Shareholders decided to be a catalyst in this process of encouraging the development of better take back systems two years ago by asking the four U.S. large computer makers to set recycling goals. Dell and HP have set such goals. Setting take back goals should be the responsibility of companies and or regulators. In addition, stakeholders need to agree on what equipment is counted and how it is counted, relative to previous sales figures.

In the absence of such leadership we view it as a proper interim role of investors to push for goals. As social investors, our role is to measure corporate performance as part of periodic evaluation of the corporate social performance of portfolios.

In 2003 at our request Dell agreed to develop the first set of recycling take back goals in the computer industry within one year. We asked the other three companies to also set goals. In May 2004, Dell announced a goal to recycle 50% more used and obsolete computer equipment in its 2005 fiscal year than it did in fiscal 2004. It readily beat that goal, taking back more than 200% more equipment in 2005 than in 2004.

In July 2004 HP announced a goal to recycle 1 billion pounds of electronic products and printing supplies globally by 2007.

More research needs to be done by regulators and activists to determine aggressive but achievable take back goals. As You Sow and its shareholder colleagues have suggested that goals should reflect a significant percentage of past sales of computers. Dell agreed to one-year goal last year but has balked at setting another one-year goal for 2006, recognizing the uncertainty of factors such as whether machines will actually be returned to them. In setting goals, the companies are aware that they are processing only a fraction of the total number of computers being returned. Many, perhaps most, units are returned through other recycling systems set up by municipalities, states, and non-profit and commercial recyclers. Passage of state take back laws such as California's, which require consumers to pay for recycling rather than companies, can exacerbate the problem by providing a disincentive to return a unit through a company's take back system.

While these important questions are being resolved, it is important for companies to set aggressive take back goals.

Back