Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-023-01707-7

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

University students’ awareness of e‑waste and its disposal practices

in Pakistan: a construction of the conceptual framework
Sultan Adeel1 · Anam Nayab1 · Moeez Ullah Qureshi1 · Khalil Ahmed Channa1

Received: 4 March 2022 / Accepted: 11 May 2023 / Published online: 27 May 2023
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2023

Abstract
Pakistan is among the few countries generating and receiving enormous e-waste, which posits a threat to its future genera-
tions. A systematic literature review also suggests exploring e-waste awareness in Asia to understand awareness and behavior.
Therefore, the present study explored university students’ awareness of e-waste and the factors hindering the disposal of
laptops, personal computers, and cellphones and suggested a conceptual framework. The study used the qualitative research
approach and non-probability sampling. We collected data through four focus group discussions (FGDs) with students at a
Pakistani university. After data saturation, we developed themes from FGDs and found computer sciences and engineering
students with better awareness than others. The factors hindering e-waste disposal were lower monetary benefits for disposal,
breach of sensitive information, nostalgic association with devices, and non-availability of disposal facilities. Other variables
like lower resale value and high family sharing increased the storage of e-devices and reduced e-waste disposal. The research
is among a few initial attempts to explore e-waste awareness and factors hindering disposal behavior in e-waste-receiving
countries (e.g., Pakistan) and provides evidence from students who are the primary users. Our findings are crucial for poli-
cymakers to take corrective actions, introduce monetary benefits, and secure disposal to reduce e-waste.

Research highlights

• We explored the university students’ e-waste awareness • Student e-waste awareness level is low; only computer
level and factors inducing the sale/storage of e-devices science students are aware.
(management perspective). • Monetary benefits to recycling and family sharing can
reduce e-waste generation.

Keywords E-waste awareness · E-waste disposal · Monetary benefits · Sensitive information · Family sharing

Introduction

After the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, consumer technolo-

gies significantly changed human lives by becoming per-
* Sultan Adeel sonal and portable. For instance, laptops and tablets replaced
sultan.adeel@iba-suk.edu.pk desktop computers, and cellphones replaced landline phones
Anam Nayab [1]. Cellphones also became an integral part of human life
anum.msmgts19@iba-suk.edu.pk [2] after an exponential increase in their adoption, with 740
Moeez Ullah Qureshi million subscriptions in 2000 to 8 billion in 2020. It implied
moeezullah.msmgts20@iba-suk.edu.pk that there are more cellphones globally than humans [3].
Khalil Ahmed Channa Likewise, global laptop sales also surpassed desktop sales
khalilchanna@iba-suk.edu.pk in 2009 [4]. Figure 1 provides the adoption trend of differ-
1
Department of Business Administration, Sukkur IBA
ent technologies [5]. The exponential increase in technology
University, Sukkur 65200, Sindh, Pakistan consumption also generated considerable waste, regarded

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
2458 Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470

Fig. 1  The pace of technology

adoption

Total E-waste (Mt) Per Capital E-waste (Kg) Total E-waste (Mt)
Total Documented and Recycled E-waste (Mt)
100 10 Per Capital E-waste (Kg)
9
80 8
7 25 25
Million Tons

Kilograms

60 6
20 20
5
Million Tons

40 4

Kilograms
15 15
3
20 2 10 10
1
0 0 5 5
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030

0 0
Years Africa Americas Asia Europe Oceania
World Regions
Fig. 2  Regional and per-capita e-waste generation, documentation,
and recycling Fig. 3  Regional e-waste generation

as waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) or and a cellphone can have a median age of ≈5 years [11].
e-waste [6]. A report by the United Nations Environment Therefore, the shorter life span and radical development
Programme [7] estimated 20–50 tons of e-waste annually. of technologies push consumers toward more innovative
In 2020 only, a Global E-waste Monitor 2020 reported the and latest products [12]. Consumers also avoid using sec-
generation of 53.6 million tons (Mt) and 7.3 kg per-capita ond-hand machines to prevent low-quality and unhygienic
e-waste globally. The figures may reach 74 Mt by 2030, products [13]. Therefore, due to consumers’ awareness and
with a surge of 2 Mt annually [8]. Figure 2 provides the behavior, e-waste has become one of the most critical waste
chronic increase in total and per-capita e-waste production, disposal issues of the present century. It is causing human
and Fig. 3 provides the distribution of e-waste in different and environmental hazards due to its greater toxic nature
regions, depicting that Asia tops the total e-waste generation than conventional wastes [14–16]. For instance, LEDs and
bar and Europe ranks the highest per-capita production. The LCDs in computers, laptops, and cellphones contain haz-
decline in the life of consumer technologies, i.e., laptops, ardous metals such as cadmium, lead, and mercury. Also,
PCs, and cellphones, further extrapolates the e-waste genera- the motherboards/circuits of the same devices contain beryl-
tion [9]. On average, a laptop can survive for 3–5 years [10], lium, nickel, and zinc. Therefore, the disposal and recycling

13
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
of these devices (e-waste) have become imperative and criti-
cal [6].
Another report on e-waste estimated that the global docu-
mentation and recycling of e-waste are minimal (14.66%);
the highest is 42.5% in Europe, followed by 11.7% in Asia,
9.4% in the Americas, 8.8% in Oceania, and only 0.9% in
Africa. Figure 3 also provides the regional documented
and recycled e-waste. However, the behavior of developed
nations (top producers) is strange, which has divided the
world into e-waste producers and receivers [17]. They dump
outdated devices into developing countries, usually illegally
[18]. For instance, China dumps ≈6.7 Mt of e-waste annu-
ally in Asia [19].
In this case, Pakistan is at the receiving end [17]. It
imports the highest number of outdated e-devices [20],
mainly from the USA, Europe, Australia, Kuwait, Saudi
Arabia, UAE, and Singapore [21]. In 2020, Pakistan gener-
ated 433 kilotons (Kt) of e-waste [22]. Widespread poverty
also forces consumers to resell and reuse their devices even
after their expiry, which posits the cause of potential haz-
ards to human and environmental health [21, 23]. Therefore,
due to high e-waste generation and consumption, Pakistan
needs effective recycling management practices to deal with
human and environmental threats [80].
To this end, the literature concludes that consumer aware-
ness and access to recycling are essential in determining
the success of e-waste management [24, 25, 39]. It is also
essential to understand consumers’ knowledge and aware-
ness as they are the primary producers of e-waste [26].
Consumers generally lack awareness about e-waste disposal
[27], and policies are insufficient to push e-waste recycling
[21]. Informal disposal systems are the central practice of
disposing of e-waste without considering the environment,
whereas consumers also do not know much about the dis-
posal sites [27]. Thus, as e-waste increases exponentially and
the overall recycling rate is below 15%, it is imperative to
study consumers’ e-waste awareness and disposal practices
[28], which are the initial steps toward e-waste management.
Besides, the government’s initiatives to construct e-waste
recycling facilities will never achieve their utmost efficiency
without appropriate consumer awareness [29, 39].
Multiple studies explored consumer e-waste disposal
behavior to manage e-waste generation [30–34]. However,
few studies comprehensively explored the consumer percep-
tion of e-waste dumping and disposal. Further, these studies
collected data from the general public, which overlooked the
specified responses from actual consumers such as students,
industry personnel, and managers. A recent systematic lit-
erature review (SLR) also highlighted the absence of com-
prehensive studies on consumers’ awareness of e-waste and
its disposal practices in developing nations, mainly in South
Asia [35]. Such gaps in the literature posit a need to explore
students’ e-waste awareness and its disposal practices to get
2459
group-specific, in-depth results, which would be beneficial
to forming the policies. Hence, the present study explores
the students’ awareness of e-waste and the factors hindering
e-waste disposal. Below are our three research objectives:
• To explore the university students’ awareness of the
e-waste disposal of laptops, PCs, and cellphones.
• To explore their awareness of the prominent factors hin-
dering the e-waste disposal of laptops, PCs, and cell-
phones.
• To develop a conceptual framework for future research
in e-waste awareness and disposal.
Goyanes and Catalán-Matamoros [36] illustrated that
the consumption of laptops, PCs, and cellphones is highest
among students, as ≈99% of university students own and
consume these devices. The paper follows the qualitative
research approach and undertakes focus group discussions
(FGDs) to collect data from university students. Our study
adds to the literature in three ways. Initially, it provides the
e-waste awareness level of university students. Next, it adds
to the literature on the factors that induce the sale or storage
of e-devices. Researchers have rarely explored both of these
areas in Pakistan. Lastly, the paper provides the basis for
the future exploration of consumer motivation and behavior
toward e-waste disposal.
We have organized the following paper into six sections.
The next section presents the available literature on e-waste
awareness and disposal, followed by methodology, findings,
and discussions in the following sections. The final section
concludes the paper by providing theoretical and practical
implications, propositions, and limitations.
Literature review
Consumer awareness is critical to guiding behavioral out-
comes and directly impacts the intentions, attitudes, and
behavior toward e-waste disposal [37, 38]. However, only a
few qualitative studies provide such evidence. For instance,
Kumar and Dixit [38] identified that low public awareness
regarding electronic waste and the absence of effective poli-
cies are the two primary barriers that make e-waste disposal
difficult. Besides, information security concerns play a vital
role in e-waste disposal [39, 40].
From the consumer awareness perspective, willingness to
dispose e-waste depends on environmental awareness [41],
which also affects consumers’ behavior toward e-waste dis-
posal [30]. Consumers’ concerns about the environment
also support their intentions to reutilize e-devices [42].
To this end, studies by Islam et al. [43, 44] explored the
impact of environmental awareness on e-waste disposal. The
results depicted the significantly positive role of consumers’
13
2460
environmental awareness. Aboelmaged [31], Arain et al.
[32], and Delcea et al. [33] also explored consumer e-waste
disposal behavior to manage e-waste generation. They con-
cluded that consumer behavior is paramount for e-waste
disposal, and environmental awareness leads to e-waste
disposal.
From the theoretical perspective, studies widely use
the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to study consumers’
intentions and behaviors toward e-waste disposal behavior.
For instance, Echegaray and Hansstein [45] reported that
consumers are aware of the e-waste and showed positive
intention toward e-waste disposal. Thi Thu Nguyen et al.
[30], Nduneseokwsssu et al. [46], Wang et al. [47], and
Shaharudin et al. [48] also utilized the TPB to determine
the consumer e-waste disposal behavior. They concluded
an encouraging connection between behavior and disposal
intentions based on consumers’ awareness levels. Besides,
Gilal et al. [34] utilized the theoretical lens of basic psycho-
logical need theory to explore the impact of word of mouth
(WoM) on e-waste disposal. The results showed the positive
role of positive WoM in increasing e-waste disposal.
Despite this evidence, there is a dearth of comprehen-
sive studies on e-waste awareness and disposal in develop-
ing nations, mainly in South Asia [35]. Besides, the past
studies took responses from the public, mainly in developed
countries, where e-waste disposal and recycling are high due
to awareness and government-induced recycling systems.
Only one study compared the e-waste awareness and dis-
posal behavior of developing and developed countries and
concluded a vast difference in awareness level and disposal
behavior between economies due to their socioeconomic and
cultural differences [49]. Kwatra et al. [26], Imran et al. [27],
and Sarath et al. [29] also emphasized the further exploration
of consumer awareness regarding e-waste and its disposal
practices.
Therefore, based on the literature, we conclude that there
is a lack of studies exploring consumer awareness regarding
e-waste and its disposal practices in developing countries.
Our study attempts to fill this gap by undertaking personal-
ized, in-depth probing responses.
Methodology/methods
Philosophical paradigm and research strategy
This research study employed the constructivist paradigm
to investigate consumer awareness regarding e-waste and
disposal practices. Research using the constructivist para-
digm focuses on an agreement and recreates the meaning
behind the behavior [50]. It helps create the interconnection
between participants and researchers and new knowledge
from experience and reasoning [50]. Researchers can also go
13
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
back and forth with the data about what the researcher meant
while asking the question and what participants meant while
answering [51]. Next, the study used a case study approach
to understand students’ awareness regarding e-waste and
its disposal practices. As a qualitative research method, the
case study considers the earlier improvement of theoretical
propositions to coordinate the data collection and analysis
[52, 53]. It is also instrumental in supporting and extending
previously created theories for specified groups.
Sampling
The sample is selected using the non-probability sampling
method with multi-stage sampling. Initially, we chose the
sample based on purposive sampling, i.e., the students at
all universities in Pakistan, as the students have more inter-
action with technologies in the universities. Goyanes and
Catalán-Matamoros [36] illustrated that the consumption of
laptops, PCs, and cellphones is highest among students, as
≈99% of university students own and consume these tech-
nologies. Similarly, the use of these technologies among uni-
versity students in Pakistan is also high. Higher Education
Commission (HEC) Pakistan also emphasized using digital
technologies to provide connectivity for the students and
disbursed PCs to universities. Besides, the Government of
Pakistan (GoP) disbursed 100,000 laptops to students under
each phase of the Prime Minister’s Laptop Scheme.1 With
such a high emphasis on technology disbursement and use,
we considered laptops, PCs, and cellphones our research
target. Next, among different universities in Pakistan, we
selected the participants from a university in Sukkur City
based on convenience sampling (i.e., students conveniently
available for the data collection). The data from the univer-
sity website2 depicted that the students received laptops and
similar devices under various schemes. These included Book
Review Competition, Math Olympiad, Talent Hunt Program
(THP) Scholarships, Prime Minister’s Laptop Scheme, etc.
Data collection method: focus group discussions
We utilized the focus group discussion (FGD) method to col-
lect the data from university students. It allows the deliberate
utilization of the connections to gather rich and in-depth data
[54] by bringing together the homogenous or heterogenous
individuals to have a deep and dynamic understanding of
the research phenomenon. We conducted four FGDs during
the third wave of coronavirus (pandemic, 2021); the first
FGD was conducted in the first week of February 2021 after
1
Please refer to Prime Minister’s Laptop Scheme at: https://​www.​
hec.​gov.​pk/​engli​sh/​servi​ces/​stude​nts/​pmnls/​Pages/​Phase-​III.​aspx`.
2
Please refer to www.​iba-​suk.​edu.​pk.
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
doing a detailed literature review and developing the semi-
structured questionnaire. The second was conducted in the
last week of February 2021 after transcribing the first FGD,
generating the first-order codes, and revising the question-
naire. Then, we transcribed FGD 2 and developed first- and
second-order codes from both FGDs. The third FGD was
conducted during the 3rd week of March 2021, and the last
was in the 2nd week of April 2021. Each FGD comprised
participants from diversified education backgrounds (Miles
et al. [62] regarded this as a heterogeneous FGD), such as
business administration, engineering, and computer science.
Each FGD randomly included a minimum of eight students
from different educational levels, such as undergraduate,
graduate, and postgraduate. Hair et al. [79] and Miles et al.
[62] suggest that the appropriate number of participants in
an FGD is between 8 and 12, and a group of two or three
researchers can easily manage them.
Data collection process: focus group discussions
Initially, we briefed participants on the study purpose, fore-
most concerns, and their rights to withdraw from the FGD
at any time. We also provided confidentiality assurance
regarding their responses at the beginning and end of the
FGDs. With their consent, each FGD was audio-recorded
for transcription [55].
The first FGD included nine participants and lasted
45 min, while the second FGD comprised nine participants
and lasted for 33 min. Both were exploratory FGDs where
participants could freely discuss and share their experiences
with e-waste. Since similar (kind of) themes emerged from
both FGDs, we conducted two more confirmatory FGDs to
verify the themes/results. The third FGD included eight par-
ticipants and lasted for 28 min. No new theme emerged from
the data; participants provided similar insights and expe-
riences. Nevertheless, researchers also conducted a fourth
FGD with eight participants to have more confidence in the
data, which lasted for 27 min. Data became saturated until
this point, and researchers were confident to move to develop
second- and third-order themes.
In each FGD, we used a semi-structured questionnaire,
including open-ended and probing questions to let partici-
pants freely move with ideas [56]. The questionnaire had
two main parts. The first part focused on inquiring about
participants’ understanding of e-waste and its concepts, its
environmental impacts, and the awareness of the possible
options to manage e-waste. The second part had three sub-
parts, where the first part inquired participants about the fac-
tors hindering e-waste disposal. The following part explored
the factors responsible for inducing the sales or storage of
e-devices, and the last part asked participants to suggest pos-
sible ways to reduce e-waste.
2461
As we improved our questionnaire after each FGD, it
became more structured during confirmatory FGDs. We
also developed memos during the data collection to help the
data analysis in the latter part [57]. Each memo incorporated
the emerging themes, points of clarification, a connection
between sentences, separation of the ideas, and participants’
non-verbal gestures, attitudes, and direct statements that
grabbed the researcher’s attention [58]. Precisely, memos
made it conceivable to record what we saw and why we
saw it.
Once the data was collected, the researchers transcribed
the audio recordings in a text format. Each researcher
transcribed one interview recording. The researchers also
reviewed each other’s transcribed files to avoid the research-
er’s personal bias and enhance the reliability since “accurate
transcripts are necessary for valid analysis and interpreta-
tion of interview data” [59].
Validity and reliability: researchers’ role
The researcher plays the role of the instrument in any quali-
tative research study. Therefore, research’s personal biases
from past experiences and study of the literature can affect
the validity and reliability of the data [57] and results [60].
Based on a suggestion by Lincoln and Guba [61], we care-
fully dealt with the issue and maintained validity and reli-
ability in three ways. Initially, during the data collection, one
of the researchers played the devil’s advocate role in each
FGD to take the conversation back to the primary concern.
To reduce the biases, we changed the researcher in every
FGD. Next, the researchers also cross-checked each other’s
transcribed documents and codes to reduce the effects of
personal biases. After reaching a consensus on codes, we
moved to data analysis. Finally, the researchers incorporated
adequate and pertinent statements from the participants to
validate the study outcomes [57]. Table 3 in the appendix
reports these statements to link the codes and emerging
themes.
Demographics
The results depicted that in four FGDs, there were 29 males
and 5 females from four departments, i.e., business admin-
istration (n = 19), electric and electronic engineering (n = 8),
computer sciences (n = 6), and education (n = 1). More stu-
dents were from undergraduate degrees (n = 26) than from
graduate (n = 6) and postgraduate (n = 2). Lastly, students
from the electrical and electronic engineering (n = 35) and
computer sciences (n = 30) departments had more e-devices
than any other department. Tables 1 and 2 below provide
detailed results of the above-mentioned demographics.
13
2462 Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470

Table 1  Study demographics S. no. Particulars Categories Focus group Sub-total Grand total
1 2 3 4

1 Gender Male 7 7 8 7 29 34
Female 2 2 0 1 5
2 Education Levels Undergraduate 7 7 5 7 26 34
Graduate 2 1 2 1 6
Postgraduate 0 1 1 0 2
3 Departments Computer science 2 1 1 2 6 34
Electrical and electronic 2 1 2 3 8
engineering
Business administration 4 7 5 3 19
Education 1 0 0 0 1

The authors developed this from the collected data

Table 2  Departmental demographics of the study

S. no. Specialization Participants Laptops in possession Cellphones in possession PCs in possession Total
Working Not working Working Not working Working Not working

1 EE 8 9
2 CS 6 8
3 Accounting and finance 1 1
4 Agribusiness 5 6
5 Business administration 6 6
6 Education 1 1
7 Finance 6 6
8 HRM 1 1
34 34
3 13 4 1 5 35
3 10 3 2 4 30
0 1 1 0 1 4
2 5 7 0 1 21
1 6 3 1 1 18
0 1 0 0 0 2
2 6 1 0 2 17
1 1 2 0 1 6
38 12 43 21 4 15

Here, EE, CS, and HRM refer to electrical and electronic engineering, computer science, and human resource management, respectively
The authors developed this from the collected data
Bold values are totals

Results of e-waste, and the awareness of e-waste management

Based on the coding methods by Miles et al. [62], we gen-
erated first-order codes followed by second- and third-
order codes after merging and bringing together the first-
and second-order codes, respectively. Below we divided
our results into two primary dimensions, i.e., university
students’ awareness regarding e-waste and its disposal
practices. Table 3 in the appendix provides the detailed
results along with the coding pattern.
E‑waste awareness
Under the university students’ e-waste awareness, the
study explored three dimensions, i.e., e-waste aware-
ness, the awareness of environmental consequences
practices.
Concerning e-waste awareness, half of the participants
already knew the concept of e-waste due to their degree
programs. Specifically, the students with computer sci-
ence and engineering degrees already knew the concept
of e-waste. Please refer to statement 1.1.1 in Table 3. The
next theme was the students’ self-interest in contempo-
rary topics, such as global warming and waste (Statement
1.1.2; Table 3). A few participants learned about e-waste
from documentaries, and the rest were unfamiliar with
the concept of e-waste. Collectively, the responses of all
participants concluded that e-waste comprises “Electrical
and electronic equipment (EEE), which has become dys-
functional or outdated due to generational advancements.”
Regarding the second dimension (the awareness of
environmental consequences of e-waste), the frequently

13
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
emerging theme was greenhouse gasses (GHG) and radia-
tion, which hurt the locality, humans, and animals (State-
ment 1.2.1 and 1.2.2; Table 3). All participants provided
similar environmental consequences of e-waste. Following
this, we asked them their preferences in buying an electronic
product produced without harming the environment, and all
mentioned its usefulness and price before buying.
Lastly, concerning the third dimension (awareness of e-waste
management practices), the frequently emerging themes were
(i) reuse, (ii) family sharing, and (iii) repair of dysfunctional
devices. The participants mentioned reusing their products to
avoid e-waste generation (Statement 1.3.1; Table 3); however,
the reuse remains minimal due to rapid technological advance-
ment (Statement 1.3.2; Table 3). To probe further, we asked
them about repairing their devices; however, they were reluctant
due to the high cost (Statement 1.3.3; Table 3). Lastly, while
putting the question regarding the benefits of family sharing,
they mentioned it as (i) having fewer security issues, (ii) better
than storing, (iii) providing a sense of nostalgic attachment, and
(iv) serving as gifts for youngers (Statement 1.3.4; Table 3).
Awareness of factors hindering the e‑waste disposal
To achieve our second research question, we asked participants
about the possible factors hindering e-waste disposal. To probe
further, we divided our questions into three dimensions, i.e.,
factors hindering e-waste disposal, factors inducing the sale
or storage of e-devices, and the solutions to reduce e-waste.
Concerning the factors hindering e-waste disposal, five
themes emerged: (i) high-security concerns, (ii) monetary
benefits, (iii) nostalgic association with the product, (iv) lack
of awareness programs, and (v) complicated disposal pro-
cess. The participants mentioned significant concern about
the data breach (Statement 2.1.1; Table 3) and low/no mon-
etary benefits while disposing of their devices (Statement
2.1.2 and 2.1.3; Table 3). They also showed their association
with e-devices. For instance, most of them mentioned that
they kept their first cellphone or the cellphone they bought
from their salary and will not dispose of them due to their
nostalgic association (Statement 2.1.4; Table 3).
The participants also mentioned the lack of awareness pro-
grams on e-waste disposal. They were reluctant to consider
their stored devices as e-waste (Statement 2.1.5; Table 3) and
suggested that governments must provide proper awareness
(Statement 2.4.5; Table 3). Lastly, the participants stated that
e-waste is a complicated and time-consuming process, and
they do not have enough time to go to the disposal sites or
market and sell out-of-use non-functional devices. Therefore, it
is easier to store their devices in their homes (Statement 2.1.6;
Table 3). We delved more into the issue and asked participants
about their willingness to dispose of their products under the
condition that a system completely disposes of their e-devices,
i.e., no system error (100% data disposal). Surprisingly, most
2463
participants refused to dispose of their e-devices and showed
privacy concerns over disposing of their products through
the (hypothetical) system. However, their responses changed
when we provided them with monetary benefits. To reduce the
researcher’s biases, we adopted this question from the literature
to further explore the phenomenon.
Regarding the second dimension (factors inducing
the sale or storage of e-devices), the frequently emerging
themes were: (i) high monetary benefits and (ii) family shar-
ing. Half of them had sold their e-devices in the market due
to good monetary benefits (Statement 2.2.1; Table 3), and
the remaining shared with family members to feel a sense
of attachment (Statement 2.2.2; Table 3). The third dimen-
sion explored the factors increasing the storage of e-waste
devices and, alternatively, the factors hindering the sales
of e-devices. The participants’ responses converged on four
themes, i.e., (i) leakage of sensitive information, (ii) nos-
talgic association, (iii) lower resale price, and (iv) lack of
information about disposal sites. All were anxious about
the meager price (Statement 2.3.3; Table 3) and informa-
tion breach, including pictures, passwords, and related data
(Statement 2.3.1; Table 3). They also stated their nostalgic
association with the devices (Statement 2.3.2; Table 3).
Lastly, concerning the third dimension (solutions to
reduce e-waste), the participant’s responses converged into
three themes: (i) individual level, (ii) organizational level,
and (iii) governmental level. At an individual level, they
mentioned that individuals could reduce e-waste by (a) reus-
ing out-of-use e-devices (Statement 2.4.1; Table 3) and (b)
high family sharing (Statement 2.4.2; Table 3). Also, the
organizations such as tech companies can (a) develop proper
channels (Statement 2.4.3; Table 3) and (ii) extract precious
metals (Statement 2.4.4; Table 3). Nonetheless, the govern-
ment’s role is paramount in managing and reducing e-waste;
there is a need for the government to show some severe con-
cern and take valuable actions to manage the emerging issue
of e-waste. For example, it may consider providing monetary
benefits (Statement 2.4.5; Table 3), awareness campaigns
regarding e-waste awareness (Statement 2.4.6; Table 3), and
penalizing the non-recycling of e-waste by large organiza-
tions and industries (Statement 2.4.7; Table 3).
Summing all, participants’ answers revolved around
three themes, i.e., (i) high or marginal monetary benefits,
(ii) awareness campaigns organized by the concerned gov-
ernmental institutes, and (iii) strict penalties for not properly
disposing of the e-devices.
Discussion
We focused on exploring university students’ awareness of
e-waste and the prominent factors hindering its disposal.
We organized four FGDs of university students in Pakistan
13
2464
and divided our findings into two primary dimensions, i.e.,
e-waste awareness and factors hindering disposal. Each
dimension focused on three sub-dimensions, i.e., the aware-
ness of e-waste, the awareness of environmental consequences
of e-waste, and awareness of e-waste management practices
under the e-waste awareness and factors hindering e-waste
disposal, factors inducing the sale or storage of e-devices, and
the solutions to reduce e-waste under factors hindering the
e-waste disposal. Below we discuss each dimension.
E‑waste awareness
Awareness of e‑waste
The results concluded that students consider e-waste as lap-
tops, PCs, and cellphones that are not functional and have
become outdated. Robinson [63] also proposes a similar def-
inition. Besides, half participants learned about e-waste from
their degree programs, i.e., computer science and engineer-
ing, and other sources such as documentaries on recycling.
The results implied that one in every two students knows the
concept. We also concluded that consumer interest and the
environment induce an awareness of contemporary technolo-
gies and issues, such as e-waste.
Awareness of the environmental consequences of e‑waste
As the literature linked environmental consequences aware-
ness with e-waste awareness [43–45], we also checked the
awareness of the environmental consequences. The results
depicted that the participants across all FGDs knew the envi-
ronmental effects of e-waste. These could be in the shape
of increased GHG and radiation, causing various health
issues to the locality, animals, and humans. Other quantita-
tive studies reported similar environmental consequences [9,
42, 64–66]. Next, the participants were not willing to buy
green e-devices when we explored their willingness to pay
for a product manufactured without harming nature (green
cellphone). They all showed apprehension over the need and
the cost of the product, implying that regardless of the prod-
uct’s nature, they will only buy if these devices are valuable
and cost-effective. It concludes that the consumers see the
product’s usefulness according to their needs and the cost.
The quantitative study of Islam et al. [43, 44] also reported
similar results.
Awareness of e‑waste management practices
In addition to the above dimensions, we explored consumer
awareness regarding e-waste management practices. We
focused on whether participants had ever thought about the
management of e-waste. Therefore, we presented e-waste in
the shape of dysfunctional devices. The results depicted that
13
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
half of the participants had unusable devices in their homes,
and half had undertaken various options to manage them.
For instance, they used hard disk drive (HDD) on another
laptop or as an external data bank. However, the reuse of
e-devices is less due to rapid technological advancement.
For instance, the participants mentioned that the HDDs have
become outdated due to solid-state drives (SSDs). Besides,
DDR3 RAMs are not compatible with laptops using DDR4
RAMs. They also disagreed with the notion of repairing
dysfunctional devices due to the high cost compared to buy-
ing a new product.
Awareness of factors hindering the e‑waste disposal
Factors hindering e‑waste disposal
The factors hindering e-waste disposal included high-secu-
rity concerns regarding the data breach, monetary benefits,
nostalgic association with the product, lack of awareness
programs, and complicated disposal process. Related to the
data breach and monetary benefits, the participants asked
for the security of their data and some monetary benefit to
dispose of their product. A study by Mishima and Nishimura
[67] also reported similar results. To probe further, we asked
about their willingness to dispose of if a system completely
(100%) disposes of their products. Surprisingly, none sup-
ported the notion; however, all agreed to dispose of it when
we provided them with some monetary benefits. Thus, we
inferred that the consumers are more anxious about the mon-
etary benefits and compare them with the market prices.
Next, their responses highly contradicted between “shar-
ing with the family members” and “monetary benefits.”
Thus, we asked them whether they would still sell their
devices in the market for monetary benefits or share them
with their family due to safety concerns. Participants explic-
itly mentioned their preference for security and benefit for
their families. Therefore, we inferred that security comes
first for consumers if they decide between monetary benefits
and security. Another thing that appeared was the nostalgic
association of participants with their e-devices. They feel
some association with the devices they have bought and
will show them to their descendants. They also suggested
the lack of awareness programs about e-waste disposal, as
e-waste disposal is a complicated process. Lastly, our partic-
ipants also shared these devices with their siblings as gifts.
Factors inducing the sale or storage of e‑devices
As we were concerned about exploring the possible factors
behind the sale or storage of e-devices as an alternative to
e-waste disposal, we explored participants’ preferences for
selling or storing the e-devices. Students showed severe con-
cern for monetary benefits and sold their devices to receive a
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
Fig. 4  Proposed conceptual framework based on the data error!
Bookmark not defined. The color difference for the “Solutions to
reduce e-waste” falls under the three categories explained in “Solu-
tions to reduce e-waste”: individual, organizational, and governmen-
tal, where the gold color shows the individual-level solution, green
color shows the organizational level, and blue color shows the gov-
ernmental level. Next, the yellow color for the “high monetary ben-
high price. However, their responses changed while sharing/
selling their devices with their family members. Our par-
ticipants pointed out that they feel attachment when sharing
with their family. We also concluded that the consumers are
concerned about their data leakage, so they do not dispose
of the e-devices they use. Other quantitative studies also
reported similar results [67–69]. Since both themes were
parallel to previously emerged themes, we inferred that the
participants were more concerned about their data and pos-
sessed some nostalgic association with their products.
Solutions to reduce e‑waste
The solutions to reducing e-waste converged at the individ-
ual, organizational, and governmental levels. All participants
showed great concern for the measures taken by govern-
ments. They must organize awareness campaigns, provide
high or marginal benefits for e-waste disposal, and penalize
non-e-waste disposal. Other quantitative studies also empha-
sized the government’s role in increasing e-waste disposal
[33, 70]. The results also concluded that the organizations
producing e-devices must develop a sustainable channel for
the disposal and extraction of precision metals. Lastly, at the
individual level, there is a need to show significant concern
over the misuse of resources, particularly metals.
2465
efits and family sharing” and the red for the other four factors depict
two subfactors under the “factors inducing the sale and storage of
e-devices.” The former two factors show the sale of the e-devices,
and the latter four factors show the storage of these devices. Lastly,
the color of “factors hindering the disposal of e-waste” has no signifi-
cance
Based on these results and to meet the third research
objective, we also developed a conceptual framework that
depicts the awareness and factors hindering e-waste disposal.
Figure 4 illustrates the developed connections.
Conclusion, implications, and future
research agenda
This study explored the awareness level of university students
about e-waste disposal (laptops/PCs and cellphones) and the
factors hindering its disposal. It also tried to fill the gap and
highlighted possible research areas in consumer e-waste aware-
ness. We used the case study research approach and a semi-
structured questionnaire to collect the student data via four
heterogeneous FGDs. The key findings concluded that students
consider e-waste (laptops, PCs, and cellphones) as out-of-use,
non-functional and outdated devices. The results suggested
that half of the participants knew about e-waste (concept), par-
ticularly those with computer sciences or engineering degrees.
Further, the GHGs and radiations were the significant effects
of e-waste, whereas reuse, repair, and family sharing turned out
to be the primary management practices for e-waste.
The major factors hindering e-waste disposal were mea-
ger or no monetary benefits, sensitive information breaches,
13
2466
nostalgic association, no disposal facility, and limited
awareness. In contrast, the solutions for reducing e-waste
included reducing security concerns, providing monetary
benefits, and high family sharing. Lastly, the participants
suggested to the government and concerned organizations
to provide awareness and technical support to manage and
reduce e-waste.
Based on these results, we provide the theoretical and
practical implications as well as the future research agenda
to explore the phenomenon further.
Theoretical and practical implications
We contributed to the existing theory of self-interest [71].
The findings illustrated that students are aware of the mat-
ters that seem interesting. Our results further strengthened
the theory of waste management [72]. It implies that e-waste
awareness plays a vital role in e-waste disposal. In contrast,
e-waste management can be effective when consumers know
the process and consequences. We extend our findings to the
information security concept, which discusses data secu-
rity as the barrier to e-waste disposal. Henceforth, we have
found that information security and monetary benefits restrict
e-waste disposal [40]. We also add to the existing literature
on consumer environmental awareness as it plays a vital role
in understanding e-waste. These findings are crucial for gov-
ernments and local organizations responsible for e-waste dis-
posal. Thus, we propose that responsible institutions develop
firm policies to tackle the increasing issue of e-waste in Asia.
Future research agenda
While explaining the possible factors hindering e-waste
disposal, our participants were inconclusive between the
monetary benefits and security concerns. To probe further,
we repeatedly asked questions, which produced different
answers. For instance, we asked about their willingness to
dispose of their products if a system completely disposes of
their devices. Surprisingly, most refused to dispose of their
e-devices and showed privacy concerns. Nonetheless, their
responses changed when we provided them with monetary
benefits. The literature also produces mixed results, such as
Heacock et al. [73], Marke et al. [74], and Chen et al. [75]
indicated security concerns as a significant factor behind
e-waste disposal, whereas Vats and Singh [76], Lakshmi
and Raj [77], and Yang et al. [78] mentioned no monetary
benefits behind limited e-waste disposal. Therefore, we con-
cluded that security concerns and monetary benefits need
more in-depth exploration and investigation. Based on our
findings, we propose the following:
P1: Going with the future: Exploring the significance
of security concerns versus monetary benefits in induc-
13
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
ing e-waste disposal may provide essential insights to
e-waste disposal institutions.
Next, past studies widely use the constructs of the theory of
planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action to explore
consumers’ e-waste intentions and behavior toward disposal.
For instance, Echegaray and Hansstein [45] studied consumer
e-waste intentions and disposal behavior using TPB. Other
studies also employed an information security concept, a
theory of self-interest [71], and a theory of waste manage-
ment [72]. These theories are also valuable in understanding
consumer e-waste behavior. Therefore, we concluded that the
theories explaining and exploring consumer e-waste disposal
behavior are concentrated. Based on our exploration, we posit:
P2: Theoretical Lens: Taking other motivational
theories, such as self-determination and organismic
integration theories, would help understand consumer
e-waste disposal behavior from intrinsic and extrinsic
motivational aspects.
Study limitations
The researchers also faced limitations. First, we conducted
the FGDs during the COVID-19 pandemic, making it
harder to access students in the university and record their
responses. Due to this, we could not conduct in-depth inter-
views after FGDs to triangulate the data and findings. Sec-
ond, we collected the data from a university in one city in
Pakistan with the intent that the students at the said univer-
sity more frequently interact with e-devices than any other
university in Pakistan. However, the awareness and behavior
of university students may differ who do not use the tech-
nologies frequently. Third, our participants only included
students from the business administration, electrical and
electronic engineering, and computer sciences depart-
ments. The COVID-19 restrictions made us overlook other
departments, such as natural sciences, agricultural sciences,
economics, education, literature, and physical education.
Therefore, we propose that future researchers collect data
from these departments of the universities. Besides this, the
researchers may address awareness and e-waste disposal at
the organizational level as they also cause the massive gen-
eration of e-waste. Lastly, future studies may also check the
conceptual framework of the present study. Researchers may
take one-to-one interviews with diverse groups and provide
more insights and confidence from the ground data.
Appendix
See Table 3.
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470 2467

Table 3  Results emerged themes from the data

Research Research dimensions Themes emerged Supporting quote
question from data

1. E-waste 1.1 E-waste awareness Degree program 1.1.1 “I got to know about the e-waste from my CS degree program.” (Participant, FGD 1)
awareness Self-interest 1.1.2 “I learned the concept of e-waste when I watched the documentary [World Bank].” (Participant, FGD 2)
levels
1.2 Awareness of the Greenhouse gases 1.2.1 “I think the e-waste causes the Greenhouse gas emission.” (Participant, FGD 3)
environmental conse- emissions
quences of e-waste Radiations 1.2.2 “E-waste, if left open, will cause the radiations.” (Participant, FGD 2)
1.3 Awareness of e-waste Reuse 1.3.1 "Once I found that my laptop is of no use, I extracted its HDD, and currently, I am using it as an extension
management practices to store my data [data bank]." (Participant, FGD 2)
1.3.2 "Let me tell you one problem here. Due to rapid technological advancements, we cannot frequently
reuse the parts of e-products in new devices. There is a compatibility issue. There is an issue with speed and
software usage. For instance, I cannot use the RAM with old specifications on my new laptop." (Participant,
FGD 1)
Repair 1.3.3 “Whenever I go for the repair of my device, the technical person asks for a high cost which I cannot pay.”
(Participant, FGD 4)
Family sharing 1.3.4 "When I got a new laptop from Prime Minister's Laptop Scheme, I gave that to one of my family mem-
bers, as I already had a better laptop [better specifications], so that they may use it." (Participant, FGD 1)
2. Factors 2.1 Factors hindering the High-security 2.1.1 “I will never go for disposing of my mobile and laptop as I think my data will not be safe.” (Participant,
hinder- e-waste disposal concerns FGD 1)
ing the Monetary benefits 2.1.2 "I need financial benefits offered by organizations committed to disposing of phones. Other than this
e-waste [monetary benefits], I need surety that they will not leak or share my data with any sources." (Participant,
disposal FGD 3)
2.1.3 "For sure, I need monetary benefits to dispose of my e-waste because I bought these devices with my
money. To offset the effect, I need compensation." (Participant, FGD 4)
Nostalgic associa- 2.1.4 “I will never ever sell or dispose of the first cellphone I bought from my salary.” (Participant, FGD 1)
tion
Lack of awareness 2.1.5 "I have a cellphone that is not working properly, but I have stored it for future use. So, I think that it is not
e-waste as I can use it in the future after repair." (Participant, FGD 2)
Complicated dis- 2.1.6 "We do not have the time. We are students and busy with multiple assignments and projects [given by
posal process the university]. In this condition, we do not find the time to go for the disposal of our devices. Therefore, we
simply store it. Also, I heard that the e-waste disposal process is complicated.” (Participant, FGD 1)
2.2 Factors inducing the High monetary 2.2.1 “Once I luckily got the high price of my laptop, so I immediately sold it to the market.” (Participant, FGD
sale of e-devices benefits 3)
Family sharing 2.2.2 "When I bought the new laptop, I sold my previous laptop to my younger brother instead of selling it to
the market due to two main reasons. One is the privacy concerns, as my data may not be safe, and second is
that although I was getting less monetary benefit from my brother, I could feel some sense of ownership."
(Participant, FGD 3)
2.3 Factors inducing the High-security 2.3.1 "I need financial benefits offered by organizations committed to disposing of phones. Other than this
storage of e-devices concerns [monetary benefits], I need surety that they will not leak or share my data with any sources." (Participant,
FGD 3)
Nostalgic associa- 2.3.2 “Whenever I think about selling my mobile, the idea comes into my mind that I will show this to my
tion children.” (Participant, FGD 3)
Lower resale price 2.3.3 "When we sell our product, we get less amount than we paid when we bought this. That is why we do not
go for selling it to the market." (Participant, FGD 2)
Lack of informa- 2.3.4 "E-waste sites are unknown to me. I know that there are some scrap sites in the city [Sukkur] and Paki-
tion stan. However, I do not know about the e-waste sites.” (Participant, FGD 4)
2.4 The solution to Reuse 2.4.1 “I think the best solution to reduce e-waste is to reuse.” (Participant, FGD 4)
reduce e-waste Family sharing 2.4.2 “Family sharing is the best option to reduce the e-waste and storage of the e-devices.” (Participant, FGD
1)
Proper channels 2.4.3 “I think at the organizational level; the tech companies should think about developing the proper channels
for disposal for e-waste collection.” (Participant, FGD 4)
Extraction of pre- 2.4.4 “It is the responsibility of the organizations to come forward and dispose of the e-waste by extracting the
cious metals precious materials.” (Participant, FGD 1)
Monetary benefits 2.4.5 “The government must provide us some sort of monetary benefits like the German government provides
for disposing of the plastic bottles.” (Participant, FGD 4)
Awareness cam- 2.4.6 “It is the responsibility of the government to run awareness campaigns to induce e-waste disposal.”
paigns (Participant, FGD 2)
Penalty 2.4.7 “I think it is the responsibility of the government law enforcing agencies to monitor the e-waste strictly
and put some penalty on the organizations who do not recycle.” (Participant, FGD 3)

Source: The authors collectively developed the themes based on the suggestions of Miles et al. [62]

13
2468
Acknowledgements We are thankful to all students and the man-
agement of Sukkur IBA University for their support throughout the
research work. We also pay our regards to the students for providing
their valuable responses regarding e-waste awareness and disposal.
Lastly, we are also grateful to our peers for the continuous feedback
during the class.
Funding Not applicable.
Data availability Research data will be available upon request from
the authors.
Declarations
Ethics approval The authors followed all ethical requirements during
the data collection and manuscript writing.
Conflict of interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1. Hillyer M (2020) Global Agenda: Technological Transformation:
Digital Communications: Information Technology: How has tech-
nology changed—and changed us—in the past 20 years? World
Economic Forum. Retrieved from Here is how technology has
changed the world since 2000
2. Guo X, Liu J, Qin H, Liu Y, Tian Q, Li D (2015) Recovery
of metal values from waste printed circuit boards using an
alkali fusion–leaching–separation process. Hydrometallurgy
156:199–205
3. United Nations—International Solid Waste Association (2020)
The Global E-Waste Monitor 2020. ISWA. ISWA: The Global
E-Waste Monitor 2020
4. Arthur C (2009) Computing: How laptops took over the world.
The Guardian. Retrieved from How laptops took over the
world|Computing|The Guardian
5. McGrath RG (2019) The Pace of Technology Adoption is Speed-
ing Up. Harvard Business Review. https://​hbr.​org/​2013/​11/​the-​
pace-​of-​techn​ology-​adopt​ion-​is-​speed​ing-​up
6. Bhutta MKS, Omar A, Yang X (2011) Electronic waste: a growing
concern in today’s environment. Economics Res Int 2011:1–8.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1155/​2011/​474230
7. United Nations Environment Programme (2009) Sustainable
Innovation and Technology Transfer Industrial Sector Studies:
Recycling from E-Waste to Resources. Published in July 2009.
090630_UNEP_eW2R_finalreport_publication_screen_rvsd4
8. Forti V, Baldé CP, Kuehr R, Bel G (2020) The Global E-waste
Monitor 2020: Quantities, flows, and the circular economy
potential. United Nations University (UNU)/United Nations
Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) – co-hosted
SCYCLE Programme, International Telecommunication Union
(ITU) & International Solid Waste Association (ISWA), Bonn/
Geneva/Rotterdam. Retrieved from GEM_2020
9. Lundgren K (2012) The Global Impact of e-Waste: Address-
ing the Challenge. International Labour Office, Programme on
Safety and Health at Work and the Environment (SafeWork),
Sectoral Activities Department (SECTOR). Geneva Interna-
tional Labour Office.
10. Miliute-Plepiene J (2021) Reusability and the potential environ-
mental impact of small electronics-Literature review and dis-
cussion. IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute 2021.
13
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
Reusability and the potential environmental impact of small
electronics (ivl.se)
11. Cordella M, Alfieri F, Sanfelix J (2020) Guidance for the assess-
ment of material efficiency: application to Smartphones. Publi-
cations Office of the European Union, Luxembourg
12. Babbitt CW, Kahhat R, Williams E, Babbitt GA (2009) Evo-
lution of product lifespan and implications for environmental
assessment and management: a case study of personal comput-
ers in higher education. Environ Sci Technol 43(13):5106–5112
13. Kumar A (2017) Extended TPB model to understand consumer
selling” behaviour Implications for reverse supply chain design
of mobile phones. Asia Pac J Mark Logist 29(4):1–26
14. Herat S, Agamuthu P (2012) E-waste: a problem or an oppor-
tunity? Review of issues, challenges, and solutions in Asian
countries. Waste Manage Res 30(11):1113–1129
15. Woodell D (2008) “High-tech trash” National Geographic.
72–73
16. Woodell D (2008) “GeoPedia: e-waste,” National Geographic.
http://​ngm.​natio​nalge​ograp​hic.​com/​geope​dia/E-​Waste.
17. Ahmad S, Rehman M (2010) ICTs and environmental sustainabil-
ity: Islamic Republic of Pakistan. In Global Information Society
Watch 2010: Focus on ICTs and environmental sustainability.
Association for Progressive Communications (APC) and Hivos.
https://​giswa​tch.​org/​sites/​defau​lt/​files/​pak-​listo.​pdf.
18. Sajid M, Syed JH, Iqbal M, Abbas Z, Hussain I, Baig MA (2019)
Assessing the generation, recycling, and disposal practices of
electronic/electrical waste (E-Waste) from major cities in Paki-
stan. Waste Manage 84:394–401
19. Honda S, Sinha Khetriwal DS, Kuehr R (2016) Regional E-waste
Monitor: East and Southeast Asia. Regional_E-waste_Monitor_
Easr_Southeast_Asia_low.pdf (unu.edu)
20. Patel RD (2021) World News: E-waste in Pakistan. Borgen Maga-
zine. E-waste in Pakistan - BORGEN (borgenmagazine.com)
21. Iqbal M, Breivik K, Syed JH, Malik RN, Li J, Zhang G, Jones KC
(2015) Emerging issue of e-waste in Pakistan: a review of status,
research needs, and data gaps. Environ Pollut 207:308–318
22. World Health Organization (2021) Children and digital dump-
sites. UN Report. Cited in Pakistanis under health hazard due
to e-waste: UN report. https://​www.​anine​ws.​in/​news/​world/​asia/​
pakis​t anis-​under-​health-​hazard-​due-​to-e-​waste-​un-​repor ​t2021​
06161​85428/
23. Abbas Z (2010) E-waste management in Pakistan. Regional Work-
shop on E-waste/WEEE Management, Osaka, pp 6–9
24. Baxter J, Gram-Hanssen I (2016) Environmental message fram-
ing: enhancing consumer recycling of mobile phones. Resour
Conserv Recycl 109:96–101
25. Khetriwal DS, Kraeuchi P, Widmer R (2009) Producer responsi-
bility for e-waste management: key issues for consideration–learn-
ing from the Swiss experience. J Environ Manage 90(1):153–165
26. Kwatra S, Pandey S, Sharma S (2014) Understanding public
knowledge and awareness on e-waste in an urban setting in India:
a case study for Delhi. Manag Environ Qual 25(6):752–765
27. Imran M, Haydar S, Kim J, Awan MR, Bhatti AA (2017) E-waste
flows, resource recovery, and improvement of legal framework in
Pakistan. Resour Conserv Recycl 125:131–138
28. Ari V (2016) A review of technology of metal recovery from elec-
tronic waste. E-Waste in transition-From Pollution to Resource.
InTech, 121–158
29. Sarath P, Bonda S, Mohanty S, Nayak SK (2015) Mobile phone
waste management and recycling: views and trends. Waste Man-
age 46:536–545
30. Nguyen TTH, Hung RJ, Lee CH (2018) Determinants of residents’
E-waste recycling behavioral intention: a case study from Viet-
nam. Sustainability 11(1):164
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
31. Aboelmaged M (2021) E-waste recycling behaviour: an integra-
tion of recycling habits into the theory of planned behaviour. J
Clean Prod 278:124182
32. Arain AL, Pummill R, Adu-Brimpong J, Becker S, Green M, Ilardi
M, Van Dam E, Neitzel RL (2020) Analysis of e-waste recycling
behavior based on survey at a Midwestern US University. Waste
Manag 105:119–127
33. Delcea C, Crăciun L, Ioanăș C, Ferruzzi G, Cotfas LA (2020)
Determinants of individuals’ e-waste recycling decision: a case
study from Romania. Sustainability 12(7):2753
34. Gilal FG, Zhang J, Gilal NG, Gilal RG (2019) Linking self-deter-
mined needs and word of mouth to consumer e-waste disposal
behaviour: a test of basic psychological needs theory. J Consum
Behav 18(1):12–24
35. Gilal FG, Shah SMM, Adeel S, Gilal RG, Gilal NG (2021) Con-
sumer disposal behavior: a systematic review and research agenda.
Int J Consumer Stud 46(5):1785–1803
36. Goyanes M, Catalán-Matamoros D (2017) Ubiquitous laptop use
in higher education: multitasking and students’ perception of dis-
traction in a European setting. First Monday. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
5210/​fm.​v22i10.​7268
37. Ishak S, Zabil M, N. F. (2012) Impact of consumer awareness and
knowledge to consumer effective behavior. Asian Soc Sci. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​5539/​ass.​v8n13​p108
38. Makanyeza C, Svotwa TD, Jaiyeoba O (2021) The effect of con-
sumer rights awareness on attitude and purchase intention in the
hotel industry: moderating role of demographic characteristics.
Cogent Bus Manag 8(1):1898301
39. Kumar A, Dixit G (2018) An analysis of barriers affecting the
implementation of e-waste management practices in India: a novel
ISM-DEMATEL approach. Sustain Prod Consum 14:36–52
40. Roychowdhury P, Alghazo JM, Debnath B, Chatterjee S, Ouda
OKM (2019) Security threat analysis and prevention techniques
in electronic waste waste management and resource efficiency.
Springer, Singapore, pp 853–866
41. Saphores JDM, Nixon H, Ogunseitan OA, Shapiro AA (2006)
Household willingness to recycle electronic waste: an application
to California. Environ Behav 38(2):183–208
42. Kumar A (2019) Exploring young adults’ e-waste recycling
behaviour using an extended theory of planned behaviour model:
a cross-cultural study. Resour Conserv Recycl 141:378–389
43. Islam MT, Dias P, Huda N (2020) Waste mobile phones: a survey
and analysis of the awareness, consumption, and disposal behavior
of consumers in Australia. J Environ Manage 275:111111
44. Islam MT, Dias P, Huda N (2021) Young consumers’ e-waste
awareness, consumption, disposal, and recycling behavior: a case
study of university students in Sydney. Australia J Cleaner Prod
282:124490
45. Echegaray F, Hansstein FV (2017) Assessing the intention-behav-
ior gap in electronic waste recycling: the case of Brazil. J Clean
Prod 142:180–190
46. Nduneseokwu CK, Qu Y, Appolloni A (2017) Factors influencing
consumers’ intentions to participate in a formal e-waste collection
system: a case study of Onitsha. Nigeria Sustain 9(6):881
47. Wang B, Ren C, Dong X, Zhang B, Wang Z (2019) Determi-
nants shaping willingness towards online recycling behaviour: an
empirical study of household e-waste recycling in China. Resour
Conserv Recycl 143:218–225
48. Shaharudin MR, Said R, Hotrawaisaya C, Rashid NRNA, Per-
wire NFSA (2020) Linking determinants of the youth’s intentions
to dispose of portable e-waste with the proper disposal behavior
in Malaysia. Soc Sci J. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​03623​319.​2020.​
17531​57
49. Borthakur A, Govind M (2017) Emerging trends in consumers’
E-waste disposal behaviour and awareness: a worldwide overview
with special focus on India. Resour Conserv Recycl 117:102–113
2469
50. Guba EG, Lincoln YS (1994) Competing paradigms in qualitative
research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of qualita-
tive research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 105–117
51. Rudestam KE, Newton RR (1992) Surviving your dissertation: a
comprehensive guide to content and process. Sage Publications
Inc, Newbury Park
52. Creswell J (2007) Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing
among five approaches, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks
53. Yin R (2003) Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd edn.
Sage, Thousand Oaks
54. Morgan D (1996) Focus groups. Ann Rev Sociol 22:129–152
55. Merriam SB (1998) Qualitative research and case study applica-
tions in education. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco
56. Kvale W (1996) Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research
interviewing. Sage Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks
57. Maxwell JA (2005) Qualitative research design, 2nd edn. Sage
Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks
58. Bogdan RC, Biklen SK (1982) Qualitative research for education:
An introduction to theory and methods. Allyn and Bacon Inc,
Boston
59. Mishler EG (1986) Research interviewing: Context and narrative.
Harvard University Press, Cambridge
60. Strauss AM, Corbin J (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research:
Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory,
3rd edn. Sage Publications Inc., Newbury Park
61. Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publica-
tions Inc, Newbury Park
62. Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldaña J (2018) Qualitative data
analysis: a methods sourcebook. Sage publications, Thousand
Oaks
63. Robinson BH (2009) E-waste: an assessment of global production
and environmental impacts. Sci Total Environ 408(2):183–191
64. Chan JKY, Wong MH (2013) A review of environmental fate,
body burdens, and human health risk assessment of PCDD/Fs at
two typical electronic waste recycling sites in China. Sci Total
Environ 463:1111–1123
65. Song Q, Li J (2015) A review on human health consequences of
metals exposure to e-waste in China. Environ Pollut 196:450–461
66. Awasthi AK, Zeng X, Li J (2016) Relationship between e-waste
recycling and human health risk in India: a critical review. Envi-
ron Sci Pollut Res 23(12):11509–11532
67. Mishima K, Nishimura H (2016) Requirement analysis to promote
small-sized E-waste collection from consumers. Waste Manage
Res 34(2):122–128
68. Nnorom IC, Ohakwe J, Osibanjo O (2009) Survey of willing-
ness of residents to participate in electronic waste recycling in
Nigeria—a case study of mobile phone recycling. J Clean Prod
17(18):1629–1637
69. Wang Z, Zhang B, Yin J, Zhang X (2011) Willingness and behav-
ior towards e-waste recycling for residents in Beijing city. China J
Clean Prod 19(9–10):977–984
70. Cai K, Song Q, Peng S, Yuan W, Liang Y, Li J (2020) Uncovering
residents’ behaviors, attitudes, and WTP for recycling e-waste:
a case study of Zhuhai city. China Environ Sci Pollution Res
27(2):2386–2399
71. Wolf S (1986) Self-interest and interest in selves. Ethics
96(4):704–720
72. Pongrácz E, Phillips PS, Keiski RL (2004) Evolving the theory
of waste management-implications to waste minimization. In Pro-
ceedings of the Waste minimization and Resources Use Optimiza-
tion Conference. 61–7
73. Heacock M, Kelly CB, Suk WA (2016) E-waste: the growing
global problem and next steps. Rev Environ Health 31(1):131
74. Marke A, Chan C, Taskin G, Hacking T (2020) Reducing e-waste
in China’s mobile electronics industry: the application of the
13
2470
innovative circular business models. Asian Education Dev Stud.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​AEDS-​03-​2019-​0052
75. Chen H, Turel O, Yuan Y (2021) E-waste information security
protection motivation: the role of optimism bias. Inf Technol
People
76. Vats MC, Singh SK (2014) Status of e-waste in India—a review.
Transportation 3(10):16917–16931
77. Lakshmi S, Raj A (2017) A review study of e-waste management
in India. Asian J Appl Sci Technol (AJAST) 1:33–36
78. Yang WD, Sun Q, Ni HG (2021) Cost-benefit analysis of metal
recovery from e-waste: implications for international policy.
Waste Manage 123:42–47
79. Hair JF, Page M, Brunsveld N (2019) Essentials of business
research methods. Routledge, Abingdon
13
Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management (2023) 25:2457–2470
80. Mukheed M, Alisha K (2020) Plastic pollution in Pakistan:
environmental and health Implications. J Pollut Eff Control
8(4):251–258
Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds
exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the
author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted
manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of
such publishing agreement and applicable law.