HDG400 Design Research Methods / Social PatternsProject 2: Developing a design proposal briefFaculty of DesignGroup: iConsumeGroup Members: Henry Fuller 5405750 / Sarah Law 5307910Lecturers: Dr. Keith Robertson / Nicki Wragg / Tony WardSubmission date: 13/05/2008

Design Proposal: Technology Consumption

The waste created from obsolete technology, in particular computers and mobile phones is a major economic and environmental issue. Technology is too often replaced by updated models after an all too short life cycle, without consumers understanding or justifying a need for it. As consumers we need to be informed and educated as to how we can be more responsible in our choices, from buying to disposal. It has become apparent that we cannot simply purchase new technology without a sustainable plan for the old.

With this in mind, we began our research by asking ourselves, could technology waste be the greatest environmental concern of the 21st Century? To reach a better understanding of the research topic, we used the triangulation practice of comparing and combining different sources of evidence. Firstly, we conducted a questionnaire asking people about their consumption habits, expressly relating to the purchase, usage and disposal of technology products. Case studies of a select range of volunteer’s homes were undertaken to gain more qualitative results, looking at what technology they own and how they dispose of those products when they are upgraded, replaced, or broken. Finally, we documented a range of photographic and cultural references of over-consumption.

The results of the research show that Australian consumers are willing to dispose of, or recycle, their old technology thoughtfully if:

• There is an easily accessible way to dispose and recycle.

• They do not have to pay fees to dispose and recycle.

Research showed us most consumers either hold onto their old technology – unable to dispose of it anywhere they deem thoughtful, or throw it into their rubbish bins as they don't know about or have easy access to a technology recycling program.

So, who is held responsible for the millions of tonnes of e-waste? Is it the unsuspecting consumer who buys all the technology? Is it the producer who manufactures it? Or is it the advertiser who tells us we need it?

Abstract

01

Over the course of the Twentieth Century we have seen a noticeable shift in the reason and rate of modern consumption. Removed from a purely explanation of commodity exchange to consumption as an expression of desire, a reposition of self and a producer of signs.

As Australian consumers, we like to own the newest, greatest, fastest technology we can afford. Advertising tells us that we need these whiz-bang products, that our life isn’t complete without them. But through constant updates in technology can we afford to keep up, economically or environmentally? Looking specifically into the consumption of technology, we can see the importance of owing powerful technology for the general consumer. This is especially obvious in children, who want the latest iPods and mobile phones to look the most impressive and rich of their peers, but it may also have become a necessity to function as an individual in the age of technology.

We purchase technology at an unsustainable rate, producing waste at a rate we cannot maintain. Consumers don’t have the information available on thoughtful disposal of technology, which causes many to just hoard their obsolete products in their cupboards and garages, never to be used again.

But does this issue lie with the consumer, the advertiser or the manufacturer? Do we as consumers need to be responsible in what they purchase, or simply ‘consume less’? Is it that advertising should be more transparent? Or is it the manufacturer not taking responsibility for the afterlife of the end product?

We need to dispel our paradigm of progress – that in order to progress we need to keep growing the economy. Growth and development are often seen as one in the same, but economic growth today is dependant on increasing consumption of resources, development can be encouraged through value-added activities.

Introduction

02

Over the course of the Twentieth Century we have seen a noticeable shift in the reason and rate of modern consumption. Removed from a purely explanation of commodity exchange to consumption as an expression of desire, a reposition of self and a producer of signs.

As Australian consumers, we like to own the newest, greatest, fastest technology we can afford. Advertising tells us that we need these whiz-bang products, that our life isn’t complete without them. But through constant updates in technology can we afford to keep up, economically or environmentally? Looking specifically into the consumption of technology, we can see the importance of owing powerful technology for the general consumer. This is especially obvious in children, who want the latest iPods and mobile phones to look the most impressive and rich of their peers, but it may also have become a necessity to function as an individual in the age of technology.

We purchase technology at an unsustainable rate, producing waste at a rate we cannot maintain. Consumers don’t have the information available on thoughtful disposal of technology, which causes many to just hoard their obsolete products in their cupboards and garages, never to be used again.

But does this issue lie with the consumer, the advertiser or the manufacturer? Do we as consumers need to be responsible in what they purchase, or simply ‘consume less’? Is it that advertising should be more transparent? Or is it the manufacturer not taking responsibility for the afterlife of the end product?

We need to dispel our paradigm of progress – that in order to progress we need to keep growing the economy. Growth and development are often seen as one in the same, but economic growth today is dependant on increasing consumption of resources, development can be encouraged through value-added activities.

Introduction

02

Naming iConsume is a modern twist on a treasured pastime. Consumption is depicted as a shortcut to happiness and wellbeing. Australia as a culture, values consumption. Advertising, individually and collectively, performed the same missionary function — to convert audiences into practising consumers. Upon their conversion to the culture of consumption, consumers underwent a further transformation. Rather than being content with the products they needed, they would continue consuming products they desired.

Wordmark Capital must expand to survive. In the era of monopolising, capitalists have pursued accumulation by reducing unit costs through mass production. The consequent explosion in the volume of products called for greater consumption. Supply could not create its own demand. Workers had to be induced to spend beyond what the system of exploitation had taught them to consider necessities.

Money was the first commodity to be standardised so that it could serve as a universal equivalent for every other commodity. After WW1 the Australian faithful heard ‘Gold is dead’ at the same time as the sales effort exploded. Once gold ceased to provide a universal equivalent for the exchange of commodities, the commodities themselves became the new measure of moral worth.1

Advertising played a role is maintaining Australian consumption during times of economic and social downturn. They sold us the dream, and we believed it to be for us. We listened, and we consumed. We chose to give iConsume a elaborate, cursive typeface because this is the dream being sold to us, it stinks of aspiration. We made it out of solid gold, because we believe; to be truly sustainable we must be true to materials.

The swirls are the “advertising” or the “sell” of the branding, they are the dream. They are aspirational, basically a bit of a piss-take of high cultured advertising.

Our brand echoes femininity because targeted women when they wanted to move a product. Before consumerism, women would make clothes, prepare meals for the family & maintain general upkeep of the household. Men went to work or fought wars. Now it can be said that we all consume for the household.

iConsume Brand

03

iConsume Wordmark

1 McQueen, Humphrey, Fancy Work: The Mass Aesthetic

Our Objectives

04

iConsume is in search of a better understanding of Australia’s rate of technology consumption with the intention of creating more value in product after-life.

The following are a set of our values and objectives:

• To promote best practice in all areas of technology consumption, from raw material extraction, through manufacture, from the sale of commodities, through product after-life.

• To inform and educate consumers about the life of technology, in hope of molding them into responsible consumers of the future, and furthermore, show consumers how to recycle their old technology they have no use for anymore.

• To identify the responsibility of the advertiser in relation to consumption.

• To successfully implement the use of advertising methods without connotations towards mass consumption, rather a balanced economic and sustainable future.

• To monitor the responsibility of technology in economical gain juxtaposed to social and environmental concerns.

• To develop and promote concepts in ‘truth to materials’ in social and production markets.

• To offer new meaning to the word progress in relation to technological development and consumption.

• To strive for a reduction in waste across all levels of manufacture, to increase re-use of obsolete technology, to be more transparent in recycling, and to honor simplicity.

Function

We envisage the final outcomes to be available to a vast audience, where information can be obtained and understood with clarity by a larger community. The final outcomes must be in line with the technology to be recycled. They must be accessible for all consumers in some shape or form. For example, our Producer/Consumer Alliance is for everyone to become a part of, not necessarily a specific age range. However, the marketing will be targeted towards Generation Y, as they are currently the biggest consumers of technology products, and will set the standards for the future.

Distribution

Our outcomes will be packaged with the technology, so the relevant information is available with the product at purchase. There will also be information online about the Producer/Consumer Alliance, for people to find out before buying products, as well as being reminded and informed.

Eight Artists & Eight Computers will be available for the public to access through an exhibition featuring artist responses to the brief. The information pack containing essential application material will be available as a magazine tear out. A published book will be available for purchase at the exhibition.

101 Things to do with ‘old’ technology has been marketed towards an interested community, its success is largely dependant upon word of mouth, however, it has also been posted on various Melbourne based websites as well as postered around the city. The response has been quite effective, having had responses from London.

Audience

We have identified three different audiences each unique to each applied outcome. For example, the Producer/Consumer Alliance; a information booklet designed to inform the consumer how best to work use their technology through its life and ultimately it’s demise has been targeted towards a mass audience by placing it with the packaging of technology at purchase.

Whereas, Eight Artists & Eight Computers has been targeted the design and art community, asking the user to create a valued object from worthless material. The initiative is designed to create awareness in an industry that works closely with technology.

Lastly, 101 Things to do with ‘old’ technology has used various media platforms to target an interested audience. By that we mean people that may not be directly involved in the over-consumption of technology, but may see it as a notable environmental concern.

Materials

As a design orientated team we have addressed the need to be conscious in our choices of materials. We must be sustainable in our choices, therefore natural fibres and processes are desirable.

Design Considerations

05

Approach

To gain better understanding of our research topic, we engaged a triangulation approach to our research. By conducting a survey, hosting a series of case studies and gathering evidence based research; we were able to obtain substantial results for thorough analysis.

In using varied applications of research we can understand the importance of gathering information from diverse sources. There needs to be alternative or conflicting views of a subject matter in order for there to be a design problem to resolve. The need to be open-minded, unbiased and unpresumptuous in our approach to research was never compromised.

Online Questionnaire

Through an online questionnaire, we invited students and friends of a varied demographic to share their own experiences of purchasing, using and disposing technology. Our results provided a quantitative analysis of the surveyed group. We often found that where space was given to our surveyed group to leave comments we got some of the greatest insight because they weren’t being prompted for an answer.

The most surprising answer we found was from the question “Do you enjoy technology?” 93% of respondents answered “Yes”, even though many reports researched earlier claim our modern lives of materialism and less in-person social interaction are linked to feeling unhappy and unfulfilled in our lives. 43% of respondents claim they hold onto their obsolete technology, with some adding they keep it in hope of fixing it some day. 17% throw their obsolete technology in the bin, and only 11% choose to recycle. As far as buying new technology, 82% say they would be happy to buy from a brand responsible for the afterlife of the product, and 69% claim they would be happy to pay more knowing a product was sustainable. However, many of those 69% added they wouldn’t want to spend much more, as technology is already very expensive.

Methodologies

An indication for change?

06

Do you enjoy technology?93% yes 7% no

How do you dispose of your obsolete technology?43% hoard it 11% recycle it 17% chuck it

Would you buy technology from a brand if it were more responsible for the after-life of its product?82% yes 18% no

Would you pay more for this sustainable brand?69% yes 31% no

07

Case Studies

Our case studies focused on a number of different residencies around Victoria, with varied demographics of those living in the houses (young professionals, families, elderly couples) looking at what technology they own and what they do with technology once it is of no more use to them. We found this approach very useful as it provided qualitative results and prompted the people we were studying to open up and give information at a more intimate level.

The main response gained from the case studies was the issue that residents are aware of the need to recycle, but know very little about technology recycling services available, if any. Residents told us they try to do the right thing, whether passing items on, or donating them – but when they can’t find anywhere sufficient, the products end up in the bin. Some also have pointed out they don’t appreciate paying fees for their old technology to be recycled, which is currently a common practice of many companies.

Observational Research

Our third area of research is through a collection of varied visual documentation as well as gathering cultural references that show evidence of over-consumption. Results from this collection have proved beneficial because audiences respond positively to visual evidence and they can be quite convincing.

Looking into pop culture, we immediately came across two cartoons that portray the “technological” life – Futurama and The Jetsons, both with different takes on technology. We once saw technology as the way to make the future easier, with flying cars and robots. Now we see technology as making life more complicated than simple.

Producer/Consumer Alliance

At present, there is little happening in the way of e-waste recycling. We have posed the question as to who takes to responsibility. Perhaps the best result is a shared interest in the after-life of technology. Where the producer has a major role in the after-life of its products rather than leaving the consumer to dispose of it. Both consumer and producer must be more responsible from the beginning of a products life, through its use and finally its demise otherwise we have no doubt that computer waste will be the greatest environmental problem of the 21st Century.

We propose an alliance between a major company and their consumers. Where, after the product is deemed obsolete, the producer takes more responsibility for its re-use, recycle or disposal. We propose this be done by educating the consumer how to best care for their product during its life and how to dispose of it in a sustainable manner once they deem it obsolete. At present, similar schemes exist, however, there is very little incentive for the consumer to participate. In some cases, the producer even charges the consumer for the return of obsolete goods for disposal. It is more economical for them to leave it for hard rubbish collection. Producers need to accept responsibility, offer discounts of upgraded products as an incentive to return the product for sustainable disposal.

A booklet on “recycling technology responsibly” could be included with technology products from the alliance company. This booklet would include places where the end product can be taken for recycling once it is of no more use to the consumer. This booklet could also include suggestions on lengthening the life of the product for the consumer (whether it be software updates or just general maintenance). This would also include an incentive to recycle the product, such as a discount voucher for next time they shop at the company after disposing of their old product as outlined in the booklet. Our research findings will shape the content of the book, as well as the campaign to advertise the alliance.

Banking Initiative

Teaching children about the real value of money and the technology they consume, by creating a program through a bank (such as Commonwealth or NAB) where kids can have a “wishlist” connected to their bank account, with the intention of teaching kids to prioritize their needs and wants, seeing the costs of the products and saving up for them. This would teach them about responsible buying – do you really need that new phone yet? What comes first? Can you afford it yet? And so on. If they are spending their money wisely, less waste will be created even before recycling.

Outcomes

08

09

Eight Artist’s & Eight Computers

Through research conducted this semester we’ve come to understand that change is realized through community investment. So we are approaching members of the community to help us gain a better understanding of how to reduce e-waste. We were astonished to find such a large amount mass of obsolete computers in hard rubbish collections last week! During a 1km drive, we uncovered 19 of them. Eight of which were collected to be the medium for an art workshop we are initiating with the help of local artists.

“Eight Artist’s & Eight Computers” is designed to show our community that these computers deemed so useless they are out for hard rubbish collection that they might have an after-life. By commissioning artists to produce work out of obsolete computers we hope to show the community a creative way of technology disposal. The workshop will be fully documented and presented in a bound book.

We believe it’s quite important to differentiate our outcomes by creating a ‘look and feel’ for each that is unique to its given audience.

Eight Artists & Eight Computers is targeted towards the design and art community there we have created a minimal colour palate and clean lined illustration.

We have chosen a single typeface in Rockwell, a typeface of strength and character.

101 Things to do with ‘old’ technology

Do you have an “old grey box” (or more specifically an obsolete computer) collecting dust somewhere around your home? Or what about those old mobile phone chargers you have no idea what to do with?

Well, we pose you the question: what else could you do with all that old technology? We are putting together a book called “101 things to do with ‘old’ technology”, with the intention of the public being the main contributors. We ask you to get creative and provide an illustration that shows what else could you do with all that old technology. We ask you to be as serious, as funny, or as strange as you like with your entries. All entries will be published in the book at the end of semester. It will not only be participating in the activities that will highlight the need for recycling of technology, but the books will be a lasting reminder and could be sold or distributed.

‘101 Things to do with ‘old’ technology’ has a different audience, therefore, a different feel. It’s probably more inviting, we’ve used Palatino, a friendly typeface and a serif that reads well at a large scale.

EIGHT ARTISTS & EIGHT COMPUTERS

101 Things todo with ‘old’technology

Research Outcomes

• Proposal & Literature Review*

Design Outcomes

• Producer/Consumer Alliance*

Costing Option 1

10

We are currently in negotiations with Law Bindery in Glenhuntly Rd who specializes in hard cover binding. We have proposed doing a series of A6 bound books each detailing an area of the complete design process from research through outcome completion.

* Hardcover Binding $70 or Soft Perfect Bind $35

• 101 things to do with ‘old’ technology* • Eight Artists & Eight Computers*

Costing Option 2

11

Alternatively, we are proposing combining all 4 books into a larger volume and differentiating sections through stock or format changes. This option will bring costs down considerably as it only employs one $40 bind.

Money saved in binding costs could be applied to other finishing techniques, such as UV glossing or embossing.

Contents

• Proposal & Literature Review • Producer/Consumer Alliance • 101 things to do with ‘old’ technology • Eight Artists & Eight Computers

12

Week 4 Week 7Week 5 Week 8Week 6

Group created— Henry and Sarah are both members of the original Ethos group and decide to build on their current research base and partnership.

Define directions of research— building upon our Ethos research and looking for design research questions to begin to specialise our research towards a queried area.

Literature review research: consumption— early research is conducted with a broad approach within the defined topic. Gathering and analysis of varied opinions from a vast source will build a sound method of research.

The iConsume brand is shaped.

Second A0 iConsume poster production.

The iConsume branding is becoming obvious. Logo and colour development.

Finish second poster.

Triangulation of research methods.

Choose which outcome to follow.

Begin Consumption literature review.

Poster presentation to Honors group.

Begin production of design outcomes.

13

Week 9 Week 10 Week 11 Week 12 Week 13

Continue production.

Look at final publications.

Begin technology art activities to work alongside Producer/ Consumer Alliance.

In discussion with our publisher (Lawbindery).

4 x bound book outcome may fall way of more economical singular bound book.

Deliver design proposal & second literature review

User-testing on Producer/ Consumer Alliance.

Complete technology art activities.

Testing stock options.

User-testing— define flaws

Continue designing final publications and final presentation PDF

Complete publications and final presentation PDF

Deliver and present

Literature Review

14

Consumerism and Technology

Over the course of the twentieth century we have seen a noticeable shift in the reason and rate of modern consumption. Removed from a purely socio-economic explanation of commodity exchange to consumption as an expression of desire, a reposition of self and a producer of signs.

We are all consumers. To the betterment of our society or otherwise, consumption has a profound effect on our lives. It is responsible for our economic progression, and dips its hand into the pocket of environmental depletion, as a result of increased energy processes adopted post WW2 in direct relation to new advances in technology.

Reasons why we consume are vast. There is a strong turn in cultural studies and social sciences towards explaining consumption as something people simply do, without necessarily judging it inherently bad. A set of optimistic youth had money in their pocket and an array of choices made available by mass production.

Money was the first commodity to be standardised so that it could serve as a universal equivalent for every other commodity.1 This was made of gold and could be judged as valuable against a product.

In a time of growing affluence and shifts in social status prescribed by mass production, consumers heard ‘gold is dead’. Once gold ceased to provide a universal equivalent for the exchange of commodities, the commodities themselves became the new measure of social and perhaps moral worth.

Advertising fostered desires rather than needs, and consumers were driven towards attaining better, cheaper material goods, devices, experiences and technologies. As consumers, through manipulation we were being sold the idea to equate social status with material goods. The more wants that are satisfied, more new ones are born.

Talking about the commodity, Marx defined it as “an external object, a thing which through its qualities satisfies human needs of whatever kind… Objects at completion seemed to impart magical powers that seemed to inhere ‘commodity fetishism’, it’s no longer an object, it “changes into a thing which transcends sensuousness”.2

An interesting cultural phenomenon started to become visual. Changes in gender relations, perceived status, expressions of the individual along with group identity and subculture. We gravitated towards notions of belonging, of taste and style. The idea of ‘social emulation’ had a profound effect with the act of consumption, as to emulate the consumption practices of a higher social order.

Consumption is not simply the individual act of purchasing, as if purchasing a product were the end to the cycle itself. When we look at consumption we must also look at sustainable procurement, all products impact on the natural and human environment in terms of their raw material extraction, manufacture, production, transport, advertising. At present consumerism indicates the unreflective practice of mindless purchasing of gadgets and technologies, brands and labels, in effect it is consumerism as culture and purchasing as language.

This culture is shaping the cities we live in. “Cities are not a pre-formed space that we happen to inhabit, they are built and maintained on social interactions and practices, including consumption”.3 Simmel concurs, “We walk through this city, processing and screening complex stimuli responding to signs, colours, smells, sounds and people”.4 As a result we develop a blasé attitude towards others as simply elements of our surroundings and, “One way we reassert ourselves and create some sense of identity is through patterns of consumption”.5

Now that we understand consumption to be more than an act of purchasing, we can perceive the notion that its movement may not be linear and we can presume that to truly quantify a 'commodities life' we must look at it in two directions. Firstly, the vertical life of a product, its responsibility from idea, through manufacture, shift to commodity, its life as a product and finally its demise. Then in contrast, we must look at its horizontal life, its symbolic value in its surrounding culture.

15

Consumption and Postmodernism

Consumption is widely received to have an important role in the emergence of a postmodern culture. Postmodern conceptions of consumption are associated with a recognition that consumption is more significant for its sign value or symbolic qualities that for its use-value.

A postmodern world encourages us to believe that anything is possible, and “the identity-conferring nature of consumption is not something that is merely restricted to the young and rich, but potentially affects the lives of everybody. We can be whoever we want, as long as we are prepared to consume”.6 Soon, we are no longer consuming objects, but also “meaning, truth and knowledge”.7 It consumes everyday life, whereby we create standards of ‘good style’, ‘good taste’ and ‘good design’.

“There is now a new form of capitalism in the world, based on the ever increasing production of new commodities for consumption”.8 The so-called consumer capitalism is dictated by sophisticated forms of consumption, where less emphasis is placed on production value. Based on where Marx wrote extensively about the use-value and exchange-value of commodities. The use value being that actual cost of production through materials and labour and the exchange value, the worth given to a product given a particular stance in social value, determined by acceptance, brand, taste and time.

The application of technology to the production process has increased the standards of living in the developed world, this cannot be underestimated. However, some onlookers are wary of the degree of control technology has on our everyday lives. The emergence of domestic technologies such as refrigerators, food processors, washing machines, radio and the television have shaped our lives. But the rate at which technology and it derivatives are consumed today must be cause for concern. The home computer, once a tool for field experts has now become a tool for the middle masses. Its original envisioned worth as a tool for education has been sacrificed by the introduction of spin-offs such as the Internet. No longer are we using it for betterment, we’re looking up images of a graphic nature, online gaming and mindless mass consuming. There must come a point where it becomes visible that technology is no longer a tool of progression, rather a food for the fetishes.

“Economic Growth is key to environmental progress”.9 How ridiculous a comment to associate environmental progress with economic growth. His assessment may be derived from a paradigm view of progress, a core belief that dramatically structures our worldwide view. People become entrapped in a belief of the masses, passed on and accepted as truth without any analysis. It is our belief that it is now; the association of economic growth to environmental progress must be revealed and understood as false. No longer will we apply advances on technology to a result of progress, because clearly we are wrong, and we are being shown this by how our natural world is responding to our “progress”.

Industrialised nations have developed new crises in health; a rise in heart related illness, obesity, type 2 diabetes and depression, concerns not witnessed in undeveloped countries therefore can be seen as directly related. Environmentally our biosphere has never been worse, consumption in unsustainable energy practices has set us on a path of self-destruction.

We need to dispel our paradigm of progress – that in order to progress we need to keep growing the economy. “Growth and development are often seen as one in the same, but economic growth today is dependent on increasing consumption of resources, where development is encouraged through value-added activities”.10

1 McQueen, Humphrey, Fancy Work: The Mass Aesthetic2 Marx, Karl, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, vol 1, trans. Ben Fowkes, London, Penguin.3 Bocock, Robert (1993) Consumption, Key Ideas, London: Routledge 4 Simmel, Georg (1997) The Metropolis and mental life, trans. E. Shils, in N. Leach (ed.) Rethinking Architecture: A reader in cultural Theory, London: Routhledge, pp-69-795 Harvey, David (1989) The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change, Oxford: Blackwell.6 Featherstone, M (1991) Culture Consumption and Postmodernism. London, Sage7 Sampson, P. (1994) ‘Postmodernity’, Faith and Modernity. Oxford, Regnum8 Bocock, Robert (1993) Consumption, Key Ideas, London: Routledge9 George W. Bush (2002) Addressing America Wells, Tom (2006) The Myth of Progress: Towards a Sustainable Future10

Literature Review

16

Disposing and Recycling of e-waste

Australians consume a vast amount of technology. The need to own the latest technology isn't just a costly economic issue, but an environmental one. There are approximately 9 million computers, 5 million printers and 2 million scanners currently in households and businesses across Australia11. Eventually all of these will need to be upgraded, and most likely in the next couple of years. So, where will all of this “obsolete” technology – e-waste – end up? If we go by the 2006 recycling forecasts from the “Advancing Australia” report, 1.6 million computers will end up in landfill, another 1.8 million in storage (adding to the existing 5.3 million already stored), and half a million will be recycled12 – and that's only computers, before we even look at other popular technology products such as mobile phones and iPods.

Most electronic technology items are considered hazardous waste. The harmless looking computer monitor, even with all manufacturing advances making them more sleek, still contain mercury and lead. These chemicals can be soaked up by the ground if left in landfill, polluting the environment.13 We do have to note however, computers created today are more environmentally friendly than 10 years ago. People are becoming more aware of the environmental impact obsolete technology has, with places such as California in the US taking the step of making it illegal to dump CRT monitors and TV's into landfill.

But if it is illegal to get rid of old technology to the most popular place of disposal worldwide – landfill – it doesn't just make e-waste go away. In these instances, it just means more old products are taking up space in storage. The other option is to recycle, but there is currently very little incentive to do so, with companies charging the user returning the product to cover “recycling costs”. Because technology products are becoming so small and compact that the useful reusable materials (such as precious metals) are much more difficult to extract when the technology becomes obsolete and is up for recycling. This makes recycling e-waste a costly procedure.

Some major companies in the US, such as Apple, are beginning to take back iPods and mobile phones for free, however this does not occur in Australia. Dell, for instance, charge $36 per item to be collected and recycled. With costs as high as that, to dispose of a product that in most cases is beyond use or repair, there is little wonder why most e-waste ends up in landfill instead of being recycled. “There is no benefit in their minds to paying for recycling, when they can just place their old computer at the curb for pickup (for free)”.14

Why are companies charging people for trying to do the right thing by recycling? And why aren't the manufacturers, who created these “toxic” items in the first place, taking responsibility for their environmental impact? According to a report on end of life options for obsolete technology, most companies are only willing to spend 0.1% more on a product to improve environmental quality. There is the suggestion of a possible future tax on technology products to cover recycling costs at the end of the product's useful life, but that will only cover future technologies, and not the 6 million-plus obsolete computers still in storage across Australia which already pose a problem. There are some companies in Europe who already have take-back schemes as legislation, but because there isn't any global legislation, manufacturers have little incentive to build products that will either be more sustainable or environmental. There's a growing trend towards industries being “green”, but that's as far as it goes.15

17

Sustainability Victoria is trying to combat the issue with “Byteback” – a recycling scheme allowing residents and small businesses to dispose of their old computers at participating councils for recycling, free of charge. Byteback is an Australian first because it represents a shared responsibility approach for government, industry and consumers.16 The old technology is disassembled and separated into plastic, precious metals, batteries, cathode ray tubes, printed circuit boards, insulated wiring, and so on, and then being transported on for recycling and recovery in Australia and globally. The Byteback scheme started in partnership with Hewlett Packard, but has since also gained the support of Apple, Canon, Dell, Epson, Fujitsu, Fuji-Xerox, IBM, Lenovo, and Lexmark. The downside to Byteback is that it is only a computer recycling “test” that will be finishing at the end of 2008, and there are currently no immediate plans to continue the scheme.

The “Rethink” initiative in North America is currently one of the most all-rounder schemes for e-waste in the world. Run by eBay, the supporting partners include Apple, Hewlett Packard and Intel, giving consumers a number of options for their technology items they have no future use for. These include selling old products on eBay through

Rethink, donating to the Cristina Foundation, who arrange recycling through organisations that have participants with special needs, and recycle options using the lists of companies provided by Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition (SVTC) and Earth 91.

Apparently, most consumers aren’t even aware of the impact e-waste in landfill really has17, so how can they be expected to know how to fix something if they don’t even know it’s an issue in the first place? Industry needs to take more responsibility for the waste they are creating, and incentives to recycle could be the key to keeping e-waste out of landfill. Greater consumer knowledge on the life of the technology they buy could also be an area to move towards responsible recycling and disposal of e-waste.

11 Australia’s Environment: Issues and Trends 2007, Australian Bureau of Statistics, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/subscriber.nsf/log?openagent&46130_2007.pdf12 Australia’s Environment: Issues and Trends 2006, Australian Bureau of Statistics, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/4613.0Media%20Release200613 Australian Government, Department of the Environment and Heritage 2004, Electronic Scrap – A Hazardous Waste14 Accettura, R 2004, Environmental Impact of Technology Waste15 Matthews, M, McMichael, F et al. 1997, Disposition and End-of-Life Options for Personal Computers, Carnegie Mellon University16 Sustainability Victoria 2008, Byteback, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.bytebackaustralia.com.au17 Accettura, R 2004, Environmental Impact of Technology Waste

References

18

Books

Marx, Karl, Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, vol 1, trans. Ben Fowkes, London, Penguin.

Bocock, Robert (1993) Consumption, Key Ideas, London: Routledge

Simmel, Georg (1997) The Metropolis and mental life, trans. E. Shils, in N. Leach (ed.) Rethinking Architecture: A reader in cultural Theory, London: Routhledge, pp-69-79

Harvey, David (1989) The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Orgigins of Cultural Change, Oxford: Blackwell.

Featherstone, M (1991) Culture Consumption and Postmodernism. London, Sage

Sampson, P. (1994) ‘Postmodernity’, Faith and Modernity. Oxford, Regnum

Bocock, Robert (1993) Consumption, Key Ideas, London: Routledge

George W. Bush (2002)

Wells, Tom (2006) The Myth of Progress: Towards a Sustainable Future

Web Documents

Dell 2008, Dell Recycling, viewed 25 April 2008, http://supportapj.dell.com/support/topics/topic.aspx/ap/shared/support/recycle/en/recycle?c=au&l=en&s=gen

Our Community 2008, Giving Computers, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.ourcommunity.com.au/giving/giving_article.jsp?articleId=468

Sustainability Victoria 2008, Byteback, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.bytebackaustralia.com.au

Tree Hugger 2005, North America & Australia announce computer recycling programs, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/01/north_america_a.php

Apple 2008, Apple and the Environment, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.apple.com/environment/recycling

Papers

McQueen, Humphrey, Fancy Work: The Mass Aesthetic

Crawford, Robert, Selling Modernity: Advertising and the Construction of the Culture of Consumption in Australia, 1900 - 1950

Accettura, R 2004, Environmental Impact of Technology Waste

Matthews, M, McMichael, F et al. 1997, Disposition and End-of-Life Options for Personal Computers, Carnegie Mellon University

Australian Government, Department of the Environment and Heritage 2004, Electronic Scrap – A Hazardous Waste

ABS Documents

Australia’s Environment: Issues and Trends 2006, Australian Bureau of Statistics, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Previousproducts/4613.0Media%20Release2006

Australia’s Environment: Issues and Trends 2007, Australian Bureau of Statistics, viewed 25 April 2008, http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/subscriber.nsf/log?openagent&46130_2007.pdf

Home Computer’s & Internet Use, Australian Bureau of Statistics, viewed 28 April 2008, http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/acc2d18cc958bc7bca2568a9001393ae?OpenDocument

Trends in Consumption, Australian Bureau of Statistics, viewed 28 April 2008, http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/94713ad445ff1425ca25682007192af2/D024193B0B472110CA256BDC00122417?opendocument