“A repairability index without verification is just greenwashing”

Using products as long as possible is becoming a key priority for many of us. It is clearly the right thing to do from both environmental and social sustainability perspectives and helps reduce the carbon footprint of the IT products we buy and use. Consider this: if our IT products could last twice as long, we could avoid half of the negative impacts associated with manufacturing new products. It’s that simple.

One important aspect of product longevity is our ability to repair faulty devices. This can sometimes be easier said than done. While everyone understands the concept of repairability on a theoretical level, the technical side can be quite different. Unlike the visible components found in furniture design, the internal parts of IT products are often hidden, making it difficult to assess their repairability. Repair work requires a certain level of technical expertise, and in most cases, one can’t get hold of a product sample and investigate its repairability features before making a purchase. On top of this, spare parts may not even be available.

This is why we need a repairability index, where experts establish criteria to define important repairability factors and present comparable scores that make it easy to identify the most repairable product models. Repairability indexes have already been implemented in France, Belgium and partly at the EU level. A huge issue, however, is the lack of independent verification. The scores are supposed to be verified by market surveillance authorities. However, they are completely overwhelmed and understaffed, and that’s true for all European Union countries, leaving IT brands to do the calculations.

Allowing IT brands to self-assess and self-declare the scores is not credible. Naturally, they are focused on selling their products, so they will interpret their data in the most positive light possible. This puts IT buyers, and anyone wanting to use IT products responsibly, in a challenging position. Without credible means to compare how easy it is to remove and replace parts, making informed product choices becomes very difficult. While I fully support the theoretical concept of the European repairability indexes, the absence of independent verification undermines the entire initiative, and all the effort invested is wasted.

TCO Certified provides what’s missing elsewhere. The repairability index included in our certification is checked by an accredited, independent verifier, proving that the information about repairability features is correct. Our certification empowers you to avoid greenwashing, compare product models credibly and identify the most repairable product models on the market.

Then of course, each of us has to do our share and ensure that products actually are repaired instead of disposed of when a fault occurs. I regularly come in contact with organizations that do the opposite — they look for the most repairable models, but when these products need repairs, they opt to replace them with new ones instead. This approach means going halfway even though all the benefits come at the end. The true advantages are realized when a product is repaired and gets a longer life — not when it is purchased.