IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i14p8467-d859980.html

Do the Main Developers of Electrical and Electronic Equipment Comply with the Precepts of the Circular Economy Concepts? A Patent-Based Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Nichele Cristina de Freitas Juchneski

    (Escola de Química, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro 21949-900, Brazil
    Instituto Nacional de Propriedade Industrial (INPI), Rio de Janeiro 20090-910, Brazil)

  • Adelaide Maria de Souza Antunes

    (Escola de Química, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro 21949-900, Brazil
    Instituto Nacional de Propriedade Industrial (INPI), Rio de Janeiro 20090-910, Brazil)

Abstract

The unceasing demand for electronic equipment has led to numerous problems, such as environmental damage and raw material shortages. The adoption of circular production chains and the precepts of the circular economy when designing electronic equipment could minimize these problems by fostering the reuse of resources without loss of quality or value. The scientific literature has many studies on the importance of circular production, but there are no data to demonstrate whether the scientific information produced on the circular economy and circular production is being taken up by industry. This study analyzes whether patent applications for inventions applicable to the production of electronic equipment meet the precepts of the circular economy. To this end, a study of patent documents was conducted. A total of 3638 documents were retrieved. Their analysis revealed that the technologies developed by the leading patent applicants and manufacturers are mainly from the first link in the production chain, materials, and components. The solutions proposed tend to be geared toward equipment efficiency and reduced energy consumption, which may indirectly increase the equipment’s useful life and save energy. Despite the existence of laws and research highlighting the importance of feeding used materials back into the production process, the developers of electronic equipment have not yet turned their attention to the recycling and retrieval of materials for their use as inputs for new components.

Suggested Citation

  • Nichele Cristina de Freitas Juchneski & Adelaide Maria de Souza Antunes, 2022. "Do the Main Developers of Electrical and Electronic Equipment Comply with the Precepts of the Circular Economy Concepts? A Patent-Based Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-23, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8467-:d:859980
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8467/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/14/8467/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alonso Movilla, Natalia & Zwolinski, Peggy & Dewulf, Jo & Mathieux, Fabrice, 2016. "A method for manual disassembly analysis to support the ecodesign of electronic displays," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 42-58.
    2. Walter R. Stahel, 2016. "The circular economy," Nature, Nature, vol. 531(7595), pages 435-438, March.
    3. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Graham, Stuart J. H. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mowery, David C., 2002. "Post-Issue Patent "Quality Control": A Comparative Study of US Patent Re-Examinations and European Patent Oppositions," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt2qt097bd, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    5. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Aharonson, Barak S. & Schilling, Melissa A., 2016. "Mapping the technological landscape: Measuring technology distance, technological footprints, and technology evolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 81-96.
    7. Angad Mann & Prateek Saxena & Mohamed Almanei & Okechukwu Okorie & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2022. "Environmental Impact Assessment of Different Strategies for the Remanufacturing of User Electronics," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Anton Berwald & Gergana Dimitrova & Thijs Feenstra & Joop Onnekink & Harm Peters & Gianni Vyncke & Kim Ragaert, 2021. "Design for Circularity Guidelines for the EEE Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-12, April.
    9. Modupe Oluyemisi Oyebanji & Rui Alexandre Castanho & Sema Yilmaz Genc & Dervis Kirikkaleli, 2022. "Patents on Environmental Technologies and Environmental Sustainability in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-17, May.
    10. Rolando Rubilar-Torrealba & Karime Chahuán-Jiménez & Hanns de la Fuente-Mella, 2022. "Analysis of the Growth in the Number of Patents Granted and Its Effect over the Level of Growth of the Countries: An Econometric Estimation of the Mixed Model Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-12, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alfons Palangkaraya, 2010. "Patent Application Databases," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 43(1), pages 77-87, March.
    2. Subtil Lacerda, Juliana & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2020. "Effectiveness of an ‘open innovation’ approach in renewable energy: Empirical evidence from a survey on solar and wind power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    3. François Lafond & Daniel Kim, 2019. "Long-run dynamics of the U.S. patent classification system," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 631-664, April.
    4. Daniel Tzabbar & Jeongsik (Jay) Lee & Donghwi (Josh) Seo, 2022. "Collaborative structure and post‐mobility knowledge spillovers: A dyadic approach," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1728-1762, September.
    5. Rentocchini, Francesco, 2011. "Sources and characteristics of software patents in the European Union: Some empirical considerations," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 141-157, March.
    6. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2004. "Erratum to "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights" [Research Policy 32 (2003) 1343-1363]," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 363-364, March.
    7. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. repec:sol:wpaper:08-041 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Michele Cincera, 2011. "Déterminants des oppositions de brevets. Une analyse microéconomique au niveau belge," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 62(1), pages 87-99.
    10. Hain, Daniel S. & Jurowetzki, Roman & Buchmann, Tobias & Wolf, Patrick, 2022. "A text-embedding-based approach to measuring patent-to-patent technological similarity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    11. Stephan, Annegret & Bening, Catharina R. & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Schwarz, Marius & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2019. "The role of inter-sectoral knowledge spillovers in technological innovations: The case of lithium-ion batteries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    12. Crown, Daniel & Faggian, Alessandra & Corcoran, Jonathan, 2020. "Foreign-Born graduates and innovation: Evidence from an Australian skilled visa program✰,✰✰,★,★★," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    13. Lederman, Daniel,Saenz, Laura, 2005. "Innovation and development around the world, 1960-2000," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3774, The World Bank.
    14. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    15. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    16. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan, 2013. "Do firms face a trade-off between the quantity and the quality of their inventions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1072-1079.
    17. Schankerman, Mark & Lanjouw, Jean, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    19. Florent Silve & Alexander Plekhanov, 2018. "Institutions, innovation and growth : Evidence from industry data," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 26(3), pages 335-362, July.
    20. Aiello, Francesco & Albanese, Giuseppe & Piselli, Paolo, 2019. "Good value for public money? The case of R&D policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1057-1076.
    21. Maria Cipollina & Giorgia Giovannetti & Filomena Pietrovito & Alberto F. Pozzolo, 2012. "FDI and Growth: What Cross-country Industry Data Say," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1599-1629, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:14:p:8467-:d:859980. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.