Nepal’s E-Waste Crisis: Why Recycling Fails & How Policy, Tech & Community Can Fix It

Every Nepali home has that drawer — the one with the old charger, the cracked phone, the obsolete router, the distant-relative’s flickering TV remote. We keep these items for nostalgia, “just in case,” or because disposing of them feels complicated. But when those buried gadgets finally leave the drawer, most of them don’t find their way to proper recycling. Instead they end up in mixed trash, informal dismantlers, or landfills — and a growing health and environmental problem quietly gets worse.

This long read explains why e-waste in Nepal rarely gets recycled, what the data shows, and practical steps (policy, business and individual-level) that can change the story — turning drawers into sources of value rather than hazards.

The scale of the problem: numbers that should worry us

Globally, e-waste is surging — the 2024 Global E-Waste Monitor reports a record volume of e-waste and stresses that recycling is not keeping pace. In 2022 the world generated 62 million tonnes; only about one fifth was documented as formally collected and recycled. (ITU)

Nepal is part of this trend. Estimates place Nepal’s e-waste generation at ~42,000 tonnes in 2023, up dramatically over the last decade — and projections show steep growth in the coming years. That growth is deeply concerning given the country’s limited formal recycling capacity. (Nepali Times)

Locally, Kathmandu Valley is a hotspot: rising device ownership and frequent replacements mean a growing concentration of end-of-life electronics in the city. Yet the bulk of this e-waste is processed informally — studies and practitioners suggest well over 90% of e-waste handling in Nepal happens outside regulated systems. (Syddansk Universitet)

Why most e-waste never gets recycled properly: broken linkages

From drawer to dump is not an inevitable path — it’s the outcome of specific failures across the system. Here are the main reasons.

1) Consumers don’t know what to do (or find it inconvenient)

Many people lack clear options for handing in old electronics. Collection points are few and unevenly publicized; “take-back” mechanisms are not widespread; and people’s default is to toss old gadgets with mixed household waste or hand them to informal scrap dealers. This behavior is understandable — it’s easier and free — but it makes downstream recycling almost impossible. (See recommendations below for simple fixes.)

2) Formal recycling infrastructure is tiny

Nepal has very limited formal e-waste recycling capacity. A handful of organizations and social enterprises (for example Doko Recyclers and a few specialized facilities) are building responsible collection and treatment services, but supply far outstrips capacity — and sophisticated, environmentally sound treatment (for printed circuit boards, mercury lamps, refrigerants) requires technology and investment that are scarce locally. (Doko Recyclers)

3) The informal sector dominates — and it’s hazardous

The informal recycling sector carries out the lion’s share of e-waste processing. Informal dismantling, open burning to recover metals, and acid leaching to strip gold or copper are common. These methods extract value today but leave pollution, poison water and soil, and expose workers (often children or migrant laborers) to heavy metals and fumes. Informal recycling is an economic lifeline for many — but the environmental and human costs are steep. (ResearchGate)

4) Policy and regulation gaps

While Nepal has overarching waste management laws, dedicated e-waste legislation and enforceable producer responsibility schemes are weak or absent. Without clear rules that mandate collection, safe recycling, or manufacturer take-back, there’s little incentive for formal players to scale and for producers to design for end-of-life recovery. Several experts recommend Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) as a practical policy instrument; some pilot discussions exist, but broad rollout remains pending. (mecs.org.uk)

5) Data gaps and low visibility

Reliable, up-to-date data matters: how much e-waste is generated, where it is concentrated, what types dominate, and what materials are recoverable. In Nepal, data is improving but still fragmented — making planning, investment and regulation harder. When the numbers are unclear, policymakers and investors hesitate. The Global E-Waste Monitor and localized studies have helped, but much more granular, city-level data (e.g., by municipality or ward) would unlock action. (E-Waste Monitor)

Human stories: why “informal” isn’t just a technical word

Behind statistics are people. Informal e-waste workers — collectors, dismantlers, scrap traders — often operate in precarious conditions. Their skills recover materials that would otherwise be lost; they earn livelihoods. But many lack protective gear, live in polluted neighbourhoods, and carry the health burden (respiratory illness, skin disease, heavy metal exposure). Any transition to safer systems must include them — offering training, safer jobs, or roles in formal collection and pre-processing — otherwise you simply push them out without solving the economic problem that drives their work. (Research on Kathmandu’s informal recycling documents both the value these workers create and the risks they face.) (Syddansk Universitet)

The opportunity: e-waste is a resource if we stop wasting it

E-waste is not just waste — it’s a concentrated store of valuable materials: copper, gold, silver, palladium, rare earths, plastics, and recoverable components. Well-managed recycling reduces the need for raw material extraction, lowers greenhouse gas emissions, and creates jobs in green industries.

A few realities make this opportunity real for Nepal:

• High value recovery: Printed circuit boards and connectors contain precious metals that are worth extracting if processed at scale and with safe methods.
• Local demand for recyclates: Reclaimed metals and plastics can feed local manufacturing or be exported to recyclers — creating a revenue stream to offset treatment costs.
• Job creation: Formal collection, repair, refurbishment and recycling create a spectrum of green jobs — from technicians to logistics to plant operators. (ITU)

What works elsewhere (models Nepal can adapt)

Countries that have improved e-waste outcomes typically combine several elements:

• Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR): Producers are legally responsible for take-back and financing recycling, which creates a market for collection and recovery. (Many European countries use EPR successfully.) (ITU)
• Formal collection networks with incentives: Curbside collection, permanent drop-off points, collection drives, and buy-back schemes make it easy for consumers to hand in old devices.
• Integration of the informal sector: Rather than criminalize informal collectors, successful programs formalize them — giving them training, PPE, and roles in pre-processing or collection. (dashboard.dokorecyclers.com)
• Public awareness & repair culture: Campaigns to encourage repair, resale, and reuse (repair cafés, second-hand markets) reduce the volume of e-waste entering the system.
• Standards and certified recyclers: Accredited facilities meeting environmental and occupational standards ensure materials are recovered without pollution. (ITU)

Nepal does not have to reinvent the wheel; rather adopt and adapt these mix-and-match strategies to local realities.

Practical steps Nepal can take now — policy, business, community, home

Below is a concise, realistic roadmap. These are practical, sequenced, and suitable for municipal or national action.

Policy & regulation (government + regulators)

1. Introduce phased EPR for major product categories (phones, TVs, large appliances). Start with pilot groups and scale. (EPR creates finance for collection.) (mecs.org.uk)
2. Set minimum standards and licensing for e-waste recyclers and collectors. Require environmental safeguards and worker protections.
3. Mandate reporting by manufacturers and importers on sales and end-of-life streams — this fills the data gap.
4. Provide fiscal incentives (tax breaks, soft loans) for investments in formal recycling plants and refurbishing centres.

Market & business (private sector + social enterprises)

1. Scale formal collection through partnerships: retailers, telecom shops, banks, and e-commerce return points can accept old devices.
2. Support refurbish & resale markets: create certified refurbishment centres that extend device lifespans — cheaper phones, jobs, and less waste.
3. Promote producer funds that pay for logistic costs of collection and pre-processing.

Doko Recyclers is an example of a homegrown social enterprise building responsible collection and e-waste handling — these players should be supported to scale. (Doko Recyclers)

Social & community actions (NGOs, schools, citizens)

1. Awareness campaigns: “Empty the Drawer” drives to collect old electronics — combine with events and instant incentives.
2. School programs and repair clubs: students learn repair, reuse, and recycling values early.
3. Community collection hubs: permanent, trusted drop-off points in wards, public libraries, or municipal offices.

Worker transition & inclusion (informal sector)

1. Formalize cooperatives of informal collectors with training, PPE, and small grants.
2. Offer reskilling: train workers in safer dismantling, e-waste sorting, logistics, or plant operation jobs.

Consumer actions (what you can do tomorrow)

• Don’t throw electronics in the mixed bin — hold them until a collection drive or drop-off.
• Check with reputable recyclers (e.g., Doko Recyclers) for pickup or drop-off options. (Doko Recyclers)
• Repair before replace; sell or donate working devices.
• Remove batteries and store them safely for separate collection (batteries are a fire and toxic risk).

Counterarguments & practical constraints (and how to address them)

• “EPR will burden consumers with higher prices.” — Properly designed, EPR shifts responsibility to producers who can optimize product design; costs are often marginal and phased in. Short-term subsidies or vouchers can ease the transition for low-income users. (ITU)
• “The informal sector will be eliminated.” — The goal is not to eliminate livelihoods but to upgrade them. Formalization and integration can increase incomes and reduce health risks.
• “We don’t have the money for recycling plants.” — Start small: decentralized pre-processing and collection, refurbishing centres, and partnerships with regional recyclers can work while building larger capacity. International climate and development funds are increasingly available for circular economy projects. (E-Waste Monitor)

Measuring success: what to track

Good policy and programs track a handful of key indicators:

• Tonnes of e-waste collected by formal channels per year
• Percentage of e-waste treated to environmental standards
• Number of formal jobs created in recycling/refurbishing
• Volume/value of materials recovered
• Number of collection points and consumer take-back events
• Health metrics for workers (PPE usage, incidence of exposure-related illness)

Monitoring these metrics creates accountability and enables course correction.

The call to action: why your next step matters

Every gadget in your drawer is a resource or a risk. If it sits forgotten, it becomes the latter. If you activate it — donate, sell, return, or recycle correctly — you become part of the solution.

Green policy, responsible producers, and empowered citizens together can turn Nepal’s e-waste challenge into a green jobs and resource recovery opportunity. The technical fixes exist; the political will, financing and community participation are the next steps.

Let’s stop letting our electronics rot in drawers and start treating them as the valuable, recoverable resources they are.

References & further reading

• The Global E-Waste Monitor 2024. ITU / UNITAR / UNU / ISWA. (E-Waste Monitor)
• “Nepal generated 42,000 tons of e-waste in 2024” — Nepalitimes summary of Global E-Waste Monitor. (Nepali Times)
• MECS analysis — How EPR can support e-waste management in Nepal (May 2025). (mecs.org.uk)
• Parajuly K., “Electronic waste and informal recycling in Kathmandu, Nepal” — baseline research on informal sector impacts. (Syddansk Universitet)
• Doko Recyclers — Nepal’s social enterprise working on formal e-waste collection & recycling. (Doko Recyclers)
• Doko Recyclers / CREASION assessment and mapping reports (2023–2025) on dry waste and e-waste flows in Kathmandu. (Doko Recyclers)

About the author

Bhuwan Chalise is an environmental advocate, researcher and e-waste management expert. He is the founder of Green Smith Nepal, where he leads programs on waste characterization, community engagement, and circular economy initiatives. Bhuwan has worked with municipal governments, NGOs and the private sector to design practical solutions for sustainable waste and e-waste management in Nepal.