It is surprising that none of the key stakeholders in the e-waste effort-neither computer companies, trade associations, state and federal regulators nor activists-have done much work on a uniform reporting metric. One of the fundamentals of business (and regulation) is that what gets measured gets managed. As computer makers develop take back systems, uniform reporting metrics are essential for stakeholders to be able to evaluate progress.

Computer makers lack uniform take-back measurement standards. As You Sow and Walden Asset Management first worked with Dell to develop a basic recycling metric to measure take-back. We requested that the measurement reflect the point at which computers became obsolete and calculate how many were collected in relation to how many were originally sold. Dell's market research indicated that while consumers may replace computers every two to three years, the used units are rarely discarded. Used machines are passed on to colleagues or family members, donated or refurbished. Dell set seven years as the average weighted life of a computer. The metric proposed by shareholders and accepted by Dell was to measure the rate of return in relation to each company's computer sales seven years ago.

We found that five major companies had disclosed electronics take back figures for portions of 2002, 2003 and 2004. They are Apple, Dell, Fujitsu, HP and IBM. Complete estimates for all five were available for only 2003. Our tally indicated that in absolute numbers of computer equipment measured by weight recycled in 2003, HP led its peers followed by IBM, Fujitsu, Dell and Apple. But looking at a rate of return analysis compared to sales for each company 7 years ago, we found that IBM was the take back leader, recycling 19% of equipment sold in 1996 followed by Fujitsu (13%), HP (7%), Dell (4%) and finally Apple (2%). Only Dell and HP have released data for 2004. Dell appears to have significantly improved its take back rate in 2004 to 9%.

Questions remain about this data as the companies differ on what they count and how they count it. For example, HP's data includes printers in its totals and IBM includes large server units, both significant portions of their business. Dell's improved 2004 figures include significant numbers of units collected in recycling drives by non-profit groups funded by grants awarded by Dell. While the figures we assembled provide a decent estimate of the level of components recycled, they are not a precise measurement of take back solely of computer units. Further, significant amounts of company internal and research waste are included, making it difficult to isolate actual take back from consumers.

There is more work to be done to develop an equitable take back metric but we are glad that some companies acknowledge the need for such metrics and working with us on it.

Back