Rapid technology change, low initial cost and even  planned obsolescence have resulted in the fastest growth of the EE products and simultaneoously resulted in the rapid development of e-waste around the globe due to enhanced rate of discarding these products after their end-of-life (EOL). E-waste is both valuable as source for secondary raw material, and toxic if treated and discarded improperly. Technical solutions are available but in most cases as in  transition economies a legal framework, a collection system, logistics and other associated services are not orchrested in the manner it is needed to implement a technical solution [1]. E-waste is thus becoming a prime concern in to-day’s society largely due to the toxicity of some of the substances. The toxicity is due in part to lead, mercury, cadmium and a host of other substances. A typical computer monitor may contain more than 6% lead by weight. E-waste may contain as high as thirty-six distinct chemicals. According to an estimate of European Commission, the total amount of waste in Europe is expected to increase by about 45% between 1995 and 2020. This forecast has led to the development of European  waste strategy based on three categories - waste prevention, recycling and reuse and environmentally sound disposal [2]. A flurry of research has been undertaken in the recent past on the sustainability of practices like “recycling and reuse” covering various types of packaging waste [3–5]. All these studies reported so far were based on single component waste stream, for instance, aluminium packaging or PET bottles. It is a matter of great uncertainty now as to whether similar conclusions can also be drawn for more complex waste stream like e-waste or not. The complexity in composition of each item in the e-waste stream makes it difficult for recycling. This is further augmented with the sparse user-friendly viable recycling methods. For example, poly brominated flame retardants (PBFRs) are widely used in plastics meant for the electrical and electronic equipment (EEE). Due to presence of halogens in PBFRs these plastics are difficult to recycle. The growth of this waste stream can be generally attributed to the  paradigm shift from an industrial society to an information technology based society with ever increasing use of information and communication technology (ICT) based devices in particular. According to Cui [6], the production of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) is one of the fastest growing areas. Hence, the amount of WEEE is also increasing very fast - in Europe, at an expected rate of at least 3% to 5% per year and is putting enormous pressure on all institutions involved in the end-of-life (EOL) management of electronic devices. The quantum of WEEE generated constitutes one of the fastest growing waste fractions, accounting for 8% of all municipal waste [7]. These facts have led to vigorous action among legislative bodies across the globe.  

Due to poor environmental standards and working  conditions in developing countries of transition economy, e-waste is being exported to these countries for processing in violation of the Basel Convention. As a couter measure several countries  like Switzerland, Sweden, Belgium, Holland, USA, Norway, Canada, Japan, Australia have formulated their own regulations for e-waste management [8–10] while 25 Member States of the European Union (EU) follow EU Waste Electrical and Electronics Equipment (WEEE) Directive (Hieronymi, 2004). The principle of all these regulatory approaches is the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) manifested with a command and control for its enforcement. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a relatively new and market-oriented regulatory instrument. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development defines it as “an environmental policy approach in which a producer’s responsibility, physical and/or financial, for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life cycle” [11].  Application of EPR for the original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of EEE is certainly appropriate. However, the feasibility analysis has to be carried out prior to finalization of the policy by the regulatory authorities. It is prudent to carry out an economic analysis since the policy under question ought to have considerable cost impacts of the different institutional system designs. Detailed economic analysis includes actual actions and activities in e-waste recycling practices. Such concerns were missing in the case of the WEEE directive in the European Union [12].  

In India, there is no legislation for the management of e-waste at present excepting inclusion of a few items of WEEE under the Hazardous Wastes (Management and Handling) Amendment Rules, 2008 [13]. An attempt has therefore, been made in this article  to give an overview of the basics of the e-waste, highlights of the EU, WEEE Directives and finally the Indian initiatives. While discussing legislative issues it would be prudent to discuss the Swiss regulation as a priori as Switzerland is the first country in the world to enforce the e-waste regulation.