La Directiva europea sobre normas comunes de fomento de la reparación de mercancías. Evaluación crítica de su proceso de elaboración
Barra lateral del artículo
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
La Comisión Europea lanzó recientemente una propuesta de Directiva para fomentar la reparación. En este artículo analizamos con un enfoque crítico el proceso de redacción para comprender las opciones políticas resultantes. Consideramos que, aunque la ambición de la Directiva era escasa desde lo principio -dadas las limitadas opciones políticas-, empeoró aún más durante el período de consulta. La selección de barreras a la reparación fue limitada, y los fabricantes presionaron a favor de una forma estrecha y cerrada de Derecho a Reparación (R2R) que les transfería todo el control sobre el mercado de reparación potencialmente emergente. Se propusieron algunas medidas de información para aumentar la transparencia, lo que potencialmente aumentaría la carga administrativa de los reparadores independientes, junto con medidas para fomentar la reparación con garantía legal. Esta Directiva no fomenta la reparación ni ayuda a los talleres independientes a superar las barreras de acceso, ni permite a los estados miembros ir más allá de los límites impuestos en la propia Directiva.
Palabras clave:
Citado por
Detalles del artículo
plugins.generic.funding.fundingData
-
Xunta de Galicia
plugins.generic.funding.funderGrants ED431C 2022/15 -
Agencia Estatal de Investigación
plugins.generic.funding.funderGrants PID2022-141162NB-I00
Referencias
Ackermann, L., Mugge, R., & Schoormans, J. (2018). Consumers' perspective on product care: An exploratory study of motivators, ability factors, and triggers. Journal of Cleaner Production 183, 380-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.099
AIRC, CLEPA, ECAR, FIGIEFA, Insurance Europe & SMEunited. (2023). European citizens should not have to wait 10 more years for a real right to repair.
Andersson, A., Carlestam, J., Gunnarsson, J., Henriksson, T., Kristoffersson, P., Mattsson, F., Nyman, L., Ridell, R., Sandin, J., Wadsten, H., & Wessberg, N. (2018). Circular Economy: Research into the availability and willingness to repair consumer electronic products. Lund University.
Armstrong, C. (2021). Key Methods Used in Qualitative Document Analysis. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3996213
Cardno, C. (2018). Policy Document Analysis: A Practical Educational Leadership Tool and a Qualitative Research Method. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 24(4), 623-640. https://doi.org/10.14527/kuey.2018.016
CHAFEA (2015). Consumer market study on the functioning of legal and commercial guarantees for consumers in the EU. European Commission.
Cole, C., Gnanapragasam, A., Singh, J., & Cooper, T. (2018). Enhancing reuse and resource recovery of electrical and electronic equipment with reverse logistics to meet carbon reduction targets. Procedia CIRP 69, 980-985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.019
Dalhammar, C., Richter, J., Almén, J., Anehagen, M., Enstrom, E., Hartman, C., Jonsson, C., Lindbladh, F., & Ohlsson, J. (2020). Promoting the repair sector in Sweden. IIIEE.
de Fusco, R. (2005). Historia del diseño. Santa & Cole Publicaciones S.L.
European Commission. (2018). Report on Critical Raw Materials and the Circular Economy. Bruxelas: European Commission.
European Commission. (2019). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Commitee and the Commitee of the Regions. The European Green Deal. European Commission. Retrieved from European Commission.
European Commission. (2020). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Commitee and the Commitee of the Regions. A new Circular Economy Action Plan. European Commission.
European Commission. (2022). Commission Staff working document. Impact Assessment. Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for setting ecodesign requirements for sustaible products. European Commission.
European Commission. (2023a). Commission staff working document. Impact assessment report accompanying the document: Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules promoting the repair of goods. European Commission.
European Commission. (2023b). Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules promoting the repair of goods and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Directives (EU) 2019/771 and (EU) 2020/1828. European Commission.
European Commission. (2023c). Regulatory Scrutiny Board Opinion. Revision of the Sale of Goods Directive.
European Commission. (2023d). Sustainable consumption of goods – promoting repair and reuse. Obtido de European Commission: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13150-Sustainable-consumption-of-goods-promoting-repair-and-reuse_en
Gharfalkar, M., Ali, Z., & Hillier, G. (2016). Clarifying the disagreements on various reuse options: repair, recondition, refurbish and remanufacture. Waste Management & Research, 34(10), 995-1005. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X16628981
Graziano, V., & Trogal, K. (2017). The politics of collective repair. Examining object-relations in a postwork society. Cultural Studies 31, 634-658. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502386.2017.1298638
Grinvald, L., & Tur-Sinai, O. (2019). Intellectual property law and the right to repair. Fordham Law Review 88, Forthcoming, Suffolk University Law School Research Paper No. 19-4, 63-128. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3317623
Kayesa, N. K., & Shung-King, M. (2021). The role of document analysis in health policy analysis studies in low and middle-income countries: Lessons for HPA researchers from a qualitative systematic review. Health Policy OPEN, 2, 100024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100024
Krebs, S., & Hoppenheit, T. (2022). Questioning the Decline of Repair in the Late 20th Century: the Case of Luxembourg, 1945-1990. In G. Bernasconi, G. Carnino, L. Hilaire-Pérez, & O. Raveus (Eds.), Les Réparation dans l'Histoire. Cultures techniques et savoir-faire dans la longue durée (pp. 185-199). Presses des Mines.
Llorente-González, L., & Vence, X. (2020). How labour-intensive is the circular economy? A policy-orientated structural analysis of the repair, reuse and recycling activities in the European Union. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105033
López-Bermúdez, F., & Vence, X. (2023). Las actividades de reparación: proximidad, distribución territorial y contribución al desarrollo regional y local. In X. Vence (Ed.), Economía circular transformadora y cambio sistémico (pp. 183-206). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Maitre-Ekern, E., & Dalhammar, C. (2016). Regulating Planned Obsolescence: A Review of Legal Approaches to Increase Product Durability and Reparability in Europe. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law, 25(3), 378-394. https://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12182
McCollough, J. (2007). The effect of income growth on the mix of purchases between disposable goods and reusable goods. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(3), 213-2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2006.00504.x
McCollough, J. (2009). Factors impacting the demand for repair services of household products: the disappearing repair trades and the throwaway society. International Journal of Cosumer Studies 33(6), 619-626. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00793.x
Milios, L. (2021). Towards a Circular Economy Taxation Framework: Expectations and Challenges of Implementation. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 1, 477-498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-020-00002-z
Nazli, T. (2021). Repair motivation and barriers model: Investigating user perspectives related to product repair towards a circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125644
Nogueira, A. (2024). Fixing the circular economy: a limited right to repair faces core constraints from private law. In Rethinking Environmental Law. Connectivity, intersectionsand conflicts. Intersentia.
Öko-Institut e.V. (2020). Influence of the service life of products in terms of their environmental impact: Establishing an information base and developing strategies against "obsolescence". German Environment Agency.
Packard, V. (1961). The Waste Makers. Longmans.
Parrique, T., Barth, J., Briens, F., Kerschner, C., Kraus-Polk, A., Kuokkanen, A., & Spangenberg, J. (2019). Decoupling Debunked. Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability. European Environmental Bureau. Retrieved from https://gaiageld.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/decoupling_debunked_evidence_and_argumen.pdf
Piringer, M., & Schanda, I. (2020). Austria makes repair more affordable. Retrieved from Right to Repair: https://repair.eu/news/austria-makes-repair-more-affordable/
Right to Repair Europe. (2021). The French repair index: challenges and opportunities. Obtido de Right to repair: https://repair.eu/news/the-french-repair-index-challenges-and-opportunities/
Riisgard, H., Mosgaard, M., & Overgaard-Zacho, K. (2016). Local Circles in a Circular Economy - the Case of Smartphone Repair in Denmark. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 5(1), 109-124. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2016.v5n1p109
Rogers, H., Deutz, P., & Ramos, T. (2021). Repairing the circular economy: Public perception and participant profile of the repair economy in Hull, UK. Resources, Conservation & Recycling. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105447
Stahel, W. (2013). Policy for material efficiency-sutainable taxation as a departure from the throwaway society. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2011.0567
Svensson, S., Richter, J., Maitre-Ekern, E., Pihlajarinne, T., Maigrret, A., & Dalhammar, C. (2018). The Emerging 'Right to Repair' legislation in the EU and the US. Going Green CARE INNOVATION.
Svensson-Hoglund, S., Richter, J., Maitre-Ekern, E., Russell, J., Pihlajarinne, T., & Dalhammar, C. (2021). Barriers, enablers and market governance: A review of the policy landscape for repair of consumer electronics in the EU and the U.S. Journal of Cleaner Production, 288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125488
Svensson-Hoglund, S., Russell, J., & Richter, J. (2023). A Process Approach to Product Repair from the Perspective of the Individual. Circular Economy and Sustainability, 3, 1327-1359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-022-00226-1
Türkeli, S., Huang, B., Stasik, A., & Kemp, R. (2019). Circular Economy as a Global Business Activity: Mobile Phone Repair in the Netherlands, Poland and China. Energies 12, 12(498). https://doi.org/10.3390/en12030498
Wiens, K. (2018). Copyright Office Ruling Issues Sweeping Right to Repair Reforms. Retrieved from iFixit: https://pt.ifixit.com/News/11951/1201-copyright-final-rule
Wieser, H., & Tröger, N. (2017). 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
Wrbka, S., & Dimatteo, L. (2019). Right to a clean environment: role of contracts and contract law. UF Law Faculty Publications, 21, 907-977. Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1955&context=facultypub
Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a(s)
- Xavier Vence, Ángeles Pereira, Blandine Laperche, Mario Pansera, Economía circular, sustentabilidad y decrecimiento , Revista Galega de Economía: Vol. 33 Núm. 2 (2024): Special Issue. Circular economy, sustainability and degrowth