Right-to-Repair, Product Durability and Obsolescence: A Legal Perspective
Open accessAbstract
There is a growing global consensus on the need to enhance product durability as a response to increasing concerns about waste and consumer rights. Modern equipment, including motor vehicles, farm and construction machinery, and consumer goods, has become more sophisticated, making repairs more complex and costly. Manufacturers often restrict access to repair manuals, software updates, and spare parts, or design products in ways that impede easy repair. This article examines the interconnected concepts of the right to repair, product durability, obsolescence, and consumer rights protection. The European Union (EU) has emerged as a leader in consumer protection initiatives, introducing comprehensive measures addressing the right to repair and product durability. These initiatives have been widely adopted, either fully or partially, by nations across the globe. This study analyzes the EU's key legislative and regulatory approaches, concluding that they are highly consumer-centric and provide a valuable framework for other jurisdictions. However, one critical area requiring further attention is product recycling. The article emphasizes that manufacturers, sellers, and recycling companies should be held accountable for managing their waste domestically, adhering to the highest workplace safety and environmental standards. Governments are encouraged to promote the reuse of products and establish systems that facilitate repair and reuse activities. Additionally, the authors advocate for an expanded research program to enable large-scale industrial recycling of consumer waste, ensuring a more sustainable and circular economy. This study highlights the importance of a holistic approach to addressing product durability and repairability, advancing global consumer and environmental interests.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Many modern products are intentionally designed with non-modular structures, permanent adhesives, or proprietary fasteners that hinder disassembly and make material separation and component access technically difficult.
“Many modern products are intentionally designed with non-modular structures, permanent adhesives, or proprietary fasteners that hinder disassembly and make both material separation and component access technically difficult [12].”
From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
The Introduction (p. 3) says complicated product designs can make repairs difficult or impossible, and the Abstract (p. 1) says design may preclude ready access for repairs. The paper does not identify non-modular structures, permanent adhesives, or proprietary fasteners, or say that such features hinder material separation. It also says barriers to repair may be inadvertent or intentional, rather than characterizing them all as intentional. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredExisting research on repairability largely focuses on product design, policy, and technical enablers, while providing limited empirical insight into consumer decision-making.
“Existing research on repairability largely focuses on product design, policy, and technical enablers, while providing limited empirical insight into consumer decision-making [3-5,12].”
From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
The Abstract (p. 1) describes a legal analysis of right-to-repair initiatives and discusses product design, repair manuals, software upgrades and spare parts. This supports the cited paper as an example of policy- and technical-enabler-focused work, but it does not establish that research largely has this focus or that empirical insight into consumer decision-making is limited. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredRegulatory action aimed at reducing repair costs is critical for converting positive consumer attitudes toward repair into sustained repair behavior.
“suggest that regulatory action aimed at reducing repair costs is critical for converting positive consumer attitudes toward repair into sustained repair behavior [6,12]”
From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
The Introduction (p. 3) says repair parts and tools should be available at competitive prices, and the Conclusion (p. 24) recommends government programs promoting repair and reuse. The paper does not establish that reducing repair costs is critical to converting positive consumer attitudes into sustained repair behavior. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThis legislative change reflects a broader movement to embed durability, reparability, and circularity into product design and market practices.
“This legislative change reflects a broader movement to embed durability, reparability, and circularity into product design and market practices [12].”
From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
Directive (EU) 2024/1799 mandates manufacturer repair obligations beyond the warranty period.
“Directive (EU) 2024/1799 [20] mandates manufacturer repair obligations beyond the warranty period and represents a significant regulatory step toward embedding repairability into market practice [6,12].”
From Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
The Right to Repair section (p. 18) discusses negotiations over a proposed directive and anticipated repairability requirements, but does not identify Directive (EU) 2024/1799 or state that it mandates manufacturer repairs beyond the warranty period. Searches for the directive number and for post-warranty producer repair obligations found no passage establishing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Nottage, Luke, Justin Malbon, Jeannie Paterson, and Caron Beaton-Wells. ASEAN Consumer Law Harmonisation and Cooperation: Achievements and Challenges. Kindle ed.: Cambridge University Press, 2019. doi:10.1017/ 9781108770149
- Rosborough, Anthony D., Leanne Wiseman, and Taina Pihlajarinne. "Achieving a (Copy)Right to Repair for the EU's Green Economy." Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 18, no. 5 (29 April 2023): 344. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpad034 · DOI
- "Unlocking Consumer Freedom: EU Parliament Votes Yes to Right to Repair.' Press Release, 21 November 2023. https://eeb.org/unlocking-consumerfreedom-eu-parliament-votes-yes-to-right-to-repair/
- Van Gool, Elias, Anaïs Michel, Bert Keirsbilck, and Evelyne Terryn. CCM KU Leuven Feedback to EU Commission Consultation on Sustainable Consumption of Goods - Promoting Repair and Reuse Legislative Initiative. Submission: KU Leuven, Consumer Competition Market, 4 April 2022. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=4211301
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Designing for Repair and Extended Lifespan: Consumer Expectations and Economic Constraints
Čok, V., Rihtaršič, J., Warell, A., & Tavčar, J. (2026) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su18126270 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Smith, R. B., & Smith, N. N.
- Affiliations
- University of New England (US)
- Kasetsart University (TH)
- Venue
- Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies
- Publisher
- Universitas Negeri Semarang
- Published
- 2024-11-30
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 767-798
- ISSN
- 2548-1584 (ISSN-L)
- 2548-1592
- OpenAlex
- W4406833052
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5
- FWCI
- 1.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- RUNE (Research UNE) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
- Social Sciences › Law › European and International Contract Law
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Comparative International Legal Studies
- Keywords
- right to repair, product durability, obsolescence, consumer protection, product recycling, circular economy, product reuse, repairability, waste management, environmental standards
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
