IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i3p385-d92328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Consumer Electronics Product Take-Back Time with Consideration of Consumer Value

Author

Listed:
  • Yi-Tse Fang

    (Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan City 32023, Taiwan)

  • Hsin Rau

    (Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan City 32023, Taiwan)

Abstract

Rapid economic growth in recent years has transformed our lifestyle to massively produce, consume, and dispose of products, especially for consumer electronics. This change has put great threat to our environment and caused natural resource depletion. Moreover, short product life cycles and quick replacements of consumer electronics create enormous electronic wastes (e-wastes). Without proper waste management, immense environmental damage is expected. In this empirical study, we notice that lots of valuable materials that can still be recycled from these used consumer electronics are left unused at home instead of being recycled at the appropriate time, which causes a low collection rate and a decrease in residual value for the used products. Therefore, it is important for the government and the recyclers to handle them efficiently by increasing the used product take-back rate. Our study develops an assessment model for customer value based on the idea of value engineering and the perspective of product life cycle. We also explore the relationship between product value and the total cost of ownership with an evaluation of their time variation, considering different usage modes for various consumer groups and different recycling award schemes (fixed and variable recycling awards). Proper take-back management is likely to create a win-win situation both for consumers and environmental protection. This study regards the notebook computer as an example to determine the optimal time for recycling laptops based on usage patterns and provides consumers a reference for when to replace their used product. The results from our modeling firstly clearly indicate that consumers with higher frequency of usage have shorter take back times and higher maximum consumer value. Secondly, a variable recycling award scheme with higher maximum consumer value is more practical than a fixed recycling award scheme.

Suggested Citation

  • Yi-Tse Fang & Hsin Rau, 2017. "Optimal Consumer Electronics Product Take-Back Time with Consideration of Consumer Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:3:p:385-:d:92328
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/3/385/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/3/385/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shinsuke Kondoh & Keijiro Masui & Mitsuro Hattori & Nozomu Mishima & Mitsutaka Matsumoto, 2008. "Total performance analysis of product life cycle considering the deterioration and obsolescence of product value," International Journal of Product Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(3/4), pages 334-352.
    2. Fleischmann, Mortiz & Krikke, Hans Ronald & Dekker, Rommert & Flapper, Simme Douwe P., 2000. "A characterisation of logistics networks for product recovery," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 653-666, December.
    3. Gottinger, Hans W., 1988. "A computational model for solid waste management with application," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 350-364, June.
    4. Saibal Ray & Tamer Boyaci & Necati Aras, 2005. "Optimal Prices and Trade-in Rebates for Durable, Remanufacturable Products," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 208-228, January.
    5. Prahinski, Carol & Kocabasoglu, Canan, 2006. "Empirical research opportunities in reverse supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 519-532, December.
    6. V. Daniel R. Guide, Jr. & Ruud H. Teunter & Luk N. Van Wassenhove, 2003. "Matching Demand and Supply to Maximize Profits from Remanufacturing," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 303-316, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hsin Rau & Yi-Tse Fang, 2018. "Optimal Time for Consumers to Purchase Electronic Products with Consideration of Consumer Value and Eco-Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Mikkel Nøjgaard & Cristiano Smaniotto & Søren Askegaard & Ciprian Cimpan & Dmitry Zhilyaev & Henrik Wenzel, 2020. "How the Dead Storage of Consumer Electronics Creates Consumer Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    3. Jaroslaw Milczarek & Piotr Cyplik & Sebastian Wieczerniak, 2018. "Using Total Cost Of Ownership As A Method For Identification Of Internal Problems In Purchase Area – Case Study," Business Logistics in Modern Management, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Economics, Croatia, vol. 18, pages 205-223.
    4. Ewa Frąckiewicz, 2021. "Information and Communication Technologies as a Source of Customer Value in the Context of Balancing the Positions of Younger and Older Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Erzurumlu, S. Sinan, 2013. "The compatibility of durable goods with contingent generic consumables," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 574-585.
    2. Aras, Necati & Aksen, Deniz & Gönül Tanugur, Ayse, 2008. "Locating collection centers for incentive-dependent returns under a pick-up policy with capacitated vehicles," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(3), pages 1223-1240, December.
    3. Aksen, Deniz & Aras, Necati & Karaarslan, Ayse Gönül, 2009. "Design and analysis of government subsidized collection systems for incentive-dependent returns," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 308-327, June.
    4. Wenyuan Wang & Daniel Y. Mo & Yue Wang & Mitchell M. Tseng, 2019. "Assessing the cost structure of component reuse in a product family for remanufacturing," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 575-587, February.
    5. Aras, Necati & Aksen, Deniz, 2008. "Locating collection centers for distance- and incentive-dependent returns," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 316-333, February.
    6. Yalabik, Baris & Chhajed, Dilip & Petruzzi, Nicholas C., 2014. "Product and sales contract design in remanufacturing," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 299-312.
    7. Pokharel, Shaligram & Mutha, Akshay, 2009. "Perspectives in reverse logistics: A review," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 175-182.
    8. Sabbaghi, Mostafa & Behdad, Sara & Zhuang, Jun, 2016. "Managing consumer behavior toward on-time return of the waste electrical and electronic equipment: A game theoretic approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 545-563.
    9. De Giovanni, Pietro & Zaccour, Georges, 2014. "A two-period game of a closed-loop supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(1), pages 22-40.
    10. Hong, I-Hsuan & Ammons, Jane C. & Realff, Matthew J., 2008. "Decentralized decision-making and protocol design for recycled material flows," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 325-337, December.
    11. Özden Tozanlı & Elif Kongar & Surendra M. Gupta, 2020. "Evaluation of Waste Electronic Product Trade-in Strategies in Predictive Twin Disassembly Systems in the Era of Blockchain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-33, July.
    12. Krikke, Harold & Hofenk, Dianne & Wang, Yacan, 2013. "Revealing an invisible giant: A comprehensive survey into return practices within original (closed-loop) supply chains," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 239-250.
    13. Das, Debabrata & Dutta, Pankaj, 2022. "Product return management through promotional offers: The role of consumers’ loss aversion," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    14. Phantratanamongkol, Supanan & Casalin, Fabrizio & Pang, Gu & Sanderson, Joseph, 2018. "The price-volume relationship for new and remanufactured smartphones," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 78-94.
    15. Zhu, Xiaoxi & Wang, Miaomiao & Chen, Guofu & Chen, Xiaoshan, 2016. "The effect of implementing trade-in strategy on duopoly competition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 856-868.
    16. Syed Mithun Ali & Asraf Arafin & Md. Abdul Moktadir & Towfique Rahman & Nuzhat Zahan, 2018. "Barriers to Reverse Logistics in the Computer Supply Chain Using Interpretive Structural Model," Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, Springer;Global Institute of Flexible Systems Management, vol. 19(1), pages 53-68, March.
    17. Mohammad Fattahi & Kannan Govindan, 2017. "Integrated forward/reverse logistics network design under uncertainty with pricing for collection of used products," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 253(1), pages 193-225, June.
    18. Atalay Atasu & Charles J. Corbett & Ximin (Natalie) Huang & L. Beril Toktay, 2020. "Sustainable Operations Management Through the Perspective of Manufacturing & Service Operations Management," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 146-157, January.
    19. He, Yuanjie, 2015. "Acquisition pricing and remanufacturing decisions in a closed-loop supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 48-60.
    20. Hasan, Md Mahmudul & Faiz, Tasnim Ibn & Modestino, Alicia Sasser & Young, Gary J. & Noor-E-Alam, Md, 2023. "Optimizing return and secure disposal of prescription opioids to reduce the diversion to secondary users and black market," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:3:p:385-:d:92328. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

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

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

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

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

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