shape. The threshold value of per capita GDP as an indicator variable is CNY 16,299 and CNY 15,572 respectively. The effect on pollution emission reduction will appear when the value is higher than the threshold, and the two-way transmission mechanism between formal and informal environmental regulations does exist. When GDP per capita exceeds CNY 27,961, there is a phenomenon of “rebound” in the effect of informal environmental regulation on pollution reduction. Based on the findings, it was suggested that both formal and informal environmental regulation should be promoted to achieve the goal of industrial solid waste emission reduction. The coordination between formal and informal environmental regulation should be considered when the government makes policies. Different environmental regulation policies should be implemented in different regions. Informal regulation should be enriched and further promoted. Environmental law should play an important role in maintaining the public’s participation in environmental regulation to prevent the failure of informal environmental regulation.