Cited by 301Recycling and Waste Management TechniquesMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementEnvironmental Impact and Sustainability

Does WEEE recycling make sense from an environmental perspective?

Hischier, R., Wäger, P., Gauglhofer, J.·2005·Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eiar.2005.04.003

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hischier, R., Wäger, P., & Gauglhofer, J.
Affiliations
Empa (CH)
Corresponding author
Hischier, R.
Venue
Environmental Impact Assessment Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-07
Volume
25
Issue
5
Pages
525-539
ISSN
0195-9255 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2003055493
Cited by
301
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 14
FWCI
32.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Impact Assessment Review (publishedVersion)
  • DORA Empa (Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (Empa)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Recycling and Waste Management Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Municipal Solid Waste Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
Keywords
electronic waste, e-waste recycling, take-back systems, recycling fees, household appliances, secondary raw materials, environmental impact of recycling, material flow analysis, life cycle assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review