Somewhere in a drawer, in probably every other household, there is a broken phone, an obsolete 3.5mm jack pair of earphones, or a charger for a device no one owns anymore. Repairing it can cost nearly as much as replacing it, if it is even possible at all. Multiplied across a region of billions of consumers, that small, ordinary frustration adds up to one of the fastest-growing environmental problems in Asia and beyond: e-waste. 

E-waste, or electronic waste, is now rising five times faster than documented recycling. It is polluting the planet, with harmful impacts on humans as well as biodiversity and ecosystems. Studies identify several key drivers, such as shorter product lifespans and limited repair options. There is also the matter of design choices that make most modern devices difficult to fix.

Asia’s Problematic E-Waste Processing

Asia is at the center of this story. The region serves as both the world’s digital manufacturing hub and one of its fastest-growing consumer markets. 

Furthermore, the electronic waste processing in Asia is another matter. Eco-Business claims that the outsized role of the informal sector in e-waste collecting and processing across Southeast Asia is an issue. Apparently, it is holding back the formal recycling industry from gaining the scale and momentum it needs. This is because black-market processing by unskilled and unprotected workers makes it difficult for legitimate recyclers to compete. 

That informality has real consequences, and it is not gender-neutral. Much of the labor that keeps Asia’s e-waste recycling economy functioning, including the informal recovery and sorting of electronics, falls on women working without contracts, protections, or recognition. 

For instance, a peer-reviewed study of e-waste management in South Asia found that recycling in the region happens predominantly through informal channels, often small family workshops rather than dedicated facilities. Worryingly, these sites expose workers to a cocktail of toxic micro-pollutants in the process. The review also notes that some countries, including Nepal and Afghanistan, still have no dedicated e-waste policy at all.

Why Right to Repair Matters

When products are difficult or expensive to fix, consumers are nudged, often without realizing it, toward replacement rather than repair. This cycle accelerates the waste stream that policy struggles to contain, if at all. 

A legal analysis published in Ecology Law Quarterly argues that mandatory right-to-repair laws directly target this dynamic. There are now more mobile phones than people in the world, and unrepaired devices are one of the most significant contributors to the growing waste stream.

With right to repair laws, manufacturers are responsible for providing timely and cost-effective repair services for consumers. Under this extended producer responsibility (EPR), repair should be the first and easiest course of action. It may also include intentionally designing electronics with repair in mind.

So far, momentum is building at the policy level, but unevenly. In 2020, Singapore established a regulated e-waste management system based on the EPR approach. Industry analysis on Asia’s 2025 product sustainability regulations showed that South Korea and the Philippines were both drafting right-to-repair frameworks. South Korea is proposing mandatory repairability ratings, labeling, and requirements that manufacturers provide repair manuals and spare parts. 

Another example is India, now the world’s third-largest e-waste producer. India has set formal recycling targets of 70% by 2026. The country has also approved a $170 million program to recover critical minerals from old electronics, recognizing what one industry executive called the “urban mining” potential of e-waste.

The Gap Between Ambition and Enforcement

Still, policy and reality remain two very different things. In fact, the policy itself is still lacking. According to a community repair event, fewer than 4% of items brought in were even covered by existing right-to-repair laws, with many well over a decade old. It underscores how insufficient current legislations are compared to what people actually own and want fixed.

Additionally, a global policy review found that while national e-waste regulations have spread rapidly across Asia, barriers persist. Uneven enforcement, weak infrastructure, and limited public awareness continue to hold back real progress. The same review notes that globally, 72% of the world’s population now lives under some form of e-waste regulation. However, actual recycling rates remain far behind collection ambitions almost everywhere.

The consequences of that gap are also unequal. Wealthier nations frequently export their own discarded electronics, legally and otherwise, to countries with cheaper labor and looser enforcement. 

What Could Actually Close the Gap

Based on existing research, three shifts stand out as genuinely achievable pathways toward circularity. Among them is scoping repair laws around what people already own, not just future products. Current right-to-repair frameworks tend to apply only to newly released devices, leaving the decade-old phones and laptops actually cluttering most households entirely uncovered.

Another strategy is formalizing the informal recycling sector rather than displacing it. One model already working in India offers a blueprint. Government bodies or NGOs can act as intermediaries between waste pickers and electronics manufacturers. This way, e-waste collected informally can be directly channeled into proper recycling streams. Meanwhile, manufacturers can fulfill their own collection obligations under existing producer responsibility rules. This kind of bridge model legitimizes and protects the workers who already do most of the collecting, instead of trying to replace them with a separate formal system that competes for the same scrap. 

The third is targeted investment paired with multi-stakeholder collaboration. Experts recommend creating centralized recycling clusters with complete value chains. These should exist alongside government collaboration with businesses and NGOs to dismantle the financial and logistical barriers that keep capital and modern equipment out of reach for most recyclers. The funding mechanisms could draw on CSR commitments from multinational electronics companies, directing resources specifically toward the e-waste hotspots that need them most. 

From E-Waste to Circularity

The upside is real and quantifiable. The Global E-waste Monitor estimates that raising global e-waste collection and recycling rates to 60% by 2030 would generate net benefits exceeding $38 billion. This would occur largely through avoided health and environmental harm. 

Achieving that ideal will require more than national targets on paper. It will mean making repair genuinely accessible, holding manufacturers accountable for product design, and building the formal recycling infrastructure that much of Asia still lacks. 

Ultimately, addressing e-waste cannot be simply about consumer convenience and behavior. It is a question of responsibility, accountability, and who bears the burden of the world’s growing appetite for new devices by design.

Editor: Nazalea Kusuma

Co-create positive impact for people and the planet.

Amidst today’s increasingly complex global challenges, equipping yourself, team, and communities with interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral insights on sustainability-related issues and sustainable development is no longer optional — it is a strategic necessity to stay ahead and stay relevant.

Join Membership Partner with Us