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

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.

1. Introduction

Electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) are equipment that are operated using an electric current or magnetic field [1]. EEE consists of devices whose composition is very varied, which contain a large variety of metals, thermoset plastics, thermoplastics, ceramics, and a range of components, such as cathode-ray tube (CRT) screens/monitors, liquid crystal displays (LCDs), and printed circuit boards (PCBs) [2].

The EEE industry is dynamic and its products are constantly being altered with a view to enhancing performance and user experience [3]. The sales of EEE are driven by multiple factors, including the offer of higher quality cameras, higher resolution screens, 5G connectivity, enhanced processing capacity, superior quality items, and new functionalities. Different reports have shown that although the sales volumes of some EEE segments may occasionally drop, the number of individual items sold every year is very high. In 2021, some 1.43 billion smartphones, 340 million computers, 127 million smartwatches, and 150 million tablets were sold worldwide. Sales of EEE were driven upwards during the COVID-19 pandemic because so many people began to work and learn from home. Another factor pushing sales is the preference that many people have for “premium” devices, which are more expensive but offer an enhanced user experience [4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. However, much of this equipment is not designed to last, and this has led to electrical and electronic equipment becoming outdated more quickly and therefore less likely to be repaired [3,11].

EEE contains a range of components, which may be manufactured in different countries, shipped to another country to be assembled, and then delivered to customers in countries all over the world. The biggest producers and exporters of EEE are China, Taiwan, the USA, South Korea, Japan, and Germany [12,13]. China, the USA, Japan, and Germany were also among the top ten consumer markets in 2021 [14].

Problems associated with the growing demand for EEE include the energy needed for its manufacture and use, high water consumption (mainly at the mining stage), the production of toxic wastewaters, and the use of finite materials in the composition of EEE. The European Union (EU) already regards many of these finite materials as critical raw materials, including precious metals, rare earth metals, indium, and lithium [15,16,17]. The EU updates its list of critical raw materials every three years, showing estimates of supply, demand, and scarcity projections for materials considered critical to the bloc’s economy. Many of these materials are extracted from other countries, such as China, the USA, Brazil, and South Africa. At the time of writing, the list contained 30 critical materials, 21 of which are relevant to the electronics industry, such as batteries, semiconductors, LEDs, LCDs, and electronic components [15,18,19].

In addition to the problems related to the manufacture of EEE, their destination when they reach the end of their useful life, which is often shortened by the launch of new products, is another cause for concern. Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) is the fastest growing waste stream in the world. In 2021, an estimated 57.4 million tons of WEEE was generated globally, but only a small amount of this waste was adequately collected and recycled. The amount of WEEE produced worldwide is projected to rise to 74.7 Mt by 2030 [20,21,22,23,24].

Like the manufacture and distribution of EEE, which both depend on the global supply chain, the disposal of WEEE is also a global phenomenon. However, these reverse supply chains are often informal, involving the unregulated export of this hazardous waste material to developing countries in breach of the Basel Convention and national legislation [25]. In these countries, artisanal WEEE is mined with a view to retrieving small quantities of precious metals. This small-scale WEEE mining is a challenge for governments and regulatory bodies with the inadequate disposal and recycling of the equipment causing multiple problems, ranging from soil and water contamination to air pollution and disease [3,17,20,21,22,23].

Socioeconomic factors are rarely considered when policies are made for the management of WEEE. Even in societies where support for the adoption of sustainable behaviors like circular production is strong, proper recycling programs are not observed. One of the reasons is the way environmental policies are developed.

The main countries that manufacture EEE have or are developing national legislation addressing WEEE. The USA does not have federal-level legislation on the management of WEEE, but 25 states do have some legislation of their own. In 23 of these where extended producer responsibility (EPR) is adopted, manufacturers are expected to pay for recycling [4,26,27]. Japan was one of the first countries globally to implement an EPR-based system for WEEE. Its Circular Economy Vision for 2020 aims to help Japan shift to new business models with greater circularity and more resilient resource circulation [28,29,30]. Since 2003, there has been ERP-based legislation in South Korea that sets forth the responsibilities of manufacturers and importers of EEE [29]. In the EU, Directive 2012/19/EU draws on the concept of EPR to set collection, recycling, reuse, and recovery targets for all six categories of WEEE [31,32,33]. The EU’s Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP) proposes initiatives throughout the product life cycle, from production to consumption, repair and remanufacturing, to waste management and secondary raw materials [16,34]. Directive RoHS 2011/65/EU applies to a variety of EEE and sets the maximum values tolerated for hazardous substances [35]. In China, the second version of the country’s RoHS (Restriction Hazardous Substances) legislation pertaining to EEE regulates the same substances as the EU’s RoHS directive [36]. China is estimated to be the world’s biggest recipient of WEEE, even though it has been a signatory to the Basel Convention since 1992 [37]. The Circular Economy Promotion Law of the People’s Republic of China is designed to promote the development of the circular economy, improving resource efficiency, protecting and improving the environment, and fulfilling the precepts of sustainable development, applying the principles of the 3Rs initiative (reduce, reuse, recycle) [38]. The country’s 14th Five-Year Plan (2021 to 2025) puts emphasis on improving the efficiency of resource utilization through reduced energy consumption, resource recovery, and the construction of more systems for recycling [39]. Many of these national WEEE policies are centered around the 3Rs and the principle of EPR, but often, there is no link between manufacturers and recyclers [22,40]. Alongside local policies, there are also cross-border agreements, such as the Basel Convention, a United Nations treaty that was created with the purpose of controlling the movement of hazardous waste and its disposal between nations and, since December 2019, is aimed to ban exports from developed to developing countries to prevent illegal dumping [20,25,41]).

Although the proper management of WEEE is essential, the increased demand for and disposal of EEE cannot be tackled through recycling alone. Products received at recycling centers are very varied: different types of products of different generations in different conditions. This makes disassembly more difficult, and often means automation is unfeasible. In developed countries, old EEE is rarely dismantled, and usually ends up being incinerated. When electronic components are sent for recycling, the processes used are often energy-intensive, recover only a fraction of the metals, and require new technologies to depolymerize, dealloy, delaminate, devulcanize, and decoat the materials. Therefore, in addition to the proper management of WEEE, the adequate recovery of its component materials still needs to be achieved before the production chain can be fully circular, reincorporating waste into the production cycle [3,17,42].

Circular production offers environmental gains, a securer supply of raw materials, and opportunities for companies to earn money while saving resources. When implemented, circularity can also boost employment and even wage levels. Yet despite the advantages of circularity versus linearity, there are still many challenges to be overcome, particularly for those products that are still being developed according to the linear model, making it hard for consumers to get them repaired and upgraded [43].

According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, a charity that promotes the circular economy, for this to come about, products must be designed for repairability, disassembly, and recyclability, their useful life must be extended as much as possible, and the value of the materials they are made of must be maintained by collecting, sorting, separating, and recycling them at the end of a product’s useful life [44]. In keeping with these tenets, Bovea et al. [45] present a set of circular design guidelines that includes the following:

-

extending life span, in which the design of the product is adapted to become more durable so that it can be used for as long as possible;

-

disassembling, whereby products are designed in a way that enables access to their components;

-

product reuse, which allows products to be reused by facilitating their maintenance or cleaning;

-

component reuse, including recommendations for facilitating the reuse of the product’s components or parts by using standardized components and minimizing the number of parts, and

-

material recycling, in which the identification, sorting, and recycling of materials are facilitated.

The development of products for circularity with characteristics designed to extend their life span, the standardization and compatibility of their components, structures that facilitate repairs and upgrades, and design for disassembly, reassembly, and recycling provide great opportunities to optimize value generation at each stage of a product’s life cycle, helping mitigate raw material shortages and environmental damage [20].

Different actions directed at the end of the life cycle are being developed by policymakers and companies specialized in recycling WEEE [46,47,48,49]. Several reports and scientific articles have addressed topics related to the increased demand for and disposal of EEE [5,6,7,8,50]. According to Forti et al. [21], although the number of countries with national e-waste policies, legislation, or regulations has increased since 2014, recycling rates cannot keep up with the volume of WEEE generated. Mohammadi et al. [51] provide a comprehensive overview of WEEE generation trends in an island context. The results show that the aggregate WEEE generated per year on these islands is set to rise significantly in the future, suggesting that small islands should consider moving away from a linear to a circular economy. Bakhiyi et al. [52] state that regulatory efforts have proved insufficient to overcome the challenges of proper WEEE management. They propose solutions focused on getting consumers to adopt more rational and eco-oriented habits in order to decrease the quantity of WEEE being produced, while also getting manufacturers to make ethical and sustained commitments, ensuring better enforcement of laws and stronger reverse logistics, together with more affordable, upgraded, eco-friendly, worker-friendly e-recycling technologies to ensure that the great economic potential of WEEE is realized fully and safely. According to Li et al. [18], the most important way of overcoming the environmental damage of WEEE is to introduce design changes throughout the life cycle of EEE. Changes in the production phase such as material substitution and green disposal at the end of life could help to reduce the negative environmental impacts.

The Circular Electronics Partnership [20] has published a roadmap to guide the industry and stakeholders to transition to circular electronics, from design to sourcing and manufacturing through to reverse logistics and recycling. The roadmap is divided into three distinct periods: starting in 2023, the beginning of the first actions, defining circular products and services along with the development and rollout of education programs and tools for circular electronics design; as of 2027, the continuation of the project with new activities, and as of 2030, the presentation of the first results. Berwald et al. [53] provide design-for-circularity guidelines for the EEE sector that include aspects of design from and for recycling, with a focus on the circularity of plastics. The guidelines can help designers and manufacturers of EEE to improve the circularity of their products, providing practical rules and design strategies. Rizos et al. [54] comment that despite the growth of literature on the circular economy, there is still little research on the barriers to implementing circular economy business models. Insufficient policies, lack of funding for small- and medium-sized enterprises, and lack of societal involvement are some of the main barriers cited in the study. The authors conclude that policy action is needed on multiple fronts, addressing different stages of the EEE life cycle, and spanning various administrative and policy levels to achieve the incorporation of circular economy practices into business models.

There is ample evidence of the importance of circular EEE production chains to minimize waste, help reduce consumption, and enable the reuse of electronics and recycling of end-of-life products in an economically viable and environmentally feasible manner [44,45]. However, actions devised in the early stages of EEE development to increase its durability and enable its recycling are still incipient and should be better exploited by manufacturers.

Oyebanji et al. [55], Dey et al. [56], and White et al. [57] report that the development of new technologies can be verified through patent documents. The Patent Landscape Report on E-Waste Recycling Technologies, published in 2013 by World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) [57], provides an overview of the technologies available for WEEE recycling and recovery as far as they are described in patent documents, focusing on mobile phones and computer equipment. The report shows that the major technology trends in WEEE management from 2006 to 2010 are related to battery dismantling, conveyor belts for WEEE logistics and sorting, treatment for hazardous cadmium, mainly from batteries, and recovery of rare earths and precious metals. However, no studies were found using patent documents to verify whether the technological development of the EEE production chain considers the precepts of the circular economy or the legislation of the main manufacturing and/or consuming countries.

Patent documents are a free source of information about new technologies and provide details on the technological state of the technology under study, defining who, when, where, and what is being developed by mining relevant data. Patent documents are one of the most complete, accessible, practical, and up-to-date sources of information on innovative developments in all areas of knowledge. It is estimated that 70% of the information disclosed in patent documents has never been published anywhere else [58,59,60].

In this context, the objective of this article is to analyze the technological developments in patent documents for EEE by link in the production chain—raw materials, intermediates, products, and post-consumption—and their connection with the circular economy, as well as which countries and companies are the main developers of these technologies. From the analysis of the patent documents, the aim is to bring to light the technological solutions proposed by the leading companies in the area and whether they contribute to extending the life of EEE, the reuse of components, and ease of repair, recycling, and maintenance of materials within the production chain. Patent documents were chosen because they are public documents and the main source of information about new technologies.

This article helps different stakeholders (academics, governments, businesses, and civil society) to keep track of the development of technology, in the context of the circular economy, by the leading EEE patenters and manufacturers.

The article is structured into sections on the circular economy, circular production, and industrial property as a source of technological information, followed by an explanation of the patent document research methodology, the results and discussion, and some conclusions.

1.1. Concepts

1.1.1. Circular Economy

The circular economy is a systemic approach to economic development designed to benefit businesses, society, and the environment. It aims to decouple growth from the consumption of finite resources and is based on three principles: designing out waste and pollution, keeping products and materials in use, and regenerating natural systems [61].

In the circular economy, the industrial system is based on the principle of restoration or regeneration. Products, components, and materials are kept inside the production system, and recovery methods, consisting of the repair of equipment, are adopted to preserve its value [52].

The circular economy combines several concepts, one of which is “cradle to cradle” as opposed to the traditional “cradle to grave” model. The idea is not just to minimize damage to the environment, but also to foster value-efficient systems, optimizing gains so that resources can be repeatedly reused without loss of quality. In a linear production system, EEE is used just once; even in the rare cases when it is recycled—using conventional techniques—it is ultimately incinerated or discarded in a landfill. Conversely, with cradle to cradle, the same materials are continuously fed back into the production of new goods, and resources are managed in a loop, feeding back into the creation and reuse of equipment for the ultimate benefit of humans and nature [62].

In addition to the concept of cradle to cradle, technological developments deriving from green chemistry can also contribute to the circular economy and the value generation of materials. Green chemistry aims to enable the use of cleaner, sustainable, and renewable processes, and products and materials that can be safely recovered, reused, or recycled to create energy, or else biodegrade without polluting. Furthermore, green chemistry also aims to reduce or eliminate the negative impacts of chemical products and processes on human and environmental health. These impacts include pollution and risks, at the source, from raw materials, solvents, reagents, and other products. In contrast to the treatment and remediation (cleaning up) of pollution, green chemistry aims to keep hazardous materials out of the environment in the first place [17].

Adopting the principles of the circular economy is particularly relevant for EEE, which has rapid innovation and substitution cycles, incurs high energy consumption, has a heterogeneous composition, and yields increasing levels of waste. There is great potential for EEE to be redesigned for durability, ease of repair, and effective end-of-use disassembly for remanufacturing and recycling [17,45].

Considering the challenges and potential of EEE, the green technology approach is gaining crucial leverage from governments and public companies in a bid to observe good practices for environmental sustainability. The concept of green technology encompasses the idea of accountability and resource-efficiency in the production, usage, and disposal of EEE without ignoring financial feasibility and performance-related considerations. The objectives of green technology are aligned with those of the circular economy: green use, disposal, design, and manufacturing, focusing on reducing the power consumption of EEE, its disposal based on a return policy, including the design of computer models that protect the environment and enhance economic growth, and greener manufacturing methods that reduce the amount of waste produced and incorporate recycled materials into new electronic devices [63].

Government policies and consumer demand for more sustainable products are external factors that can stimulate manufacturers to apply circular economy concepts into the manufacturing of new products. New laws to encourage the circularity of EEE development could induce companies to comply with greener legal requirements and consumer expectations, driving green innovation initiatives. In addition, information on environmental policy trends could also reduce the uncertainty and risk of investing in innovation, and active government commitment could create green demands and markets, reduce business risks, and contribute to learning [64,65,66]. The “right to repair” movement is one example of direct action designed to promote circularity. It now has some important followers, such as the European Commission and some US states, which are drafting legislation to ensure that the useful life of EEE is longer, and it is designed in such a way as to enable it to be repaired, so that disposal ceases to be the only viable option [67,68,69].

1.1.2. Circular Production

A production chain involves a sequence of steps in which raw materials are transformed into products. Different units are responsible for each of these stages, which come together like links in a chain. The supply chain generally begins with the extraction and processing of raw materials and ends with the distribution of the good to customers. In a linear process, a production chain ends at this point. It is a model that takes no account of what happens after the product reaches the end of its useful life.

In this study, the circular production chain was divided into four links: raw materials, intermediates, products, and post-consumption. The materials used to manufacture EEE make up the “raw materials” link, and include metals, plastics, ceramics, and components such as capacitors, heat exchangers, processors, batteries, and others. Decisions about equipment at the design stage influence what raw materials are used. In the second link (intermediate) are the software and systems designed to improve the functionality of the equipment. The “product” link consists of the EEE itself, while “post-consumption” covers everything related to the management of the WEEE, both processes and equipment.

While a linear production chain normally begins with obtaining raw materials and normally ends with delivery to a customer, a circular process also encompasses the disposal, recycling, and recovery of the materials and their return to the production process in the form of raw materials for the manufacture of new products. In linear production, factors include the choice and origin of the materials, the product design, how its components affect the ability to repair or recycle it, its durability, and other considerations. In circular production, the resources circulate cyclically, enabling them to be used to the best advantage in the production process.

As traditional manufacturing sources raw materials from mining and other primary sector activities, some key raw materials—especially metals such as indium, lithium, and tantalum—are now in short supply. It is estimated that unless existing metal extraction processes are overhauled, demand will outstrip supply in the near future [15,16,18]. One way to address this problem is to use materials recycled in the post-consumption stage, as raw materials. The success and feasibility of recycling depends directly on the way products are designed and developed. If they contain toxic substances or varied materials or are very hard to dismantle, this may make it unattractive or even unfeasible to recycle them. That is why it is so important for manufacturers to think about the disassembly stage when their products are still on the drawing board [70]. Another way to reduce demand for raw materials in EEE is by increasing its useful life, the modularity of its components, and its repairability.

If the environmental burden caused by WEEE is to be overcome, then circular production must be adopted, since it has the power to help eliminate or reduce the generation of waste throughout the equipment’s life cycle. For this to be effective, every stage of this life cycle must be considered when the equipment is still being designed.

1.1.3. Industrial Property as a Source of Technological Information

A patent is a legal title that protects an invention. Patent documents are a source of technological information and an indicator of R&D performance, and they can also be harnessed to guide policymaking decisions [71,72,73].

The information found in patent applications includes the priority date (the date of first filing), the countries and companies involved in the development of the invention, and gives indications as to whether the invention conforms to the precepts of the circular economy.

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) states that patents are territorial rights that are only valid in the country or region where a patent has been filed and granted, in accordance with the law of that country or region. Therefore, patent protection can only be obtained in several countries if a national patent application is filed with each national patent office of interest, or a regional patent office is used, such as the European Patent Office (EPO) or the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). Filing patent applications through the EPO can have the same effect as applications filed or patents granted in the member states of that region. This means that, in certain regions, patent protection can be granted by a regional patent office that has validity in some or all of its member states. The PCT is administered by the WIPO and enables patent applications to be filed in 156 countries worldwide [74]. As for the meaning of patenting for individual countries, the more priority patents they attract, the more advanced their technological infrastructure can be assumed.

The market potential for a given invention is an important variable when choosing where to file for patent protection. Costs, risks, and the protection received must also be considered at the time of filing. According to Graham et al. [75], the size of a patent family reflects the expected economic value of the invention. The geographic scope of protection is a strategic decision and indicates the potential commercial and economic value and market coverage of a given invention. The greater the number of countries where an invention is patented, the more potential commercial and economic value there is to be gained [73].

Patent documents are indexed by a global classification system known as the International Patent Classification (IPC). It has existed since 1975 and is adopted in over 100 countries, facilitating the classification and search for patent applications. In the IPC, inventions are classified into eight fields (A to H), and each of these is broken down into classes, subclasses, and so forth [76].

2. Methodology for the Search and Analysis of Patent Documents

Regarding the technological development of EEE, the objective of this article is to analyze patent documents by their link in the production chain and their connection with the circular economy. To achieve this objective, a three-step methodology was proposed:

Step 1: Literature review, selection of EEE, and development of the patent search strategy.

In the first step, the Web of Science database was searched to retrieve articles and obtain an overview of the literature on the production and use of EEE, the production and management of WEEE, the circular economy, and production chains. A keyword combination was used according to the purpose of the study. The keywords used in this initial search were “electronic equipment” and “electronic waste” combined with “cradle-to-cradle”, “life cycle analysis”, “circular economy”, “circular production chain”, “recovery”, and “recycling” [18,20,21,23,45,52].

After the study of several articles and reports covering EEE data, policies, the importance of sustainability, energy efficiency, design, and circular production, it was decided that the target EEE for this article should be equipment that quickly becomes obsolete, is in high demand, can be hard to dismantle, has a complex design, and is hard to recycle because of its heterogeneous composition, form, and size [3,8,77,78,79,80]. The EEE selected for this study were therefore: laptops, tablets, smartphones, smartwatches, CRTs, LCDs and LED screens, PCBs, thin-film integrated circuits, and integrated circuits. The search strategy was developed from a combination of:

Group I: general terms for EEE, such as: TS = ((electronic* NEAR equipment*) OR (electronic* NEAR device*) OR (electronic* NEAR component*));

Group II: terms related to the circular economy focused on the development of electronic equipment such as: TS = ((design* NEAR (disassembl* OR environment* OR recover* OR recycl* OR sustainabilit* OR e-product* OR green* OR lean* OR product* OR multi*purpose* OR regenerative*) OR (durable NEAR use*) OR (eas* NEAR disposal) OR (eas* NEAR disassembl*) OR (eas* NEAR reuse*) OR (energ* NEAR efficienc*) OR (manual* NEAR disassembl*) OR (life NEAR cycle NEAR thinking*) OR (low NEAR environment* NEAR impact*) OR ((planned OR perceived) NEAR (obsolescence*) OR (reduc* NEAR energ* NEAR use*) OR (reduc* NEAR toxicit*) OR (reparabilit*) OR (restrict* NEAR hazardous NEAR substanc*) OR (sustainable*) OR (toxicit*) OR (waste* NEAR reduction*) OR (cradle*to*cradle OR cradle 2 cradle OR C2C))))

Group III: a combination of IPC codes [81] for the different kinds of EEE and specific terms related to the equipment of interest:((ip= (A62D-101/00 OR A62D-003* OR B03B-009/06 OR B03C-001* OR B09B-003* OR B23K* OR B29B-017* OR C08J-011* OR C09K-011* OR C09K-019* OR C22B* OR G04B* OR G04G-009/06 OR G04G-009/12 OR G06F* OR G09G-001* OR G09G-003* OR H01B-015* OR H01L21* OR H01L-027* OR H01M-010/54 OR H01M-006/52 OR H04M* OR H04N* OR H04W* OR H05K-001* OR H05K-003*)) AND (TS= (PCB OR (printed NEAR circuit NEAR board*) OR wiring OR (integrated NEAR circuit* OR ICT) OR (comput* NEAR (equipment* OR apparatus)) OR laptop OR notebook OR (portable NEAR computer*) OR (CRT OR (cathode-ray NEAR tube)) OR (LCD OR (liquid NEAR crystal NEAR display*)) OR (LED OR (light*emitting diode)) OR (OLED OR (organic NEAR light*emitting NEAR diode)) OR (mobile* phone* OR (hand* OR portable* OR cellular* OR handheld) OR device* OR telephon* OR phone* OR radio*) OR ((watch* OR clock) and (digital* OR smart* OR wireless*)) OR (flam* NEAR retardant* OR (halogen* free))))).

“TS” means that the search is done in the Title and Abstract fields within a patent record.

Step 2: Patent document search and data refinement.

The patent document search was conducted on the commercial platform Derwent Innovation, a commercial database that covers over 39 million patent documents from 40 worldwide patent-issuing authorities in the field of chemistry, electrics, and electronics). The patent search covered documents indexed from the 1970s until the end of 2020. More recent patent documents could not be searched because in most countries, patent databases have an 18-month access restriction period prior to full publication [82].

The search was performed using the following search strategy: “((Group I) AND (Group II) AND (Group III)”.

After removing the duplicates, the next step was to process the results in Vantage Point, a text mining software that serves to refine, analyze, and report on scientific, technical, market, and patent information [83].

Step 3: Analysis of patent documents.

Once the data were processed in the Vantage Point, the information extracted from the patent documents was analyzed with a focus on (a) the temporal evolution of patenting in the area of interest and (b) countries of first filing.

After an initial analysis of the documents processed in Vantage Point, it was found that 72% of all the patent applications were filed between 2010 and 2020. These documents were then subject to a second level of analysis to identify: (a) the main applicants; (b) patent protection procured in countries other than the country of first filing; (c) links in the production chain, and (d) technical solutions.

3. Results and Discussion

In this section, we present the results and discussion, according to the objectives set forth above.

3.1. Temporal Evolution of Patenting for EEE

A total of 3638 patent documents were retrieved, dating from 1970 to 2020. Figure 1 shows the distribution of the patent applications in the period analyzed.

The temporal evolution of patenting shown in Figure 1 demonstrates how technologies for EEE started to be developed slowly in the 1970s. The number of patent applications filed per year was less than 50 until 2002, but from 2003, research into new technologies took off. The patent applications dating from 2010 to 2020 account for 72% of all the documents retrieved, and this was also the period that saw the most significant growth.

The number of patent applications filed in 2019 and 2020 is partial. There were fewer applications in 2019 and 2020 because the search was done by the oldest priority year, and patent applications are normally published 18 months after the date the first application was filed (priority date). However, even with the limited number of documents available for these years, patenting activity still rose, demonstrating increased interest on the part of industry for new technologies aimed at the development of EEE.

3.2. Countries of First (Priority) Applications

The patent applications retrieved were filed in a total of 34 countries. Five of these were chosen as the country of first filing of over 87% of the applications, which is indicative of the global market concentration in just a few markets. Figure 2 shows the countries chosen for first filing.

The country where most priority patent applications were filed was the United States, followed by China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. Japan was the top priority country until the 1990s, but lost this position in the 2000s to the USA.

As of 2010, the USA, South Korea, Taiwan, and China all experienced a marked upturn in their patenting activity. Indeed, if the current trend continues, China’s patenting activity will soon outstrip that of the USA in this area.

In Figure 2 we can also see how much patenting activity in the area of interest rose between 2010 and 2020. The USA has a considerable proportion (35%) of all the priority patent applications, followed by China (28%) and Japan (15%). It is no coincidence that the top patenting countries are also countries with the largest intellectual property offices in the world, showing a robust intellectual property culture. These countries also have the biggest EEE consumer markets and large technology manufacturing infrastructure [12,13,14,84,85].

3.3. Main Applicants (Top Five)

The analysis of the temporal evolution (Figure 1) showed that 72% of all the patent documents retrieved were filed between 2010 and 2020. As explained in the methodology, this was accordingly the period chosen for the second level of analysis.

The patent documents retrieved show that the number of companies developing technology for EEE is high. The patent applications filed by the top five patenters were selected, which jointly filed 353 patent applications, representing 13% of patenting activity in the area between 2010 and 2020.

Table 1. Top five patent applicants related to the development of EEE in the context of the circular economy.

Company	Samsung	SEL *	IBM	Apple	Hon Hai
Headquarters	South Korea	Japan	USA	USA	Taiwan
Filings in 2010–2020	110 (92%)	73 (80%)	55 (67%)	70 (88%)	45 (62%)
Country chosen for most first applications	South Korea	Japan	USA	USA	China

* Semiconductor Energy Laboratory. Source: Elaborated by the authors based on a survey carried out on Derwent Innovation.

shows the top five applicants, the number of inventions between 2010 and 2020, what percentage these applications represent vis-a-vis all their patent applications in the period, and the countries chosen for priority protection.

Table 1 shows that three of the five companies are headquartered in Asian countries known for their advanced technology, while the others (IBM and Apple) have their head offices in the USA. These companies are some of the leading EEE producers and exporters with important consumer markets, such as South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, and the USA.

The main filers of patent applications applicable to the development of EEE are all large companies and are among the major companies operating in the technology market [12,86]. Most of their patenting activity was in the 2010–2020 period, as seen in the general curve of patenting (Figure 1). The companies that develop the technology tend to make the priority (first) patent application in their “home” country, which are also the countries chosen most for priority patenting (Figure 2).

3.4. Patenting in Countries Other Than the Priority Country

The choice of where to file for patent protection is a strategic decision that also indicates the economic value and commercial potential the applicant believes the invention has.

Figure 3 shows the countries where most patent applications were filed by the companies listed in Table 1. Each line is color-coded to indicate the companies, and the line thickness changes according to the percentage of patents filed in each country. The thickest line connects to the country where the priority patent application was filed.

The USA is the country where IBM and Apple patent their inventions first, but it is also the country where over 75% of the other companies’ patent applications were filed, making it a key market for the protection for new technologies. China, Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea have similar characteristics, receiving a lower percentage of patent applications.

Both Apple and IBM filed fewer patent applications outside the priority country. The Semiconductor Energy Laboratory (SEL) applied for protection for over 75% of its inventions in the USA, but also filed patent applications for over 25% of its inventions in other countries, like South Korea and Taiwan, while also procuring protection elsewhere through the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) administered by WIPO. Hon Hai tended only to file one priority application for its inventions, making the USA the target market of over 75% of these, and Japan the target of less than a quarter. Few patent applications were filed in Europe through the European Patent Office (EPO).

The main applicants often filed their patent applications in countries other than those of their first filing. The USA, which has an important consumer market, is seen as an important country for the leading companies. The other countries, which also consume large volumes of EEE, do not feature as strongly as the USA in the industrial property protection strategies of the main applicants. Even though China is the main EEE consumer market in the world and one of the top producers in the sector, the country is not seen by large companies in the EEE sector as strategically important when it comes to protecting industrial property.

3.5. Patent Applications per Link in the Production Chain

The patent documents filed by the main applicants identified from the Derwent Innovations platform were classified into the four links in the (circular) production chain: raw material, intermediates, products, and post-consumption.

Table 2. Patent applications for each production chain link.

Production Chain Link	Samsung	SEL	IBM	Apple	Hon Hai
Raw Materials	71%	96%	36%	57%	89%
Intermediate	15%	1%	62%	36%	9%
Products	14%	3%	2%	7%	2%
Post-consumption	-	-	-	-	-

Source: Elaborated by the authors based on a survey carried out on Derwent Innovation.

shows the distribution of patent applications for each production chain link.

Of the five companies studied, four put most of their R&D resources into raw materials, components, and processes. After that, intermediates were the target of the most action, especially by IBM, which focuses its effort on the development of software and systems.

Products attracted less patenting activity, with most of this for inventions related to PCB and LCD screens. It should be noted, however, that as products are a combination of different technologies that are patented individually, not much patenting activity was expected for this link. However, it is important to map the few documents retrieved in the search.

Although some improvements in terms of durability and disassembly of EEE were observed, there were no inventions specifically for the post-consumption stage, although it should be borne in mind that an analysis of the remaining patent documents could reveal the existence of inventions pertaining to this crucial link for the circular economy.

3.6. Technical Solutions Proposed

Next, the patent documents filed by the top five applicants between 2010 and 2020 were analyzed for the technical solutions and improvements they proposed. These are shown in

Table 3. Technical solutions in the claims filed by the main patent applicants.

Improvements in the Context of the Circular Economy/Links in the Production Chain	Samsung				SEL				IBM				Apple				Hon Hai
	RM	I	P	T	RM	I	P	T	RM	I	P	T	RM	I	P	T	RM	I	P	T
Efficiency	23	5	-	28	14	-	1	15	3	18	1	22	7	5	-	12	2	1	-	3
Efficiency + Energy Consumption	7	3	-	10	13	-	-	13	-	5	-	5	7	2	-	9	-	1	-	1
Energy Consumption	6	-	-	6	4	-	-	4	-	3	-	3	3	4	-	7	3	1	-	4
Efficiency + Others	10	-	-	10	20	-	1	21	2	-	-	2	6	4	-	10	-	-	-	-
Repairability + Others	3	-	-	3	1	-	-	1	1	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	3	-	-	3
Manufacturing process + Others	1	-	10	11	11	-	-	11	11	-	-	11	-	-	-	-	1	1	-	2
Energy Consumption + Others	4	4	-	8	2	-	-	2	-	-	-	-	-	5	2	7	-	-	-	-
Usability + Others	-	4	-	4	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	3	3	2	-	5	-	-	-	-
Durability + Others	3	-	-	3	1	1	-	2	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-	1
Assembly + Disassembly	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	19	-	-	19

Raw Materials (RM), Intermediate (I), Product (P), and Total (T). Source: Elaborated by the authors based on a survey carried out on Derwent Innovation.

, broken down by link in the (circular) production chain, as in the analysis above.

The inventions were mainly for the early stages of the manufacturing process, addressing new materials, components, manufacturing processes, and EEE design. This was not unexpected, given the search strategy used. The innovations claimed to improve efficiency (mainly Samsung and IBM), energy consumption (all applicants), assembly and disassembly efficiency (especially Hon Hai), manufacturing processes (mainly Samsung, SEL, and IBM), repairability (all, but fewer in number), usability (Samsung, IBM, and Apple), durability (Samsung, SEL, and Hon Hai), and combinations of these different aspects.

As can be seen in Table 3, the inventions aimed mostly to improve the efficiency of the equipment, making it quicker or enhancing its processing capacity, although there were innovations in terms of smarter energy consumption and longer battery life.

Different interfaces, and new materials and components can make devices more user-friendly, ergonomic, and attractive, improving user-device interaction. The inventions geared toward user experience are normally related to usability, while the ones that relate to equipment design usually aim to make it more attractive. There were fewer that focused on making it easier to assemble and disassemble the equipment, including during the manufacturing process itself (e.g., for machines). However, these improvements could be harnessed for the repair of devices that would otherwise be discarded, and could even facilitate their recycling.

Other innovations cited in smaller numbers related to durability, reparability, the use of fewer parts and less-polluting materials and processes, improved production processes (in terms of time, cost, complexity, etc.), and the modularization and miniaturization of EEE.

To illustrate some of the proposed improvements,

Table 4. Examples of technical solutions proposed by the main patent applicants.

Publication Number	Applicant	Link in Production Chain	Improvements in the Context of the Circular Economy
KR20170114839 [87]	Samsung	Raw Materials	Efficiency—heterocyclic compound, used in an organic photoelectric device, capable of selectively absorbing light in a green wavelength region and improving efficiency.
US2016139908 [88]	IBM	Intermediate	Efficiency—a method of providing a cloud computing for enabling convenient on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources to be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or interaction with a provider of a service.
JP2015228489 [89]	SEL	Raw Materials	Efficiency + Energy Consumption—a light-emitting element with excellent heat resistance and color reproducibility, and high luminous efficiency, energy efficiency, and color purity with respect to emitted light.
US2017357409 [90]	Apple	Raw Materials	Efficiency + Energy Consumption—a method performed on an electronic device with a display and a touch-sensitive surface; the device that allows a user to improve speed and efficiency of a machine-user interface, thus conserving energy, and improving battery life.
WO2021191735 [91]	SEL	Product	Efficiency + Others (production cost, size, fewer parts, and design)—a high-definition display device produced easily by reducing the number of wirings and simplifying the drive circuit. The luminous efficiency is improved. The size and weight reduction of display are achieved by reducing the number of components of the electronic device. The production cost of display device and the number of production process steps are reduced. The freedom of design of organic photodiode is improved.
JP2017147445 [92]	SEL	Raw Materials	Efficiency + Others (miniaturization, energy consumption, improved production processes, and design)—a semiconductor device, which is miniaturized or highly integrated, and having favorable electrical characteristics is provided. The semiconductor device is manufactured with high productivity, high design flexibility and low-power consumption.
US2019295938 [93]	IBM	Raw Materials	Efficiency + Others (repairability)—a chip module with a discrete electronic device which provides an efficient electrically conductive contact, enables repairability and adaptability of the discrete electronic devices placed within the recesses, as well as access for checking functionality of the respective electronic device.
US2019155336 [94]	Samsung	Raw Materials	Repairability + Others (repair cost and disassembly)—a bonding tape which reacts according to a temperature change to vary the bonding force. The bonding tape easily reassembles and disassembles a product when the product is repaired, and repair costs of the product can be reduced.
TW201228092 [95]	Hon Hai	Raw Materials	Repairability + Others (assembly and disassembly)—an antenna module in which the assembling and disassembling can be performed easily. The antenna can be repaired and replaced easily.
US10602612 [96]	Apple	Raw Materials	Manufacturing processes + Others (miniaturization and design)—a printed circuit board assembly in which the position of the vertical interconnects can facilitate a cost reduction regarding material cost and waste, provides a freedom of design, and allows the circuit board miniaturization.
CN207397179 [97]	Samsung	Raw Materials	Manufacturing processes + Others (fewer parts, assembly, disassembly, usability, repairability, and design—a laptop lower cover without screw structural designs, beautiful appearance, convenient disassembly; the user can dismount the lower cover to clean dust exchange elements and improve the user experience; optimize the notebook manufacturer to manage the material, reduce the management, and cost of purchasing screws; screws due to environmental corrosion or reassembly may be lifting the repair work efficiency.
US2011224951 [98]	IBM	Raw Materials	Manufacturing processes—method for performing computer-aided design of an electronic circuitry which enables providing greater accuracy in an electronic device, the electronic circuit and packaging analysis, greater accuracy in the computer-aided design and fabrication, thus reducing the number of fabrication cycles, cost, and time.
WO2021225971 [99]	Apple	Product	Energy Consumption + Others (durability)—a display structure comprising a display panel that includes pixel circuitry connected to a matrix of light-emitting diodes (LEDs), which is provided with the potential for energy efficiency and is less prone to lifetime degradation and sensitivity to moisture.
US9185062 [100]	Apple	Intermediate	Usability + Others (energy consumption and efficiency)—a method for capturing and sending media which has the increased efficiency, and the reduced energy usage increases battery life.
US2016037870 [101]	Apple	Raw Materials	Usability + Others (durability and design)—a removable module which can extend the functionality of a consumer product. The attachment system is easy to use and intuitive as the tool is not required. The system has a low profile, thus enabling the consumer product to maintain a specific shape or esthetic.
CN102858102 [102]	Hon Hai	Raw Materials	Durability + Others (repair cost, assembly, and disassembly)—a housing for an electronic device using a silicone rubber membrane which improves maintenance efficiency and reduces maintenance cost, and may be reused while allowing easy assembly or disassembly of the housing.
CN102736705 [103]	Hon Hai	Raw Materials	Assembly + Disassembly—a casing for an electronic device that a printed circuit board can be easily assembled to or detached from the casing without any tools, which makes the assembly and disassembly of the electronic device simple and convenient.
CN103458646 [104]	Hon Hai	Raw Materials	Assembly + Disassembly + Production Cost—a housing for an electronic device in which the assembly and disassembly of the electronic device can be made convenient and easy. The manufacturing cost of the device is reduced.
CN107463857 [105]	Hon Hai	Raw Materials	Disassembly—a light guiding device packaged which easily determines that the structure has been disassembled without authorization since the unauthorized disassembler cannot restore the original location of the barrier objects when the barrier objects gather into one place.
EP2631748 [106]	Samsung	Product	Design—a capacitive touch panel for electronic device in which the panel enhances the visibility of a product, clarity of the product, and the design of the product can become more appealing by configuring the UV resin layer for additionally preventing refractions and reflections of light.
KR20170124844 [107]	Samsung	Raw Materials	Fewer parts + Others (size, design, and manufacturing processes)—the control units allow a reduced product thickness, the bezel region is minimized to implement the design luxuriously. The number of soldering steps is reduced so that the manufacturing cost of the product is reduced.
KR20130049439 [108]	Samsung	Raw Materials	Less Polluting Processes + Others (manufacturing processes and efficiency)—method for forming a circuit pattern on a printed circuit board (PCB) which prevents the board from being deformed or degenerated. Simplifies the fabrication process to reduce fabrication costs and environmental pollution, to increase energy efficiency, and enhances the reliability of the product including the PCB overall.

Source: Elaborated by the authors based on a survey carried out on Derwent Innovation.

presents a selection of the patent applications (publication number and applicant), which link in the production chain they are from, and what improvement or technical solution they propose.

When a product is developed according to the precepts of circularity, its development already takes into account its disposal, recycling, and the recovery of its component materials, and it also displays features such as repairability, disassembly, durability, standardization, and component compatibility. As noted earlier, these considerations enable the value of materials to be maintained, raw material scarcity to be mitigated, and material losses and environmental damage to be reduced [17,20,44,45,70].

Table 3 and Table 4 show that from 2010 to 2020, the main innovators for EEE were focusing primarily on the efficiency of their devices, which may indirectly increase their useful life. However, extending the useful life of such equipment does not appear among the claims in the documents analyzed.

The patent applications filed by Hon Hai are mainly focused on product assembly and disassembly. Although the applicant does not mention it, such inventions could also facilitate equipment repair and recycling. Conversely, when design decisions make it difficult or impossible for third parties to disassemble equipment, even if this is for safety reasons, they can make it hard, overly expensive, or unfeasible to repair it.

Despite the speed of the innovation and obsolescence cycle, few patent documents were identified that focused on reducing the pollution produced during manufacturing, extending products’ useful life, and designs that facilitated repairs, upgrades, or disassembly for recycling.

The scientific literature offers a host of data substantiating the need to migrate to the circular production of EEE to reduce the production of WEEE, facilitate the recycling and reuse of materials, and minimize the risk of raw material shortages. There is also now legislation targeting the post-consumption link that makes manufacturers responsible for their waste products through the principle of extended producer responsibility. The EU, through its Circular Economy Action Plan, and China, through the Circular Economy Promotion Law, propose measures for the entire life cycle, improving resource efficiency, and fostering sustainable development [34,38].

In general, recycling materials used in EEE and returning them to the production process as raw materials for new components is not the target of the R&D investments of the main EEE manufacturers. Nonetheless, some of the inventions observed in the patent documents may contribute to the circular economy and sustainable development, since more efficient products can have a longer useful life, equipment designed to be easier to assemble and disassemble can enable equipment repairs and upgrades, and more efficient energy consumption can have a positive environmental impact and extend battery life.

4. Conclusions

This study presented an analysis of patent applications for aspects of the production of EEE based on the precepts of circular production chain and the circular economy. The claims from the applications filed from 2010 to 2020 by the main patent applicants were analyzed in more detail.

First, the patenting trends in the area were identified. The patenting of technological solutions for the EEE under study increased significantly as of 2003, especially in the USA and China, which have the highest patenting activity in this area. The leading patent applicants were some of the top technology companies headquartered in the USA and Asia. The leading Asian companies tended to protect their inventions in more countries than one, especially in the USA, while the leading American companies filed less than 25% of their patent applications in countries other than the USA.

The innovations identified in the patents were mainly for the raw materials link of the production chain and focused on the development of new components, materials, production processes, and product design. The solutions for the early stages in the life cycle and use of the equipment focused, among other things, on enhanced performance, reparability, user experience, energy efficiency, assembly and disassembly, manufacturing process, and new materials.

These findings show that there is a chasm between the concepts and guidelines for a circular economy discussed in academic publications and public policies and what is actually being developed in the EEE industry. In general, most studies and policies focus mainly on the recycling and reuse of materials. However, the leading patent applicants and manufacturers of EEE focused mainly on features that can extend the useful life of the equipment or save energy. Although these are in line with the precepts of the circular economy and sustainable development, they fall short of fostering truly circular production.

The issues associated with the high demand for EEE and its disposal, along with the benefits to be obtained by maintaining materials in the production chain, as demonstrated by scientific studies, not to mention targeted national legislation and international treaties, seem to have little impact on the biggest EEE manufacturers in terms of making them rally their resources into focusing on what happens to their equipment after it has reached the end of its useful life. More robust legislation and more interaction between manufacturers and other stakeholders, like governments, consumer groups, and recyclers, could encourage manufacturers to rethink their technology development processes from a more sustainable perspective.

For this study, a macro-to-micro analysis of the top five patent applicants was conducted, observing the countries where priority and subsequent patent applications were filed, and identifying which links in the production chain the claims belonged to. Future research could analyze a larger sample of patent applicants and find out whether there are any smaller companies or startups developing technologies to foster the reuse and recycling of EEE. A similar methodological approach could also be used to investigate scientific publications on the same subject.

Looking at the issue of EEE from a broader perspective, it is important for efforts to be made to develop national and regional legislation and standards to regulate the development of EEE. Multi-stakeholder working groups, bringing together governments, corporate entities, consumers, and researchers (e.g., universities and non-profit entities), could be set up with the aim of fostering the successful development of EEE in line with the fundamental concepts of the circular economy.