As I flipped through childhood photos taken more than 20 years ago, my eyes landed on an old air conditioner in the background, still functional, quietly outliving the promises of today’s throwaway technology. It was a silent reminder of an era when durability mattered, when things were built to last. Believe it or not, there was a time when engineering for longevity was a source of pride, when manufacturers competed not just on innovation, but on the reliability and lifespan of their products. That philosophy has all but vanished from today’s mainstream business goals. In its place has emerged a calculated practice known as “planned obsolescence.”
What is planned obsolescence?
Planned obsolescence is a strategy of designing products to deteriorate in a fixed amount of time, rather than building them to last longer. Products are now deliberately designed with short lifespans, ensuring they become outdated, break down, or lose their appeal within a predetermined period. It’s not a flaw, it’s a feature — a business model engineered for profit through relentless cycles of replacement.
First conceptualized in the early 20th century, the strategy gained traction during the Great Depression when manufacturers sought to stimulate economic activity through repeat consumption. Economist Bernard London even proposed it as a government policy in his 1932 pamphlet, “Ending the Depression Through Planned Obsolescence.”
Since then, the strategy has become the dominant business model. This approach has manifested in multiple forms, all of which have helped define the consumer culture of the 21st century.
Examples of different types of obsolescence
- Functional obsolescence occurs when a product is intentionally designed to physically degrade or break down after a certain period or use. The infamous case of Epson inkjet printers refusing to print once a counter hit a certain number of pages is a classic example of this.
- Stylistic or perceived obsolescence plays on consumer psychology. Even if a product is fully functional, it may be deemed obsolete due to aesthetic or design trends. Apple, for instance, releases new iPhone models annually, often with only incremental upgrades, subtly nudging users to replace their still-functioning devices.
- Psychological obsolescence is closely tied to marketing. Advertising cultivates a sense of inadequacy for not owning the latest version of a product. Consumers are persuaded not by necessity, but by desire or the fear of falling behind socially.
A classic example is from the fashion industry, where brands like Zara drive psychological obsolescence by frequently launching new trends, making consumers feel like their wardrobe is outdated practically weekly. This encourages repeated purchases based on fashion pressure rather than actual need or product functionality.
- Systemic or incompatibility obsolescence occurs when older products are rendered obsolete due to incompatibility with new systems, software, or accessories. A prominent example is when newer iOS updates gradually slow down older iPhones, allegedly for battery health reasons.
- Dated obsolescence involves products that are intentionally programmed to stop working after a set time. Light bulb manufacturers in the early 20th century formed the Phoebus cartel, agreeing to limit bulb lifespan to 1,000 hours, despite having the capacity to last far longer.
These layered forms of obsolescence have collectively accelerated the rate at which consumers discard and replace goods, fueling what some scholars refer to as a “linear economy” — a “take–make–dispose” model that places enormous strain on environmental systems.
Consequences of planned obsolescence
Environmental: Planned obsolescence accelerates environmental harm by depleting natural resources and promoting unsustainable consumption. According to the United Nations’ Global E-waste Monitor 2024, the world generated a record 62 million metric tons of electronic waste in 2022, marking an 82% increase since 2010. Of this, only 22.3% was formally collected and recycled.
Improper disposal of e-waste releases hazardous substances like lead, mercury, and cadmium leach into the soil and water, contaminating ecosystems and posing risks to human health. Additionally, manufacturing new products generates pollution and increases energy use, contributing to higher carbon emissions and climate change.
Social: The ethical sourcing of materials used in products with planned obsolescence is a concern, with potential links to conflict minerals and irresponsible extraction practices. The extraction of materials like cobalt in DRC for electronics contributes to not just environmental degradation but also human rights issues.
Furthermore, the drive to produce cheap, disposable goods can contribute to poor labor practices, including low wages and unsafe working conditions in manufacturing facilities, particularly within the fast fashion industry. For example, in 2024, investigations into labor practices of Shein in Guangzhou, China, revealed that workers often endured 75-hour workweeks, with inadequate safety measures and low wages.
Planned obsolescence also has a notable impact on the affordability and accessibility of goods. While the initial purchase price of products designed for shorter lifespans might be lower, consumers, especially those with limited financial resources, are often trapped in a cycle of frequent replacements, leading to higher long-term costs. This cycle can create a significant financial burden and exacerbate social inequalities.
Governance: There is an increasing expectation for companies to move away from business models that rely on planned obsolescence and embrace more sustainable, circular economy approaches. Transparency in product design, including the intended lifespan and repairability, is crucial for fostering trust between consumers and manufacturers.
Recognizing the negative impacts of planned obsolescence, regulations and legal frameworks are beginning to emerge. For instance, France has outlawed the practice, and the European Union is implementing “Right to Repair” directives aimed at extending product lifespans and reducing e-waste. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes, which hold manufacturers accountable for the end-of-life management of their products, are also gaining traction as a policy tool.
A new wave of regulation
Governance failures related to planned obsolescence are increasingly under scrutiny. In 2020, Apple was fined €25 million by the French government for deliberately slowing down older iPhones without informing users — a case that highlighted how lack of transparency can quickly become a reputational and legal liability.
The EU’s Right to Repair directive, passed in 2021, mandates that manufacturers provide parts and repair information for appliances such as washing machines and televisions for up to 10 years. Notably, France has adopted a more direct legal stance by explicitly criminalizing the act of deliberately shortening a product’s lifespan to boost replacement rates.
In the United States, more than 20 states have introduced similar bills, and New York passed the Digital Fair Repair Act in 2022 — a landmark moment that requires original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to provide diagnostic tools and parts to consumers and third-party repair shops..
Toward intentional obsolescence with circular accountability
For businesses, the challenge lies in transitioning from a linear model reliant on planned obsolescence to a more sustainable, circular economy approach. This shift presents opportunities for innovation in durable design, the development of repair services, and the adoption of product-as-a-service models.
The concept of a circular economy — where products are designed for reuse, refurbishment, and recycling — offers a promising path forward. In this model, planned obsolescence could evolve from a tool of disposability to a strategy for managed renewal. By planning product upgrades and replacements within a closed-loop system, companies can preserve resources, reduce emissions, and still drive recurring revenue.
One core strategy is modular design and disassembly, seen in products like the Framework Laptop and Fairphone, which allow independent replacement of components such as the screen, battery, memory, and ports. This modularity reduces the Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) and boosts customer satisfaction. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) data shows that simply replacing a smartphone battery instead of discarding the entire device can cut embedded emissions by over 70%. These products follow Design-for-Disassembly (DfD) principles, using mechanical fasteners, separating materials by type, and labeling components for automated recycling, all aligning with ESG manufacturing strategies.
Another approach is the Product-as-a-Service (PaaS) model, where customers pay to use a product instead of owning it. For instance, at Schiphol Airport, Philips provides “Light-as-a-Service” by selling lighting as a service (lumens), while keeping ownership of the fixtures. Philips takes care of maintenance and recycling. The system uses smart sensors to monitor product health, predict failures, and manage returns, helping improve resource reuse and meet environmental standards like GRI 306 and ISO 14001.
Closed-loop material recovery is a third pillar, exemplified by Apple’s AI-driven Daisy robot, which disassembles iPhones to extract 14 rare elements such as cobalt, tungsten, and gold, recovering over $40 million in materials annually. This enables end-of-life (EOL) recycling rates of over 90% for certain materials and shifts the perception of waste into a resource reservoir, directly supporting ESG metrics in emissions reduction and supply chain circularity.
Social initiatives like Patagonia’s Worn Wear program also illustrate circular practices by encouraging consumers to repair, resell, or recycle clothing, which fosters both brand loyalty and economic resilience — key concerns under the “S” or Social pillar of ESG.
Impact on ESG
To meet evolving ESG expectations, companies must integrate end-of-life strategies and transparency into their governance. Key performance indicators include repairability scores, circularity ratios, average product lifespan, and take-back/recycling rates. Firms that report these metrics in alignment with ESG frameworks like SASB Standards and TCFD disclosures are better positioned to anticipate regulatory changes and manage reputational risks.
Companies with strong ESG performance often experience improved financial results, better risk management, enhanced brand reputation, and greater appeal to investors who are increasingly prioritizing sustainability. ESG-conscious governance now means life cycle impact disclosures, repairability indices (as in France), and strategic end-of-life planning.
More importantly, it reflects a shift in thinking — from maximizing short-term profits through replacement cycles to building long-term value through product stewardship and consumer trust. The growing significance of ESG also reflects a broader shift towards stakeholder capitalism, where businesses are expected to account for their impact on a wider range of stakeholders beyond just shareholders.
Conclusion
The old air conditioner in the background of my photo was not remarkable. It was simply made well and built to last. But in today’s world, that quiet durability feels almost radical. Planned obsolescence has become a design choice, a business strategy, and a cultural norm — one that is pushing us toward environmental tipping points and deepening social divides.
But it doesn’t have to be this way.
Through circular economy principles, the same concept once used to consciously drive waste can now be reimagined to drive sustainability and longevity. Products can be modular, repairable, and serviceable. Waste can become a resource reservoir. Manufacturing and design principles can transform from being tools of exploitation to becoming levers for renewal, if governed with intention and accountability.
Businesses must begin to reconcile the profit-driven strategy of planned obsolescence with the values of ESG. Consumers, too, must shift their expectations, demanding transparency, longevity, and choice. Only then can we move toward an economy where products aren’t just made to be bought, but made to be kept.
For more insights and guidance on navigating the evolving landscape of climate action, sustainability and other related issues, stay tuned to our blog for future updates and expert analyses.
And help us build a more sustainable and prosperous world through responsible investment practices by becoming a member of the Advance ESG community.
It’s free to join and there are no future financial obligations. Together, we can make a difference in safeguarding our planet for future generations.
