top of page

Exploring the Purchasing behaviour of Refurbished and Second-hand smartphone users

A cross-cultural study in India and the Netherlands

Location: Delft

Collaborators: Maartje Sonneveld, Monisha Mohan

Refurbished and second-hand stand as effective circular economy strategies next to smarter product use and manufacture to reduce e-waste and regain value from used smartphones. This cross-cultural study aims to explore the purchasing behaviour of consumers while purchasing second-hand and refurbished smartphones in two countries - India and the Netherlands. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with participants (n = 12) from both countries. The interviews were analysed using the guidelines of an inductive thematic analysis. This paper maps out the major themes and subthemes that influence the purchase behaviour of used phones. The themes were then classified into purchase intentions, which refer to the basic prerequisites of the users, and acceptance, which refers to the willingness of users to accept reused smartphones based on their intellectual understanding and emotional receptiveness. Finally, a theoretical model was developed to translate the relationships of the different themes into the purchase behaviour.

Introduction

The growing demand for Information and Communication Technology (ICT) products such as smartphones in the electronics market has led to a continuous infusion of new products, resulting in early obsolescence of products and a rapid increase of e-waste every year (Awasthi and Li, 2017). The Global E-waste Monitor 2020 claimed that the 53.6 Mt of E-waste was generated in 2019 and estimates the waste to grow to 74.7 Mt by 2030 (Forti et al., 2020). One of the reasons for this surge in E-Waste is the substantial shortening of lifecycles of electronic items due to attractive consumer designs, advancement in electronics and marketing and compatibility issues (Kiddee et al., 2013). E-Waste holds serious environmental and health threats at a global level (Grant et al., 2013, Mihai et al., 2019) due to its composition of hazardous substances including persistent organic waste and toxic metals (Ahirwar and Tripathi, 2021, Perkins et al., 2014).

A significant contributor to this colossal amount of waste is the Mobile phone (Ongondo and Williams, 2011a). There were around 7.5 billion mobile phone subscribers globally by June 2015 (Galetovic et al., 2018); and it is estimated that mobile phones are replaced within intervals of 11 months by the consumer (Simonsen et al., 2022). A promising concept that has the potential to reduce this E-Waste is circular economy. The environmental and economic benefits of a circular approach to smartphone production and consumption have been studied extensively (Weiser et al., 2018; Hobson et al.,2018, Murray et al., 2017). It has also been promoted by the European Commission in its “Circular Economy Action Plan” in early 2020 which presents a “Circular Electronics Initiative” to include its action plans, including but not limited to the implementation of the “Right to Repair” and a take back scheme to empower consumers to resell or return their tablets and phones (European Commission, 2020).

Reuse and refurbish stands as effective circular economy strategies next to smarter product use and manufacture and consumers play a key role in the success of these strategies (Potting et al., 2017). Current literature investigates purchase intensions, factors influencing purchase decisions including consumers' values and behaviour, perceived risk, and perceived value of second-hand and refurbished products (Wang and Hazen, 2015, Bellies et al., 2017, Bigliardi et al., 2022). Although purchasing intentions play a crucial role, it is also important to note that they do not always result in actual purchasing behaviour. Knight et al. (2013) mention that participants in their study regard longevity and reliability as important factors. However, observation of their decision-making process concluded that these characteristics were not always the most favoured concerns. Thus, the primary goal of this research is to examine the purchasing behaviour of consumers towards used phones.

The consumer perspective on buying new smartphones versus refurbished smartphones has been investigated by Van Weelden et al. (2016) and this paper uncovers that refurbished products are rejected at different moments in the decision making process and it is found that a lack of familiarity with refurbished products is a major cause of current low consumer acceptance. Previous studies show consumer’s purchase intention is influenced by socio-cultural norms and is diverse in developed and emerging economies (Mostafa, 2007). Although existing studies provide valuable insights there are few limitations. Firstly, to our knowledge, consumer perception on second-hand and refurbished is not studied together. Secondly, cultural influence of different economies on these two models is understudied (Wieser & Tröger, 2018). Thus, this study intends to fill this gap by exploring the purchasing behaviour of second-hand and refurbished smartphone users in two countries – India and the Netherlands. In doing so, we sought to understand the country/ culture specific influences and the extent to which it impacts the actual purchase behaviour of the discussed reuse models.

​​

Theoretical background

 

2.1. Extending the service lifetime of Smartphones

The alternative scenarios for the End of Life of Smartphones have been broadly categorized as Recycle, Remanufacture, Reuse, landfill, and incineration. Considering the environmental impact, reuse holds a higher hierarchy when compared with recycling, incineration, and landfill (Anandh et al., 2021). Even when considering the production chain, Reuse (R3) and refurbish (R5) has higher circularity than recycle (R8) and incineration (R9), lower the R-number, higher the circularity (Potting et al. 2017). Higher circular strategies have lower environmental impact as it encompasses lower resource and energy consumption and waste generation.

Extending the service lifetime of Smartphones is one of the most effective measures for circularity (Sinha et al., 2016) and this can be achieved with retention and recirculation mechanisms. Retention deals with increasing the time a user is in possession of a device, and recirculation is achieved by passing on a device to another user (Bieser et al., 2022).

In this paper we focus on the two recirculation mechanisms:

  • Second hand - passing on the device to another user (e.g., to a friend or selling it in a marketplace, such as eBay, Facebook, Marktplaats or passing it to a different person without exchange of money)

  • Refurbishment - passing the device to an intermediary who resells the device (companies like Amazon renewed)

​

2.1.1. Second-hand phones:

Second-hand devices are previously owned devices that are sold or given free to another user (e.g., to a family member, friend, or peer). This practice of selling and buying goods from each other is not new (Sherry, 1990) and with recent developments, the transactions have evolved from informal offline to online platforms. Now a vast array of affordable used products can be easily accessed through various online platforms, such as Facebook, eBay, and Etsy. With these technological advancements and a shift in consumer values and attitudes, buying second-hand products online has become a widely popular and accepted form of consumption (Yrjölä et al., 2021).

 

2.1.2. Refurbished phones:

Refurbished phones are renewed phones, its working condition is improved by repairing and/or replacing faulty components and making cosmetic changes to its appearance (Mugge et al., 2017). It is highly beneficial to the stakeholder population. Policymakers consider this method as eco-friendly, as it decreases unessential waste, Firms benefit from reduced material loss to the scrap and Consumers get some economic advantages when selling or trading their products for refurbishing (Yoo and Kim, 2016). In recent years, there has been a surge in various local merchants and online platforms like Cashify, Back Market, Leapp and Flipkart-owned Yaantra that sell refurbished mobile phones. The significance of these models and the trend is reflected in the Mordor Intelligence market report (2022) which predicts the global used and refurbished market value is expected to grow from 251.09 million units in 2021 to 459.86 million units by 2027.

 

2.2. Consumer Perspectives towards the purchase of Smartphones

The term 'consumer perspective' refers to the attitude of a consumer towards a product, category, service, or experience. It is essential for researchers to understand consumer decision-making and predict their purchasing behaviour to develop tools or design studies (Heinemann et al., 2010).

Several models have been researched to understand consumer behaviour, some of which have been discussed below. In the Theory of Planned Behaviour by Ajzen (1991), the assumption is that consumers act rationally based on three aspects:

  • Attitude - the behavioural attitude towards the product.

  • Subjective Norm - the relevant norms of the individual concerning the product; and

  • Perceived Behavioural Control - the perception of the individual about their level of control and the intention to perform the expected behaviour.

Another model suggests that social norms are the perception of expectations by others and personal norms are internalized moral rules. These two are crucial psychological factors influencing consumer behaviour (Cialdini et al., 1990).

According to Thokchom (2014) there are five major factors that influence a consumer to buy new smartphones. After Brand image, price is the most crucial factor, followed by perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and product knowledge. However, the study of Mohammed (2017) on factors influencing Gen Z (1997-2013) concluded that classical factors such as price, ease of use and usefulness are no more important, whereas payment options, perceived enjoyment, peer and social influence, product design and product brand have a higher influence on the intention to buy a smartphone. There are five dimensions of motivation to purchase used products: Sustainability, economic benefits, uniqueness, convenience, and social responsibility (Padmavathy et al., 2019) and Kwarteng et al. (2018) states the most important motivating factor after cost saving is the product's number of years in use.

Many models like Theory of Planned Behaviour by Ajzen (1991), Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology by Venkatesh et al. (2003) identify social beliefs as one of the major factors that influence human behaviour. Social influence is the effect of the important people’s opinion in one’s choice. People of different countries are deep-rooted in their culture (Andrews and Chompusri, 2005) and their behaviour is influenced by the values shared on a country level. On a granular level, friends, family and peers are the social actors who influences the choices and behaviour of the individuals (Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Society plays a major role in influencing user behaviour which in turn impacts the circularity of the country. Thus, our study explores the influence of socio-cultural norms in two diverse societies – India and the Netherlands and how this translates into the actual purchase behaviour of used phone consumers.

​​

Methodology

To study the factors that influence consumers’ decisions to purchase reused smartphones, a qualitative approach involving semi-structured in-depth interviews was adopted, as this method suits the exploratory goal of this study (Jain, 2021). In-depth interviews were favoured because they offer rich details about consumers’ individual perspectives and experiences and allows the interviewer to ask for more in-depth explanation (Patton, 2002).

​

3.1. Participants

India and the Netherlands, being developing and developed economies, respectively (UN ESCAP et al.,2017), have different markets and cultural norms. Hence, individuals from these two countries were used as they could provide different perspectives on the purchase behaviour of used smartphones which further increases the validity of the study. Purposeful sampling technique was used to identify individuals who have experience with purchasing used smart phones (Palinkas et al.,2015). A selection questionnaire was circulated to identify individuals who meet the following predetermined criteria:

  • Permanent resident of India or the Netherlands

  • Purchased either second-hand or refurbished products in the last 3 years.

  • The age group of 18-35 (To reduce the heterogeneity of Sample)

  • Participants with conversational English proficiency (for compatibility with transcribing)

  • Participants available for 30–45 min online/offline Interviews

  • No restrictions on gender, education, socio-economic status, and so forth

The selection questionnaire which was circulated across different channels in India and the Netherlands, was filled by 84 responders.

​

3.2. Data Collection

Based on the selection criteria, 12 individuals (6 from India and 6 from the Netherlands) were identified for the interview, whose detailed descriptions are provided below. These were encoded with a general identification code incorporating their Nationality (Dutch/ Indian) and used smartphone purchased (second-hand/ refurbished) to maintain anonymity:

​

​​​​​​

Participant No
Country of Permanent Residence
Phone Purchased (Refurbished / Second Hand)
Participant Code
1
India
Second-Hand
INSH1
2
Netherlands
Refurbished
NLRB1
3
Netherlands
Second-Hand
NLSH1
4
India
Refurbished
INRB1
5
Netherlands
Second-Hand
NLSH2
6
India
Second-Hand
INSH2
7
Netherlands
Refurbished
NLRB2
8
Netherlands
Second-Hand
NLSH3
9
Netherlands
Refurbished
NLRB3
10
India
Second-Hand
INSH3
11
India
Refurbished
INRB2
12
India
Second-Hand
INSH4

​

Data saturation is the phenomenon of achieving sufficient data, which is reached when it can be concluded that additional data collection is unlikely to provide newer insights (Mason, 2010). Data Saturation in this study could not be achieved due to the lack of funding, time and limited scope of the project. The research is therefore limited to the rich insights gained from the 12 interviewees and has the potential to provide a deeper understanding of the behaviour on further investigation. A single interview guide for all the participants was used, ensuring that all the respondents were asked the same question to minimize bias and ensure that effective comparisons could be drawn. (Onimisi, 2020).

An interview guide was systematically developed based on the five-step process developed by Kallio et al. (2016), with the synthesis of the literature and research objectives as foundations. It served as a flexible framework for 30-minute semi-structured interviews. Based on the responder’s preference, the interviews were conducted either online (through MS Teams & Zoom) or offline on the campus of TU Delft. A pilot study was conducted before the start of the actual interviewing process to identify potential researcher biases and test the quality of the interview guide (Chenail,2011).

​

3.3. Data analysis

The online interviews were recorded and transcribed with MS Teams & Zoom and the offline interviews were recorded using the default phone recorder and later transcribed using MS Word. The transcriptions were then analysed using Inductive Thematic Analysis, which is a widely used approach in qualitative research that involves identifying patterns or themes within the data (Braun, 2012).

The transcripts were first reviewed multiple times to get a sense of the overall content and identify initial ideas or themes. Next, initial codes were developed by identifying specific words, phrases, or sentences that were relevant to the research question with the software Atlas.ti. Initially, close to 1258 codes were generated in the first round of inductive coding. The codes were then peer reviewed to ensure triangulation (“A Companion to Qualitative Research,” 2005) and reduced to 314 codes after several rounds of team discussions. These lists of codes were then grouped into 17 subthemes, which were then categorized into five themes inductively. A model was then created with these themes to theoretically explain their influence on the purchase behaviour of used smartphone buyers.

​

​​​​​​

Results & Discussions

The interviews were analysed using the guidelines of an inductive thematic analysis. During the analysis five themes relevant to the research questions emerged from the codes. They are as follows:  User Personality  Requirements  Consumer Circumstances  Accessibility  Risks.

​

4.1. User Personality​​

​

Table

Based on the interviews we found out that the participants had a very diverse phone use. This is in line with the research of Falaki et al. (2010) who found immense diversity in user behaviour among phone users. Most of the participants involved in the interviews can be divided into 3 categories based on their phone usage and their relationship with phones: Good Caretakers, Basic users and Power users. These different kinds of users typically have other requirements for their smartphones which can result in different consumer behaviour, as will come to light in a next theme.

​

4.1.1. Good Caretakers

Good caretakers include participants who take very good care of their phones; they don't often break or lose them. They often tend to use phones for a very long time till the end of its life. It also includes participants with high levels of emotional attachment to their phones and consider it a very personal possession. For them, phones are more like a friend, a companion, or a lifeline.

​

“It could be like a second companion, right? Because the first thing we wake up we look to the side of the bed. If there is no one else, we take the phone and we look into it. That's it….So it's like a second company” (INSH3)

“Of course, almost every day I use a phone fairly often. It's like a lifeline for me, of sorts” (INRB2)

 

4.1.2. Basic users

These are the users who don't use phones a lot, they feel that phones are just a piece of electronics that is used primarily for communication. They have very low demand for the phone, all they need is a functioning phone, a device to make calls with basic functionalities like SMS and the Internet. They don't attach values or emotions to their phones and feel all devices are good enough. The primary focus of these users revolves around the practicality and convenience of the phone, a topic that has been documented in related studies (Walsh et al., 2007) (Vacaru et al., 2014).

​​

“So I don't really value items like phones or expensive computer or expensive clothes or anything like that” (NLRB3)

​

4.1.3. Power users

Those who are highly dependent on phones and feel addicted to them. They heavily rely on phones to function in their daily lives like using them for payments, navigation, calendar, and maintaining personal and professional relationships. They have high levels of functional attachment to their phones, a trend also seen by Van Deursen et al. (2015).

​​

“It's very important, If I run out of charge I am equal to a homeless person, yeah.” (INRB1)

​

4.2. Requirements

The requirements of smartphone users are factors that strongly influence their purchasing behaviour (Lay-Yee, 2013). Consumers have different requirements when it comes to purchasing phones and these requirements are based on their beliefs, product expectations and usage, which links back to the user personality theme discussed in section 4.1. On a broad level, these requirements can be classified into product features, durability, use history, value for money, and sustainability.

​

4.2.1. Product features

Functionality and performance are the most important requirements when it comes to purchasing phones. This includes technological specifications like the operating system, applications supported by the phones, compatibility with other devices, and hardware factors like the camera, speed, and battery. Smartphone brand, phone size, stylish design or appearance of the phones, and user-friendly interface are some of the basic factors that influence smartphone purchasing decisions. These requirements are similar across cultures and users with very specific feature requirements often prefer to buy new phones over used phones.

​​

“Because yeah, as I said, like specifications are the thing which I which matters to me more rather than the brand or the look of the phone. So yeah.” (INSH1)

 

4.2.2. Durability

Most participants prefer to buy phones that are durable as they intend to use them for a very long time. There is a high awareness of the significance of battery health, software, and security updates in extending the lifespan of smartphones. There is scepticism towards the durability of new products among consumers (Echegaray, 2016) as well as in the refurbished market as we found. Older version phones may not have healthy batteries or enough software updates to use for long and this makes the age of the phones one of the major determinants of durability. One participant claimed that smartphone companies intentionally cause product obsoletion by reducing the software updates, indirectly forcing users to buy another phone.

​​

"so majorly for me. It's more about durability because I tend to keep on using the phone until it is rendered completely useless." (INSH1)

​​

The second determinant is the repairability of smartphones. Many users expect the phones to be repairable and clearly prefer phones/brands that offer replaceable parts or easy repair services. For this reason, some of them expressed interest in buying Fairphones, a smartphone brand that has replaceable components. Compared to second-hand phones, refurbished phones are considered durable because refurbished phone companies provide a clear description of the phone's age and offer attractive services like warranty, return, and repair policies.

​

4.2.3. Value for money

Used phones are considered the cheaper alternatives for expensive new phones. The value of refurbished smartphones is found to be based on the perceived incentive and quality and perceived benefit and risk (Nasiri & Shokouhyar, 2021). This subtheme is therefore highly related to Accessibility (Section 4.4) and Risk (Section 4.5). We found that for our participants, price is the most important factor that influences used phone purchases but not the new phone purchase. It was observed that most often power users and good caretakers consider purchasing used phones when they want the best phones with high-end specifications for cheaper prices and they wait for good deals to make the most of them. Whereas the basic users prefer used phones as they feel money should be spent on better things than the phone. Refurbished phones are considered the best value for money and are popular among students living in the Netherlands.

​​

"while I was searching new phones I already had this model Galaxy 21 E in mind because it has just a great camera and uh was fast and as small as I wanted it to be, so I was going to refurbished looking at back market to get a refurbished one maybe and they had them for like €200 off. So that was very attractive to me, yeah." (NLRB2)

​

4.2.4. Use history

Phone use history is a special requirement when considering purchasing used phones. To the user's satisfaction, refurbished phone companies provide different phone options based on prior usage with varying price points. "slightly used" phones are most sought after as they are considered "good as new".

​​​

"There's new life into it. You know this, like all the functions work and you're sure that it's as good as new." (NLRB1)

​

​On the other hand, some prefer second-hand phones from family or friends as they have a better knowledge of how the phone was used and further trust that their close one's wouldn't give/sell bad phones to them. The information on the prior usage of phones is quite uncertain when buying it from unknown sellers over platforms like Marktplaats (in the Netherlands) or OLX (in India).

​

4.2.5. Sustainability

Among the two countries, there was a striking difference between the user's inclination towards sustainability. Many users from the Netherlands claimed to be less materialistic and expressed their concerns about the increasing amount of global waste, ineffective e-waste recycling methods, and their willingness to take a greener approach - reducing resource consumption by repairing and reuse of phones. This behaviour can be linked to their upbringing where several participants accredited their drive for sustainability to education, sometimes even linking it back to their primary schooling. While almost all participants from the Netherlands had awareness about sustainability and perceived purchasing used phones as a sustainable option, participants from India didn't specify much about sustainability. Although Sustainability is a well-known concept in the Netherlands, participants agreed that it is not the main factor that they consider while purchasing phones (Nasiri & Shokouhyar, 2021b; Van Weelden et al., 2016b; Hughner et al., 2007; Meyer, 2001; Young et al., 2009).

​​

"But if it didn't come along, as in, if it wasn't really that sustainable, I might have bought it as well, because at the first time I was thinking, oh, OK, great for the money, yeah." (NLRB2)

​​

​4.2.6. Social Requirements

The study also revealed some underlying social requirements that influenced the participant’s purchase decisions. The idea of a smartphone as a status symbol emerged as a prominent code in many Indian participants, which influenced them to prefer new phones instead of reused ones. This result is grounded in the studies of ((Lay-Yee, 2013b; Munnukka & Järvi, 2011; Richins, 1994; Shapiro, 1985; Sheth et al., 1991), where social requirements are found to be latent factors in the purchase.

​​

“Yeah, people look down on others, or rather, even if they don't look down on others, […] they have a mentality to show off. […] So yeah, it's buying a new phone is a big deal, like buying a refurbished phone is really like I think they perceive it as, they think that others will judge them, maybe they'll make fun of them.” [INSH4]

​

This is a contrasting to the experiences of Dutch participants, who felt that it was acceptable to buy the cheapest option available to them.

​

“Yeah. And it's just really generally accepted that you try to buy the cheapest option possible.” [NLRB1]

​

4.3. Consumer Circumstances

Consumer circumstances are found to play a major role in the initial considerations of consumers while buying a reused phone. Based on the qualitative interviews, the personal circumstances of the reused smartphone consumers could be divided into two sub-themes. The first is urgent needs which involves the necessity of the smartphone at that moment. Furthermore, the occupation of the interviewee also played a noticeable role in their purchasing behaviour.

​

4.3.1. Urgent Need

A major driver for the interviewees purchasing refurbished and second-hand phones were the urgent needs that derived due to incidents where their existing phones either broke, got stolen or got lost.​​

​

“I lost my phone. So she offered me, and then I got it [...] Why to go for a new phone. Why to spend much higher limit. This is a good phone. Why don't we use it?.” [INSH3]

​

​This quote indicates an example of a predominantly new smartphone user who had lost their phone recently and preferred to go with a second-hand phone instead of a new one.

A similar instance was also observed in case of a refurbished smartphone user when their phone broke down and had an urgent need for another one. Here, a refurbished phone was successful in fulfilling the urgent need because of the established trust and fast delivery of the refurbished phone seller:

​

“Well, with Back market was very great actually because well I needed to phone quickly because the other one died and It was very, uh, well, when I bought it, it was the next day It was at my place. So it was very fast.” [NLRB2]

​

4.3.2. Occupation

It was found that the occupation of the users influenced their purchase behaviour. This is confirming the findings of Sung (2015) and Jamalova and Constantinovits (2020) who state that occupation and income level influence smartphone purchase and diffusion. The interviewees of the research who were long-term users of pre-used phones, switched to new phones when they started working in companies that provide plan/reimbursement options to buy new phones. Phone plans (a service where the companies provide phones on a subscription model which is borne by the company) are common in the Netherlands, and Indian companies mostly offer reimbursement. Participants also added that they would switch back to their initial behaviour of purchasing reused phones if the companies do not provide these services anymore.

​

“Since I've been buying the phone for the past 3-4 years, my company actually buys them for me, so I get it. I get reimbursed for it. So for the most part, price is not an issue. That is why I go through a new purchase option instead of a refurbished one. Had I had to buy it from my own pocket, I would have no problem buying a refurbished phone as long as that as it is from a reputable.” [INRB2]

​

​It was also found that the behaviours of some Dutch participants were not only influenced by their occupational status but also of their family. The cases in which the phones were circulated within the family, the behaviour was implicitly driven by the organizations where the primary buyer of the phone from whom they received the second-hand phone had a similar phone plan and the phones were later passed across the family when they were paid off:

​

“...he just has this phone plan with his work. So he like pays it off in 2 years and then you can get a new one. […] Well, I get them for free, so it's bonus.. ” [NLSH1]

​

4.4. Accessibility

The perceived accessibility is found to have a significant impact on the purchasing behaviour of smartphone users. It entails the way reused phone sellers are perceived, but also the knowledge of available options. The perceived accessibility influences the acceptance of purchasing a reused smartphone. It relates to the Risks theme (Section 4.5), as perceived accessibility is negatively influenced by perceived risks.

​

4.4.1. Sellers

As mentioned in ‘risks’, the role of trust significantly impacts the participant’s view of reliable sellers of second-hand or refurbished phones. The perceived accessibility of online sellers is mentioned to be influenced by a few factors:

  • Familiarity, which talks about the familiarity of the platform used to buy the reused phone. A lot of participants mention people in their surroundings who also use the platform. Others mention recognizing the brand and therefore trusting it. Van Weelden et al. (2016) mentions the level of familiarity as an important determinant in consumers’ evaluation of risks and benefits.

  • Good user experience, which is about the user-friendliness of the platform used to buy the reused phone.

  • The availability of detailed product information; specifically, participants appreciated the categorization of phones on refurbished websites into different price ranges based on their conditions.​

​

“There's also like 3 categories. There's like It's good as new, then very good and then good. Good as new is like, it almost looks like a new phone.” [INRB1]

​

4.4.2. Knowledge of the options

Among the participants, several Indians exhibited limited knowledge regarding the existence of refurbished phones and the availability of sellers offering such products. It was noted that refurbished phones are not as prevalent in India as compared to the Netherlands. Moreover, there was a greater level of confusion among Indian participants regarding the distinction between "second-hand" and "refurbished" phones and a lower awareness of the available refurbished options. The study also found that most participants were not aware of the extent to which their governments influence the practice of buying or selling reused phones.

​

“No… Refurbished phones… As from… you were saying that there are options like second-hand outlet stores or something like that?” [INSH3]

​

This finding is consistent with the work of Van Weelden et al. (2016c) and Wang et al. (2013) who found that more knowledge of the to-be-purchased item, takes away doubts.

​

4.5. Risk

Next to perceived accessibility, perceived risk also plays a role in the acceptance of the purchase of a reused smartphone. We found that this theme is very strong among our participants, especially when focussing on the purchase of the reused phones. Van Weelden et al. (2016c) recognized this theme in their own research on only refurbished phones, now it also submerged from the second-hand phone users. Four subthemes emerged within risks: trust, scams, warranty and potential for disappointment.

​

4.5.1. Trust

Trust was the first subtheme identified as a significant dimension of the risks involved in purchasing second-hand or refurbished phones. Distinct differences in trust were observed between second-hand phone buyers and refurbished phone buyers. Second-hand phone buyers preferred seeing the phone beforehand and conducting manual checks, while also emphasizing the importance of trusting the individual seller. Some second participants shared experiences where they were feeling uncomfortable about the environment and the seller. In contrast, refurbished phone buyers emphasized the trustworthiness of the selling platform, which should have a good reputation. Both groups exhibited higher trust in organized businesses compared to individual second-hand sellers.​

​

“So if you have a refurbished phone via a company, then I would trust it, If it's from a marketplace and I would be more like aware like OK is this also is this phone not stolen?” [NLSH3]

​

​A significant number of participants from both countries mentioned the effort required when purchasing a used phone, including the time-consuming process of finding a trustworthy option, a finding supported by Young et al. (2009b).

​

“It's a huge hassle as well. […] When you're buying a new phone, you just walk into any store and you get a feel for it. You pay for it and you walk out and you're pretty sure that it's going to be the thing that you're paying for. But when you’re buying a used phone, actually, even if it's from a fairly reputable seller like Amazon, or something you are not sure the kind of a product that you are receiving. It could have some inherent defect.” [INRB2]

​

Additionally, participants who obtained their phone from a relative or friend expressed trust in the source, familiarity, and a straightforward process, thereby indicating no trust issues with the seller.

​

“I knew what kind of usage my sister has, so it kind of helps that I know she is not that clumsy that she would drop it often and there is not much repairing needed for it or something.” [INSH1]

​

4.5.2. Scams

The second subtheme that came up in the interviews is scams. Especially in India, participants demonstrated a high level of awareness of scams in the phone market and actively tried to avoid falling victim to these fraudulent activities.

​

“I mean, just like any other country, there have been a lot of scams. Because if there's a scope for a scam, there’s always going to be scammers everywhere.” [INSH2]

​

4.5.3. Warranty

The third dimension of risks in buying second-hand or refurbished phones revolved around the issue of expiry. Some participants mentioned that reused phones often lack warranties or the option for repairs at brand-specific repair shops. In contrast, participants highlighted that refurbished phones typically come with warranties that are, in some cases, comparable in duration to those of new phones.

​

“So [for second hand phones] you miss that security that you have with refurbished phone, you have warranty for like 6 months” [NLSH3]

​

4.5.4. Potential for disappointment

The final risk-related subtheme is centred on the potential for disappointment. Nasiri and Shokouhyar (2021c) talk about experiences with phones not working, screen scratches, lower battery health, lack of accessories and non-original packaging. Based on the interviews, both refurbished and second-hand phones that were bought online, the experience of receiving the phone was a little disappointing compared to a new one. The packaging was very sober, and a charger was not always included.

​

“The packaging was kind of bad. So like when opening, I thought it was a scam.” - [INRB1]

​

Instances were also reported where individuals who purchased second-hand phones online experienced disappointment due to certain parts not functioning as expected.

Most second-hand phone-buying participants were aware of the risks. However, they decided to make the purchase as they claimed that they knew what they were getting into. Based on existing research, people tend to choose a known risk over an ambiguous risk and avoid situations in which the probability of the outcome is unknown (Ellsberg, 1961; Camerer & Weber, 1992).

​

4.6. Modelling the purchase behaviour of reused smartphone users

Based on the themes derived from the Analysis, a theoretical model was developed to understand the purchase behaviour of consumers based on their perspectives. Their diverse cultural background (of Netherlands and India) ensured that the model was not limited to any specific demographic but applicable to the wider contexts of both developing and developed countries.

Framework

This model characterizes the consumer behaviour of purchasing used smartphones into different phases. The influences of the themes derived from the study can be categorized into Consumer purchase Intentions and Acceptance. The purchase intentions include the practical prerequisites that stimulate the user to buy reused phones. As discussed, the adherence to user personality, fulfilment of their personal requirements and personal circumstances drive their intentions towards the purchase of used smartphones.

Acceptance in this context refers to the willingness of users to accept reused smartphones based on their intellectual understanding and emotional receptiveness. It was observed from this research that used smartphones become more acceptable to users when they are accessible in their cultural context and the perceived risks are mitigated or under tolerable limits. The intentions to buy and accept used phones then together translate into the consumer behaviour of purchasing used smartphones.

​

Purchase behaviour model

Conclusion

The study aims to understand and analyse the behaviour of consumers while purchasing refurbished and second-hand smartphones in the cultural context of India and the Netherlands. From the model developed from the study, the purchase behaviour of used smartphone is a result of two aspects, namely intention to purchase and acceptance of used phones. The intentions involve the basic prerequisites of users and can be promoted with the development of durable phones with better quality, that have longer software support while being sustainable and affordable.

An under-researched and interesting finding is the different kinds of users and their intentions to buy a used phone. Our research identifies 3 kinds of users and concludes that those various types of users have different requirements. Targeting different user demographics can make the purchase of a used phone more attractive. [MM1] [AP2] Therefore, it would be interesting to research on a bigger scale what the requirements and overall intentions of these different users are.

Another noteworthy observation pertaining to the intentions of working professionals involves the phone plans services and the reimbursement policies for new phones in India and the Netherlands. Implicitly, these company policies influence the behavioural patterns of preowned phone users, inducing a tendency to acquire new phones. Given that these policies are specifically designed to be compatible solely with newer devices, a collaboration of these companies with firms dealing with used phones would prevent this by integrating used phones into the policies.

The next aspect pertains to the acceptance of used phones, which involves the themes of accessibility and risks. The acceptability of these phones can be improved by making their selling platforms more trustworthy and improve their user experience. The awareness of used phones is very high in the Netherlands as compared to India. Especially in India, many users are unaware of the refurbished market and cannot differentiate between refurbished and second-hand phones Further research can be done to understand how used phones can be made more accessible by mitigating actual and perceived risks.

It was observed that even if many of the participant’s families, especially their parents either didn’t have any opinion or disliked their decision to purchase reused phones, they proceeded to buy them. This showcases a possible generational shift in the acceptability of reused phones, which can be further explored in future research through a study of purchase behaviour of reused phones considering sample groups of different generations. Another interesting finding was about the ban on imports of refurbished and second-hand phones in India, which was later removed in 2019 with additional conditions on these phones to be BIS Compliant. It can be further researched on how such policies, both implicitly and explicitly influence the purchase behaviours of consumers.

In conclusion, this cross-cultural study sheds light on the complex dynamics of purchase behaviour among refurbished and second-hand smartphone users in India and the Netherlands, offering valuable insights for marketers, policymakers, and researchers seeking to understand and capitalize on this evolving consumer trend in the global smartphone market.

​

Curious about how you can utilize qualitative user research to understand your product/service/business's use by your consumers and map their behaviour for interesting insights?

 

Get in touch through the contact form—I would love to collaborate!

References

 

  1. A Companion to qualitative research. (2005). Choice Reviews Online, 42(05), 42–2567. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.42-2567

  2. Ahirwar, R., & Tripathi, A. K. (2021). E-waste management: A review of recycling process, environmental and occupational health hazards, and potential solutions. Environmental Nanotechnology, Monitoring and Management, 15, 100409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enmm.2020.100409

  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t

  4. Alwahaishi, S., & Snasel, V. (2013). Modeling the Determinants Affecting Consumers’ Acceptance and Use of Information and Communications Technology. International Journal of E-adoption, 5(2), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.4018/jea.2013040103

  5. Anandh, G., PrasannaVenkatesan, S., Goh, M., & Mathiyazhagan, K. (2021). Reuse assessment of WEEE: Systematic review of emerging themes and research directions. Journal of Environmental Management, 287, 112335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112335

  6. Andrews, T., & Chompusri, N. (2005). Temporal Dynamics of Crossvergence: Institutionalizing MNC Integration Strategies in Post-Crisis ASEAN. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 22(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-005-6415-7

  7. Awasthi, A. K., & Li, J. (2017). Management of electrical and electronic waste: A comparative evaluation of China and India. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 76, 434–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.067

  8. Bieser, J. C. T., Blumer, Y., Burkhalter, L., Itten, R., Jobin, M., & Hilty, L. M. (2022). Consumer-oriented interventions to extend smartphones’ service lifetime. Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 7, 100074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2022.100074

  9. Bigliardi, B., Filippelli, S., & Quinto, I. (2022). Environmentally-conscious behaviours in the circular economy. An analysis of consumers’ green purchase intentions for refurbished smartphones. Journal of Cleaner Production, 378, 134379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134379

  10. Camerer, C. F., & Weber, M. (1992). Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4), 325–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00122575

  11. Chen, Y., Wang, Z., Li, Y., Kang, R., & Mosleh, A. (2018). Reliability analysis of a cold-standby system considering the development stages and accumulations of failure mechanisms. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 180, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2018.06.022

  12. Chenail, R. J. (2016). Interviewing the Investigator: Strategies for Addressing Instrumentation and Researcher Bias Concerns in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2009.2821

  13. Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015

  14. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2013). Teaching thematic analysis: Overcoming challenges and developing strategies for effective learning. Psychologist, 26(2). http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/21155/

  15. Ditlev-Simonsen, C. D. (2021). Circular economy: New business models. A guide to sustainable corporate responsibility: From theory to action. Retrieved March 15, 2023, from https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-88203-7_6

  16. Echegaray, F. (2016). Consumers’ reactions to product obsolescence in emerging markets: the case of Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 134, 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.119

  17. Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884324

  18. Essoussi, L. H., & Linton, J. D. (2010). New or recycled products: how much are consumers willing to pay? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27(5), 458–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761011063358

  19. European Commission, Pezzini, A., & Lohan, C. (2020). A new circular economy action plan: Communication from the commission to the european parliamant, the council, the european economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. Retrieved March 15, 2023, from https://edz.bib.uni-mannheim.de/edz/doku/wsa/2020/ces-2020-1189-en.pdf

  20. Falaki, H., Mahajan, R., Kandula, S., Lymberopoulos, D. K., Govindan, R., & Estrin, D. (2010). Diversity in smartphone usage. https://doi.org/10.1145/1814433.1814453

  21. Forti, V., Balde, C. P., Kuehr, R., & Bel, G. (2020). The Global E-waste Monitor 2020: Quantities, flows and the circular economy potential. The Global E-waste Monitor 2020.

  22. Friberg, R., & Sanctuary, M. (2018). Market stealing and market expansion: an examination of product introductions in the organic coffee market. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 20(2), 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10018-017-0194-5

  23. Galetovic, A., Haber, S., & Zaretzki, L. (2018). An estimate of the average cumulative royalty yield in the world mobile phone industry: Theory, measurement and results. Telecommunications Policy, 42(3), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2018.02.002

  24. Grant, K., Goldizen, F. C., Sly, P. D., Brune, M., Neira, M., Van Den Berg, M., & Norman, R. E. (2013). Health consequences of exposure to e-waste: a systematic review. The Lancet Global Health, 1(6), e350–e361. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2214-109x(13)70101-3

  25. Grob, A. (1995). A structural model of environmental attitudes and behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90004-7

  26. Heinemann, A. W., Tulsky, D. S., Dijkers, M. P., Brown, M., Magasi, S., Gordon, W. A., & DeMark, H. (2010). Issues in Participation Measurement in Research and Clinical Applications. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91(9), S72–S76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2009.11.031

  27. Hobson, K., Lynch, N. R., Lilley, D., & Smalley, G. (2017). Systems of practice and the Circular Economy: Transforming mobile phone product service systems. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 26, 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.04.002

  28. Hughner, R. S., McDonagh, P., Prothero, A., Shultz, C. J., & Stanton, J. V. (2007). Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6(2–3), 94–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.210

  29. Jain, N. (2021). Survey Versus Interviews: Comparing Data Collection Tools for Exploratory Research. The Qualitative Report. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2021.4492

  30. Jamalova, M., & Constantinovits, M. (2020). Smart for development: Income level as the element of smartphone diffusion. Management Science Letters, 1141–1150. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.10.027

  31. Jiménez-Parra, B., Rubio, S., & Vicente-Molina, M. (2014). Key drivers in the behavior of potential consumers of remanufactured products: a study on laptops in Spain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 85, 488–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.047

  32. Kallio, H., Pietilä, A., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031

  33. Kaufmann, H. R., Panni, M. F. a. K., & Orphanidou, Y. (2012). Factors Affecting Consumers’ Green Purchasing Behavior: An Integrated Conceptual Framework. Amfiteatru Economic, 14(31), 50–69. https://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_1100.pdf

  34. Khalili, N. R. (2011). Practical Sustainability: From Grounded Theory to Emerging Strategies. Amfiteatru Economic, 14(31), 50–69.

  35. Kiddee, P., Naidu, R., & Wong, M. H. (2013). Electronic waste management approaches: An overview. Waste Management, 33(5), 1237–1250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.01.006

  36. Kim, Y. J., & Kim, B. (2016). Joint pricing of new and refurbished items: A comparison of closed-loop supply chain models. International Journal of Production Economics, 182, 132–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2016.07.017

  37. King, A. J., Burgess, S. C., Ijomah, W., & McMahon, C. (2006). Reducing waste: repair, recondition, remanufacture or recycle? Sustainable Development, 14(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.271

  38. Knight, T., King, G., Herren, S., & Cox, J. (2013). GB Report. Electrical and electronic product design: product lifetime. In wrap.org.uk. Brook LyndHurst. Retrieved March 14, 2023, from https://docplayer.net/21207357-Gb-report-electrical-and-electronic-product-design-product-lifetime.html

  39. Kronthal-Sacco, R., Van Holt, T., Atz, U., & Whelan, T. (2020). Sustainable Purchasing Patterns and Consumer Responsiveness to Sustainability Marketing Messages. Journal of Sustainability Research, 2. https://doi.org/10.20900/jsr20200016

  40. Kurisu, K. (2015). Pro-environmental Behaviors. Springer eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55834-7

  41. Kwarteng, M. A., Pilík, M., & Juřičková, E. (2018). Beyond cost saving. Other factor consideration in online purchases of used electronic goods: a conjoint analysis approach. Management Şi Marketing, 13(3), 1051–1063. https://doi.org/10.2478/mmcks-2018-0022

  42. Lay-Yee, K. L. (2013a, December 2). Factors Affecting Smartphone Purchase Decision Among Malaysian Generation Y. https://archive.aessweb.com/index.php/5007/article/view/2593

  43. Lay-Yee, K. L. (2013b, December 2). Factors Affecting Smartphone Purchase Decision Among Malaysian Generation Y. https://archive.aessweb.com/index.php/5007/article/view/2593

  44. Mason, M. (2010). Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 11(3), 19. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-11.3.1428

  45. Meyer, A. (2001). What’s in it for the customers? Successfully marketing green clothes. Business Strategy and the Environment, 10(5), 317–330. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.302

  46. Mihai, F., Gnoni, M., Meidiana, C., Ezeah, C., & Elia, V. (2019). Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE): Flows, Quantities, and Management—A Global Scenario. Elsevier eBooks, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-816190-6.00001-7

  47. Mohammed, A. B. (2017). Selling smartphones to generation Z: Understanding factors influencing the purchasing intention of smartphone. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research, 13(6), 3220–3227.

  48. Mordor Intelligence. (2022). Used and refurbished smartphone market - growth, trends, covid-19 impact, and forecasts (2023 - 2028). Retrieved March 15, 2023, from https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/used-and-refurbished-smartphone-market#faqs

  49. Mugge, R., Jockin, B., & Bocken, N. (2017). How to sell refurbished smartphones? An investigation of different customer groups and appropriate incentives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 147, 284–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.111

  50. Munnukka, J., & Järvi, P. (2011). The value drivers of high-tech consumer products. Journal of Marketing Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/02672571003737783

  51. Murray, A., Skene, K. R., & Haynes, K. (2017). The Circular Economy: An Interdisciplinary Exploration of the Concept and Application in a Global Context. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(3), 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2

  52. Nasiri, M. J., & Shokouhyar, S. (2021a). Actual consumers’ response to purchase refurbished smartphones: Exploring perceived value from product reviews in online retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62, 102652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102652

  53. Nasiri, M. J., & Shokouhyar, S. (2021b). Actual consumers’ response to purchase refurbished smartphones: Exploring perceived value from product reviews in online retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62, 102652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102652

  54. Nasiri, M. J., & Shokouhyar, S. (2021c). Actual consumers’ response to purchase refurbished smartphones: Exploring perceived value from product reviews in online retailing. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 62, 102652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102652

  55. Ongondo, F., & Williams, I. H. (2011). Greening academia: Use and disposal of mobile phones among university students. Waste Management, 31(7), 1617–1634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.01.031

  56. Onimisi, T. (2019). The use of qualitative research method in the study of policy implementation in Nigerian: sharing an experience. Global Journal of Politics and Law Research, 8(2), 1–10.

  57. Padmavathy, C., Swapana, M., & Paul, J. (2019). Online second-hand shopping motivation – Conceptualization, scale development, and validation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.014

  58. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2013). Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

  59. Patel, J. B., Modi, A. G., & Paul, J. (2017). Pro-environmental behavior and socio-demographic factors in an emerging market. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 6(2), 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-016-0071-5

  60. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two Decades of Developments in Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative Social Work, 1(3), 261–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325002001003636

  61. Perkins, D., Drisse, M. N. B., Nxele, T. C., & Sly, P. D. (2014). E-Waste: A Global Hazard. Annals of Global Health, 80(4), 286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aogh.2014.10.001

  62. Potting, M. P., Worrel, & Hanemaaijer. (2017, March 27). Circular Economy: Measuring innovation in product chains. PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. https://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/circular-economy-measuring-innovation-in-product-chains

  63. Raudsepp, M. (2001). SOME SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL PREDICTORS OF ENVIRONMENTALISM. Trames, 5(4), 355. https://doi.org/10.3176/tr.2001.4.06

  64. Richins, M. L. (1994). Valuing Things: The Public and Private Meanings of Possessions. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(3), 504. https://doi.org/10.1086/209414

  65. Shapiro, K. (1985). Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility. American Economic Review, 75(3), 424–440. https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/10026207300

  66. Sherry, J. F. (1990). A Sociocultural Analysis of a Midwestern American Flea Market. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1086/208533

  67. Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(91)90050-8

  68. Sinha, R., Laurenti, R., Singh, J., Malmström, M., & Frostell, B. (2016). Identifying ways of closing the metal flow loop in the global mobile phone product system: A system dynamics modeling approach. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 113, 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.05.010

  69. Sung, W. (2015). A study on the effect of smartphones on the digital divide. https://doi.org/10.1145/2757401.2757427

  70. Thokchom, R. S. (2013). THE RISE OF AN APPARATGEIST: FACTORS AFFECTINGBANGKOK-BASEDCONSUMERS’ PURCHASE INTENTION FOR SMART PHONES. AU-GSB E-JOURAL, 5(1). http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.php/AU-GSB/article/view/490

  71. Vacaru, M., Shepherd, R., & Sheridan, J. A. (2014). New Zealand Youth and Their Relationships with Mobile Phone Technology. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 12(5), 572–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-014-9488-z

  72. Van Deursen, A. J. a. M., Bolle, C. L., Hegner, S. M., & Kommers, P. (2015). Modeling habitual and addictive smartphone behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.039

  73. Van Weelden, E., Mugge, R., & Bakker, C. (2016). Paving the way towards circular consumption: exploring consumer acceptance of refurbished mobile phones in the Dutch market. Journal of Cleaner Production, 113, 743–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.11.065

  74. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

  75. Vergara, M., Braulio-Gonzalo, M., Juan, P., & Bovea, M. D. (2017). Consumer attitude towards the repair and the second-hand purchase of small household electrical and electronic equipment. A Spanish case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 158, 261–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.143

  76. Walsh, S. P., White, K. M., & Young, R. M. (2007). Over‐connected? A qualitative exploration of the relationship between Australian youth and their mobile phones. Journal of Adolescence, 31(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.04.004

  77. Wang, Y., Wiegerinck, V., Krikke, H., & Zhang, H. (2013). Understanding the purchase intention towards remanufactured product in closed-loop supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(10), 866–888. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpdlm-01-2013-0011

  78. Wieser, H., & Tröger, N. (2018). Exploring the inner loops of the circular economy: Replacement, repair, and reuse of mobile phones in Austria. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 3042–3055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.106

  79. World Economic Situation and Prospects 2017. (2017). In World economic situation and prospects .. United Nations. https://doi.org/10.18356/fe12fb85-en

  80. Young, W. F., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., & Oates, C. (2009). Sustainable consumption: green consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sustainable Development, n/a. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.394

  81. Yrjölä, M., Hokkanen, H., & Saarijärvi, H. (2021). A typology of second-hand business models. Journal of Marketing Management, 37(7–8), 761–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257x.2021.1880465

bottom of page