J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
DOI 10.1007/s10163-013-0191-0
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Potential e-waste generated from households in Indonesia
using material flow analysis
Pertiwi Andarani • Naohiro Goto
Received: 12 September 2012 / Accepted: 22 August 2013
Ó Springer Japan 2013
Abstract Waste of electronic and electrical equipment
(e-waste) generated in Indonesia is expected to increase
due to high growth of the Indonesian economy and fast
development in technology. As Indonesia has not yet had
specified criteria on e-waste, in this study, e-waste is
defined as any obsolete or unwanted electronic and elec-
trical equipment that is introduced into the recycling and
disposal process. The objective of this study is to estimate
the e-waste generated in Indonesian households using the
method of material flow analysis. The amount of generated
e-waste could be used for constructing an e-waste recycling
management system in Indonesia. E-waste materials that
need to be treated could be known. In this study, some
types of equipment, such as television, washing machine,
refrigerator, personal computer, and mobile phone, were
chosen to be tracers. Using the modified material flow
analysis model proposed by Steubing et al. (Waste Manage
30:473–482, 38), the potential e-waste that was generated
from households was estimated. The total estimated accu-
mulation of generated e-waste from households in 2015
and 2025 is about 285,000 and 622,000 tonnes, respec-
tively. If a proper recycling system was in place, a new
source for valuable materials recovery would be created, as
well as protecting the environment and health.
Keywords E-waste generation  Material flow
analysis  Household  Indonesia
P. Andarani  N. Goto (&)
Department of Environmental and Life Science, Toyohashi
University of Technology, 1-1 Hibarigaoka, Tenpaku-cho,
Toyohashi, Aichi 441-8580, Japan
e-mail: goto@ens.tut.ac.jp
P. Andarani
e-mail: andarani@gmail.com
Introduction
In the early part of Indonesia’s economic development,
electronic and electrical equipment (EEE, or referred to as
e-product throughout this paper) were considered as luxu-
rious and unaffordable things for middle-lower income
people. However, due to rapid industrialization, Indone-
sia’s economy has been growing rapidly during the last
decades. At 4.6 % real GDP (gross domestic products)
growth in 2009, Indonesia was ranked third highest in the
Group of Twenty (G20), after China and India [33]. With
the fast development of technology, not only is there a
wide range of e-product choices, but the prices also
become more affordable. As e-product use is booming, the
amount of waste of electronic and electrical equipment
(WEEE, or referred to as e-waste throughout this paper)
will also increase significantly. High technology develop-
ment will also accelerate the obsolescence rate, resulting in
e-products being discarded before the end of their physical
lifetime.
Although e-waste is an emerging global issue, to date it
is not a common term for many Indonesians [30]. More-
over, currently, there is no specific regulation regarding
e-waste; hence, national regulations have not identified
e-waste terminology. E-waste can be only considered as
hazardous waste if it contains hazardous substances. The
Ministry of Environment, as the authority of national
environmental management involving waste management,
has raised concerns relating to this issue to the national
level, including addressing its associated problems [30].
The term e-waste is used to describe old, end-of-life or
discarded appliances that use electricity. It includes com-
puters, consumer electronics, mobile phones, etc., that have
been disposed by their original users. As Indonesia has not
yet had specified criteria on e-waste, in this study, e-waste
123

is defined as any obsolete or unwanted electronic and
electrical equipment that is introduced into the recycling
and disposal process. Formal recycling of e-waste using
efficient technologies and facilities is rare; therefore,
e-waste is managed through various low-end management
alternatives, such as disposal in open dumps, backyard
recycling, and disposal into the environment, such as sur-
face water, landfills, etc. As in other countries such as
Nigeria [32], limited funding has also caused significant
impediments to the effective management of toxic wastes.
In Indonesia, it is generally difficult to find any e-waste
dumped in official final disposal sites or landfills [42].
Economic hardships are forcing thousands of impoverished
people to make a living scavenging electronic waste, thus
exposing themselves to health hazards. Old electronic
goods that are already obsolete and unwanted are thrown
into waste open dumps along with other waste, then the
discarded goods are picked up by scavengers, who sell
them to electronic repair stores or workshop for usable
parts. The unusable components are later thrown away
arbitrarily, polluting the environment and water sources.
E-waste needs to be treated properly in order to reduce
health and environmental risks while ensuring the recovery
of precious metals inside.
Based on a survey conducted by MoE and BCRC-SEA
in 2007 [30], households are considered to be the largest
consumers of e-products. The objective of this study is to
estimate thee-waste generated in Indonesian households
using the method of material flow analysis (MFA). The
amount of generated e-waste could be used for constructing
an e-waste recycling management system in Indonesia.
E-waste materials that need to be treated could be known.
In this study, some types of equipment, such as televisions
(TVs), washing machines (WMs), refrigerators (RFs),
personal computers (PCs), and mobile phones (MPs), were
chosen to be tracers. In this case, an air conditioner was not
considered a primary Indonesian home appliance. How-
ever, ongoing growth in the Indonesian economy and the
resulting strong consumer purchasing power is expected to
encourage higher ownership of consumer appliances,
especially those previously regarded as products of sec-
ondary importance, such as air conditioner [15].
Material flow analysis is a method used to describe,
investigate, and evaluate the metabolism of anthropogenic
systems [38]. It is based on the law of the conservation of
matter, so that the flows and stocks of materials can be
controlled by a simple material balance comparing all
inputs, stocks, and outputs of a process within a system
defined in space and time [8].
E-waste assessments by using MFA have already been
conducted by several researchers [1, 23, 26, 29, 36–38, 45,
46]. Basically, these researchers developed a model that
simplified the actual material flow of end-of-life equipment.
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
Aizawa et al. [1] assessed the Japanese system for recycling
home electrical appliances and discussed future perspec-
tives by examining the material flows of the appliances,
recycling technologies, development of eco-design, and
management of substances of environmental concern.
Estimation of present and future quantities of e-waste in
each specific case has been assessed by Matthews et al. [29],
Peralta and Fontanos [36], Steubing [37], Steubing et al.
[38], and Yang et al. [45]. A market supply method was
implemented through their studies by using actual sales
data. They used assumptions, expert interview, and surveys
for the percentages of obsolete equipment being reused,
recycled, stored, and landfilled; lifespan of equipment; and
sales growth rates. Steubing [37] and his team’s later
research in 2010 [38] particularly distinguished first users,
consisting of household, government, and business sectors.
Other than actual sales data, Liu et al. [26] estimated the
annual total possession amount of e-product by using
regression equation. Yoshida et al. [47] developed a method
of minimizing the total ‘‘error’’ of flows for the material
flow of used PCs in Japan to compare the results from
before and after the introduction of a PC recycling system.
Methodology
Material flow model description
The generated household e-product waste (e-waste) will be
estimated by the MFA model proposed by Steubing et al.
[38], with several adjustments. This method was chosen
because consumer behaviors need to be analyzed until the
e-products become an ultimate waste. Appliances tend to
pass in and out of use, following a ‘cascade of use’. Many
items are not disposed of by first users, but are redistributed
through reuse. However, the proportion of the first users
choosing whether to reuse, store (in this model, called
Storage 1), or directly dispose of their obsolete equipment
is thoroughly described in transfer coefficient. Each
activity of reuse, storage, or direct disposal is called a
process. In this MFA model, the process could be transport
or storage. Because there is the possibility that a second
user might store their obsolete equipment again, second
storage (Storage 2) is also included in the system. The
MFA model illustration is shown in Fig. 1.
The goal of material balance is to be able to calculate
the material flows and the material in storage at any time
and any point of the system. The processes in this MFA
model are mainly storage processes, where material
remains in the stock of a process during a specific residence
time (e.g. television remains for ten years in a household).
A flow is defined as a transfer of material from one process
to another [8].
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
Fig. 1 Household MFA model of electronic and electrical products
and the system boundary. The indicated abbreviations are the names
of process (C consumption, L households lower income, H households
Lifetime or lifespan is defined as the total time that the
product remains at the system boundaries from the retail
point until the moment when it is sent to the solid waste
management system; hence, equipment reuse is considered
within the lifetime [4]. It is difficult to determine the actual
end-of-life of each e-product item; therefore, it is some-
times necessary to make some assumptions based on the
expert interview or questionnaire if the actual data cannot
be obtained [38]. In this study, the total lifetime of
equipment could be estimated as the total residence time
from first user until the equipment reached the recycling
and disposal process, depending on each pathway.
According to Oguchi et al. [34], this definition of lifetime
refers to ‘domestic service lifespan’.
In the MFA model, each process has a certain residence
time that materials (in this case, e-product) stay in and do
not flow to other processes. Through a survey conducted by
online and printed media, the estimated residence time of
each process was known. The material that stays in the
process is called stock, this is where material is stored for a
defined time according to its residence time. Processes are
linked by flows (mass per time or unit per time). The
material will leave a certain process after a defined resi-
dence time.
As described before, the e-waste source chosen for this
research was from households. It is necessary to classify
consumers based on household economic well-being
(purchasing power), because there is a quite wide range of
disparity of income or wealth in the Indonesian society,
with the Gini index at 36.8 [20]. Due to the household
economic well-being disparity, different consumer behav-
iors were expected. Consumer behavior is a decision-
making process of obtaining, using, evaluating, consuming,
and disposing of a product. There are many ways to clas-
sify consumer groups; however, in this study, the consumer
groups were divided based on their income into lower-
middle income and higher-middle income household.
higher income, R reuse, S1 storage after 1st use, S2 storage after 2nd
use, RD recycling and disposal) and flow (F)
According to World Bank [43], the middle class is deter-
mined by expenditure of 2–20 USD/day. In this study,
15 USD/day income (approximately, in Indonesian
Rupiah, IDR 4,000,000.00) was used to classify the
household, considering that 2 USD/day is too low for a
household to purchase e-products. The equation of material
balance in the MFA model is based on Steubing’s model
and modified as follows:
FX;out ðtÞ ¼ FX;in ðt  rÞ
FX;out ðtÞ ¼ TCX:Y1  FX;out ðtÞ þ TCX:Y2  FX;out ðtÞ þ   
þ TCX:Yn  FX;out ðtÞ
where, FX,out (t) is the all flows leaving process X in the
year t, FX,in (t - r), the all flows entering process X in the
year (t - r), where r is residence time, TCX:Yn , the transfer
coefficient from process X to Yn, and n, is the counting
number of each type of process.
There are some differences between the MFA model
that was applied to this study and the model used by
Steubing et al. in 2010 (hereafter, it will be referred to as
Steubing’s model). First, in this model, only households are
considered as the first users of e-product, while e-product
inflow to business and government sectors are neglected.
The household sector is considered to be the largest source
of e-waste because Indonesia has the fourth largest popu-
lation in the world [9]. This assumption was confirmed by
the survey carried out by the Ministry of Environment of
Indonesia and BCRC-SEA in 2007 [30]. The term of
‘Production and Sales’ process in Steubing’s model was
changed to ‘Consumption’ process, because in this model,
the consumption data originated not only from production
and sales, but also from shipment of personal computers
and total subscribers of mobile phone service providers. In
this model, televisions, refrigerators, washing machines,
PCs (desktop [DP] and portable [PP]), and mobile phones
were used as tracer equipment for household e-waste due to
123

Fig. 2 Total consumption of
electronic equipment and its
prediction. Data source: TV
[13], RF [13], WM [13], DP [2,
3, 18], PP [2, 3, 18], MP [17]
quantitative relevance and high growth rates; whereas
Steubing’s model used PCs, laptops, Cathode Ray Tube
(CRT) and Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) monitors as
tracer equipment.
Data collection
The data needed was collected from various potential
sources, both primary and secondary. The total consump-
tion of e-products obtained from secondary data is shown
in Fig. 2. The data input used in this study is based on
domestic sales data of home appliances from 2005 until
2010 [13], PC sales [2, 3], PC shipment [18], subscribers of
mobile phones [17], and the results of questionnaires
conducted both online and via paper-based survey. The
survey was conducted from August to September 2011, by
standardized questionnaires. The respondents came from
various locations in Indonesia such as Sumatra, Java,
Kalimantan, Sulawesi, and Papua. Java Island had the
largest number of respondents (164 out of 213 respon-
dents). There were fewer respondents from lower income
households than from higher income households (91 and
122 respondents, respectively).
It is assumed that all televisions, refrigerators, and
washing machines sold were for consumer use (neither for a
business nor government). Desktop and portable PC ship-
ment data for consumer use have been obtained
from International Data Corporation (IDC) [18], and
the sales from the association of computer entrepreneurs
in Indonesia [2, 3]. In case of mobile phones, it is
assumed that one subscription (ownership) equals one
mobile phone, hence, the number of devices sold in a year is
the difference between the total number of subscriptions in
a given year and the year prior. The flows from consumption
to first user were divided by the transfer coefficient resulting
from the questionnaire (to lower income households and to
higher income households are 44 and 56 %, respectively).
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
Information was obtained from Apkomindo [2, 3]
regarding the proportion of desktop and portable PCs sold
in Indonesia; however, this data was not enough to predict
the amount sold during 2005–2025. There is some infor-
mation on portable PC penetrating the market in 2003 [2],
2007 [3], 2008 and 2009 [3]. Then, for the other years, it
was assumed that the market share of portable PCs
increased by 2 % from the year before, based on the IDC’s
estimation of sales growth for both desktop and portable
PCs. Portable PC sales were indeed increasing rapidly due
to their cheap price compared to desktop PCs, particularly
for netbooks, whose price was less than 3,000,000 IDR.
The prediction of future sales (from 2011 in Fig. 2) data
for the years 2011–2025 were determined based on some
assumptions: first, televisions and refrigerators are esti-
mated to be a mature market at rates of 7.5 and 7 %,
respectively; washing machines are still growing until 2020
at rate 10 % and stay constant at 7.5 % in 2020 and there-
after. Future sales of PCs were estimated based on IDC’s
growth rate prediction for emerging markets from 2011
until 2015 [19], then after 2015 it is assumed that this
equipment sale is still developing, but with a slower rate. As
for mobile phone, it is estimated that the growth rate
gradually decreases [17]. In 2016, the growth rate is
assumed to be 7 % and that rate is kept until 2025 (for
details, Table 1 shows the market growth rates assumption).
In this study, the flow is calculated in unit of weight so
that all of the equipment can be easily compared. Average
weight of the equipment was used to convert a unit of
equipment into a mass unit based on the estimated weight
of e-products in developing countries from the United
Nation Environmental Program [41], data from Araujo’s
study [4], and cited figures from Osibanjo and Nnorom’s
research [35]. The average of weight can be seen in
Table 2. However, the flows in units of equipment were
also calculated in order to compare these with the results of
mass unit flows.
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag

Table 1 Market growth

Equipment Market growth assumption (respectively) Source
assumption
Television 7.50 % Assumption
Refrigerator 7% Assumption
Washing 2011–2020: 10 % Assumption
machine 2021–2025: 7.5 %
Desktop PC 2011–2015: 5.2, 3.8, 4.3, 2.8, 2.1 % 2011–2015 [19]
2016–2025: 2 % then decreasing 2 % after each 2 years interval 2016–2025:
assumption
Portable PC 2011–2015: 18.7, 19.8, 23.1, 21.1, 20.8 % 2011–2015 [19]
2016–2025: 18.8 % then decreasing 2 % after each 2 years interval 2016–2025:
assumption
Mobile phone 2011–2015: 14.2, 6.6, 4.7, 9.7, 9.8 % 2011–2015 [17]
2016–2025: 7.5 % 2016–2025:
assumption

Table 2 Average weight of equipment
Electronic item Average weight (kg) per unit Source
Television 30 [41]
Refrigerator 45 [41]
Washing Machine 40 [4]
Desktop PC 25 [41]
Portable PC 5 [41]
Mobile Phone 0.1 [35]
Scenarios
Some scenarios are necessary to predict e-waste quantities
that are likely to be generated. Three scenarios have been
designed for the prediction of e-waste; namely baseline,
upper, and lower scenarios. Transfer coefficient and resi-
dence time were modified according to the scenario. The
baseline scenario represents the results of questionnaires
(average observed consumer behavior). Two more scenar-
ios are used to determine the possible upper and lower
limit. The upper scenario predicts that a higher predicted
amount of e-waste is generated, which means that this
scenario is more pessimistic. On the contrary, the opti-
mistic view that e-waste will not be generated in large
amounts is described in the lower scenario.
Residence times of the upper scenario were designed
according to literature studies [5, 11, 12, 21, 23, 25, 29, 36–
38]; it has the shortest residence times in each process.
Residence times in the lower scenario were created based
on the same literature studies, but were longer than in those
studies, as this scenario represents the lowest probable
e-waste generation. The values of residence times used in
the model are summarized in Table 3.
In the case of transfer coefficients in the lower scenario,
basically, the reuse process has the largest portion, while a
flow to direct disposal is the lowest (4–6 %). Referring to
the literature, the transfer coefficients of the reuse process of
the lower scenario have higher values than those of the
baseline scenario. On the other hand, a pessimistic view has
been applied to the upper scenario, where the proportion of
direct disposal is higher (14–16 %) than the other choices.
These values are not so high, considering that it is very hard
to find e-waste in the form of equipment at final disposal in
Indonesia. Exact values are stated in Table 4. According to
this table, for the baseline scenario, the value of the transfer
coefficient from household to disposal/recycling process
(4–11 %) is lower than that in Steubing’s model (7–29 %).
The value of this transfer coefficient in the model is similar
to Peralta and Fontanos’ [36] assumption (15 %) in the
Philippines’ generated e-waste assessment, since both
Indonesia and the Philippines are developing countries and
less equipment being sent to final disposal.
Sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity analysis is necessary to assess the consequences
of error in the model. This analysis was applied to transfer
coefficients and residence times by creating two modified
scenarios: transfer coefficient modification and residence
time modification. According to Steubing et al. [38], for
transfer coefficients, the effect of a 10 % error in each
transfer coefficient on the generation of e-waste was
assessed by the following procedure: a specific transfer
coefficient was increased by 10 % while the other transfer
coefficients in the same process were decreased by equal
shares, in order to preserve an overall sum of all coeffi-
cients equal to 1; for residence times, the effect of a 1-year-
error on the generated e-waste was analyzed as follows: the
residence time of computer equipment in a specific process
was decreased by 1 year (while the other residence times
were not changed).
The mean deviation for the years 2015–2025 was cal-
culated comparing the generated e-waste of the modified

123
 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag

Table 3 Residence times (year)

Scenario Baseline scenario Lower scenario Upper scenario
TV RF WM DP PP MP TV RF WM DP PP MP TV RF WM DP PP MP

Low income households 7 7 4 4 3 3 8 10 5 5 4 4 6 7 3 3 2 2

High income households 7 7 5 5 4 3 8 10 6 6 5 4 6 7 4 4 3 2
Re-use 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 1
Storage after 1st use 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1
Storage after 2nd use 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
TV Television, RF Refrigerator, WM Washing machine, PC Personal computer, DP Desktop PC, PP Portable PC, MP Mobile phone

Table 4 Transfer coefficients

Scenario Baseline scenario Lower scenario Upper scenario
From To TV RF WM DP PP MP TV RF WM DP PP MP TV RF WM DP PP MP
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)

Consumption Low income 44 44 40 48 36 42 44 44 40 48 36 42 44 44 40 48 36 42

households
High income 56 56 60 52 64 58 56 56 60 52 64 58 56 56 60 52 64 58
households
Low income Storage 1 29 19 16 31 20 17 20 10 10 25 20 10 45 20 30 25 20 21
households Re-use 66 74 76 65 74 77 75 85 85 70 75 86 40 65 55 60 65 65
Disposal/ 5 7 8 4 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 15 15 15 15 15 14
recycling
High income Storage 1 24 18 19 29 25 30 21 10 19 26 22 20 47 22 34 29 26 25
households Re-use 70 75 70 65 69 64 73 84 75 68 72 75 37 62 50 55 58 60
Disposal/ 6 7 11 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 5 16 16 16 16 16 15
recycling
Reuse Storage 2 50 50 50 50 50 50 67 67 67 67 67 67 33 33 33 33 33 33
Disposal/ 50 50 50 50 50 50 33 33 33 33 33 33 67 67 67 67 67 67
recycling
TV Television, RF Refrigerator, WM Washing machine, PC Personal computer, DP Desktop PC, PP Portable PC, MP Mobile phone

scenario to the baseline scenario. This deviation between 7 ± 5, 7 ± 5, 4 ± 4, 4 ± 3, 3 ± 2, and 3 ± 2 years,

flow quantities of these scenarios and the baseline scenario
in each year is divided by the baseline scenario’s flow
quantities; hence, a flow deviation is indicated by per-
centage. A mean of those corresponding flow deviations
from the year of 2015 until 2025 was calculated for
analysis.
Results and discussions
Survey results
Based on the survey (213 responses), the lifespan of new
equipment such as televisions, refrigerators, washing
machines, desktop PCs, portable PCs, and mobile phones
for middle-higher income households are 7 ± 5, 7 ± 4,
5 ± 4, 5 ± 3, 4 ± 2, and 3 ± 2 years, respectively.
Meanwhile, for middle-lower income households, they are
respectively. The lifespan of new equipment is represented
by residence time with first users in the model. This survey
showed that washing machines and PCs in lower-middle
income households have a shorter lifetime in the first use
compared to higher-middle income households. It probably
indicates that higher-middle income households tend to
buy more long-lasting washing machines and PCs com-
pared to lower-middle income households. It should be
noted that in Indonesia, there are informal PC assemblers
who produce PCs at more affordable prices, without quality
assurance. However, the standard deviations of this data
are quite high, so the uncertainties associated with this
survey is high. Although scenarios are developed to esti-
mate possible upper and lower limits in the model, more
respondents are needed in a future survey.
As for determining transfer coefficient, the respondents
chose one or more options regarding the treatment of
obsolete equipment (e.g. donating, selling, storing, and

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
disposing). Therefore, the data produced from this survey
are not ordinal, but the overall percentage of respondents’
decisions.
Respondents made some suggestions regarding pro-
spective e-waste management. There should be a regulation
and concern about e-waste from the government. It is
important to enforce the regulation of municipal solid
waste segregation. Respondents also suggested that the
recycling system should not overburden consumers;
instead, the producers are the one who should take
responsibility for their products (by applying an extended
producer responsibility (EPR) approach). A public–private
partnership institution could be established to manage
e-waste in Indonesia. In addition, reducing consumption of
new electronic devices was suggested by respondents. The
alternative actions on the e-waste management system
should not be based on the survey alone, but also on other
criteria that determine the feasibility of its implementation
(such as existing e-waste recycling, market size, available
technology, etc.). This study also addresses the preliminary
considerations of such a system in a general discussion (see
‘E-waste: problems and its current management practice in
Indonesia’ subsection). It is necessary to carry out a
detailed investigation regarding this issue in the future.
E-waste generation
The total e-waste generation based on scenarios can be
seen in Fig. 3. The total estimated accumulation of gen-
erated e-waste from households in 2015 and 2025 is
285,000 tonnes and 622,000 tonnes, respectively. The total
e-waste in 2025 is predicted to be more than twice as large
as that in 2015. Based on the MFA model of this study,
total e-waste generated (2015–2025) was estimated to be
3.75–4.98 million tonnes. It is necessary to note that due to
a lack of consumption data, the obtained results were only
from 2015, because the model could only estimate the
e-waste being generated in a certain year after several
defined residence times were passed, depending on each
Fig. 3 Total e-waste generation
estimation based on scenario
pathway (see Table 5). The longer residence time, the later
the results will come out. An example probably will make
this explanation easier to understand: in the baseline sce-
nario, the refrigerator (which has the longest residence time
among all of the equipment) has 10 years of total lifespan
in order to generate stock in the recycling and disposal
process from all pathways, so the refrigerator will become
an ultimate waste after 10 years. The obtained data of
refrigerator sales are only from 2005 until 2010, so the
refrigerator sold in 2005 is estimated to become a waste in
2015. Therefore, the results are presented from 2015 until
2025, in order to easily compare quantities among
equipment.
Through Fig. 3, which represents the estimation of
generated e-waste by every scenario, deviation between
those scenarios could be determined. The principal reason
for the difference in the predictions of the three scenarios is
the different average life span that results from the specific
settings of residence times and transfer coefficients. Lower
scenario gave the optimistic view that the amount of
e-waste will be greatly reduced by reuse at various rates.
The deviation between baseline and the lower scenario was
7.96 % in 2015 and 26.81 % in 2025, while in 2015 and
2025, it was 1.98 % and 7.49 %, respectively. This devi-
ation increased because, it is assumed that the market is
always growing, causing larger deviation between baseline
and other scenarios in the future. The deviation between
the baseline and upper scenario will be explained in the
next paragraph.
According to Fig. 3,the baseline scenario is really sim-
ilar to the upper scenario in the early stage of generated
e-waste estimation. From the questionnaires, the residence
time of reuse was not long enough and even not so realistic,
because the duration of reuse was only one to two years for
all of the equipment. Even in 2017, the waste of televi-
sions, refrigerators, and mobile phones according to the
baseline scenario is larger than for the upper scenario. The
decrease of sales in 2006 is the reason why the e-waste in
2017 for the baseline scenario is higher than for the upper
123
 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag

Table 5 Collected data and available results

E-product Data type Period Lifespan (baseline scenario)
Residence time required* Results will be available

Television Sales 2003–2010 11 2014

Refrigerator Sales 2005–2010 10 2015
Washing Machine Sales 2005–2010 7 2012
Desktop PC Shipment 2005–2010 7 2012
Portable PC Shipment 2005–2010 6 2011
Mobile Phone Subscription 2005–2010 5 2010
* To generate the stock of recycling and disposal process from all pathways (direct disposal from first user; disposal from re-use; disposal from
storage)

Fig. 4 Estimation of e-waste

generation by weight

Fig. 5 Estimation of e-waste

generation by unit

scenario. When sales dropped significantly, the calculation
of the upper scenario was influenced (there is a residence
time difference, so when the sales are high for e-waste
estimation for the baseline scenario, sales are significantly
lower for the upper scenario at the same estimated e-waste
generation time). However, the deviation between the
baseline and upper scenario’s results became larger over
time after 2017, because there is assumption that the sales
are always growing.
Figures 4 and 5 show the proportion of generated
e-waste types from household in Indonesia by weight and
by unit, respectively. If a proper recycling system was in
place, a new source for valuable materials recovery would
be created. The lower scenario gave an optimistic amount
that e-waste could be reduced by reuse. According to the
baseline scenario of this study, in terms of unit, the mobile
phone has dominated the amount of generated e-waste
(83 %) in 2015; however, in terms of weight, the television
has the largest portion of e-waste (37 %).
This result can be confirmed in the survey: each
household has more than one unit of television (two units
in each household), and each person has more than one unit
of mobile phone (six units in each household). While in
2025, the mobile phone will still probably dominate the

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
Fig. 6 Material flow of electronic and electrical equipment of household in 2015
e-waste quantities by unit (52 %), by weight, the refriger-
ator is likely to be the largest in proportion (34 %), based
on this study. This seems to be an overestimation of the
real amount, because the assumption of market growth is
considered to be constant while the market might be
growing at larger rates every year, and there is a case when
the market may be slowing down due to an unpredictable
economic crisis. However, the assumption is needed, since
there was a lack of reliable data regarding market growth.
Further sales increases are possible, since consumers tend
to buy new equipment with more powered functionalities
before the end of the lifetime of their existing ones [4]. The
other reason for overestimation is that the weights of
television and desktop PC remain constant, while in the
reality the weight of the television should be reduced due to
the increasing rate of replacement of CRT with LCD
screens. Furthermore, as technology develops, the portable
PC also might become lighter in the future.
Analysis of material flows
The MFA model results can be seen in Figs. 6 and 7. These
figures also easily show that a doubling quantity of the
flows is estimated to occurr in the next 10 years, with
televisions and refrigerators dominating the fraction by
weight. It should be noted that there is also uncertainty
associated with the model itself, i.e. the flow could also go
another way than the estimated pathway. Similar to a study
conducted in Chile [38], it can be observed that the most
important flow of computer equipment to recycling and
disposal is via reuse, either directly from reuse or from
storage 2 process. The reuse process of a household could
either be donating or selling it as secondhand equipment.
Although portable PCs are estimated to grow faster than
other equipment, we can see in Fig. 7 that in 2025, their
flow into recycling and disposal may still remain low,
while the purchasing is already considerably high. Mobile
phone flows seem lower in these Sankey Diagrams due to
unit of ton. Despite its low weight, the mobile phone is an
important product sold in the secondhand equipment mar-
ket [30]; hence, their flows of reuse in terms of unit are
considerably high compared to other equipment.
The MFA model
As mentioned previously, MFA models have been devel-
oped to estimate the amount of e-waste generation [1, 23,
26, 29, 36–38, 45, 46]. Each model has its own charac-
teristics that are adjusted to available data. The MFA
model as applied to this study requires a quantity of
e-waste inflow to society, such as production, sales, ship-
ment, export–import, or consumption data. These data were
also used to estimate generated e-waste amount in previous
studies [23, 29, 36–38, 45].
The MFA model employed in this study assumes that
the lifetime of the e-products is based on the user’s deci-
sion, which has been assessed through survey question-
naire. However, lifetime can be assumed to be constant; or
lifetime distribution of e-product according to cumulative
distribution function, namely normal distribution, log-
123

Fig. 7 Material flow of electronic and electrical equipment of household in 2025
normal distribution, or Weibull distribution. Weibull dis-
tribution is a common distribution function that has been
applied to previous studies about stock and obsolescence
model [24, 26, 46, 49]. Generally, Weibull distribution
requires a number of products in use, namely a possession
amount. Due to lack of reliable data, the possession amount
of e-products in Indonesia could not be acquired. Instead of
each e-product possession amount, the national survey in
Indonesia showed the monthly expenditure class per capita
of ‘electronics and repairs’ as a general category [7]. As for
the Steubing’s MFA model, the lifetime distribution could
be obtained in term of frequency by using consumption
data, so the lifetime of e-product is not absolutely constant.
Figure 8 shows lifetime distribution of each e-product in
this study according to scenarios, by derivation from
transfer coefficient and residence time. These lifetime
distributions represent the probability that a pathway will
likely occur. In this model, it is assumed that the product is
used a maximum of twice (first user and reuse process).
However, in the reality, the e-product may be used more
than twice. A methodology to calculate the average of
times of use of a material in society was developed by
Yamada et al. [44], based on the Markov chain model using
matrix-based numerical analysis, and Matsuno et al. [27]
applied the methodology to analyze the number of times of
use of the iron element, and its residence time in society.
Duchin and Levine [10] also developed the Markov chain
model to track multiple resources simultaneously and
consistently, as well as the possibility of representing both
resources and products in mixed units. In future research,
the Markov chain-based methodology could be developed
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
and applied to assess the actual number of times of use of
e-products in society, from production, reuse, and recycle,
to final disposal.
Sensitivity analysis
Sensitivity analysis has been carried out to assess the
possible effect of 10 % error in transfer coefficient and
1 year decrease in residence time. It should be noted that
sensitivity analysis was conducted by comparing the
modified scenario to baseline scenario. The deviation or
difference of flow quantities between the modified scenario
and baseline scenario is indicated by percentage; that is, the
deviation divided by the baseline scenario’s flow quantity.
The modified scenarios comprise transfer coefficient
modification (10 % increase) and residence time modifi-
cation (1 year decrease). The results of sensitivity analysis
of transfer coefficients and residence times can be seen in
Tables 6 and 7, respectively.
In Table 6, it can be noticed that 10 % difference of
transfer coefficient will not cause the results to change
more than 4 %. The largest influences of a 10 % increase at
a certain flow can be seen for the transfer coefficient for
portable PC from Reuse to Storage 2 process (-2.77 %).
Therefore, distinguishing the first user or consumer by
categorizing household (such as lower or higher income) is
not absolutely significant. Moreover, if the lifespan could
be estimated accurately, there might be no need to make
the distinction of first users. Distinguishing first users is
important to design a take-back end-of-life equipment
system [38], particularly if government and businesses are
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
Fig. 8 Lifetime distribution of each e-product in this study according to scenarios: a television, b refrigerator, c washing machine, d desktop PC,
e portable PC, f mobile phone
also assessed. The target amount of the collection rate
could be set on the user who is likely to dispose the
obsolete equipment. According to Table 7, the largest
deviation is 12.26 %, while the average deviation is
1.66 %. It can be implied that 1 year error of determining
residence time could affect no more than 13 % of the
results.
From these results, it can be noticed that the portable
PC has relatively larger values compared to the other
equipment. This is due to the assumption that its growth
rate will increase rapidly compared to other equipment,
because the PC market is still not saturated (in 2007, the
computer ownership percentage of the total population in
Indonesia is 5.9 % [6]). Therefore, as the amount of
equipment sold is increasing, the effect of error will also
increase. One of the primary limitations of this model is
the lack of flexibility with respect to assigning different
parameter values for every year of e-products sales in
Indonesia. For example, it is clear that PC monitors or
televisions sold in 2005 will have a distinctly different
weight than those sold in 2020 (many more LCD screens
might be sold).
123
 J Mater Cycles Waste Manag

Table 6 Sensitivity analysis of 10 % error in transfer coefficient In Chile [38] and the Philippines [36], the amount of
From To TV RF WM DP PP MP
e-waste was predicted to double in only 10 years.
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) According to this study, e-waste might more than double in
Indonesia, particularly in non-mature markets, such as
C L 0.00 -0.01 -0.05 0.37 1.62 0.02
personal computer (PC), either desktop or portable PC.
H 0.00 0.01 0.07 -0.36 -1.96 0.07 Looking at PC sales and shipment (Fig. 1) and the data
L S1 -0.18 -0.41 -0.40 -0.18 -0.80 -0.10 from Biro Pusat Statistik/Center of Statistical Bureau
R -0.46 -0.36 -0.36 -0.13 -0.78 0.11 (BPS) [6], the PC penetration in Indonesia is still very low,
RD 0.67 0.86 0.85 0.42 1.55 0.05 but there is high possibility for rapid growth, due to the
H S1 -0.24 -0.57 -0.70 -0.33 -1.29 -0.06 lowering of prices on portable PCs.
R -0.60 -0.51 -0.64 -0.21 -1.15 0.09 Based on the estimations of Zoeteman et al. [50], the
RD 0.86 1.03 1.22 0.49 2.51 0.06 annual household generation for developed countries such
R S2 -0.59 -1.31 -1.47 -0.53 -2.77 0.22 as the USA, EU-25, and Japan, the global e-waste genera-
RD 0.00 -0.01 -0.05 0.37 1.62 0.02 tion in 2010 from households is 8.4, 8.9, and 4.0 million
TV Television, RF Refrigerator, WM Washing machine, PC Personal tonnes, respectively. Compared to Indonesia, in 2015, the
computer, DP Desktop PC, PP Portable PC, MP Mobile phone, e-waste generated from households is predicted to be
C consumption, L households lower income, H households higher approximately 0.3 million tonnes, and 10 years later, more
income, R reuse
than double that amount is estimated (0.6 million tonnes).
According to the same study of Zoeteman et al. [50], China
Table 7 Sensitivity analysis of 1 year error in residence time will probably have surpassed the quantities of household
Process TV (%) RF (%) WM (%) DP (%) PP (%) MP (%) e-waste in Japan (5.7 million tonnes) in 2010. While it is
estimated that India has generated 0.66 million tonnes of
L 2.40 3.71 3.87 2.01 5.27 -2.23
e-waste from households in 2010, West Africa is estimated
H 3.03 4.60 5.83 1.95 10.90 -1.16
to generate 0.07 million tonnes. Indonesia seems to have
R 3.34 6.27 -11.76 -1.19 12.26 -3.37
lower quantities of household e-waste than developed
S1 1.74 1.59 1.88 -2.47 4.37 -6.37
countries (USA, EU-25, Japan), China, and India. However,
S2 1.02 2.46 3.25 -2.99 5.98 -6.41 it is important to note that developed countries, particularly
TV Television, RF Refrigerator, WM Washing machine, PC Personal EU countries and Japan, generally have low growth rates of
computer, DP Desktop PC, PP Portable PC, MP Mobile phone, generated e-waste [50]. In 2005, the generated quantity of
L households lower income, H households higher income, R reuse, S1
household e-waste in Japan was estimated to be 3.1 million
storage after 1st use, S2 storage after 2nd use
tonnes [50], so the growth rate of those e-wastes was 29 %
in 5 years, whereas in Indonesia, there is a doubling of
Comparison to other countries on e-waste generation amount (117 %) in 10 years. If there is no control of the
high increasing rate volume of e-waste streams, e-waste
Compared to India [12], which is also a developing coun- will continue to grow rapidly in Indonesia.
try, the estimated amount of household PC waste in Indo-
nesia is much lower in 2015, that is, about 1.6–3.1 million E-waste: problems and its current management practice
units, while in India around 51.42–78.36 million units of in Indonesia
computers will become obsolete. However, it should be
noted that this study only assessed e-waste from house- Depending on their type, e-products contain different
holds, while for the study in India, household and business hazardous materials that are harmful to human health and
sector use was included. Moreover, Indonesia has five the environment if not disposed of properly. While some
times lower e-waste generation per capita compared to naturally occurring substances are harmless in nature, their
India. In Indonesia, it is estimated that about 0.006–0.012 use in the manufacture of electronic equipment often
units per capita will become obsolete in 2015. In India, the results in hazardous compounds. However,exposure to
contribution of large household appliances such as washing e-waste that has not been processed (e.g. dismantled/dis-
machines and refrigerators in the overall e-waste stream assembled) is not dangerous to humans. The problems
composition is not that significant, due to the high rate of occur when the device is treated carelessly, without any
reuse (70 %) [11]. In 2006, the penetration rate of 0.0045 concern for the environmental or health.
computers per capita from the household sector and 0.0073 Based on this study, televisions may be the main stream of
computers per capita from the business sector [12] indi- e-waste by weight in 2015. The largest concern is lead
cates that the household sector contributes approximately contained in the CRTs of televisions. Lead is used in CRTs to
38 % of total generated e-waste. protect users from potentially harmful exposure to x-rays;

123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
moreover, it is bound in a glass matrix as lead oxide, and is
stable and immobile [40]. According to Townsend et al. [40]
using the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) for lead
leachability), twenty-one of thirty color CRTs exceeded the
5 mg/l lead regulatory limit. Moreover, mercury may be
contained in fluorescent lamps that provide backlighting in
LCDs [14]. Refrigerators also contain harmful chemicals
such as CFC (Chlorofluorocarbon), which becomes waste in
recycling process. In Japan, since April 2004, recovery of
CFCs from insulation is required [31]. Washing machines
particularly contain salt water (used as a liquid balancer in
fully automatic washing machines) and motors, and the
circuit boards cannot be disassembled because they are
coated with resin for water proofing [28].
An e-waste recycling facility has not yet been officially
established in Indonesia. However, in Batam Island and
East Java Provinces, there are industrial areas where
recycling industries have been built [30]. As mentioned
previously, backyard recycling of PCs and mobile phones
is common practice in Indonesia. Individuals from the
informal sector usually recover precious material from
e-waste, such as gold from the integrated circuit (IC)
socket or IC chipset. Using bare hands and without wearing
any mask, they burn IC and mix it with some other
chemicals (e.g. HNO3, selenium, etc.) to recover gold. This
process generates waste water containing heavy metals that
exceed threshold values of Indonesian waste water regu-
lations (e.g. Cu, Cr, Co, Pb, Ni, Sn, and Zn) [39]. Due to
the different characteristics of weight and hazardous sub-
stances, it would be good if there was categorization of
end-of-life electronic and electrical products. This catego-
rization needs further research to determine the composi-
tion of particular e-waste in Indonesia. While televisions,
PCs, and mobile phones might become lighter in the near
future, it should be noted that refrigerators and washing
machines could remain bulky in terms of weight.
In Japan, there is a system of recycling home electrical
appliances that has several unique aspects, including lim-
ited number of target appliances, a recycling fee system
that requires consumers to pay a recycling fee at the time of
disposal, and a direct recycling obligation for manufac-
turers, who have a physical rather than a financial
responsibility for their end-of-life products. However,
problems with the recycling system include inelastic
recycling fees, illegal dumping, illegal transfer by retailers,
and the limited number of target appliances [1]. It is nec-
essary to note that in Indonesia, the same problems might
occur. Based on a survey of 180 people in Jakarta, paying
for recycling may not be applicable in Indonesia; and trade-
in programs to induce e-waste recycling are encouraged
[16]. However, the recycling home electrical appliances
system that was enacted in Japan increased the amount of
four specified home electrical appliances that were recy-
cled from about 319,249 tonnes in 2001 to about 447,262
tonnes in 2006 [1]. Based on another study [50], the
domestic recovery of e-waste in 2010 was estimated to be
2.8 million tonnes of 4.0 million tonnes annual household
generated e-waste (70 % recycled). Further research
regarding the estimated number of existing e-waste recy-
cled either formally or informally in Indonesia is required.
It is necessary to evaluate how effective a new system of
e-waste recycling is after implemention in Indonesia.
Exportation also must be considered. In Japan, the ratio
of domestic disposal and recycling decreased to 37 % in
the fiscal year 2004, whereas the domestic reuse and export
ratios increased to 37 % and 26 %, respectively [46].
According to Yoshida and Terazono [47], about 2 million
secondhand televisions are exported from Japan annually,
of which approximately 400,000 units are exported to the
Philippines. Nevertheless, inappropriate recycling and final
treatment processes, such as open burning of wires and
improper crushing of CRT tubes, were observed at or near
two dump sites in Metro Manila [47]. In Indonesia, there is
indication that e-waste exportation exists. However, no
official data regarding e-waste (other than metal scraps
from e-waste) have been found, except in 2005, 6,643
secondhand PC monitors were imported from Japan to
Indonesia [22], although this activity is actually restricted
in Indonesia by Decree No. 756/MPP/Kep/12/2003 on
Import of Non-new Capital Goods. The main dealers col-
lecting e-waste are investors from Korea and China who
trades e-waste in bulk. They export those wastes to buyers
in China, Hongkong, and Taiwan to be reprocessed [16]. A
further study should be done on the benefit and impact at
the sites where the e-wastes from Indonesia are processed.
In order to develop a sustainable e-waste management
system in Indonesia, it is necessary to take into consider-
ation the legal aspects, existing conditions of obsolete
electronic equipment, and environmental impact. Currently,
there is no research assessing environmental impact of
improper e-waste treatment and illegal disposal in Indone-
sia. This is probably due to the absence of specific e-waste
regulations, although the law of environmental pollution
(Law No. 32/2009 about Environmental Protection and
Management) does exist. In Indonesia, many non-identifi-
able small and medium scale industries carry out recycling
and refurbishing, particularly in producing low cost PCs.
An EPR option may not be feasible for such producers/
manufacturers, as most of them lack the infrastructure and
economic capabilities for adopting an EPR system. The
EPR system should be accompanied by door-to-door col-
lection of e-waste and an advanced recycling fee (ARF) to
manage e-waste thoroughly in Indonesia. A clear and
defined role of government is necessary to build an e-waste
management system in Indonesia. Treatment processes of
123

e-waste aimed at either removing the hazardous items or at
optimal recovery of main recyclable materials (e.g. metals,
glass and plastics), but achieving both objectives, would be
most desired. Wang et al. [48] introduced the ‘Best-of-2-
Worlds’ philosophy (Bo2W), which seeks technical and
logistic integration of ‘best’ pre-processing in developing
countries to manually dismantle e-waste and ‘best’ end-
processing to treat hazardous and complex fractions in
international state-of-the-art end-processing facilities.
Indonesia is one of the potential countries to adopt Bo2W
philosophy [48]. However, further investigation to model
the system best implemented in Indonesia is needed to
determine the technical requirements (how to implement
EPR, ARF, and/or take-back mechanism based on Bo2W
philosophy) for establishing an e-waste management sys-
tem as well as its financing models.
Conclusions
In Indonesia, there is indication that a large flow of reuse is
currently happening. However, the most important flow of
e-waste equipment into recycling and disposal processes is
via reuse, because reuse can reduce a large number of
e-waste that is potentially being generated. Based on the
MFA model of this study, total e-waste generated
(2015–2025) was estimated to be 3.75–4.98 million tonnes.
In 2015, televisions are estimated to be the largest f e-waste
type (37 % televisions by weight). The flow quantity of
television is very high compared to the other e-products;
hence, the recycling facilities should support an appropriate
television recycling process, for either CRT or LCD screens.
The MFA model is based on transfer coefficient and resi-
dence time that represent consumer behavior following a
cascade-of-use of electronic and electrical equipment.
Transfer coefficient divides the flow between processes,
while residence time represents how long the material will
stay as stock in a process. However, in the model, transfer
coefficient did not have much effect on the corresponding
e-waste generation, while the lifespan (residence time) was
very necessary to predict e-waste generated in the future. It is
important to achieve a higher participation rate on the survey
in order to reduce uncertainties in the model input. In addi-
tion, further research on assessing the quantity of e-waste
recycled for the current situation, as well as how feasible it is
to implement the EPR, ARF, take-back system, and the
Bo2W philosophy in Indonesia, are needed.
References
1. Aizawa H, Yoshida H, Sakai S (2008) Current results and future
perspectives for Japanese recycling of home electrical appliances.
Resour Conserv Recycl 52:1399–1410
123
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
2. Apkomindo (Computer marketers association of Indonesia)
(2008) Data of domestic sales
3. Apkomindo (Computer marketers association of Indonesia)
(2009) Data of domestic sales
4. Araujo MG, Magrini A, Mahler CF, Bilitew B (2012) A model for
estimation of potential generation of waste electrical and elec-
tronic equipment in Brazil. Waste Manage (Oxford) 32:335–342
5. Basel Convention Regional Centre for South-East Asia (BCRC-
SEA) (2007) E-waste inventory guidelines. http://www.env.go.jp/
en/recycle/asian_net/Project_N_Research/E-wasteProject/12-2.
pdf (Accessed 3 July 2012)
6. BPS (Biro Pusat Statistik/Center of Statistical Bureau) of Indo-
nesia. 2008. ICT Indicator
7. BPS (Biro Pusat Statistik/Center of Statistical Bureau) of Indo-
nesia. 2010. Expenditure for Consumption of Indonesia 2010
8. Brunner P, Reichberger H (2004) Practical handbook material
flow analysis. Lewis Publisher, Florida
9. CEIC (2011) CEIC latest actual data: 2010 http://www.imf.org/
external/pubs/ft/weo/2011/02/weodata/weoselgr.aspx (Accessed
20 Feb 2012)
10. Duchin F, Levine SH (2010) Embodied resource flows and
product flows: combining the absorbing markov chain with the
input–output model. J Ind Ecol 14:586–597
11. Dwivedy M, Mittal RK (2009) Estimation of future outflows of
e-waste in India. Waste Manage (Oxford) 30:483–491
12. Dwivedy M, Mittal RK (2010) Future trends in computer waste
generation in India. Waste Manage (Oxford) 30:2265–2277
13. Electronic Marketers Club (EMC) (2011) Data of electronic and
electrical appliances
14. Empa (2009) Hazardous substances in e-waste. http://
ewasteguide.info/node/219 (Accessed July 26 2012)
15. Euromonitor International (2012) Consumer appliances in Indo-
nesia. Country report
16. Hanafi J, Kristina H, Jobiliong E, Christiani A, Halim A, Santoso D,
Melini E (2011) The prospects of managing WEEE in Indonesia.
Glocalized solutions for sustainability in manufacturing. Proceed-
ings of the 18th CIRP international 492 conference on life cycle
engineering, Technische Universität Braunschweig, pp 492–496
17. Indonesian Commercial Newsletter (ICN) (2007) Cellular tele-
communications industry in Indonesia, pp 28–54
18. International Data Corporation (IDC) (2011a) Asia Pacific
Quarterly PC Tracker 2Q11
19. International Data Corporation (IDC) (2011b) IDC Worldwide
Quarterly PC Tracker
20. International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2011) World Economic
Outlook Database
21. Jamal H, Al-Haddad Y, Jamal L (2009) E-waste management in
Kuwait. In: Proceedings of the second Kuwait waste management
conference
22. Japan Environmental Sanitation Center, Japanese Ministry of
Environment, Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
(2007) Report on which type of secondhand EEE and E-waste
scrap is regulated by Basel Convention (in Japanese)
23. Kang HY, Schoenung JM (2006) Estimation of future outflows
and infrastructure needed to recycle personal computer systems in
California. J Hazard Mater 137:1165–1174
24. Kim S, Oguchi M, Yoshida A, Terazono A (2012) Estimating the
amount of WEEE generated in South Korea by using the popu-
lation balance model. Waste Manage. 10.1016/j.wasman.2012.07.
011
25. Laissaoui SE, Rochat D (2008) Technical report on the assess-
ment of e-waste management in Morocco. Moroccon Cleaner
Production Centre and EMPA
26. Liu X, Tanaka M, Matsui Y (2006) Generation amount prediction
and material flow analysis of electronic waste: a case study in
Beijing, China. Waste Manage Res 24:434–445
J Mater Cycles Waste Manag
27. Matsuno Y, Daigo I, Adachi Y (2007) Application of Markov
chain model to calculate the average number of times of use of a
material in society: an allocation methodology for open-loop
recycling, part 2: case study for steel. Int J LCA 12(1):34–39
28. Matsuto T, Jung CH, Tanaka N (2004) Material and heavy metal
balance in a recycling facilities for home electrical appliances.
Waste Manage (Oxford) 24:425–436
29. Matthews HS, McMichael FC, Hendrickson CT, Hart DJ (1997)
Disposition and end-of-life options for personal computers.
Carnegie Mellon University Green Design Initiative Technical
Report #97-10
30. Ministry of Environment (MoE) and Basel Convention Regional
Centre (BCRC-SEA) (2007) Preliminary inventory of electronic
and electrical waste (e-waste) in Indonesia. http://www.env.go.jp/
en/recycle/asian_net/Project_N_Research/E-wasteProject/05.pdf
(Accessed 3 July 2011)
31. Murakami S, Terazono A, Abe N, Moriguchi Y, Miyakawa H
(2006) Material flows of end-of-life home appliances in Japan.
J Mater Cycles Waste Manage 8:46–55
32. Nnorom IC, Osibanjo O (2008) Electronic waste (e-waste):
material flows and management practices in Nigeria. Waste
Manage (Oxford) 28:1472–1479
33. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) (2010) OECD Economic Surveys: Indonesia. OECD
Publishing
34. Oguchi M, Murakami S, Tasaki T, Daigo I, Hashimoto S (2010)
Lifespan of commodities: part II. J Ind Ecol 14(4):613–626
35. Osibanjo O, Nnorom IC (2008) Material flows of mobile phones
and accessories in Nigeria: environmental implications and sound
end-of-life management options. Waste Manage (Oxford) 28:
198–213
36. Peralta GL, Fontanos PM (2006) E-waste issues and measures in
the Philippines. J Mater Cycles Waste Manage 8:34–39
37. Steubing B (2007) E-waste generation in Chile, situation analysis
and estimation of actual and future computer waste quantities
using material flow analysis. Master’s Thesis, Swiss Federal
Institute of Technology at Lausanne (EPFL) and Swiss Federal
Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research (EMPA)
38. Steubing B, Boni H, Schluep M, Silva U, Ludwig C (2010)
Assessing computer waste generation in Chile using material flow
analysis. Waste Manage (Oxford) 30:473–482
39. Sukandar S, Widyarsana MW (2007) Recycling of e-waste in
Indonesia by informal sector: case study of gold recovery from
e-waste components. Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engi-
neering, Institute Technology of Bandung, Bandung
40. Townsend TG, Musson S, Jang YC, Chung IH (1999) Charac-
terization of lead leachability from cathode ray tubes using the
toxicity characteristic leaching procedure. Florida Center for
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management
41. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2009) Recy-
cling—from e-waste to resources: sustainable innovation and
technology. UNEP transfer industrial sector studies. Solving the
E-waste problem (StEP)
42. Widyarsana IM (2011) E-product and E-waste survey data,
method development of generated e-waste estimation (case study:
Bandung City). Dissertation. Institute Technology of Bandung,
Indonesia (in Indonesian)
43. World Bank (2011) Indonesia economic quarterly: 2008 again?
Investing in Indonesia’s institutions for inclusive and sustainable
development
44. Yamada H, Daigo I, Matsuno Y, Adachi Y, Kondo Y (2006)
Application of Markov chain model to calculate the average
number of times of use of a material in society: an allocation
methodology for open-loop recycling, part 1: methodology
development. Int J LCA 11(5):354–360
45. Yang J, Lu B, Xu C (2008) WEEE flow and mitigating measures
in China. Waste Manage (Oxford) 28:1589–1597
46. Yoshida A, Tasaki T, Terazono A (2009) Material flow analysis
of used personal computers in Japan. Waste Manage (Oxford)
29:1602–1614
47. Yoshida A, Terazono A (2010) Reuse of secondhand TVs
exported from Japan to the Philippines. Waste Manage (Oxford)
30:1063–1072
48. Wang F, Huisman J, Meskers CEM, Schluep M, Stevels A,
Hageluken C (2012) The best-of-2-worlds philosophy: develop-
ing local dismantling and global infrastructure network for sus-
tainable e-waste treatment in emerging economies. Waste
Manage. 10.1016/j.wasman.2012.03.029
49. Zhang L, Yuan Z, Bi J (2011) Predicting future quantities of
obsolete household appliances in Nanjing by a stock-based
model. Resour Conserv Recycl 55:1087–1094
50. Zoeteman BCJ, Krikke HR, Venselaar J (2010) Handling WEEE
waste flows: on the effectiveness of producer responsibility in a
globalizing world. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 47:415–443
123