Sri Lanka faces mounting challenges in managing its rapidly growing electronic waste (e-waste) problem, with the country generating an estimated 4.2 kg of e-waste per capita annually.
Dominant e-waste categories in Sri Lanka include large household appliances such as refrigerators, air conditioners, and washing machines, as well as smaller devices such as computers, mobile phones, televisions, batteries, and lighting equipment. As electronic goods become increasingly accessible and consumer habits evolve with changing income levels, the island nation has struggled to develop adequate waste management solutions to match this proliferation of discarded electronics.
In this article, we provide an overview of the key findings and arguments outlined by existing research, to encourage urgent need for coordinated policy action on e-waste management. Addressing this growing challenge requires both national-level strategies and strong local implementation. In particular, we believe that the newly formed Local Government councils – especially Municipal Councils in large urban areas – should take up this urgent issue.
Import dependency and quality concerns
Sri Lanka’s Electrical and Electronic Equipment (EEE) sector is heavily import-dependent, with approximately 95% of the market relying on foreign products. A large portion of these imported EEE are used or second-hand products. This growing second-hand market for EEE in the country is largely driven by limited consumer purchasing power. The imported used items typically have shorter lifespans than new products, resulting in faster turnover and higher rates of obsolescence. For instance, used computers turn into e-waste within 2-3 years, with the process exacerbated by high humidity levels and high temperatures in Sri Lanka.
Although the registered importers have to obtain no objection and clearance from the Central Environmental Authority upon importation of used electronic items, particularly for used computers, washing machines, and televisions, weak import-export regulations and insufficient enforcement mechanisms have enabled unregulated imports of EEE into the country. Many used items are also imported as parts and assembled in Sri Lanka making quality control a more complex task. This has contributed disproportionately to the country’s e-waste problem and has turned Sri Lanka into a dumping ground for low-quality electronics.
Consumer awareness and disposal patterns
The landscape of e-waste awareness in Sri Lanka reveals stark disparities among different stakeholder groups. Consumer understanding of proper e-waste management remains limited, with many individuals unaware of shared responsibilities or available collection systems. A large proportion of consumers believe they alone are responsible for their e-waste and often store old electronics at home instead of disposing of them appropriately.
Even when consumers attempt to dispose of e-waste, they face several barriers – including a lack of information about collection centres and the absence of convenient door-to-door services. In most cases, e-waste is handed over to local government bodies, who often sell it as trash to mobile waste collectors, leading to improper handling and further environmental risk.
Institutional and corporate response
While stakeholders and institutions generally demonstrate higher awareness levels than consumers, they often evade responsibility due to weak regulatory enforcement. The Central Environmental Authority has listed authorised e-waste recyclers and collectors and outlined stakeholder responsibilities. However, enforcement remains weak, and both upstream and downstream implementation face significant challenges. The issue is further compounded by Sri Lanka’s limited technological expertise and infrastructural support for end-processing of e-waste. Consequently, a major portion of the country’s e-waste is exported to countries such as India, China, and Pakistan for final processing.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs among corporates remain voluntary in Sri Lanka with plans to make it mandatory only later this year. EPR is a policy approach designed to shift the responsibility for products from Municipalities and consumers to producers, by making producers responsible for their products along the entire lifecycle, including at the post-consumer stage. However, in Sri Lanka the primary focus of EPR is on plastic waste management and not electronics and electrical equipment.
Responsibilities of EEE manufacturers, importers, sellers, and organisations that assemble in Sri Lanka are not clearly defined. Generally there is ignorance of EPR by many organisations. Some companies like Abans, Singer, and LG have begun implementing EPR programs, but only go so fas as offering concessions on new products in exchange for old items that are sent to recyclers. This means that consumers who do not immediately purchase new products are still forced to be responsible for their e-waste.
The informal sector paradox
One of the most complex aspects of Sri Lanka’s e-waste challenge lies in its extensive informal sector network. This ad hoc system includes informal sellers, repair shops, collectors, and dismantlers who play crucial roles in both the use-phase of electronic equipment and the post-consumer stage. The informal sector’s prominence creates a paradox: while it provides important repair services and livelihoods, it also complicates formal e-waste management efforts.
The competition between formal and informal sectors for access to e-waste makes EPR implementation particularly challenging in Sri Lanka. Most stakeholders remain unaware of where the e-waste collected from their establishments ultimately ends up, and large amounts of e-waste can often be found accumulating in open yards, creating environmental and health hazards.
Government and policy limitations
Government commitment to e-waste management remains limited, with local authorities showing minimal involvement in effective waste management strategies. This lack of engagement at multiple levels of government has created implementation gaps and enforcement challenges that undermine existing regulatory frameworks. The policy environment suffers from insufficient understanding of how to integrate formal and informal sectors effectively. While general recommendations suggest “greater integration of formal and informal sectors,” there is little concrete guidance on how this can be achieved within Sri Lanka’s specific ecosystem.
The path ahead
With the recent lifting of import restrictions and signs of economic recovery, Sri Lanka is expected to experience a rise in the consumption of electronic goods, as households upgrade older appliances and white goods. This will likely result in a surge in discarded electronic items, placing increased pressure on existing waste management systems.
The importation of hybrid and electric vehicles (EVs) is also anticipated to contribute to the e-waste stream, particularly through the disposal of EV batteries and related electronic components.
This projected increase in e-waste highlights the urgent need for Sri Lanka to strengthen its waste management infrastructure and regulatory frameworks. Proactive measures – including clearer responsibilities for producers and retailers, improved consumer awareness, formal integration of the informal sector, and investment in local recycling capabilities – will be essential to mitigate the environmental and health risks associated with rising e-waste volumes.
This article by CSF researchers is based on a review of existing literature and draws from multiple academic studies and research papers on e-waste management systems and recommendations.
