e-waste management in india and sweden

January 2018

Internship Report submitted to El-Kretsen

Submitted by:

HARVEEN KAUR Doctoral Research Scholar

University of Delhi, Delhi (India)

E-waste has emerged as an important environmental concern in India because of the large quantities and the

existing unscientific processing practices. Besides, this it can also be misused to extract confidential data of an organization. Over the last few decades, India has become a major destination for E-waste exports from the developed nations. The report discusses about the Swedish E-waste management system and propose possibilities and opportunities to implement an organised collection and recycling system in India.

E-WASTE MANAGEMENT IN INDIA AND SWEDEN

E-waste management in India and Sweden Internship conducted in Feb- March 2017 Report Submitted in July 2017 Revised version of Report submitted in January 2018 Prepared & Submitted by:

Harveen Kaur Doctoral Research Scholar Department of Resource Management & Design Applications Lady Irwin College University of Delhi New Delhi-110001 Email: [email protected]

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would extend my thanks to El-Kretsen, a non-profit organisation in Stockholm,

Sweden for allowing meto pursue an internship at their organisation. I am grateful

to Martin Seeger, CEO and Mårten Sundin, Head of Marketing for their co-

operation and encouragement for completion of this report. Thanks are also due

to my other colleagues at El-Kretsen who helped through focussed discussions

and filed visits. Special thanks is due to Dr Sushma Goel, Associate Professor

(Supervisor) for her support and help with necessary documentation required for

the internship program. Sincere thanks are also due to Mr Alok Mukherjee and Mr

Ramesshwar D.Gupta for necessary support. Lastly, I extend my thanks to my

parents who believed in my potential and encouraged me to pursue this program.

- Harveen Kaur

(Doctoral Research Scholar)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

E-waste has emerged as an important environmental concern over the globe. The issue is

dealt considerably well in the developed nations due to the availability of stringent rules. In

contrast, developing countries are struggling with the management of electronic waste (E-

waste). E-waste in developing countries is internally generated as well as imported illegally

from other nations (Nnorom & Osibanjo, 2008).

However, the scenario is very different in Sweden and it has become a benchmark nation for

best practices related to E-waste scenario. It is very highly positioned globally in respect of

the amounts of electrical waste that it gathers and recycles. Considering the accomplishment

of this framework for efficient waste management, it can be acknowledged as a standard

model for different nations with the comparative conditions to adopt and adapt to

accomplish a powerful E-waste collection framework to enhance the manageability of

overseeing E-waste problem(Lee etal., 2012).

The aim of this internship program was to understand the Swedish waste management

system and propose possibilities and opportunities to implement an organised collection and

recycling system in India. The researcher tried to investigate answers to the following

research questions:

What are the policies and rules concerning the management of E-waste in Sweden

and India?

Are stakeholders complying with the rules and regulations pertaining to E-waste

management in Sweden and India?

What are the existing practices of stakeholders with regard to E-waste

management in Sweden and India?

What roles and responsibilities are undertaken by different stakeholders for E-

waste management in Sweden and India?

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.No. Title Page No.

1. Introduction 1

2. Comparison of Categories and Products of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)

2

3. General comparison of two countries at a glance 5

4. Official associations between two countries in respect to E-Waste 6

5. Overview of general waste management in Sweden 7

6. Extended Producer Responsibility: An Approach of extending responsibility on the generator

9

7. Management of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (EEE) in Sweden 10

8. Role of Producer Responsibility Organisations in Sweden 12

9. Management of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (EEE) in India 13

10. Comparative analysis of India and developed nations in respect of implementation of E-Waste legislations

15

11. Conclusion 16

12. References 17

1

1. INTRODUCTION

Considering amplified E-waste generation day by day due to increased dependence of

people on electronics it has become imperative that we look for sustainable solutions for

managing consumption of electronics. Electronic products are purchased, used and then

disposed of very quickly by the end users without giving due consideration of its harmful

effects to health as well as the environment(Pathak et al., 2017). The current scenario for

E-waste disposal is very disastrous as there is no system in place for proper collection,

disposal, recycling and refurbishment of E-waste from the end user.

As per a recent report by Toxics Link (2014)approximately 50 well-known electronic brands

manufacturing the mobile phone, laptop, camera etc. have no system in place with respect

to taking back their products after 'end of life' or after they turn into E-waste. Furthermore,

there are not enough collection centres for same. The menace is also increasing as there is

no system in place by Government for a consolidated inventory of E-waste manufacturing

units, storage facilities for e-waste, authorizing E-waste recycling plants and no action plan

for storage of E-waste (Times of India, 2017).It is estimated that India produces an

estimated quantity of 1.70 Million tonnes of E-waste per annum which is comprised of

mobile phones, laptops and various other electronic products. Out of this, only 4,62,896

Million tonnes of E-waste is recycled. The lack of proper system to record inventory is a

major setback for non-availability of quantified data on E-waste in India. However, few

states namely Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh, Goa and Madhya Pradesh

have come forward and started the process of recording inventory. The Parliament report

also stated that 70 % of the total E-waste is generated majorly by 10 States and 65% of E-

waste is generated by 65 cities alone in the country (The Tribune, 2017).E-waste Waste has

evolved with various names such as Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) and

end-of-life electronic waste etc. It is also used as a generic term defining different types of

electronic items that are no longer of any an incentive to their possessors. It has been

observed that there is considerable information available about different aspects of E-

waste, yet the meaning of the expression "electronic waste" is very mind boggling to

illustrate. Referring to the academic writing on the subject, there is, uptil now, no standard

definition, as each nation has its own particular meaning of E-waste. The inquiries that

2

emerge, subsequently is: What is to be termed as an E-waste? Are these electronic or

electrical equipment (EEE), which are obsolete in terms of usefulness? Items that are

operationally disposed of? Or, on the other hand, is it both? (Mmereki et al., 2016 and

Wath et al., 2010). Definitions of E-waste applicable in Sweden and India are discussed

below:

2. COMPARISON OF CATEGORIES AND PRODUCTS OF WASTE ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC

EQUIPMENT (WEEE)

The product categories of Electronic items listed in the legislation of Sweden and India are

mentioned in Table 1 and Table 2:

Table 1: Categories and products of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment in Sweden

S.No. Category Products

1. Large household

appliances

Large cooling appliances, Refrigerators, Freezers, Other large

appliances used for refrigeration, conservation and storage of

food, Washing machines, Clothes dryers, Dishwashing machines,

Cooking Electric hot plates, Microwaves, Other large appliances

used for cooking and other processing of food, Electric heating

appliances, Electric radiators. Otherfanning, exhaust ventilation

and conditioning equipment

2. Small household

appliances

Cleaners, Carpet sweepers, Other appliances for cleaning,

Appliances used for sewing, knitting, weaving and other processing

for textiles, Iron and other appliances for ironing, mangling and

other care of clothing, Toasters, Fryers, Grinders, coffee machines

and equipment for opening or sealing containers or packages,

Electric knives, Appliances for hair-cutting, hair drying, tooth

brushing, shaving, massage and body care appliances, Clocks,

watches and equipment for the purpose of measuring indicating or

In Sweden: ‘Electrical and electronic equipment’ or ‘EEE’ means equipment which is

dependent on electric currents or electromagnetic fields in order to work properly and

equipment for the generation, transfer and measurement of such currents and fields and

designed for use with a voltage rating not exceeding 1 000 volts for alternating current

and 1500 volts for direct current (EU Directive, 2012).

In India: E-waste means electrical and electronic equipment, whole or in part discarded as

waste by the consumer or bulk consumer as well as rejects from manufacturing,

refurbishment and repair processes (MoEFCC, 2016).

3

registering time Scales.

3. IT and

telecommunicat

ions equipment

Centralized data processing, Mainframes, Minicomputers, Printer

units, Personal computing, Personal computers (CPU, mouse,

screen and keyboard included), Laptop computer (CPU, mouse,

screen and keyboard included), Notebook computers, Notepad

computers, Printers, Copying equipment, Electrical and electronic

typewriters, Pocket and desk calculators and other products and

equipment for the collection, storage, processing, presentation or

communication of information by electronic means, User terminals

and systems, Facsimile, Telex, Telephones, Pay telephones,

Cordless telephones, Cellular telephones, Answering systems, And

other products or equipment of transmitting sound, images or

other information by telecommunications.

4. Consumer

equipment

Radio sets, Television sets, Video cameras, Video recorders, Hi-fi

recorders, Audio amplifiers, Musical instruments, Other products

or equipment for the purpose of recording or reproducing sound

or image, including signals or other technologies for the

distribution of sound and image than by telecommunications.

5. Lighting

equipment

Luminaries for fluorescent lamps with the exception of luminaries

in households, Straight fluorescent lamps, Compact fluorescent

lamps, High-intensity discharge lamps, including pressure sodium

lamps and metal lamps, Low-pressure sodium lamps, Other lighting

or equipment for the purpose of spreading or controlling light with

the exception of filament bulbs.

6. Electrical and

electronic tools

(with the

exception of

large-scale

stationary

industrial

tools)

Drills, Saws, Sewing machines, Equipment for turning, milling,

sanding, grinding, sawing, cutting, shearing, drilling, making, holes,

punching, folding, bending or similar processing of wood, metal

and other materials, Tools for riveting, nailing or screwing or

removing rivets, nails, screws or similar uses, Tools for welding,

soldering or similar use, Equipment for spraying, spreading,

dispersing or other treatment of liquid or gaseous substances by

other means, Tools for mowing or other gardening activities.

7. Toys, leisure

and sports

equipment

Electric trains or car racing sets, Hand-held video game consoles,

Video games, Computers for biking, diving, running, rowing, etc.,

Sports equipment with electric or electronic components, Coin slot

machines.

4

8. Medical devices

(with the

exception of all

implanted and

infected

products)

Radiotherapy equipment, Cardiology, Dialysis, Pulmonary

ventilators, Nuclear medicine, Laboratory equipment for in-vitro

diagnosis, Analyzers, Freezers, Fertilization tests, Other appliances

for detecting, preventing, monitoring, treating, alleviating illness,

injury or disability.

9. Monitoring and

control

instruments

Smoke detector, Heating regulators, Thermostats, Measuring,

weighing or adjusting appliances for household or as laboratory

Equipment, Other monitoring and control instruments used in

industrial installations (e.g.in control panels).

10. Automatic

dispensers

Automatic dispensers for hot drinks, Automatic dispensers for hot

or cold bottles or cans, Automatic dispensers for solid products,

Automatic dispensers for money, All appliances which deliver

automatically all kind of products.

Source: EU Directive, 2012

Table 2: Categories and products of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment in India

S. No Categories of electrical and electronic equipment Average Life (years)

Category A:INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT

1.

Personal Computing: Personal Computers (Central Processing Unit

with input and output devices) 6

2. Personal Computing: Notebook and Notepad Computers 5

3. Printers including cartridges 10

4. Copying equipment 8

5. Telephones 9

6. Cordless telephones 9

7. Cellular telephones Cellular (NA), Feature

(7), Smart (5)

8. Answering systems 5

Category B: CONSUMER ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS

9. Television sets (including sets based on (Liquid Crystal Display and

Light Emitting Diode technology) 9

10. Refrigerator 10

11. Washing Machine 9

12. Air-Conditioners excluding centralized air conditioning plants 10

13. Fluorescent and other Mercury-containing lamps 2

Source: MoEFCC, 2016

5

3. GENERAL COMPARISON OF TWO COUNTRIES AT A GLANCE

Sweden is a Scandinavian country, also known as one of the cleanest nation worldwide. It

has landmass of just 450,295 sq. km in comparison to with 3,287,590 sq km for India. Its

population size is even lesser – 9.9 million people compared with 1.3 billion for

India(Worldometers, 2017). The table below shows a demographic comparison of two

countries:

Table 3: Comparative analysis based on demographic data

S.No. Sweden India

1. The current population of Sweden is 9,904,614 based on the latest United Nations estimates.

The current population of India is 1,338,826,135 based on the latest United Nations estimates.

2. Sweden population is equivalent to 0.13% of the total world population.

India population is equivalent to 17.86% of the total world population.

3. Sweden ranks number 90 in the list of countries (and dependencies) by population. 85.3 % of the population is urban,

India ranks number 2 on the list of countries (and dependencies) by population. 32.8% of the population is urban.

Source: Worldometers, 2017

Sweden is also well –known for management of its energy requirements, using non-

conventional sources of energy, wherever possible, to reduce its dependence on oil and to

remain environmentally responsible. In sharp contrast, India is struggling with

management of various kinds of waste. Its municipalities have failed to manage piles of

landfills (Bhaskar, 2014).

At the very face of it, it is perhaps not judicious to match a country as massive as India with

a country as small as Sweden as far as waste management is concerned. However, the way

Sweden is known to innovate is indeed amazing and worthy of learning from. Swedes

normally emphasize significantly on recycling. It is to such an extent that only 1% of the

entire waste generated in this country is deposited in landfills. At least, that has been the

rate since 2011.It is this habit of the Swedes that has not created problems for the country.

6

The programme of converting waste-to-energy by the technique of incineration has been

there in Sweden foralong time. At the present, the demand has clearly outstripped supply.

Sweden is importing waste from neighbouring countries and also acquiring compensation

in the process ofexhausting the same(Samudranil, 2017).

In recent years, Sweden is seeing an increase in incineration capacity with the start-up of

new plants and expansion in capacity of the existing plants. Presently, it has 33 burning

plants with an incineration capacity of handling approximately 6 million tonnes each year.

For meeting specific end goal for feedstock prerequisites for its incineration plants, Sweden

as of late began bringing in around 8,00,000 tonnes of waste from European countries

every year. Sweden has started accepting bulk quantities of waste from neighbouring

countries like Norway where sending out waste is less expensive than consuming it. The

incineration plants in Sweden are equipped to produce energy in the form of electricity or

heat which in turn is dispersed from district heating grids to various cities in Sweden for

heating purposes and the electricity produced is vented to power market (Legislative

Council Secretariat, 2014).

4. OFFICIAL ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN TWO COUNTRIES IN RESPECT TO E-WASTE

To deal with the sustainable issues both countries have signed various Memoranda of

Understanding (MoUs) together in past few years to enhance the bilateral cooperation

with regard to environment protection and sustainable development. Sweden and India

have entered into a number of Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) within a wide range

of areas. The MoUs are of great importance as they facilitate cooperation between the two

countries in areas of mutual interest. Future collaborations between two countries for

areas related to the environment have been agreed upon. The areas include pulp and

paper industry, waste policy, e-waste policy, bio-medical waste management and waste

to energy, sewage treatment technologies, climate and air quality control, air and water

quality monitoring and environmental issues related to pharmaceuticals, collaboration

on mercury and chemicals in products, biodiversity and climate change. The responsible

Ministries for collaboration under MoU are Ministry of the Environment in Sweden and

Ministry of Environment, Forests &Climate Change in India (Embassy of Sweden, New

7

Delhi, 2017). It is interesting to report that the MoU has been signed between Sweden and

India with respect to E-waste policy and some positive change can be anticipated in this

matter soon. In view of above discussion, an internship program was planned by the

researcher to explore waste management system in Sweden. The detailed purpose of

internship has been discussed in next heading.

5. OVERVIEW OF GENERAL WASTE MANAGEMENT IN SWEDEN

Because of correspondingly less populace in Sweden, it has a waste management

framework, which is impressively more resource-efficient today than it was during the

1990s(Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, 2012).Swedish ministries are small by

international norms, and delegation of authority is large with central government

organisations. However, central environmental agencies depend on provincial constituency

executive boards and the local authority to execute the Government's environmental

agendas and policies. The Ministry of the Environment has Swedish Environmental

Protection Agency (Swedish EPA) as its central agency which is otherwise called as

Naturvårdsverket. A large part of the practical implementation related to this policy

relating to licensing, inspection and reporting is carried out by these boards and

authorities. The county secretarial boards set environmental goals for their countries, and

often local authorities set objectives for their municipalities, all based on the national

environmental goals. One of the significant responsibilities of the Swedish EPA is,

therefore, monitoring the state of the environment (Lönnroth, 2010).In Sweden, there is a

legislative producer responsibility for eight product groups (Fig 1) namely:

8

Fig 1: Product categories as part of producer responsibility in Sweden

Source: Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, 2012

Producers sponsor the foundation of collection structures in neighbourhoods where packaging

waste, news and pams (realistic papers) are sorted and gathered. Such collection systems are

established either by the municipalities or by the property proprietor. Collection establishments

in each area fluctuate from municipality to municipality. The contractor procured by the

municipality or the property proprietor transports the gathered waste to an accumulation point

named by one of the producers. The collected waste is then directed for recycling. Thus,

Producers must ensure that there are suitable collection systems in all residential areas and

that certain quantity of the waste is channelized for recycling (Swedish Environmental

Protection Agency, 2012).

Eigh

t P

rod

uct

Gro

up

s

Packaging

Tyres

News and pams (graphic papers)

Cars

Electrical and electronic products (including incandescent bulbs and

certain light fittings)

Batteries

Pharmaceuticals

Radioactive products and unclaimed radioactive sources

9

6. EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY

The term “Extended Producer Responsibility”, and its concept as a preventative

environmental protection strategy was first used and defined by Lindhqvist in a report for

the Swedish Ministry of the Environmental and Natural Resources in 1990 (Lindhqvist, 2000

and Manomaivibool, 2009).Extended producer responsibility (EPR) is a policy approach in

which producers have an imperative responsibility be it financial or physical for the

handling, collection or disposal of products reached the end of their life. In other words,

the responsibility is handed over to the producer for the management of waste from local

government authorities and the general taxpayer. Often, environmental expenses of

management and disposal of waste are usually incorporated into the price tag of the

product by the producers. However, it is unknown to the consumers. The budgets of EPR

programmes also seem to vary from one nation to another and also depends upon the kind

of strategy mechanism selected, programme designed, products or waste streams

adopted(OECD, 2001). In Sweden, Producer responsibility is envisioned to encourage

producers to create products that are more cost-effective with resources, at ease to recycle

and do not comprise materials which can detriment environment (Avfall Sverige, 2016).

6.1 Model on types of Producer responsibilities

A model for characterising different types of producer responsibility was developed by

Thomas Lindqvist. The model illustrated in Fig 2, distinguishes different forms of

responsibility(Lindhqvist, 2000).

Fig2:Model on types of Producer responsibility

Source: Lindhqvist, 2000

10

6.2 Types of Producer Responsibilities

The detailed description of each responsibility is mentioned below (Toxics Link, 2006):

Liability: Producer is responsible for environmental damage caused by the

product in question

Economic responsibility- Producer covers all or part of costs for collection,

recycling or final disposal of products

Physical responsibility: Producer is involved in the physical management of the

products or of the effect of the products. This can range from merely

developing the necessary technology to managing the total ’take back' system

for collecting or disposing of products they manufacture.

Ownership: Producer assumes both physical and economic responsibility.

Informative responsibility: Producer is responsible for providing information

on the product or its effects at various stages of its life-cycle

7. MANAGEMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT (EEE) IN SWEDEN

Universally, Sweden is very highly positioned in respect of the amounts of electrical waste

that it gathered. Sweden has had an obligation for producers on E-waste management back

2001, which put the monetary heap of recycling electronic products on producers. The

producers in Sweden made an efficacious transportation and recycling framework through

the producer responsibility organization El-Kretsen. The researches show that Sweden at

present has one of the most astounding measures for collected and recycled per capita E-

waste in the world (Lestander, 2009). The Swedish commercial industry acknowledged in

the mid-1960s that, eventually, an environmental guiding principle would transpire and

they decided upon on collaboration with others over conflicts and suggested to the

Government to set up a Swedish Environmental Research Institute (IVL). The Government

in this manner also chose to set up the Environmental Protection Agency in 1967 and

presented the comparing enactment (the Environment Protection Act of 1969) and

industries also settled on collaboration as opposed to encountering. From that point

forward, Environmental protection came to be viewed up till now another compel for the

transformation of Swedish industry (Lönnroth, 2010).

11

The roles and responsibilities of every stakeholder are distinctly characterised in legislative

framework of E-waste in Sweden. Everybody takes an interest in the effort for

channelization of E-waste, be it Waste generators (households/businesses), Producers,

Municipalities and Governmentauthorities(Legislative Council Secretariat, 2014).The

diagram below in Fig 3 depicts how various stakeholder together demonstrates a funnel-

like an approach towards their responsively E-waste management.

Waste generator: Households are in charge of isolating and storing waste at the

different accessible collection pointspossessed up by the municipalities.Businesses

hold the obligation to ensure waste generated gets treated and recycled, on a free

market. Thus,

Private persons/households: Sort and disperse waste at designated

collection points

Companies/Industries: Handlestheir own generated waste

Municipalities: are obliged to have a waste management plan (excluding waste with

producers responsibility)and bear the responsibility of collecting and disposing of

household waste, except for the product categories covered by producer

responsibility. Municipalities may issue local regulations regarding the management

of household waste e.g.:Collection and treatment of municipal waste, Information

on households, Waste prevention

Producers: (manufacturer/importer/dealer) are obliged to take care of waste arising

from their products. They bear producer responsibility for end-of-life packaging,

cars, tyres, recycled paper, batteries and electrical and electronic products.

GovernmentAuthorities: are responsible for setting up national environmental

objectives and laws/regulations while authorities oversight the responsibility.

12

Fig 3: Shared responsibilityof all stakeholders

8. ROLE OF PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY ORGANISATIONS IN SWEDEN

The producer responsibility for batteries and waste from electrical and electronic products

(WEEE) is regulated by two EU Directives, which are each implemented in Sweden through

their own ordinance products (Swedish Ordinance 2008:834 and 2005:209).In 2015, the

updated Ordinance 2014:1075 was implemented in its entirety. Now, all producers dealing

in consumer electronics have to be covered by a nationally approved collection system,

whereas producers dealing with other equipment may choose to take responsibility for

their own producer responsibility. The new Ordinance clearly states that it covers virtually

all products (including components) powered by leads or batteries (El-Kretsen, 2015).

El-Kretsen is a non-profitmaking business, with ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 certifications,

owned by 21 trade organisations. El-Kretsen is recognised as a nationally approved

collection system electrical and electronic waste established in 2001. It Works jointly with

the 290 municipalities in Sweden, some 20 transport carriers and approximately 30

recycling sites and 600 recycling stations. Local recycling points are approximately

1,5000,000 in number. There are some 10,000 battery collection boxes all over Sweden and

it assists more than 1700 affiliated companies (El-Kretsen, 2017). They have control over the

entire recycling cycle. The system is called “Elretur” (a joint venture between El-Kretsen,

Shared responsibilty for management of Electronic waste

Producers

MunicipalityWaste

generator

13

Sweden’s municipalities and Avfall Sverige) and is managed in collaboration with the

Swedish local authorities (Avfall Sverige, 2001).The collaboration means that:

The local authorities manage and fund manned collection points, such as recycling

centres, where the households may leave the E-waste without charge.

El-Kretsen manages and funds transports the E-waste to pretreatment and recycling

in accordance with the prevailing laws.

Fig 4: Process of Collection of E-waste

Source: Avfall Sverige, 2001

9. MANAGEMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT (EEE) IN INDIA

E-waste has emerged as an important environmental concern in developing countries like

India. India yields nearly 12.5 Lakhs MT of E-waste every year. The highest generating E-

waste cities in India include Mumbai (96,000 MT) followed by Delhi-NCR (67,000MT) and

Bangalore (57,000MT). Further, cities like Chennai, Kolkata, Ahmedabad, Hyderabad and

Pune also generate 47,000 MT, 35,000 MT, 26,000 MT, 25,000 MT and 19,000 MT of E-

The common collection system “Elretur” makes it

easy for Swedish households and consumers to hand in their E-waste for collection

January 1st, 2009, a producer responsibility for batteries

was taken into effect in Sweden, which also is a

collection system managed by El-Kretsen.

E-waste collected by municipalities / businesses is

transported to specialised recycling facilities of El-

Kretsen

El-Kretsen then transports E-waste to the so-called pretreatment facilities

The amounts of collected waste are continuously

reported to El-Kretsen’s web-based information system, which allows the carriers to

plan and transport the waste effectively

Loaded carriers are marked with bar codes which helps in

keeping statistics of the collected waste quantities from each collection point

All contractors working for El-Kretsen hold necessary

permits for five categories of transports:White goods,

Refrigerators and freezers, Lamps, Batteries & Various

other electronics

The E-waste is transported to specialised recovery facilities

holding a contract with El-Kretsen

El-Kretsen, regulate how the pretreatment is carried out. Controls and follow-ups are made through audits at the

facilities. The control includes inspection of the treatment at

the facility as well as of the downstream treatment

14

waste per year independently(Kaur & Goel, 2016a). A study predicts that the aggregate of

E-waste is estimated to grow to 49.8 MT by 2018, with an annual growth rate of 4 to 5%

(Baldé, 2015).

The recently amended E-waste (Management) Rules, 2016 has widened the scope of the

existing E-waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 2011 by including several major

provisions. The former E-waste rules had several limitations for stakeholders that

prevented proper implementation of the rules. The new Draft on E-waste Rules clearly lays

down the responsibilities of various stakeholders with detailed specifications. The inclusion

of Producer Responsibility Organisations (PROs) is a welcome initiative in the draft rules.

However, whether the inclusion of PROs will change the existing scenario is still uncertain

as such models have worked well for developed countries where number of organisations

come together to implement the take-back policy of E-waste which is financed by

producers or manufacturers (Kaur & Goel, 2016a)

Target based approach for implementation of EPR has been adopted in the recent E-Waste

(Management) Rules, 2016, which stipulate phase wise collection target to producers for the

collection of e-waste, either in number or weight, which shall be 30% of the estimated

quantity of waste generation during first two year of implementation of rules followed by

40% during third and fourth years, 50% during fifth and sixth years and 70% during seventh

year onwards. The E-Waste (Management) Rules, 2016 mandate CPCB to prepare guidelines

on implementation of E-Waste Rules, which includes specific guidelines for extended

producer responsibility, channelisation, collection centres, storage, transportation,

environmentally sound dismantling and recycling, refurbishment, and random sampling of

EEE for testing of RoHS parameters. Selling or placing of EEE in the market by any producer

without EPR Authorisation shall be considered as aviolation of the Rules and causing damage

to the environment, which shall attract provisions under E (P) Act, 1986(CPCB, 2016).

9.1 Collection targets for Producers

In India, E-Waste collection targets for the producers are clearly specified in Guidelines

on Implementation of E-Waste (Management) Rules, 2016 published by Central

15

Pollution Control Board (CPCB, 2016)(CPCB, 2016) and recently updated as per

amendment made in 2017 which are as follows.

Table 4: Collection targets for Producers in India

S.No. Financial Year Estimation of target for collection of E-waste from market

1. 2018 – 2019 5% of the sales figure for the financial year 2016-17







8. 2025 onwards 20% of the sales figures the year preceding the previous year.

Source: MoEFCC, 2017

10. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INDIA AND DEVELOPED NATIONS IN RESPECT OF

IMPLEMENTATION OF E-WASTE LEGISLATIONS

Kaur & Goel(2016b) highlighted the Relative examination of enactments in India and

different nations:

Table 5: Comparative Analysis of India and Developed Nations

S.No. Developed countries India

1. Developed countries hardly import E-waste from other countries unlike India

India imports E-waste from developed countries

2.

Developed countries have online centralised system for management of E-waste

Developing countries like India lacks a centralised system for management of E-waste

3.

Producers take the absolute responsibility of end of life products e.g. Switzerland, Spain and United Kingdom

Concept of EPR is still a controversial subject

4. Penalties are stringent for violation Rules don’t specify any stringent penalty

5. Formal Sector is more active In India, formal sector is less active as compared to informal sector which is too large to tap

16

6. For most electronic products there is a take-back policy

Less or no take-back schemes for electronic items e.g. old refrigerators / AC’s / washing machines

7. Advanced recycling fee (ARF) is paid by consumers for home appliances such as in Japan under Japanese Home Appliance Recycling Law (2001)

Consumers don’t want to bear cost of recycling for end- of- life goods

8. Recycling sector is highly active and well trained

Most of the recyclers in India are not even trained for recycling E-waste. They seem to have moved into this business because of profitability

Source: Kaur & Goel, 2016b

11. CONCLUSION

Sweden’s sophisticated system handle waste, and convert them into energy, are so good

that the Scandinavian country has run out of waste to feed the machines. The increasing

material costs made EoL (end of life) handling of E-waste all the more financially feasible in

Sweden and reasonable. India is struggling to clean-up trash under the Swachh Bharat

Abhiyan. Some lessons to learn from Sweden

Need for Producer Responsibility Organisation in India

Waste management is a public service

Clear division of roles and responsibilities that enable necessary investments

Long-term regulations and economical steering instruments

Cooperation between municipalities

Collaboration between public and private sectors

Focus on communication and public engagement

17

12. REFERENCES

Avfall Sverige. (2001). Sweden – World leader in WEEE collection and treatment. Avfall Sverige. (2016). Swedish waste management 2016. Baldé, C. P., Wang, F., Kuehr, R., & Huisman, J. (2015). The Global E-Waste Monitor 2014 (pp. 1–80). United Nations University, IAS – SCYCLE, Bonn, Germany. Bhaskar, R. (2014). Policy Watch: Lessons we can learn from Sweden in waste management. Retrieved June 4, 2017, from http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report-policy-watch-lessons-we-can-learn-from-sweden-in-waste-management-2007453 CPCB. (2016). Central Pollution Control Board. Guidelines on implementation of E-Waste (Management) Rules, 2016. Retrieved June 22, 2017, from http://cpcb.nic.in/upload/Latest/Latest_135_GUIDELINES-E-WASTE_RULES_2016.pdf El-Kretsen. (2015). Our Operations 2015. Retrieved June 3, 2017, from http://mita.gov.mt/en/ouroperations/Pages/Our-Operations.aspx El-Kretsen. (2017). Producer responsibility. Retrieved June 3, 2017, from http://www.el-kretsen.se/english/producer-responsibility Embassy of Sweden, New Delhi. (2017). Memoranda of Understanding between Sweden and India. Retrieved June 4, 2017, from http://www.swedenabroad.com/en-GB/Embassies/New-Delhi/Business/Memoranda-of-Understanding-between-Sweden-and-India--sys/ EU Directive. (2012). EU Directive (WEEE) 2012/19 published by the European Parliament and the Council. Retrieved June 22, 2017, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32012L0019&qid=1498134725448&from=EN Kaur, H., & Goel, S. (2016a). E-waste legislations in India: A Critical Review. Management and Labour Studies, 41(1), 63–69. doi:10.1177/0258042X16649466 Kaur, H., & Goel, S. (2016b). Handling and Management of Electronic Waste: Review of Global Legislations. International Journal of Recent Development in Engineering and Technology, 5(2), 1–10. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.32464.71685 Lee, H. M., IEEE, & Sundin, E. (2012). The Swedish WEEE system – challenges and recommendations. doi:10.1109/ISSST.2012.6228012 Legislative Council Secretariat. (2014). Waste management policy in Sweden. Retrieved

18

from http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr13-14/english/sec/library/1314in05-e.pdf Lestander, Y. (2009). Collection and Recycling of Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment in Sweden and Wuhan, China- a Case Study. Umeå University Department of Ecology and Environmental Science. Lindhqvist, T. (2000). Extended producer responsibility in cleaner production: policy principle to promote environmental improvements of product systems. PhD Dissertation, 175. doi:http://www.lub.lu.se/luft/diss/tec355.pdf Lönnroth, M. (2010). The organisation of environmental policy in Sweden- A historical perspective, (December), 7–11. Manomaivibool, P. (2009). Making Sense of Extended Producer Responsibility: Towards a framework for policy transfer. PhD Dissertation. Mmereki, D., Li, B., Baldwin, A., & Hong, L. (2016). Ch-4 The Generation, Composition, Collection, Treatment and Disposal System, and Impact of E-Waste. In E-Waste in Transition - From Pollution to Resource. InTech. doi:10.5772/61332 MoEFCC. (2016). E-waste (Management) Rules, 2016 notified by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Govt.of India. Retrieved June 19, 2017, from http://www.moef.gov.in/sites/default/files/EWM Rules 2016 english 23.03.2016.pdf MoEFCC. (2017). Draft E-waste (Management) Amendment Rules, 2017. Retrieved November 15, 2017, from http://envfor.nic.in/sites/default/files/GSR-1349(E)_0.pdf Nnorom, I. C., & Osibanjo, O. (2008). Overview of electronic waste (e-waste) management practices and legislations, and their poor applications in the developing countries. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52(6), 843–858. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.01.004 OECD. (2001). Extended Producer Responsibility : A Guidance manual for governments. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, p. 159. doi:10.1787/9789264189867 Pathak, P., Srivastava, R., & Ojasvi. (2017). Assessment of legislation and practices for the sustainable management of waste electrical and electronic equipment in India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 78(March), 220–232. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.062 Samudranil. (2017). What can India learn from Sweden about handling trash. Retrieved June 4, 2017, from http://www.mapsofindia.com/my-india/india/what-can-india-learn-from-sweden-about-handling-trash Swedish Environmental Protection Agency. (2012). From waste management to resource efficiency: Sweden’s Waste Plan 2012–2017.

19

The Tribune. (2017). India generates 1.70 million tonnes e-waste a year: Environment minister. Retrieved July 6, 2017, from http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/india-generates-1-70-million-tonnes-e-waste-a-year-environment-minister/428359.html Times of India. (2017). Authorities have failed to close illegal e-waste units, says report. Retrieved May 17, 2017, from http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bareilly/authorities-have-failed-to-close-illegal-e-waste-units-says-report/articleshow/58134095.cms Toxics Link. (2006). EPR : Sustainable solution to electronic waste. Toxics Link. (2014). Time to Reboot. Wath, S. B., Vaidya, A. N., Dutt, P. S., & Chakrabarti, T. (2010). A roadmap for development of sustainable E-waste management system in India. Science of the Total Environment, 409(1), 19–32. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.09.030 Worldometers. (2017). Sweden and India Population (2017)- Worldometers. Retrieved from http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/sweden-population/ and http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/india-population/

e-waste management in india and sweden

Documents