Why do some people repair broken goods while others replace them? And what does this mean for waste and carbon emissions?
Dr Hazel Pettifor, Senior Researcher at Oxford’s Environmental Change Institute, shared new insights in an international webinar hosted by the CMCC Foundation – Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change.
The study focused on Japan’s “Reduce–Reuse–Recycle” framework, which has helped cut municipal waste but now faces slowing progress. Using a dynamic equilibrium model, Dr Pettifor and colleagues explored how different policies – such as repair bonuses or extended producer responsibility (EPR) fees – interact with consumer behaviour across income groups.
Their findings show that economic incentives and lifestyle factors play a major role in repair decisions. While lower repair costs could double repair rates under the right conditions, barriers such as convenience and access still limit uptake. The research also highlights important trade-offs: repairing goods can cut waste but sometimes increase emissions if older appliances are less efficient.
Dr Pettifor said:
Policies that make repair more affordable are vital, but they must go hand-in-hand with efforts to reduce barriers and raise awareness. Without that, the potential to cut waste and emissions will remain unrealised.”
The results underline the importance of aligning policy, price signals, and public awareness campaigns to ensure circular economy goals support both waste reduction and climate mitigation.
Watch the full webinar recording.