A new European Commission study maps out why small electronics rarely make it back into the circular economy — and what cities and policymakers can do about it.
Every year, millions of smartphones, tablets, laptops, and their chargers reach the end of their useful life in European households. Yet instead of being returned, repaired, or recycled, a large share of them end up in a drawer. A 2022 study commissioned by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Environment takes a hard look at this problem — and charts a course for fixing it.
The Problem: A Drawer Full of Lost Value
Between 25% and 50% of Europeans keep old, unused devices stored at home. This “hibernation” of small electronics is more than just a household quirk — it represents a significant leak in the circular economy. Small electronic waste (WEEE) is currently one of the fastest-growing waste streams in the EU, yet collection rates remain stubbornly low. The devices being hoarded are loaded with valuable and often critical raw materials: copper, cobalt, lithium, and rare earth elements that could be recovered and reused.
Why do people hold on to their old devices? The study identifies a clear set of drivers: people keep gadgets as backup devices or intend to sell them later; they have an emotional attachment to old phones; they worry about data security when handing devices over; they distrust the recycling process; and — crucially for city logistics — they simply lack easy, nearby options for returning devices.
The Supply Chain Challenge
The problem doesn’t stop at the consumer’s front door. The reverse supply chain for small electronics is fragmented and poorly monitored. Illegal collectors and scavengers divert devices away from proper recycling channels. Unreported exports of used electronics outside the EU obscure how much waste is actually being generated. High recycling costs reduce demand from recyclers. And municipal collection points often have inconvenient opening hours or are located too far from urban residents to be practical.
For city logistics professionals, this highlights a structural gap: the infrastructure that moves goods to consumers has been refined over decades, but the infrastructure that brings end-of-life devices back remains underdeveloped.
Three Types of Return Systems — and What Works
The study reviewed 119 existing return initiatives across the EU, categorizing them into three types: reward systems (financial incentives for returning devices), convenience systems (drop-off bins, postal returns, door-to-door pick-up), and charity systems (encouraging returns for a good cause).
Reward systems benefit from a growing second-hand market but require investment in valuation infrastructure. Convenience systems are easier to replicate across cities and regions — particularly postal and door-to-door services. Charity systems struggle to compete where financial or convenience incentives are strong.
Eight Policy Actions on the Table
Based on stakeholder workshops and impact modeling, eight policy actions were assessed. The top performers were:
Deposit-refund systems (DRS) emerged as the most effective overall, estimated to recover around 62% of covered devices. Half of those collected would go for reuse, half for recycling. The catch: reliable data is still limited, and full implementation is considered challenging in the short term.
Financial incentives for devices with low residual value are expected to boost collection by around 20%, mainly in the first three years of implementation. They work well for older models that consumers wouldn’t bother selling.
Door-to-door and postal collection services showed strong potential, projecting a 14% increase in collections over 10 years, with 40% of devices going for reuse. This is directly relevant for city logistics operators, as it integrates return flows into existing last-mile infrastructure.
Data privacy certification and drop-off point databases were flagged as key enabling measures — not high-impact on their own, but essential foundations that remove barriers to consumer participation.
What This Means for City Logistics
The study makes clear that solving the small electronics return problem is fundamentally a logistics challenge. Building denser, better-publicized collection networks; integrating return pickups into existing parcel delivery routes; and providing consumers with clear, personalized information about end-of-life options are all levers squarely within the domain of urban logistics.
The report recommends a mix of EU-level harmonization and national implementation, recognizing that local context matters enormously. For cities and logistics operators, the opportunity is significant: the infrastructure and trust required to collect used devices efficiently already exists in last-mile delivery networks. The question is whether the policy and economic framework will catch up.
Also read: What are the opportunities of e-waste for Dutch logistics companies?