Reverse Chain for Electronic Waste to Promote Circular Economy in Brazil: A Survey on Electronics Manufacturers and Importers

Abstract

Government requirements for the management of waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) by electronics manufacturers and importers has raised some difficulties in structuring the reverse chain of WEEE in Brazil, notably due to the territorial extension of the country. The need to implement circular economy practices (CE) in the reverse chain of WEEE has been acknowledged as a key requirement for sustaining the international competitiveness of Brazilian companies. In this context, this study sets up to evaluate the flows of the reverse chain of WEEE, aiming to promote CE as well as its actions for the recycling, reuse, remanufacturing, and reduction of WEEE in Brazil. The study identifies and characterizes key manufacturing decisions for developing waste management capabilities, including the need for waste management responsibilities for installing and operating the collection points and transporting waste to recyclers. Likewise, the study highlights the relevance of the adoption of strategies for selling recycled materials to the secondary market, along with reusing and reducing the use of virgin materials. Initially, the managerial strategy is based on recycling and remanufacturing actions due to short-term monetary revaluation, in addition to the immediate resolution of the complex problem. It should be noted that the decision to outsource WEEE management does not exempt the manufacturer from reusing and reducing material consumption, an important contribution that must be taken into account in organizational practice, beyond the immediate resolution of the complex problem.

1. Introduction

The growth in the production and the obsolescence of electronic equipment has been responsible for the increase in the waste of electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) in the order of 3 to 5% per year [1]. The volumes of WEEE are important not only due to the scarcity and value of the materials they contain but also due to the presence of materials that, if not properly disposed of, can have a negative impact on the environment [2]. From a socioeconomic standpoint, the disposal of WEEE offers opportunities for the economy, due to the possibility of reuse and the commercialization of the raw materials included in this type of waste, such as plastics, iron, aluminum, steel, gold, silver, bronze, copper, platinum, and palladium [3].

In Brazil, there are specific regulations, in the National Solid Waste Policy (NSWP), that aim at managing the WEEE reverse logistics system. Such regulations define the responsibilities that are shared by the players in the reverse chain of WEEE. It addresses reverse logistics as an instrument of economic and social development, covering actions, procedures, and means designed to enable the collection and the restitution of solid waste for reuse in production cycles or for an environmentally appropriate destination [4]. Reverse logistics can be understood as the activities that are required for planning, implementing, and controlling the reverse flows of production, including the flows of raw materials, finished products, and items rejected or discarded, with the purpose of providing a final destination that enables their reintegration into the business cycle, with the minimum possible environmental impact, while meeting existing legal requirements [5].

In Brazil, the aforementioned NSWP highlights the relevance of sectoral agreements, concerning legal acts of a contractual nature, that are established between public authorities and players involved in reverse chain operations, such as manufacturers, managers, recyclers, in addition to distributors and importers, aiming toward the adaptability of solid waste management systems [6]. In this vein, a sectoral agreement was signed in 2019 establishing the obligation of implementing reverse logistics flows involving the participation of manufacturers, importers, distributors, and traders of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (EEE) in waste collection, with the purpose of expanding WEEE collection points [7]. This sectoral agreement aims to contribute to achieving viable reverse logistics systems in Brazil, while not guaranteeing it, since there are numerous challenges in order for its processes to become effective. Challenges include the lack of consistency in the classification and efficiency of collection channels for WEEE [8]. As such, and despite the existence of the NSWP and of the sectoral agreement, the management of WEEE in Brazil still lacks operationalization. For this reason, it is important to carry out studies that can provide insights for improving the organization and management of such reverse chains.

The need for research is also reinforced by the lack of an established and operational reverse chain for dealing with WEEE based on CE concepts. The main objective of the CE is to create a regenerative system to ensure optimal reuse, renewal, remanufacturing, and recycling of products, materials, and waste, manipulating them in a closed loop [9]. Still, few companies in the sector consider WEEE reverse logistics as a necessary operation to achieve CE for resource efficiency [1], mainly because it aims to “close the cycle in the reverse WEEE chain” of end-of-life products [9].

In this context, this study reports a systematic literature review that was carried out addressing research about logistics and reverse chain flows of WEEE with CE. In this study, 19 articles were identified that dealt directly with CE, as well as its actions for the recycling, reuse, remanufacturing, and reduction of WEEE. It was also found that the manufacturer, waste manager, and recyclers are the main players in the reverse WEEE chain. These results are exhibited in Table 1.

At the time of this study, only the work by Shittu et al. [1] describes the development of a survey in India on WEEE management. This research suggested the manufacturer as being the main player in promoting CE because it must incorporate CE in the design, production, and management of WEEE at the end of its useful life, aiming at the reuse of WEEE for new products. Five case studies related to the reverse logistics of WEEE to promote CE also emphasized the role of the WEEE manager to assess the optimal collection points in Ukraine, the required transport strategies, and aspects related to product design and consumer participation [10]. Likewise, three case studies in Italy reported the adoption of closed-loop WEEE, with recycling practices for the reuse of materials in the secondary market [11]. These actions contributed to the EU targets defined for collection and recycling systems [9], generating industrial symbiosis [12]. A case study was also identified describing the recovery of precious metals and the reduction in environmental impacts in the UK [13]. Thirteen studies reported on the reverse logistics of WEEE to promote CE with a focus on the recycler operation. Three of these case studies were carried out in Brazil, considering the destination of WEEE in Rio de Janeiro for recycling, reuse, and remanufacturing, as being a source of funds for the generation of income and jobs [14], as well as the generation of WEEE, and the location of recycling companies and collection routes. Recyclers contribute to the consolidation of new circular business models [15]. The WEEE management and remanufacturing practices analyzed in Brazilian recyclers identified a CE with revenue generation due to increased recycling and remanufacturing [16]. Two case studies were further found in Belgium, offering an evaluation of the technical and economic viability of plastic recycling strategies contained in WEEE, generating CE due to closed-loop reuse [17,18]. Sengupta et al. [19] developed a case study addressing the extended WEEE producer responsibility that showed that formal and informal WEEE recycling sectors can favor the transition to a CE in India. Cordova-Pizzarro et al. [20] used a case study approach to evaluate the management of secondary material recycling centers in Mexico, from WEEE from cell phones, highlighting that the reuse and recycling of WEEE contribute to CE. Likewise, André et al. [21] built on a case study to investigate the environmental impacts and economic advantages in the treatment, recycling, reuse, and remanufacturing of end-of-life laptops in Sweden, generating CE. Tong et al. [22] analyzed the implications of environmental regulation for improving the managerial practices of Chinese recyclers through a case study, enabling the reuse of WEEE and promoting the circularity of materials. Levanen et al. [23] analyzed the interactions between CE management activities and business models related to WEEE recyclers in Chile and Finland, an essential consideration for the recycling and reuse operation in a closed cycle. Parajuly and Wenzel [24] evaluated, also using a case study, the aspects required for maximizing the reuse of electronic waste in recycling centers, requiring the adoption of reuse and recycling to promote circularity. Hagelüken et al. [25] evaluated government regulations to drive closed-loop recycling in Belgian and German WEEE recyclers for the recovery of precious metals. Sabtu et al. [26] found that the integration of logistics operators in the reverse chain of WEEE increases the volume of recycling and waste circularity, reducing costs and increasing revenue in Malaysia.

As exhibited in Table 1, 19 out of the 34 surveys identified in the literature relate the logistics/reverse chain of WEEE with CE. Among these, 17 are exploratory case studies with limited possibilities of generalization, and only two are confirmatory surveys. From these, one aimed to identify the most relevant attributes for the integration of logistics operators in the WEEE reverse chain in Malaysia [26], and the other aimed to assess the current global situation of WEEE management in India and discuss opportunities for improvement [1]. As a result, no study has yet developed a survey to evaluate, using the Friedman Test and Simes–Hochberg multiple comparisons, the flow of the reverse chain of WEEE to promote CE, as well as its actions for the recycling, reuse, remanufacturing, and reduction of WEEE in Brazil, denoting the research gap addressed by this study.

Building on the research gap identified, the objective of this study is to evaluate, through the Friedman Test and Simes–Hochberg multiple comparisons, the flows of the reverse chain of WEEE to promote CE, as well as its actions for the recycling, reuse, remanufacturing, and reduction of WEEE in Brazil. It should be noted that this study is relevant for theory and organizational practice because Brazil is the second largest producer of WEEE on the American continent, with 1.5 million tons per year. Moreover, the sectoral agreement for electronics in 2019 was also approved in São Paulo, Brazil, which requires the implementation of the WEEE reverse chain. Thus, industries in this sector are struggling to organize themselves for the reverse logistics operation of WEEE due to the geographical extension of the Brazilian territory.

Table 1. Research on WEEE logistics/reverse chain.

Authors/Year	Method	Country Searched	Mentioned about CE	Reuse	Recicling	Reduce	Remanufacturing	Recovery in the Production Chain	Recovery in the Secondary Market	Manufacturer	Manager	Recyclers
Andersen (2022) [27]	Case Study	European continent	null							X
Shittu et al. (2021) [1]	survey	India	X	X			X	X		X
Kumar e Dixit (2019) [28]	survey	India	null							X
Oliveira Neto et al. (2017) [29]	survey	Brazil and Switzerland	null							X
Schevchenko et al. (2021) [10]	Case Study	Ukraine	X			X					X
Shi et al. (2019) [30]	Case Study	Canada	null								X
Matarazzo et al. (2019) [11]	Case Study	Italy	X		X				X		X
Bridgens et al. (2019) [13]	Case Study	United Kingdom	X		X						X
Isernia et al. (2019) [9]	Case Study	Italy	X		X						X
Agrawal et al. (2018) [31]	Case Study	India	null								X
Marconi et al. (2018) [12]	Case Study	Italy	X		X	X			X		X
Brito et al. (2022) [14]	Case Study	Brazil	X	X	X		X	X	X			X
Ottoni et al. (2020) [15]	Case Study	Brazil	X		X	X		X	X			X
Sengupta et al. (2020) [19]	Case Study	India	X		X			X		X		X
Cordova-Pizarro et al. (2019) [20]	Case Study	Mexico	X	X	X	X	X	X	X			X
Wagner et al. (2019) [17]	Case Study	Belgium	X	X	X	X		X				X
Wagner et al. (2019) [18]	Case Study	Belgium	X	X	X	X		X				X
André et al. (2019) [21]	Case Study	Sweden	X	X	X	X	X	X				X
Tong et al. (2018) [22]	Case Study	China	X	X	X							X
Levanen et al. (2018) [23]	Case Study	Chile and Finland	X		X		X		X			X
Alves and Farina (2018) [16]	Case Study	Brazil	X		X		X		X	X		X
Wang et al. (2018) [32]	Case Study	China	null									X
Parajuly and Wenzel (2017) [24]	Case Study	Denmark	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X		X
Souza et al. (2016) [33]	Case Study	Brazil	null									X
Liu et al. (2016) [34]	Modeling and simulation	China	null									X
Hageluken et al. (2016) [25]	Case Study	Belgium and Germany	X		X							X
Sabtu et al. (2015) [26]	survey	Malaysia	X		X							X
Aras et al. (2015) [35]	Modeling and simulation	Turkey	null									X
Kilic et al. (2015) [36]	Modeling and simulation	Turkey	null									X
Song et al. (2013) [37]	Case Study	China	null									X
Assavapokee and Wongthatsanekorn (2012) [38]	Modeling and simulation	United States	null									X
Achillas et al. (2012) [39]	Modeling and simulation	Greece	null									X
Achillas et al. (2010) [40]	Modeling and simulation	Greece	null									X
Achillas et al. (2010) [41]	Modeling and simulation	Greece	null									X

Table 1. Research on WEEE logistics/reverse chain.

Authors/Year	Method	Country Searched	Mentioned about CE	Reuse	Recicling	Reduce	Remanufacturing	Recovery in the Production Chain	Recovery in the Secondary Market	Manufacturer	Manager	Recyclers
Andersen (2022) [27]	Case Study	European continent	null							X
Shittu et al. (2021) [1]	survey	India	X	X			X	X		X
Kumar e Dixit (2019) [28]	survey	India	null							X
Oliveira Neto et al. (2017) [29]	survey	Brazil and Switzerland	null							X
Schevchenko et al. (2021) [10]	Case Study	Ukraine	X			X					X
Shi et al. (2019) [30]	Case Study	Canada	null								X
Matarazzo et al. (2019) [11]	Case Study	Italy	X		X				X		X
Bridgens et al. (2019) [13]	Case Study	United Kingdom	X		X						X
Isernia et al. (2019) [9]	Case Study	Italy	X		X						X
Agrawal et al. (2018) [31]	Case Study	India	null								X
Marconi et al. (2018) [12]	Case Study	Italy	X		X	X			X		X
Brito et al. (2022) [14]	Case Study	Brazil	X	X	X		X	X	X			X
Ottoni et al. (2020) [15]	Case Study	Brazil	X		X	X		X	X			X
Sengupta et al. (2020) [19]	Case Study	India	X		X			X		X		X
Cordova-Pizarro et al. (2019) [20]	Case Study	Mexico	X	X	X	X	X	X	X			X
Wagner et al. (2019) [17]	Case Study	Belgium	X	X	X	X		X				X
Wagner et al. (2019) [18]	Case Study	Belgium	X	X	X	X		X				X
André et al. (2019) [21]	Case Study	Sweden	X	X	X	X	X	X				X
Tong et al. (2018) [22]	Case Study	China	X	X	X							X
Levanen et al. (2018) [23]	Case Study	Chile and Finland	X		X		X		X			X
Alves and Farina (2018) [16]	Case Study	Brazil	X		X		X		X	X		X
Wang et al. (2018) [32]	Case Study	China	null									X
Parajuly and Wenzel (2017) [24]	Case Study	Denmark	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X		X
Souza et al. (2016) [33]	Case Study	Brazil	null									X
Liu et al. (2016) [34]	Modeling and simulation	China	null									X
Hageluken et al. (2016) [25]	Case Study	Belgium and Germany	X		X							X
Sabtu et al. (2015) [26]	survey	Malaysia	X		X							X
Aras et al. (2015) [35]	Modeling and simulation	Turkey	null									X
Kilic et al. (2015) [36]	Modeling and simulation	Turkey	null									X
Song et al. (2013) [37]	Case Study	China	null									X
Assavapokee and Wongthatsanekorn (2012) [38]	Modeling and simulation	United States	null									X
Achillas et al. (2012) [39]	Modeling and simulation	Greece	null									X
Achillas et al. (2010) [40]	Modeling and simulation	Greece	null									X
Achillas et al. (2010) [41]	Modeling and simulation	Greece	null									X

2. Systematic Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

2.1. WEEE Logistics/Reverse Chain with Emphasis on the Manufacturer

Andersen [27] presented case studies in manufacturing, addressing its subsidiaries located in eight countries in Europe. The study suggests that outsourcing the management of WEEE can reduce the manufacturer’s efforts. On the other hand, WEEE can be sold to the secondary market instead of returning to the manufacturer’s chain. Kumar and Dixit [28] studied the selection of partnerships among manufacturers with WEEE recycling facilities and the implementation of collection centers in India. The results of these studies indicate that the selection of partnerships should consider recycling companies that prioritize the restructuring and redistribution of collection points for their ability to reduce the costs of transporting waste and mitigate pollutants from greenhouse gases.

Oliveira Neto et al. [29] conducted a study addressing manufacturers and centers for treatment and recycling in Brazil and Switzerland by mapping the reverse chain of WEEE. They concluded that the waste management carried out by the manufacturer and the strategic implementation of recycling, the reuse of secondary raw materials, and the commercialization of WEEE promote economic gains for the Brazilian reverse chain. However, Brazil does not have the necessary technology to fully process precious metals, and for this reason, it directs them to Swiss recyclers. Parajuly and Wenzel [24] evaluated the criteria that are required to maximize the reuse of electronic waste in recycling centers. It was concluded that there is a need for the manufacturer to incorporate features into the product design so that the volume of material lost in recycling processes can be reduced. Only one study on the subject mentioned CE. Shittu et al. [1] surveyed the global situation of WEEE management and discussed opportunities for its improvement in India. The research results offer support for the incorporation of CE principles in the design, production, and management of WEEE at the end of its useful life, aiming at the reuse of WEEE in the production of new products. In this context, research results suggest that manufacturers can generate CE through the operationalization of WEEE collection, segregation, reuse, recycling, remanufacturing, and sale to the secondary market, generating waste circularity in the supply chain itself. It is recommended to incorporate CE principles in the design, production, and management of WEEE at the end of its useful life, aiming at the reuse of WEEE in the production of new products.

This leads to the development of the first hypothesis:

H1. 

The manufacturer carries out the WEEE collection, segregation, reuse, recycling, remanufacturing, and commercialization operations for the secondary market, promoting CE.

2.2. WEEE Logistics/Reverse Chain with Emphasis on Waste Management

Some studies emphasized how the manager of WEEE conducted the decision process about the location of collection points. Shevchenko et al. [10] evaluated optimal collection points selected by a manager of WEEE to minimize costs and reduce emissions in Ukraine. The results informed the development of transport strategies as well as product design for a circular business model and consumer participation in the reverse chain. Thus, it is possible to maintain the products and WEEE being used for as long as possible, generating a reduction in the use of materials. Shi et al. [30] performed multicriteria simulations focusing on the optimized insertion of collection centers in the operation of the manager of WEEE in Canada. The results suggested that collective management played an important role in the reverse chain of WEEE, linking manufacturers and recyclers while reducing environmental impacts.

There were also some studies directed at the performance of WEEE managers for the recycling operation. Matarazzo et al. [11] conducted a case study to evaluate the effectiveness of CE, aimed at the management of WEEE in plants dedicated to WEEE treatment and recycling in Italy. The results indicate that the manager of WEEE contributes to the operationalization and integration of the reverse chain because it guarantees compliance with the legislation while generating value for the recycled raw material. Bridgens et al. [13] also developed a case study on WEEE management addressing the UK context. It was concluded that the WEEE manager contributes to a more balanced economic recycling system, enhancing economic and environmental gains in the reverse chain. The implementation of technologies for recycling and reusing secondary raw materials are necessary and contribute to the recovery of precious metals. Isernia et al. [9] assessed the extent to which the Italian WEEE management system and its legislation and regulations support the goals set by the European Union with a focus on the collection and recycling systems for CE effectiveness. They concluded that the adoption of a WEEE manager improves the operationalization and integration of the reverse WEEE chain, guaranteeing more consistent economic and environmental returns. Marconi et al. [12] developed a platform dedicated to the reverse chain to promote industrial symbiosis, generating CE improvement at the Italian meso level. The results highlighted that the WEEE manager has an important role in recovering the value of the secondary raw material. Thus, the manager contributes to a more balanced circular recycling system, enhancing economic gains and mitigating environmental impacts.

Some studies mentioned the implementation of outsourced WEEE managers for recycling, reuse, and remanufacturing. Agrawal et al. [31] evaluated the main opportunities and strategies for the effectiveness of the reverse chain in India, considering the implementation of outsourced WEEE managers for recycling, reuse, and remanufacturing. The outsourcing of the management of WEEE improves the flow of recycled raw materials to the market and enables the commercialization of the remanufactured product. Overall, five out of the seven articles identified in the literature were case studies addressing WEEE reverse logistics/chain as a means to promote CE with an emphasis on the WEEE manager [9,10,11,12,13]. The research results, therefore, support that the manager of WEEE is a relevant player to promote CE because they meet the manufacturer’s needs in terms of WEEE collection, segregation, reuse, recycling, remanufacturing, and marketing to the secondary market. The manager for WEEE is responsible for the implementation of collection points and the identification of recyclers, in addition to selling materials to the secondary market. This leads to the formulation of the second hypothesis, as follows:

H2. 

The WEEE manager is an important player to manage the manufacturer’s waste, as well as dealing with the recyclers, promoting the CE.

2.3. WEEE Logistics/Reverse Chain with Emphasis on the Recycler

Some studies on WEEE logistics mentioned the integration of formal and informal collectors in the recycling process and the implications of the development of regulations for WEEE management in order to promote CE. Liu et al. [34] proposed a model for the development of a recycling policy for WEEE for both formal and informal sectors in China. The study highlights that the informal market has a competitive advantage, deriving economic gains from the formal market. As for the formal recycling sector, adequate environmental processes generate high costs. The lack of control over informal recycling sectors entails risks of contamination of the environment. These results suggest that restructuring governmental regulations and tax incentives is essential to improving CE. Tong et al. [22] analyzed CE in terms of the policies, regulations, and reverse chain management of WEEE in the formal and informal sectors dealing with recycling in China. It was found that 75% of the WEEE recycled by the formal sector is acquired from the informal sector. As a result, financial gains generally remain with the formal sector, requiring redistribution via government subsidies and the alignment of WEEE regulations to improve CE.

Ottoni et al. [15] analyzed the generation of WEEE, the locations of recycling companies, and collection routes in Brazil. The findings suggest that recyclers can benefit from formality, an efficient solution that contributes to the consolidation of new business models and to the improvement of processes relevant to the CE. Souza et al. [33] evaluated the implementation of collection points and raw material recycling and reuse units, in formal and informal settings, with regard to WEEE management in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The informality of recycling brings economic losses. Current regulations maximize the return of WEEE to the reverse chain, with economic and environmental gains.

Sengupta et al. [19] conducted a case study about the informal WEEE sector in India and the artisanal methods employed for the recovery of raw materials. The study explored economic issues and threats to human health due to the toxicity of chemical products. They proposed a model based on an extended producer responsibility integrating formal and informal collectors in the recycling process to establish circularity for value recovery. Hagelüken et al. [25] evaluated government regulations in Belgium and Germany to contribute to CE, regarding treatments and recycling for the recovery of precious metals. The results show that the regulations applied to WEEE recyclers contribute to encouraging the adoption of innovative strategies for recycling and reusing non-ferrous metals.

Other studies have focused on the identification of the optimal location for WEEE recycler facilities and WEEE collection points. Achilles et al. [40] developed a multicriteria simulation model to determine the optimal location of two strategic points for the implementation of WEEE recyclers. By mapping the regions with more favorable conditions for deployment, and building on simulations, the study suggested optimal locations, with the potential for annual cost savings in the reverse chain of WEEE of around 235,000 Euros while preventing the deployment of waste to landfills. Assavapokee and Wongthatsanekorn [38] adopted a mixed linear programming model for choosing the optimal location for WEEE recyclers in the USA. The study supported that the best location can promote economic gains for the reverse chain, such as the reduction in logistics costs associated with the transport and storage of waste. As for the environmental impacts and their relationship with CE, the authors highlight the WEEE legislation in the country, which explained that a large part of electronic waste was routed to landfills in Texas, conditions that are different from CE.

Aras et al. [35] developed a mathematical multi-period simulation model to determine the optimal location for WEEE recycler facilities in Turkey. Its implementation promotes CE by reducing costs with logistics transport, mitigating environmental impacts, and offering economic gains for the reverse chain. The research reports the importance of government WEEE directives to maximize the return of WEEE to the reverse chain. Moreover, in Turkey, Kilic et al. [36] mapped 21 different locations to identify the best settings for recycler facilities and WEEE collection centers. They used computer simulations based on a mixed linear programming model.

Two studies reported on the optimal location of collection points. Achillas et al. [41] developed a mixed linear programming mathematical model to map the optimal locations between intermediate recycling stations and WEEE collection centers. It was found that the WEEE recyclers strategically distributed in regions restricted to Macedonia are the most favorable to contribute to cost reductions in logistical transport and the decrease in the generation of fossil pollutant carbon dioxide, favoring CE. Achillas et al. [39] mapped WEEE collection points, applying simulations based on multicriteria linear programming, in Macedonia, Greece.

Research on WEEE reverse logistics was also identified within the scope of the economic and environmental assessment of WEEE recycling. Alves and Farina [16] developed a framework for analyzing CE-based WEEE management and remanufacturing practices to achieve environmental and economic gains in Brazil. It was concluded that the strategic distribution of WEEE collection centers is favorable to CE and contributes to the mitigation of pollutants in the environment and to the increase in revenue to the reverse chain. Wagner et al. [17,18] evaluated the technical and economic feasibility of plastic recovery strategies contained in WEEE in Belgium. It was found that the adoption of plastic recycling processes indicates a significant potential for economic return, reducing significant amounts of incinerated or discarded waste, leveraging CE by reducing costs and generating economic gains in the reverse chain. André et al. [21] investigated environmental and economic impacts relevant to CE in the treatment, recycling, and remanufacturing of end-of-life laptop computers in Sweden. It was concluded that 70% of laptops discarded by first-hand users had their useful life extended through remanufacturing practices; 30% of laptops were used for WEEE recycling, favoring the reuse of precious metals, the generation of revenue to the reverse chain, and the consequent mitigation of hazardous substances.

Other research contributions addressed the reuse of WEEE by recyclers and in the secondary market. Brito et al. [14] conducted a case study at a WEEE recycler in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to analyze WEEE recipients and the social implications of WEEE reverse logistics. They concluded that the main recipients of recycled EEE are third-sector organizations that serve social projects. As such, along with the potential for the RL of end-of-life EEE as a source of raw material, there are also unexplored possibilities in Brazil that could lead to new job creation and income generation. Wang et al. [32] investigated the reverse chain of WEEE, addressing concurrent outsourced recyclers and retailers managing e-waste collection centers in China, the study explored key criteria for the effectiveness of CE. The study suggests that regulations have a positive influence on the collection of WEEE, as well as on recycling operations, reducing the risk of the inappropriate disposal of waste into the environment and promoting greater economic gains for the reverse chain. Parajuly and Wenzel [24] developed a conceptual framework for evaluating the criteria required to maximize the reuse of WEEE in Denmark. The importance of legislation and product design development for end-of-life WEEE management was highlighted.

Song et al. [37] investigated the treatment and recycling processes adopted in recycling and identified the benefits arising from reused secondary resources and the mitigation of potentially hazardous substances in China. Iron and steel make up around 50% of WEEE, followed by plastics (21%) and non-ferrous metals (13%). When considering the presence of elements such as lead, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, and selenium, the results indicate that the treatment and recycling of electronic waste can reduce the impacts on the environment. The adoption of innovative strategies for recycling and reusing secondary raw materials in a closed cycle contributes to material circularity, the recovery of precious metals, and the reduction in environmental impacts, converging with the improvement of CE. Cordova-Pizarro et al. [20] evaluated, in Mexico, the management of recycling centers (formal and informal) in the context of secondary material flows from cell phone waste. The study showed that 42% of electronic waste can be remanufactured, while the remaining 58% undergo recycling processes, contributing to a reduction in environmental impact while generating economic gains.

Another study reported the interactions between the business management for CE and the role of female recyclers. Levänen et al. [23] analyzed interactions between CE management and business activities in different WEEE recyclers in Chile and Finland. It was found that the adoption of innovative WEEE recycling strategies and legislation is essential for the recovery of precious metals and the mitigation of the effects of hazardous substances on the environment. Another survey concluded on the importance of partnerships with logistics operators for recycling. Sabtu et al. [26] identified the most relevant attributes regarding the partnership with third-party logistics operators in Malaysia. The results show an increase in logistical operations and an improvement in the distribution of recycling channels. This favors the growth of revenue and the reduction in costs in the reverse chain. Such practices are aligned with CE, leading to economic advantages. Thirteen case studies identified in the literature reported on WEEE reverse logistics/chain to promote CE with a focus on the operation of recyclers [14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26]. In these studies, the research results emphasize the role of recyclers to promote CE, notably by involving formal and informal collectors in the process. Likewise, they highlight the need for regulatory development, determining the ideal location for recycler facilities and collection points, economic and environmental gains from recycling, the reuse of WEEE in the production process and destination for the secondary market, and partnership with logistics operators for recycling distribution. This leads to the formulation of the third hypothesis:

H3. 

The recycler conducts the collection of WEEE, its segregation, reuse, recycling, and remanufacturing, and the commercialization operations for the secondary market, promoting a CE.

2.4. WEEE Reverse Logistics/Chain Promoted Recycling, Reuse, Reduction, and Remanufacturing

The content analysis performed on the selected articles focusing on the logistics/reverse chain of WEEE identified actions related to recycling, reuse, reduction, and remanufacturing.

The adoption of reverse logistics/chain resulted in CE because recycling was implemented, resulting in the recovery of materials and precious metals in a closed-loop cycle [11,14] in industrial symbiosis [12], enabling compliance with environmental legislation [13,23,25]. Likewise, consumer participation was also observed in carrying out the recycling and return of WEEE to the reverse chain [9]. It should be noted that legislation and tax incentives can enable the legalization of the formal recycling sector [22]. The informal recycling sector can inflict economic damage to the reverse chain, despite mitigating hazardous substances [20]. In developing the extended responsibility of the manufacturer, it is necessary to integrate both the formal and the informal recycling sectors in order to increase operating capacity and improve working and safety conditions [19]. However, the adoption of WEEE collection centers generates an increased need for recycling, requiring investment in technologies, while increasing economic gains [24]. It is also important to assess the location of recycling centers, collection routes, and the disposal of EEE at the end of its life, with a view to recovering secondary raw materials, saving energy, and mitigating environmental damage [15]. Thus, the WEEE collection, recovery, and dismantling processes generate CE and create revenue; however, the collaboration between recovery centers and manufacturers is essential [16]. For example, plastic recycling and recovery promote CE [17,18], as well as recycling laptop waste for the mitigation of substances harmful to the environment [21]. In this context, outsourcing transport for reverse logistics operators is a viable solution in economic terms [26].

In the same vein, the adoption of reverse logistics/chain resulted in CE when WEEE reuse was implemented. This supports the incorporation of CE principles in the design and production of EEE and WEEE management in order to define clear reuse standards so that products are reintroduced in the market [1]. This includes several characteristics such as those related to the waste, qualification, cost, availability of local labor, and technological adequacy for reuse, aiming at mitigating hazardous substances [14]. Likewise, elements related to the reuse of cellular WEEE in the production of by-products [20], the reuse of secondary plastic from WEEE in a closed cycle [17,18], and the reuse of laptops aiming at the reuse of their components [21], are important mainly in the recycling and recovery of precious metals [24]. The informal market feeds the reuse that contributes to extending the useful life of products and the financial gains of WEEE collectors [22].

Some studies observed how the adoption of reverse logistics/chain can lead to CE because WEEE remanufacturing was implemented, recommending the incorporation of CE in the design, production, and management of WEEE, considering the remanufacturing of products for reintroduction in the market [1]. The aim is the destination of remanufactured EEE for commercialization in the market [14,20,24], such as the strategic development of remanufacturing practices for laptops [21]. Remanufacturing creates conditions for improving the circularity of the material, in addition to the reuse of waste for the production of new EEE [16]. On the other hand, there is little incentive for remanufacturing the use of materials recovered from WEEE, because the cost is high [23].

In addition, other works concluded that the adoption of reverse logistics/chain resulted in CE for the reductions achieved in the use of materials. The adoption of a transport strategy, together with circular product design and consumer participation, enables the use of the products and WEEE for longer, allowing for a reduction in the use of materials [10]. This was enabled by the use of recycled materials, reducing the consumption of virgin raw materials [15,24] in businesses such as plastic recycling and recovery [17,18]. The adoption of industrial symbiosis also promotes circularity and reduces the use of materials [12], specifically when using recycling and remanufacturing. The introduction of a remanufactured product into the market reduces the consumption of virgin materials [20,21].

In this context, research suggested that the adoption of reverse logistics/chain resulted in CE because the recycling, reuse, remanufacturing, and reduction of materials were implemented. Thus, CE, from the perspective of the reverse WEEE chain, aims to promote the circularity of waste in a closed cycle, aiming at reusing as much waste as possible in the manufacturing of products and/or its sale to the secondary market. Thus, the fourth hypothesis is suggested:

H4. 

WEEE reverse logistics/chain promotes CE by generating:

H4a. 

A reduction in material consumption;

H4b. 

Waste reuse;

H4c. 

Waste recycling;

H4d. 

The remanufacturing of EEE products.

2.5. Destination of Recycled WEEE

Some of the articles analyzed identified the destination of WEEE collected in the reverse logistics operation, either for the EEE production chain or secondary market. Parajuly and Wenzel [24] observed that in Denmark, the price of the product has the most significant impact on the likelihood to reuse and reform and on remanufacturing processes in the production chain. Secondary raw materials are also used in other sectors, being sold in the secondary market. Matarazzo et al. [11] and Marconi et al. [12] concluded that Italian recyclers sell recycled waste to the secondary market. In Brazil, Alves and Farina [16] concluded that there is a collaboration between recovery centers and the manufacturer for remanufacturing and recycling for sale in the secondary market. Ottoni et al. [15] and Brito et al. [14] mentioned that recycled materials do not return to the manufacturer, but found the opportunity to recover raw materials and sell them to the secondary market. Levänen et al. [23] concluded that the lack of government incentives in Chile/Finland to remanufacture can explain the importance of sales to the secondary market. Cordova-Pizarro et al. [20] reported that in Mexico, manufacturers outsource WEEE remanufacturing, promoting the insertion of the remanufactured product in the market and the recovery of WEEE from cell phones in the production of by-products in the secondary market. As such, despite the mentions of the returns of recycled WEEE for reuse by the same manufacturer, in most articles, the recycled WEEE is destined for sale in the secondary market. This leads to the formulation of the fifth hypothesis:

H5. 

The recycled WEEE:

H5a. 

Are returned to the manufacturer for reuse;

H5b. 

Are intended for sale on the secondary market.

Figure 1 shows the conceptual model for evaluating the players (manufacturer, waste manager, and recyclers), the 4Rs, and the destination of WEEE for the manufacturer’s production chain and/or for the secondary market.

3. Data and Methods

A descriptive and exploratory survey was developed aiming at understanding how to identify the best configuration for the reverse chain management of WEEE. For that, a cross-sectional survey was carried out [42,43].

The research techniques combined qualitative and quantitative approaches. For Yin [44], quantitative and qualitative studies can be complementary in order to provide a better understanding of a phenomenon under study.

Documents such as the NSWP and the Sectorial Agreement for the Implementation of the Reverse Logistics System for Electronic Products in Brazil were accessed. In this way, this research was characterized, in terms of its objectives, as exploratory, with a qualitative and documental approach, since it aimed at providing a global view on a certain subject, relatively unexplored and with many hypotheses to address [45,46].

3.1. Data Collection Procedures

The development of the conceptual model was supported by a preliminary systematic literature review in order to identify the research gap, as well as to develop the questionnaire. For this purpose, the PRISMA method [47] was used. The review phase was organized into four phases: identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. Articles were identified in the Scopus, Science Direct, Web of Science, Scielo, Emerald, Wiley, Proquest, Ebsco, and Taylor & Francis databases (

Table 2. Parameters used for the systematic literature review.

Research Databases
Ebsco	Emerald	Proquest
Science	Science Direct	Scopus
Taylor & Francis	Web of Science	Wiley
Research terms—set of keywords
“reverse logistics” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“reverse logistics” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“reverse logistics” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”
“reverse chain” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“reverse chain” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“reverse chain” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”
“recyclers” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“recyclers” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“recyclers” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”
“recycling center” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“recycling center” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“recycling center” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”
“managers” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“managers” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“managers” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”
“waste manager” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“waste manager” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“waste manager” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”
“manufacturers” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“manufacturers” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“manufacturers” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”
“electronics manufacturer” + “e-waste” + “circular economy”
“electronics manufacturer” + “weee” + “circular economy”
“electronics manufacturer” + “waste electrical and electronic equipment” + “circular economy”

).

A total of 93 works were found in high-impact journals, 34 of which were validated, meeting the exclusion criteria. According to the recommendations of the PRISMA method [47], a flow diagram was presented, indicating the four phases of the process and the number of articles related to each phase, according to Figure 2.

The statistical software used to evaluate the sample size was G*Power, version 3.1.9.7. Cohen’s [48] recommendations were considered for the F-statistic analysis, which evaluates the relationship between the variation of sample means and the internal variation of these samples. In determining the size of the effect (f²), we considered the parameters at the values of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35, which, respectively, represent small, medium, and large effects [48]. This work adopted an f² equal to 0.35. After performing the calculation, it was determined that the minimum sample should have at least 84 responses.

The pilot test was carried out according to the methods presented by Forza [42] and included the participation of ten specialists, all executives in the areas of sustainability in companies that manufacture and import EEE. As such, all specialists had in-depth knowledge in the management of the reverse WEEE chain, knowing and actively participating with the players, that is, the manufacturer, the manager, and the recycler, in addition to being involved with the efforts for meeting the Sectoral Agreement for the Implementation of the WEEE Reverse Logistics.

In the subsequent step, the validated questionnaire (Appendix A) was sent to the other participants. Several follow-up interactions were necessary until a total of 91 completed questionnaires were obtained.

3.2. Procedures for Data Analysis

After receiving the completed questionnaires, data were tabulated, formatted, and submitted to statistical tests [49]. The Friedman Test was used, followed by the Simes–Hochberg multiple comparisons test in order to assess the degree of the importance of each player in reverse chain management to promote CE.

The Friedman Test, according to Siegel and Castellan [50], consists of a non-parametric evaluation, applicable in the design of statistical test modules related to data measured at the level of ordinal variables, covering three or more groups of analyses. When detecting the rejection of the internal hypothesis of the Friedman test, the null hypothesis, there is a need to carry out a complementary test of multiple comparisons in order to identify which groups have statistically different and significant means and which do not.

For this, the Simes–Hochberg multiple comparison test was used, which analyzes the means of the groups two by two, seeking to assess whether or not there are statistically significant differences between the tested groups [51]. This multiple comparisons test performs a pairwise evaluation to test the equality of group means. The p-value obtained for each pair supported the existence of significant statistical differences.

4. Results

4.1. Degree of Importance of Players in WEEE Reverse Chain Management to Promote CE

The answers obtained for the first question concerning the degree of importance of the players, manufacturer, manager, and recycler, for the practical and viable conditions in the management of the reverse chain of WEEE to promote CE (Figure 3), suggest that respondents tend to attribute the highest importance to the manager followed by the manufacturer. The recycler was ranked as less representative. In Figure 3b, the cumulative representation of the values linked to the players is highlighted. This represents the values that refer to the sum of the scores of each player according to the Likert scales used by the respondents.

The non-parametric statistical analysis performed for this question (Figure 4) involved the application of the Friedman Test followed by the Simes–Hochberg multiple comparisons test. The results support that the means of all groups are equal, with no statistically significant differences. However, the p-value was below 0.05, leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis. That is, it was possible to verify, with 95% confidence, that there are statistically significant differences in at least two of the compared groups.

This justified the need for a complementary analysis to investigate which groups have statistically different means. For this purpose, the Simes–Hochberg multiple comparisons test was applied and, according to the p-value results of each combination, statistically significant differences were found between the manager and manufacturer combinations, as well as manager and recycler.

The ordered classification of the table of groupings presents the ranking of the means of each element analyzed, considering that elements of the same group have means that are not significantly different from each other. On the other hand, elements from different groups have means that are significantly different from each other.

These results associate the manager with a higher ranking. In addition, statistically significant differences were found for all multiple comparisons. Therefore, hypothesis H2 was supported: when managing the reverse chain of WEEE, the manager promotes CE.

As such, the management of the reverse chain of WEEE carried out by the manager promotes to EEE companies a more adequate treatment of electronics at the end of their useful life through a more effective model for CE.

The rejection of hypothesis H1—the manufacturer, when managing the reverse chain of WEEE, promotes CE—indicates that it is more advantageous for EEE companies to opt for the use of collective management. This releases them from the need to manage, implement and operationalize a functional structure of great magnitude and complexity, which should gradually be expanded for the purpose of meeting WEEE return targets, as recommended by the Sectorial Agreement of the Electronics Reverse Logistics System in Brazil.

Regarding hypothesis H3—the recycler, when managing the reverse chain of WEEE, promotes CE—this was also rejected because it is a model of isolated initiatives or voluntary activities. As recommended by the Sectoral Agreement, there are no obligations to meet WEEE return targets. Therefore, the expansion of services related to the WEEE reverse logistics system is not required for this approach. However, these voluntary initiative institutions are responsible for disposing of 100% of the WEEE that is collected in an environmentally appropriate manner.

With regard to the achievement of WEEE return targets recommended by the Sectoral Agreement for the reverse logistics of electronics, the operation of the reverse chain through the manager stands out as the most advantageous for the CE. In addition, this collective modality brings advantages to associated EEE companies due to the sharing of solutions, the optimization of resources, and the infrastructure for the environmentally appropriate treatment and final disposal of WEEE.

It was found that EEE manufacturers decide to hire a WEEE manager to implement, structure, and operate the WEEE management system in Brazil, mainly hiring recyclers and installing collection points. In the scientific literature, no work has evaluated the most appropriate configuration to promote CE in Brazil. Three studies on WEEE logistics/reverse chain to promote CE were identified. Alves and Farina [16] developed a framework for the analysis of WEEE management and remanufacturing practices; Brito et al. [14] analyzed the fate of WEEE and the social implications of WEEE reverse logistics; and Ottoni et al. [15] analyzed WEEE generation, the location of recycling companies, and collection routes for choosing WEEE reverse logistics routes. Thus, this study advances the state of the art because it presents the structure of the reverse WEEE chain suitable for promoting CE in Brazil. It also contributes to the organizational practice because the WEEE manager is responsible for informing the legislative bodies and the government about the achievement of targets set for the return of WEEE, in accordance with the requirements of the “NSWP” and the “Sectoral Agreement for the Implementation of the Waste Management System”. Reverse Logistics of Electronics in Brazil”. This result is aligned with Shi et al. (2019) [30], stating that the WEEE manager plays an important role among legislative bodies and manufacturers in promoting recycling and reducing environmental impacts.

4.2. Levels of Application of CE “4Rs” in the WEEE Reverse Chain

Based on the results from Question 2—the management of the reverse chain of WEEE is related to the promotion of CE in Brazil—it was possible to assess the levels of the practical application of the 4Rs of CE. The descriptive analysis of responses related to recycling was highlighted as the most representative in terms of the degree of importance, followed by remanufacturing, reusing, and reducing, the latter two with little expressive values, as illustrated in Figure 5.

A non-parametric statistical analysis was performed for Question 2 (Figure 6). The Friedman Test was below 0.05; that is, supporting the rejection of the null hypothesis, and suggesting that there are statistically significant differences between the 4Rs of CE in at least two groups of compared elements.

The p-value for each combination related to the Simes–Hochberg test made it possible to reject the null hypothesis, evidencing statistically significant differences between the following combinations: recycle and reduce; recycle and remanufacture; recycle and reuse; remanufacture and reduce; and remanufacturing and reuse.

On the other hand, the combination of reuse and reduce had a p-value above 0.05, indicating that there are no statistically significant differences between these last two elements evaluated with the test of multiple comparisons. In the grouping table, the ordered ranking of each analyzed element is presented, indicating greater weights for recycle, followed by remanufacture, reuse, and reduce.

The greater importance of recycling for CE in the reverse WEEE chain denotes that electronic waste recycling activities in Brazil are prominent, so the configuration and operation of this reverse chain favor the reuse of secondary raw material. Its greatest contribution to CE is directed at reducing the need for the consumption of virgin raw materials due to the possibility of using recycled material, also reducing the need to extract raw materials from nature. Therefore, hypothesis H4c is supported—the reverse chain of WEEE promotes CE by generating waste recycling.

Remanufacturing—in particular, the recovery of components, module manufacturing, and new electronic products—are practices on the rise in the reverse WEEE chain in Brazil. Therefore, hypothesis H4d is supported: the reverse chain of WEEE promotes CE, generating the remanufacturing of EEE products. On the other hand, it was confirmed that practices linked to reduction and reuse are non-existent in terms of implementation in the reverse chain of WEEE in Brazil. Consequently, research hypotheses H4a and H4b are rejected: the reverse chain of WEEE promotes CE, leading to a reduction in the consumption of materials and the reuse of waste.

This finding suggests that the use of strategies for the development of new products that may present lower energy consumption and eco-labeling certifications for materials from electronic waste, which are part of reducing, does not apply to the reverse chain of WEEE in Brazil. Pertaining to reuse, practical strategies related to extending the useful life of the product that is still within functional standards in terms of operational use are also not applicable in the Brazilian WEEE reverse chain.

Even so, it should be highlighted as a relevant finding that the recycling action is the most representative, under a higher level of application. It is related to the reuse of secondary raw materials in WEEE recycling activities, which reduces the need to extract virgin raw materials from nature due to the proportional use of secondary materials (recycled), contributing to CE. It was also found that remanufacturing refers to the recovery and recirculation of components and modules and the production of new products (secondary products) from WEEE, which contribute to CE through product enhancement, in addition to avoiding the inappropriate disposal of e-waste into the environment. On the other hand, reduction and reuse are not applied in the reverse chain of Brazilian WEEE. They, respectively, refer to the design of EEE for the consumption of less energy or use of materials, in addition to extending the useful life of EEE that is obsolete for some users but meets the requirements of other users. Likewise, it is also observed that the application of the “Rs” (reduce and reuse) is convergent with the electronics production chain. In the scientific literature, although publications have related reuse practices [14], remanufacturing [16,20,31], and recycling practices [13,25,33], which are part of the “4Rs” of CE, no research has evaluated them in the reverse chain of WEEE, nor the levels of the practical application of the “4Rs” (reduce, reuse, remanufacture, recycle) in a CE. Furthermore, this result corroborates the finding by Bressanelli et al. [52]. These results contribute to the theory, showing a study that evaluates the application of the 4Rs of CE in the reverse chain of WEEE, mainly when concluding that only recycling and remanufacturing are adopted, while reduction and reuse actions are not seen. This result can be explained by the fact that reduction and reuse actions are adopted when the manufacturer decides to conduct them within the operation and not hire a waste management company that is very focused on recycling and remanufacturing as its central objectives. It also contributes to organizational practice because it shows that despite the decision to outsource WEEE management to a “manager”, the manufacturer must be attentive to reuse actions and reduction in material consumption.

4.3. Degree of Importance of Players in the Management of the Reverse Chain of WEEE and the Sending of Recycled Materials to the Secondary Market

For Question 3—the degree of importance of the players in relation to the management of the reverse chain of WEEE in the processes of collection, storage, sorting, pre-processing, and sending to the recycling centers—the descriptive analysis indicated a stronger representativeness of the manager. They were attributed with a greater degree of importance, followed by the manufacturer and the recycler, both with less expressiveness in these results, according to Figure 7.

The non-parametric statistical analysis made it possible to reject the null hypothesis concerning the equality of group means. The analysis of multiple comparisons with the Simes–Hochberg test made it possible to verify that only the manufacturer and recycler group presented a p-value greater than 0.05, indicating that there are no statistically significant differences between the averages of this group.

Regarding the manager and manufacturer groups, manager and recycler, the multiple comparisons test confirmed the existence of statistically significant differences. Thus, the manager was the most representative player in terms of the degree of importance in the management of the reverse chain, in addition to the respective targeting of recycled materials to the secondary market (see Figure 8).

4.4. Degree of Importance of Players in the Management of the Reverse Chain of WEEE and the Sending of Recycled Materials to Electronics Manufacturers

The results for Question 4—the degree of importance of manufacturers, managers, and recyclers in relation to the management of the reverse chain of WEEE in the processes of collection, storage, sorting, pre-processing, and sending to recycling centers—suggested a tendency for respondents to evaluate the three players on the lowest scales of the degree of importance (Figure 9).

The statistical analysis supported the null hypothesis for the equality of the means of all groups. This result was also supported by the Simes–Hochberg multiple comparisons test, since all possible combinations indicated a p-value above 0.05. In the orderly classification of the grouping table, the absence of statistically significant differences is considered, since all tested elements are inserted in the same group, confirming this statistical result (see Figure 10).

Therefore, the statistical results presented confirm the low representativeness attributed to the three players, manufacturer, manager, and recycler. They are not considered important to the management of the reverse chain of WEEE in Brazil in relation to practices of the operationalization and destination of the recycled material for the manufacturing companies of EEE. This suggests that the electronics industries do not absorb the secondary raw material originating from WEEE. In other words, this is not a common practice for the purpose of promoting CE in Brazilian reality.

On the other hand, it should be noted that this slightly more representative ranking found for the manufacturer corroborates the study by Neto, Correia, and Schroeder [29] on a large electronics manufacturer installed in Brazil, which operates in isolation, reusing plastic materials, such as polymers, in its production chain through its own reverse logistics and recycling system for its electrical and electronic products sold in Brazil.

4.5. Configuration of the Most Appropriate WEEE Reverse Chain to Promote CE in Brazil

According to the results, the WEEE manager is presented as the most appropriate configuration in terms of practical and viable conditions for the management of the reverse chain of WEEE to promote CE (see Figure 11). Matarazzo et al. [11], Shi et al. [30], and the Sectoral Agreement for the Implementation of the Reverse Logistics System for Electronic Products call it a collective model for the management and operation of the reverse WEEE chain, which is undertaken by legal entities consisting of manufacturers, importers, or associations of EEE manufacturers that present technical management conditions for the implementation and structuring of the reverse logistics system.

The manager in this collective modality, in addition to operating and managing the entire reverse chain of WEEE, has the purpose of promoting strategies that can contribute to CE in terms of material circularity and the environmentally appropriate destination for this type of waste, meeting the obligations of the NSWP. Furthermore, one of the priorities of the collective model is the expansion of the number of companies in the EEE production chain associated with the WEEE manager.

In the processes of structuring the reverse WEEE chain, the collective manager carries out the implementation of collection points, seeking to gradually expand the number of facilities, in addition to being responsible for hiring third-party logistics operators or logistics agents who are responsible for the transport of WEEE.

After the primary storage of WEEE at the collection points, the next step consists of removing and transporting the electronic waste to be carried out, storing, sorting, and directing them to the WEEE treatment centers.

The WEEE treatment centers are responsible for waste segregation and pre-processing activities. Products that are in remanufacturing conditions are sent to specialized companies; however, segregated materials such as plastics, glass, and ferrous materials are directed to specific industries for the recycling of raw materials, which are destined for the secondary market. Furthermore, it should be noted that printer circuit boards (PCBs) are only pre-processed in recycling centers; these materials are sent to companies abroad that specialize in the extraction of precious metals.

Finally, in the WEEE treatment centers, waste that is not usable and considered waste is disposed of in an environmentally appropriate manner, in accordance with current legislation. With regard to the practical application of the CE 4Rs in the Brazilian reverse chain of WEEE, it is emphasized that only recycling and remanufacturing are applied in operational practice.

As mentioned, the Brazilian WEEE reverse chain decided to sell the recycled and remanufactured materials to the secondary market because it did not show interest in integrating the reverse operations in the manufacturing plant. Thus, the specific industries in the manufacture of products from “plastic materials, glass, ferrous and non-ferrous metals” denote that the recycling processes are decentralized, not returning the recycled material to the electronics production chain. In the scientific literature, no research has evaluated whether the recycled material is directed to the electronics production chain or to the secondary market; only qualitative evidence was identified in the research by Matarazzo et al. [11], Marconi et al. [12], Brito et al. [14], Ottoni et al. [15], Alves and Farina [16], Cordova-Pizarro et al. [20], Levanen et al. [23], and Parajuly and Wenzel [24] on the destination of recycled materials, mostly for the secondary market. Therefore, this work innovates and complements the research by Oliveira Neto et al. [29], which reported, in isolation, the direction of recycled materials to the secondary market to promote CE, studying a multinational EEE company, not covering the management of the Brazilian reverse chain of WEEE as a whole. In terms of practical contributions, the domain of decentralized processes under the use of recycled material indicates that the reverse chain of WEEE and EEE companies need to improve their reuse and recycling processes in order to create a cooperative network in its completeness, closing the reverse cycle for the reuse of the secondary raw material in the EEE production chain.

5. Conclusions

This study leads to the conclusion that the most appropriate configuration to promote CE in Brazil for the management of the reverse chain of WEEE refers to the “WEEE Manager”, allowing associated EEE manufacturers to not have to implement and operationalize “Individual Systems”. Thus, the WEEE manager is responsible for installing and operating the collection points and transporting waste to recyclers.

This study contributes to the scientific literature, as no works were found that evaluated the proper configuration of the reverse WEEE chain to promote CE in Brazil. It is also the first study that evaluates the application of the 4Rs in the reverse chain of WEEE, a relevant aspect to promote CE, and whether the recycled material is directed to the electronics production chain or to the secondary market.

The study also contributes to the managerial practice, suggesting the tendency of EEE companies to adhere to the “Collective Model” for WEEE management, which was presented as the most favorable to promote CE in Brazil. EEE companies, by adopting this management modality, have the advantage of sharing the entire reverse logistics system coordinated by the “Manager”, who is responsible for structuring, operationalizing, and managing the entire reverse chain of WEEE, in addition to informing the legislative entities and the government on the fulfillment of targets for the return of electronic waste, as recommended by Brazilian legislation. In addition to showing that, despite the decision to outsource WEEE management to a “manager”, the manufacturer must be aware of reuse actions and reduction in material consumption. It is also suggested that it is important to promote the use of “reduce and reuse” to promote CE in the reverse chain of WEEE in Brazil, because it is important to reduce WEEE generation at the source, in addition to reusing WEEE as much as possible.

The contribution of this research to society is that when considering the implementation of the “Collective Model” of WEEE management to promote CE, the study also highlights the need for effective consumer participation in this reverse chain, which is fundamental to leverage the material circularity of electronic waste, with the aim of closing the cycle between the end-of-life product and the recycled raw material. In view of this, awareness of correct disposal and the effective participation of the final consumer are fundamental for a more objective and sustainable CE in order to bring benefits to the population.

For future research, the study supports the usefulness of the application of simulation approaches to identify optimal routes for the reverse chain of WEEE. This approach would contribute to bringing together Industry 4.0, and CE, as suggested by [53,54,55,56]. Studies would also be useful for the identification of barriers to the adoption of reverse manufacturing for WEEE as it is practiced in the metals and [57] and textile [58] sectors.