Exploring Barriers in Promoting Circular Economy of Consumer Durable Goods in Remote and Indigenous Communities in Newfoundland and Labrador

Exploring Barriers in Promoting Circular Economy of Consumer Durable Goods in Remote and Indigenous Communities in Newfoundland and Labrador | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Exploring Barriers in Promoting Circular Economy of Consumer Durable Goods in Remote and Indigenous Communities in Newfoundland and Labrador Yasamin Atabaki, Atanu Sarkar, Shegufa Shetranjiwalla-Merchant, and 3 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7244287/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 9 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Consumer durable goods (CDGs), including large appliances and electronics, substantially contribute to global waste generation. Managing CDGs waste in rural and remote communities encounters challenges like, lack of access to repair services, recycling programs, and sustainable disposal options. This study explores the implementation of circular economy (CE) as a strategy for two remote and rural communities (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada) and examine the barriers to implementing CE. The study also examined the challenge of implementing CE practices in the communities despite their alignment with sustainability principles, a qualitative approach rooted in traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) that considers the voices of these communities in CDG design with CE principles was explored. Semi-structured interviews were conducted covering areas of waste disposal behaviors, repair and reuse practices, economic and cultural influences on product lifespan decisions, and the role of TEK in sustainable waste management. The study emphasised significant barriers to adopting CE principles in remote and Indigenous communities by incorporating community voices and identified opportunities to incorporate TEK into local-scale waste management practices. Findings from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous participants highlight the gap between circular intent and systemic feasibility, with high repair costs, a lack of local recycling or waste diversion services, and limited infrastructure being the key barriers to CE engagement. The findings underscored the critical need for targeted infrastructure investments such as those aimed at improving waste management, repair accessibility, and recycling capabilities in remote and Indigenous communities, coupled with policy reforms tailored to the specific requirements. Consumer durables circular economy Indigenous traditional ecological knowledge Canada Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Introduction Durable goods are products that have a lifespan of more than three years, as defined by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2025). Consumer durable goods (CDGs), such as household appliances and electronics, play a significant role in global consumption, and their production and disposal have serious environmental and health consequences. As planned obsolescence has increased, new technologies have become less durable and not reparable, generating more waste after the end of life (van Nes et al., 2006). Many of these products contain toxic substances, such as heavy metals and flame retardants (UNEP, 2025). For instance, due to the ineffective management of electronic waste (e-waste), precious metals such as gold, silver, copper, nickel, and aluminum, which could otherwise be recovered and reused, are lost, leading to increased demand for virgin resource extraction (Grant et al., 2013 ). Moreover, toxic and hazardous substances are released into the surrounding environment, contaminating the global environment by releasing persistent organic pollutants and mercury and posing health risks to the workers and communities that reside nearby toxic waste dumps (UNEP, 2025). Despite increasing concerns about environmental sustainability, circular economy (CE) principles such as reusing, refurbishing, remanufacturing, etc., remain absent in CDG manufacturing and disposal, intensifying environmental degradation and resource depletion (Milios, 2018 ). Although CE frameworks have been developed to encourage waste minimization, resource efficiency, and product longevity, limited research has been conducted specifically regarding public perception, consumer behaviors, and socio-economic barriers such as high repair costs compared to replacement, a lack of financial incentives for refurbished goods, limited access to recycling facilities, and consumer preferences for new products over repaired ones (Cooper, 2010 ). Most existing studies focus on general waste management, overlooking cultural and local perspectives that could drive circularity at the community level (Laitala, et al., 2018 ; Kirchherr et al., 2017 ; Korhonen, et al., 2018 ). The widespread reliance on a linear "take-use-waste" model, which prioritizes convenience and disposability over sustainability, discourages consumers from participating in repair, reuse, and material recovery, highlighting a critical gap in transitioning towards CE-based CDG management (Bakker, et al., 2014 ). In Canada, particularly in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), waste management challenges are exacerbated by geographic isolation and limited infrastructure (MMSB, 2022). The Canadian government's solid waste diversion report measures the generation, recycling, composting, combustion, energy recovery, and landfilling of these materials from the CDGs in municipal solid waste (MSW). In 2022, Canada's national solid waste diversion rate stood at 27%, meaning that just over a quarter of all MSW was kept out of landfills through recycling, composting, and other recovery processes. However, NL had the lowest diversion rate in the country at just 11%, falling well below the national average (ECCC, 2024). This is especially true in rural and Indigenous communities in NL, which often lack access to repair facilities, recycling programs, or sustainable means of disposal, resulting in limited options and a tendency to landfill CDGs (GoC, 2017). These challenges conflict with traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), which emphasizes environmental stewardship and sustainable resource use (Whyte, 2013 ). Despite these abovementioned issues, no research has specifically focused on CE strategies for CDGs in rural and Indigenous communities of NL. This underscores an urgent need for community-led approaches to explore TEK for Indigenous communities with modern CE practices. This study addresses this gap by identifying obstacles to CE adoption and proposing culturally appropriate waste management solutions for CDGs in rural and Indigenous communities in NL. Objectives This study aims to identify the barriers and challenges in promoting a CE for CDGs in remote and Indigenous communities of NL. To contribute to a sustainable and inclusive CE model, the study will integrate TEK of Indigenous communities and community voices to develop a comprehensive framework. The following objectives of the study are shown below: To identify the barriers and challenges in the current ‘take-make-waste’ linear economy that hinder recovery, reuse, and regeneration in CDGs. To determine the current/dominant product design's negative impacts on the community in the current linear economy. To explore how TEK can contribute to understanding the impact of waste from CDGs. To develop an inclusive CE framework based on insights from remote and Indigenous communities to guide the waste management of CDGs. Methods Study Design Using a thematic analysis based on TEK and CE principles, this research takes a qualitative, community-based participatory approach. The study design utilizes content-rich, descriptive narratives from a community of members to understand barriers to CE implementation. This approach aligns with the study objectives to first understand perceptions of community experiences with CDGs and waste management practices in remote and Indigenous communities before applying external models of CE implementation. Study locations It was important to first establish a relationship with communities before co-producing research objectives with their elders and members. For this research, northern non-Indigenous and Indigenous communities were selected based on the established relationships and their expressed interest in the research outcomes. The two communities that helped develop the research objectives and work with the supervisory team in NL are; a) Harbour Main – A rural, non-Indigenous community, and b) Conne River (Miawpukek First Nation) – An Indigenous community. These communities helped the researchers capture both remote and Indigenous perspectives. As shown in Fig. 1 , Harbour Main is located approximately 65 km from its expected waste management facility at Robin Hood Bay. In comparison, Conne River is approximately 172 km from the nearest regional waste site in Norris Arm. The considerable distance and limited transportation resources and facilities make waste disposal a significant challenge for the Miawpukek First Nation community (Conne River). Consequently, many residents dispose of waste, including CDGs, in a local landfill just a few kilometres away from the community. This highlights the systemic waste management disparities affecting remote Indigenous communities. Participants Adults, those 18 years of age and older, were considered eligible to participate in the study. Participants included; a) Community leaders (band members of the council, mayor), b) Community members (youth and seniors of all genders), c) Representatives from the public service sector. Ethics approval First, ethics applications were developed with collaborators from these communities, and participants were identified with their assistance. This study was duly approved by the McMaster Research Ethics Board (MREB) and the Interdisciplinary Committee on Ethics in Human Research at Memorial University of Newfoundland to ensure compliance with ethical guidelines. Ethics approval was granted on July 21, 2023 under MREB #6008. The interview questions are provided in Supplementary file 1. Data Collection Semi-structured interviews were prepared with the help of the community collaborators and passed ethics approval. These questions were open ended to allow participants to share their views and provide insights and intended recommendations on waste management practices for various CDGs categories, including large household appliances such as TVs, washing machines, dryers, etc., and electronics. The interview questions were adopted from the validated questionnaire from Rogers et al.’s ( 2021 ) study, "Repairing the Circular Economy: Public Perception and Participant Profile of the Repair Economy in Hull, United Kingdom," which investigated public perceptions of repair practices in the context of the CE (Rogers et al., 2021 ). The interviews were conducted in-person, lasting around 30 to 40 minutes​. Drawing on the study's insights, the study explored themes similarly within the frames of remote and Indigenous communities in NL. Participants were recruited via community leaders (the band chief for Conne River, the mayor of Harbour Main). Recruitment initiatives included postings on community Facebook​ pages, flyers hung in public spaces, and in-person outreach​. The participants received an information letter explaining the study's purpose, interview questions, and their rights, including the option to withdraw at any time​. Informed consent was obtained through a signed consent form, and for those who could not sign in advance, oral consent was accepted​. Data were stored securely following Memorial University's ethics guidelines, and confidentiality was guaranteed. ​After the interview, participants were compensated with a gift card as a gesture of gratitude​. Qualitative Analysis The primary data received from interviews were transcribed and analyzed using standard data processing software. In this study, the information from the interviews was transcribed using the Sonix.ai website (Purchased plan and licensed) and was uploaded into ATLAS.ti (version 25.0.0.32864) software for qualitative data analysis. During the primary coding process, emerging codes were developed from the interviews as they arose, incorporating both the software's suggested codes and the researcher's insights (Atlas.ti, 2025; Sonix.ai, 2025). A separate coding process was conducted for each community to capture the unique perspectives and contextual differences within each community. After completing the initial coding, themes were developed based on interview quotes, and the researcher categorized the distribution of these quotes among themes. As a result of the diversity and size of some primary codes, sub-themes were created to provide a more comprehensive and detailed analysis of the data. A structured synthesis of the qualitative data was achieved through this process, thereby allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the barriers and opportunities related to CE practices in each community. This process is illustrated in the flow chart shown in Fig. 2 . Qualitative analysis was crucial for this research because it considers these communities' nuanced experiences, attitudes, and contextual difficulties. Seven themes and sub-themes were developed from the data sourced from the interviews, and the emerging codes developed (Fig. 2 ). The researchers developed these themes through careful coding and the interpretation of interview transcripts. While ATLAS.ti was used to support this process, it did not generate themes independently; instead, the software suggested potential codes and thematic groupings by highlighting frequently occurring keywords and phrases. These suggestions served as prompts for deeper interpretation, but the researcher determined and defined the final themes. Using Atlas.ti, from the codes and sub-codes generated during the analysis, broader themes and sub-themes were constructed to represent the main challenges (Fig. 3 ). The sub-themes provide more granular insight into specific issues raised by participants. Two figures have been provided to provide a better understanding of the categories. As shown in Fig. 4 , the number of quotes for each created theme category is accompanied by the significance of each category compared to the other categories, and as shown in Fig. 5 , the number of quotes corresponds to each of the various sub-themes identified by participants. Disclaimer 1: “The numbers in this chart represent selected, illustrative quotes and may not reflect the full range of data collected.” Disclaimer 2: “Some quotes may appear in multiple theme groups due to their relevance to more than one category. This overlap reflects the interconnected nature of the themes and sub-themes identified in the qualitative analysis.” Results Demographic Profiles of Participants Participants recorded their demographic profile, which included self-identification of their gender, educational level, income, and occupation. Eighteen members were interviewed in the Conne River community and 14 in the Harbour Main community. Out of thirty-two participants, 18 members identified as women (56%) and 14 identified as men (44%). Figure S2.1 (supplementary information) shows that most participants achieved higher education levels, with the majority (13 participants, 40%) holding post-secondary or bachelor’s degrees (10 participants, 31%). Other education levels, such as college diplomas and trades in specific technical programs, were less common, with minimal representation from participants with Grade 11 or 12 education or specialized certifications. Participants were also asked about their income as shown in Figure S2.2 (supplementary file). The figure comparing individual and household incomes reveals a clear trend: household incomes are significantly higher than individual incomes, indicating the impact of multiple earners within households. Income levels vary widely, with some participants reporting household incomes above $ 200,000 while others fall into much lower ranges. Individual incomes tend to concentrate on lower brackets, with relatively few exceeding $ 100,000. This variation likely impacts participants' ability to engage with CE practices and access repair and waste management services. Participants were also asked about their occupation (Figure S2.3 (supplementary file)). The figure highlights a diverse array of participant occupations, with retired individuals, teachers, healthcare, administration and trade jobs representing the most common roles among participants. This occupational diversity spans fields such as health, education, finance, and manual labor, offering the study a wide range of expertise and perspectives. The themes in Fig. 4 are discussed in detail here, and quotes from community members that provide the frequency in Figs. 4 and 5 are indicated in this discussion. Themes It is clear from Fig. 4 that the community members showed a great interest in applying CE principles (45 to 50 quotes) as indicated by the maximum quotes on the theme of challenges in applying CE principles (blue bar), in their attitudes towards CE principles (pink bar) and the decision-making drivers in their choices for CE (orange bar). They were also interested in waste management related to CE (darker green bar) but had less interest in applying TEK or knowledge about the transportation and product design in the CE (light green, red and yellow bars, 15–22 quotes) as shown in Fig. 4 . From Fig. 5 , it is evident that community members had barriers to CE and waste management at the consumer level highest on their mind, as these showed up as the most frequent themes in the interviews (blue and darker green bars, 30–35 quotes). Repair and reuse including costs and price considerations were second and overshadowed environmental sensitivities, and any good intentions clearly indicate opportunities for systemic and policy changes in these areas. Theme 1: Challenges in Applying CE Principles Based on the themes and sub-themes identified, participants identified large and small appliances and electronics as the most challenging product categories to apply CE principles. These categories were highlighted due to frequent struggles related to repair costs, the accessibility of repair services, and the complexity of modern technology. The following analysis further examines these categories and identifies their core barriers that inhibit participants from practicing CE successfully. More quotes from participants are provided in the supplementary documents for each theme. Large Appliances As a result of their complexity, high repair costs, and technological advancements, large appliances, such as washing machines, refrigerators, and dryers, present significant barriers to implementing CE principles. Due to the integration of electronic and specialized components in modern large appliances, repairs are more challenging and costlier than those of older models. Van Nes and Cramer ( 2006 ) state that the lack of accessible repair services and expensive proprietary parts contribute to higher rates of replacement for large appliances [2]. Milios, L. ( 2018 ) highlights that this issue is exacerbated in rural or remote areas, where repair services are scarce, and that geographical isolation often discourages repairs due to logistical costs [5]. If my dryer, if it was broken, and if there was somebody around here who could fix it, uh, fairly quickly. And if I didn't have to drive, I guess 150km to Grand Falls, wait 3 or 4 weeks to get it fixed and then get it shipped back to me. So, I still would need something in the meantime. Not like there's a laundromat around here so probably just as easy to get one delivered the next day. So, I still have a dryer, right? It's just we're isolated down here. We don't have repair shops and stuff like that. Small Appliances The low cost and short lifespan of small appliances such as toasters and coffee makers often lead to their replacement. The repair cost often exceeds the replacement cost, resulting in a culture of throwaway consumption. Moreover, due to their affordability and perceived disposability, small appliances are discouraged from being repaired. They're just cheap to buy. I just wouldn't, I don't know. And then one of them, I guess it's just it's accessibility that no one says, hey, I'm a toaster repairman or I'm a hairdryer repair person, right? You just so and they're just cheap to buy and go down to Walmart and get one for $ 12. So, it cost me more in gas to get a repairman out here than it would be to go to Walmart and get a new one. Electronics The topic of this theme is based on the most frequently mentioned electronic categories highlighted by participants, including mobile phones, larger electronics such as televisions, and printers. Each category presents unique challenges related to planned obsolescence, repair costs, and replacement behavior, which hinder the adoption of CE principles. Many participants reported that fully functional phones became obsolete due to the discontinuation of software updates or compatibility issues. I just somehow think these high-tech companies are aware of how old your phone is, and then they start pop ups, start coming on your phone of issues. There's no more storage space. There's no more backup. You can't back up your Gmail and all this kind of stuff, and the phone becomes basically dysfunctional. So, I was at the point where none of my calls would go through, or I'd try to call from places where the calls would work before and they would no longer work. So, it becomes so frustrating trying to operate that you're driven to get another one. So, I hated to give up on my phone because it was perfect. It wasn't damaged, it was no scrapes on it. I kept it meticulous, but I felt I had to. Furthermore, Proske et al. ( 2016 ) highlight that younger consumers are influenced by trends and a desire for the latest technology, which can lead to the disposal of older devices, even if they are still functional (Proske et al., 2016 ). Over time, the declining cost of larger electronic devices, such as TVs, makes replacement more cost-effective than repair. Participants noted that the cost of repairing a TV often equals or exceeds the price of a new one. Printers illustrate a unique challenge in applying CE principles due to the high cost of ink refills compared to the price of new printers. Consumers are driven to frequently replace their printers due to this cost imbalance. To get the ink for it was more expensive... than just buying a printer at Costco with ink in it. The printer we have upstairs was $80, and new ink would be $140. Also, without any facilities for extended producer responsibility and access to returning obsolete hardware, disposal is only limited to landfilling instead of recycling or refurbishing. CE Principles Barriers A broader understanding of the barriers to applying CE principles can be divided into three main categories: Cost of Repair versus Replacement, Availability of Repair Services, and Technological Complexity. The high cost of repairs relative to the low cost of replacements has been identified as a significant obstacle. In Grand Falls, there's somebody who could do it. But I have to pay him to come from Grand Falls to do that and then go back up. So that's a full day for him. So, he's going to want his mileage. He's going to want an eight-hour day on top of the repair costs and everything else. So, I'm paying $ 1,500 to get him to repair a $ 1,000 fridge. Another significant barrier is the lack of access to repair services, particularly in rural and remote areas. Participants frequently mentioned the difficulty of finding repair professionals nearby, long wait times, and high transportation costs, making repairs impractical. Moreover, from the interviews, we learned that modern electronics become increasingly challenging to repair due to their cutting-edge designs, proprietary components, and failure to standardize components. Participants mentioned that even a minor problem with a device will often require an extensive diagnosis and require one-of-a-kind components that cannot be replaced without professional help. Theme 2: Community Attitudes Toward CE Principles An examination of community behaviors, preferences, and challenges associated with the adoption of CE principles is presented in this theme. It is divided into two main sub-themes: 1) Reuse, Repair, and Disposal Preferences and 2) Environmental and Economic Considerations. Reuse, Repair, and Disposal Preferences Participants demonstrated a range of attitudes toward reusing, repairing, and disposing of products that were often shaped by the type of product, the resources available, and their confidence in repair attempts. Community members are also interested in repair and reuse, especially with sentimental or high-value items. However, time, cost, and accessibility are common barriers to repair. While emotional attachment motivates some repair efforts, a lack of convenience often leads to disposal instead. Frequent Repair Attempts: Several participants expressed a willingness to repair certain items, particularly furniture and tools, which they viewed as durable and worth maintaining. One participant explained how they often repair tools to extend their lifespan: We share tools in our neighborhood, and if something breaks, we try to fix it. Tools are expensive, so it’s better to keep them working for as long as possible. Ease of Online Resources: The availability of online tutorials (e.g., YouTube) has enabled some community members to attempt repairs themselves. Those with do it yourself confidence used these platforms to repair smaller appliances and household items. More complex repairs, however, remain challenging. …Getting repair guys out here is a challenge. So, the last two things—my dryer and fridge—I fixed myself with YouTube's help. Once you get the part numbers, it's straightforward… Recycling and Disposal Challenges: Small appliances are often disposed of despite efforts to repair them due to limited recycling options and repair feasibility. Individual circumstances, such as time constraints, life stages, and resource availability, play a significant role in disposal decisions. Disposal often becomes the default option when repairing or recycling requires considerable effort. As someone with limited time and two kids, I think how you answer that question is based on your support network and where you live and like where you're privileged or what space you're in in your life. Because when the kids were small, I would have put anything in the garbage because if it... the overhead to get something done. The participants also identified significant logistical and infrastructure barriers to responsible disposal. A lack of nearby disposal facilities often makes proper disposal inconvenient or impossible, especially in remote communities. Responses showed that there is genuine interest among the community members to repair and reuse items, particularly high-value or sentimental items, yet systemic barriers such as time constraints, high repair costs, low technical skills, local repair service options, and a lack of disposal and recycling infrastructure undermine engagement with circular behaviors. Environmental and Economic Considerations Community attitudes reflect a mix of environmental awareness and economic considerations. In some cases, sustainability is prioritized, while short-term financial convenience is the priority in other cases. Despite the tension between environmental values and financial realities, cost remains an important factor in decision-making. Additionally, some participants noted a growing awareness of the environmental impact of waste, encouraging behaviors such as repurposing, recycling, and passing on items. As this consciousness has spread, people have become more resourceful within their community, making new use of older furniture or other possessions. They expressed how these practices not only minimize waste but also provide economic benefits, from earning cash back on recycled materials to saving money by reusing household items. I just find that people are more, uh, have a bit more awareness. They understand, like, you know, the impact of waste and on our environment. So, I find that people they're just more aware. So, they repurpose more, they sell more. You'd see people putting out stuff for the bulk garbage. But then there's always people who drive around looking, um, and can repurpose some of these things. Like we've noticed we had a gentleman that would cut the cords off TVs and stuff to kind of get the metal and the wire and stuff, to bring. And when he collects so much, then he would get, um, get a refund for the items when he stripped off the plastic. And the same thing goes for recycling batteries and different items. So, you can see the awareness, you can see people being smarter and passing on items. Theme 3: Decision-Making Drivers in Community Choices for CE This theme investigates drivers of community decisions on CE practices. The results show that decisions arise from value-driven considerations, economic realities, warranty effects, and environmental consciousness. These elements address the complexity of decision-making at the community level and the nuanced trade-offs involved. This helps in understanding which products are more likely to be repaired or replaced, operationalizing CE principles in practice. Value-based decision making Several participants emphasized the importance of value-based considerations in their decision-making, particularly when evaluating the quality, durability, and practicality of new or second-hand items. This is particularly evident when purchasing large appliances and high-cost items like large electronics. Purchasing a higher-quality item highlights a community preference for investing in reliable products that offer greater longevity and reduce the need for frequent repairs or replacements. Participants frequently compared this approach to choosing cheaper, lower-quality items, which may have a lower upfront cost but are perceived as less durable and having limited long-term value. I would say most of those items that you mentioned, the thing I would look at would be the quality of the item, right? So yeah, there is a price point, but I'd rather spend a little bit extra money on a brand that I knew would last as compared to one that, you know, some of these TVs are a prime example, you can go to Walmart and pick up a 60-inch TV for 400 bucks. Now, I don't know how long it lasts, there's only so many TV manufacturers out there and they're all swapping parts in and out. So, you know, uh, but I would generally look at price, and I guess the quality of the item would be my biggest thing when we purchase. Despite varying levels of skepticism, value-based decision-making was also applied to the purchase of second-hand goods. Some individuals view second-hand items as a practical and affordable option, whereas others are concerned about their reliability and condition. Some second-hand things are sort of better than others. You know, a second vehicle is certainly no issue. Secondhand furniture is okay. I am not sure if I'd be keen to buy a second-hand fridge or something like that. Cause I don't know if. cause with the car, you can look at the mileage and look at the shape of the vehicle. And that can give you an indication. That might give you an idea of what you're getting and maybe this is just some ignorance on my part of an understanding of those things. But I wouldn't be able to look at a fridge and say, oh yeah, it's got another five years in it for sure… so, I don't know if I have the, the ability to make a good judgment call on those sorts of second-hand things, but say, for instance, vehicles or furniture and that sort of things you can do. As a result of these attitudes, it is evident that a critical decision-making driver is a trade-off between perceived value and risk when purchasing second-hand goods, with a preference for items whose quality can be more easily determined (such as cars and furniture) and hesitation around goods such as appliances. Cost and Price Sensitivity Economic considerations primarily influenced repair, reuse, and replacement decisions. Participants often weighed the repair cost against the replacement price, with many opting to replace when repair costs were deemed excessive. Many participants noted that they make repair or replacement decisions based on the relative costs involved. So, it would really be the availability of a repair person to come here specifically in rural, because that's shifted 20 years ago, you'd be able to find someone easily, and now it's not so easy. And so, it's the availability of someone who would physically come to your house and then how much that would cost, and the likelihood of the age of the object on how much money you would potentially spend on it. And so, if that was, you know, if we could get someone to come here and they came here and they said it was $ 500, but a new fridge is like a thousand, then it would be a conversation of like, what's the best investment, fixing it or buying a new one? The balance between short-term affordability and long-term risks and the financial implications of unforeseen issues often influences the decision to purchase second-hand. This view reflects the security and reliability of purchasing something new, especially when given a warranty. For many, warranties provide protection against having to pay out-of-pocket costs for repairs and peace of mind. In contrast, when purchasing second-hand, buyers generally accept more significant financial uncertainty since if something purchased is defective, the buyer bears the risk of having to repair/replace that property. Participants were particularly concerned about these issues for specific categories of items (e.g., electronics or appliances) as the potential repair cost could outweigh the initial savings of buying second-hand. Environmental and Economic Trade-offs Participants often discussed how historical changes in consumption patterns influence present-day attitudes toward environmental and economic decisions. One participant reflected on generational differences, recalling how their mother, born in 1937, witnessed the transformation in waste patterns firsthand. Waste patterns have changed dramatically in a short period—especially since the 1950s and 1960s, when disposable items became widespread. People owned fewer things, and those things were often made from more durable materials like wood. However, the rise of plastics and mass-produced materials like Formica created a disposable culture. Furthermore, participants often had difficulty choosing between environmental values and practical experience when replacing older appliances with new, energy-efficient models. When it comes to the appliances I don't know. I haven't had good success I haven't really. It kind of discourages me actually going and buying new appliances. But I know new is better because it's better for the environment. And, you know, it's all low efficient, energy efficient. Um, but the old stuff lasts us forever. This perspective reveals the tension between older appliances' perceived durability and newer models' environmental advantages. Although participants recognized that energy-efficient appliances are better for the environment, many were reluctant to purchase them based on earlier experiences involving reduced reliability or a shorter lifespan. The trade-off between the durability and sustainability benefits of modern options is still seen as a dilemma that naturally leads to delayed decisions and an unwillingness to replace items. These findings emphasize the importance of addressing durability concerns in modern appliances while promoting their environmental benefits to encourage broader adoption. By bridging the gap between environmental efficiency and product longevity, manufacturers and policymakers can help reduce the hesitancy associated with sustainable choices. Warranty and Guarantee Influence Participants noted that their relationship with products often changed once the warranty period expired. Sometimes, items were discarded or replaced once warranty coverage was no longer available. Moreover, participants expressed frustration with the limitations of warranty periods and the challenges associated with their use. We got warranty on that stuff, so we would send it away for warranty work. And then probably once the warranty was gone, we'd get rid of it and get something new. Proactive engagement must be undertaken with companies since the expiration of a warranty often serves as a psychological and financial tipping point that influences the decision to replace instead of repair. Theme 4: Influence of Product Lifespan on CE Principles The product lifespan significantly impacts participants' decisions regarding repair, reuse, or replacement. In line with CE principles, items with longer lifespans were considered more valuable, while those with shorter lifespans were disposed of more frequently. Product Longevity and Ownership History Participants praised the durability of older appliances and furniture compared to newer models. Participants often reminisced about older products' superior durability and repairability, noting that they were designed for easy maintenance and built to last. I think that before people knew each other really well. And so, it would be more apt to pick up something that somebody else wasn't using, like down the street or whatever, because they knew each other, but that's just not necessarily the case. Products were more easy. They were built more durable. and a better quality. And they were built in a way that was meant to be fixed and live on for a long time. And now it's not. And I think that that's not necessarily a knowledge that I could share and fix in some way. It's just an unfortunate way that our society has moved towards making things more convenient and less expensive. So, nothing that I think would be very useful. Just unfortunate kind of the way society has moved. Several examples have been cited of decades-old appliances still being used compared to newer products that have a shorter lifespan. One respondent stated that furniture retailers now tell them that major appliances only last an average of 5 to 6 years, compared with older appliances that remained functional for decades. Several participants expressed disappointment at the decline in product quality, emphasizing that modern items are often viewed as disposable. Another participant reflected that products were considered valuable investments in the past, with appliances like microwaves being expensive luxury items. However, in today's world, mass production and lower-quality materials have made household goods cheaper and more disposable, reinforcing a culture of frequent replacement rather than long-term use. These insights bring a sense of nostalgia for durable goods that lasted longer and aligned better with sustainable practices. Across the diverse group of participants, they expressed that modern products are often designed to prioritize convenience and affordability rather than longevity and/or repairability, creating challenges for integrating CE principles into everyday life. Warranties and Guarantees A warranty can provide financial security and influence choices, particularly for high-cost items; however, participants also expressed frustration with the limitations and challenges associated with warranty processes. Many participants noted that the availability of a warranty encouraged them to seek repairs rather than replacements. Warranties were seen as a safety net that reduced the financial risk associated with repair costs. If it was covered under warranty, yeah, I would go for repairs, but warranty work sometimes really hard to get done. And, repairs like, I've gone through probably three fridges, four fridges since, you know, in the last 20 years. And it seems like they don't last half as long as the older technology. this newer technology with the displays in them and the apps for the cell phone where you can go like to me, that's only just, it's a waste. You know, and it's way too expensive to repair. Participants highlighted the importance of engaging directly with manufacturers to address repair needs, especially when warranties have expired. The level of support manufacturers provide plays a significant role in whether consumers choose to repair or replace their products, highlighting inconsistencies in key areas. While some manufacturers go the extra mile by offering repairs or replacements beyond the warranty period as a goodwill gesture, others are less flexible, leaving customers dissatisfied. Furthermore, accessibility is another challenge; some manufacturers lack local repair services, especially in remote areas, discouraging people from attempting repairs and pushing them toward replacements. Moreover, repair costs vary widely. While some manufacturers offer reasonably priced options, others impose high fees that make repairs unfeasible. Addressing these challenges by making repair services more accessible, affordable, and transparent could build consumer trust, encourage repairs over replacements, and align manufacturers’ practices with the principles of a CE. Theme 5: TEK-specific Themes and Further Business Models for Communities This theme examines the role of TEK and innovative business models tailored to the needs of local communities. It discusses the contribution of TEK to sustainable practices, especially in Indigenous communities, and identifies methods through which local businesses can align with CE principles. The analysis focuses on three sub-themes: Perception of TEK for CDGs, Education of New Generations on TEK, and Waste Management Plans for Indigenous Communities. Perception of TEK for CDGs Participants expressed a variety of viewpoints regarding TEK's role in managing life cycle stages of CDGs. While traditional knowledge remains a vital part of Indigenous culture, its role in managing CDG has been limited and often overshadowed by modern approaches and systemic challenges. Cultural Values and Community Support: TEK strongly emphasizes community support and reducing waste, values deeply rooted in Indigenous practices today. Participants shared that they prioritize repairing and repurposing items rather than throwing them away, particularly when these items can serve others in their community. Like us Indigenous, I guess we really like to help out family members and people in our own community. Like, instead of throwing something away, if we can get it fixed and it could serve someone else a better purpose, I would much rather do that. This approach reflects TEK principles, prioritizing the community's well-being over individual convenience. By repairing items for redistribution, they minimize waste and foster sustainability within their community. Traditional Practices vs. Modern Challenges Historically, lifestyles guided by TEK naturally generated minimal waste, as they were shaped by resource scarcity. In contrast, modern living has brought about a disposable culture and new challenges in managing waste associated with CDGs. Many participants expressed frustration with current waste management systems, often citing landfills as a symbol of systemic inefficiency and environmental harm. Traditional knowledge passed down through generations—through parents, grandparents, and elders—has long emphasized social and cultural norms that promote well-being and environmental stewardship. Following the principle of sustainability, teachings about respect and cleanliness were shared through daily interactions rather than formal schooling. However, one participant noted that modern practices often violate such teachings as current behaviors increasingly disregard the principles of environmental responsibility once deeply embedded in everyday life. They find it appalling. Every one of them. Actually, if you speak to 90, I say 90% of the community will say they're blown away by the landfill. And I think, and you spoke of being in the position that I am in. And it's really frustrating. It is frustrating and I remember when I first got on the council, somebody looked up and said, you must feel powerful. And I said, I never felt so weak before in my life. And that's the God's honest truth because you feel like. These concerns reflect a deep alignment with TEK's principles of environmental stewardship. Participants also highlighted the lack of infrastructure and support needed to apply these principles to managing CDGs effectively. Another participant mentioned that several traditional practices have been diminished due to modernization. This observation emphasizes the challenge of balancing the preservation of traditional practices with modern life's economic and cultural demands, where affordability and convenience frequently take priority. Contrasts Between Past and Present Waste Practices Participants reflected on how waste generation and management have changed over time, comparing the minimal waste of earlier generations to the modern disposable culture. “It definitely not, well it kind of got the pros and cons too, because back in the day you didn't have a whole lot. I mean, for our community, you were lucky if you had TVs. I remember when we were growing up, we didn't have a TV. And the disposal of those kinds of things wasn't so much in your face kind of thing. But we didn't have, back when we were growing up, we didn't have a disposal site kind of thing. So, you could have been something like, if you walked around the beach, you could see a mic, it wouldn't be a microwave back then, but whatever, over there. But right now, even though it's not the best, but it's in a confined area.” This contrast highlights how TEK was rooted in sustainable living, with little interaction with CDGs, which were nonexistent or considered luxuries. The emergence of consumer culture and the accessibility of inexpensive, disposable items have significantly transformed these practices, posing new challenges in applying TEK to today's waste management needs. Education of New Generations on TEK Participants from Indigenous communities frequently emphasized the importance of passing down ecological values to younger generations; however, these teachings were available for broader sustainability principles rather than specific methods for managing or disposing of CDGs. I don't know if it's concentrated but have it incorporated into the schooling, the different aspects of Aboriginal content kind of thing, you know, like the food, taking care of mother Earth, like that kind of thing. So, yeah, you could go off to universities and get degrees and stuff like that, but be conscious of your history like you are kind of what you've been exposed to, kind of thing. We were kind of not very well off and we didn't have much. So, you took care of your things. You learned how to repair things when you can, or whatever the case may be, you could follow that through. It doesn't matter that you get 80 or 90 or $ 100,000. You still could do the same thing because it was instilled into you. Waste Management Plans for Indigenous Communities Participants from Indigenous communities highlighted ongoing challenges and emerging solutions in managing waste, particularly for CDGs. A critical need for community-driven waste management programs was highlighted, as no structured waste management systems are available. As identified by participants, the absence of local infrastructure was a common barrier to effective waste management. The logistical burden of transporting waste to distant facilities, which requires personal time, effort, and money, discourages responsibility for disposal, highlighting the need for community-driven solutions like mobile collection programs to alleviate some of the environmental burden on communities. Proactive efforts to partner with regional waste management entities demonstrate a strong commitment to enhancing waste disposal practices; however, challenges such as disagreements over tipping fees must be addressed to ensure the success of these collaborations. To address these challenges, participants proposed innovative solutions that emphasize a locally driven and collaborative approach. There has been discussion about establishing community recycling and disposal depots and leveraging existing resources and programs for support. Electronics and other recyclable materials could be collected at these depots. A community-operated depot offers two key advantages: enhancing access to recycling services and creating local job opportunities. Moreover, these depots could generate revenue by processing and tagging recyclable items. There's things you can do. So that's one thing I'm interested in now is, can we set up a depot here? Something simple, and it's not necessarily that somebody's going to own this and make money off of it, but it's in the community, it's offering that recycling service, and we have employees that we can utilize for this through that program. So, it's not costing the depot any money to hire anybody. And now we've got people being put to work. People can drop off their stuff. Tag it. Money goes into an account. When they want to pull it out, they can pull it out. The research objective to explore TEK as a potential framework for managing CDGs faced a significant limitation: transportation and access to services emerged as the primary barriers in Indigenous communities. Participants often identified logistical challenges as a barrier to proper disposal. The lack of infrastructure and geographic isolation prevent Indigenous communities from fully participating in CE practices despite their cultural alignment with sustainability. Theme 6: Transportation and Accessibility of Repair Services in Remote and Indigenous Communities This theme delves into the challenges remote and Indigenous communities face in accessing repair services, emphasizing transportation barriers, logistical limitations, and their impact on CE practices. Interviews highlight that limited repair infrastructure and high costs often force residents to replace items rather than repair them, leading to increased waste and missed opportunities for sustainable practices. Transportation and Access to Services Several participants mentioned geographic isolation as a significant barrier to receiving repair services. The lack of local repair professionals and the distances required to access services result in inconvenience and costs. Well, one of the things, I guess, in where we're so far away from a, you know, service center is that it's very difficult to get stuff repaired, even from a personal perspective with my house. You know, if there was an opportunity to get it repaired, it would have to do it. But a lot of cases, you have to buy new because you can't take it somewhere to get it repaired unless you have to drive two hours away and then you're two weeks getting someone to look at it. So, you almost have to purchase. You have to purchase a new product. The lack of local services also means fewer repair opportunities for CDGs, discouraging attempts to extend their lifespan. Transportation Costs and Logistics The financial strain of transporting items for repair was a recurring theme. For larger appliances, the combined cost of transportation and repair frequently surpasses the expense of purchasing a new item. Consumers often anticipate that large companies will include transportation and installation services with their products; however, rural areas frequently encounter obstacles such as limited-service availability and added transportation costs, making access to these services more challenging. It’s not worth the hassle of taking it up the highway. You know, for the actual cost of a new one. Traveled up the highway, get a service personnel to look at it, get it repaired and go out and pick it up. It's just as, probably even cheaper to purchase a new one. You know, if you had a bigger ticket item, then you can weigh the pros and cons and see what the cost would be. For large and small appliances, the logistical challenges and high costs associated with transporting items for repair often outweigh the benefits, particularly when replacement costs are comparable. The economic burden of transportation costs often creates a tipping point where replacing an item becomes more cost-effective than repairing it. This challenge is widespread with mid-range appliances, which usually fall between inexpensive and high-end options. Impact on Community Decision-Making Transportation challenges also have a direct and significant impact on community decision-making, especially in remote and Indigenous communities. Logistical and financial obstacles often drive whether people repair, replace, or even buy CDGs, as analyzed in a previous section on the Decision-Making Drivers in Community Choices for CE analysis. The absence of integrated services, such as delivery, installation, and old equipment removal, aggravates these challenges, influencing purchasing behavior and waste management practices. “I'm reluctant to buy anything in St. John's because I figure that they're going to charge me whack of money for transportation. I think we bought the fridge and stove from Sears in Bay Roberts when it existed. And they end up giving us a number of somebody who would do the transportation. And, that was an annoyance, because it seems to me a big company like Sears should do the deliveries and do the installation and take away the old equipment.” The absence of extended services from large companies is viewed as a missed opportunity to promote sustainable practices. If delivery and installation were included, community members would face fewer barriers to acquiring or maintaining CDGs, fostering alignment with CE principles. Reliance on Self- Repair and Local Networks The limited availability of repair services and the high transportation costs in remote and Indigenous communities often drive residents to depend on self-repair and local networks to maintain CDGs. This behavior demonstrates community resilience and resourcefulness but also highlights systemic barriers to professional repair services. Participants often shared that their first response to malfunctioning appliances or other CDGs was to attempt repairs themselves. With professional repair services typically located hours away, self-repair has become a practical necessity in many cases. He would work really hard first to repair it himself. We have had things break down before. So, if a Maytag or if a fridge or a freezer or anything breaks down and you call the manufacturer, they'll say, okay, what's the closest repair person? And it's six hours away, it's St. John's. You don't get anything closer. So normally the company will sell, send the parts out to us, and we will try to repair it ourselves first. If that fails, then we replace it. So, then we dispose of it then. Yeah, but we try to repair it ourselves first if we can. In addition to self-repair, community members frequently turn to informal networks, including neighbors or local professionals, for help with diagnosing and repairing items. These networks are essential in areas with limited or unavailable professional repair services. Furthermore, as was mentioned in previous sections by participants, to enhance their self-repair efforts, they increasingly utilize online resources like YouTube tutorials, which offer step-by-step instructions and guidance for troubleshooting and fixing a variety of issues. These tools empower those with limited technical expertise to take on repairs themselves, minimizing their dependence on professional services. Theme 7: Waste Management and CE This theme examines the integration of waste management practices with CE principles in remote and Indigenous communities. Sub-themes such as Local Waste Management Initiatives and Challenges in Waste Disposal highlight how these communities address unique environmental and logistical challenges to align with CE principles. Challenges in Waste Disposal Participants often pointed out that the absence of formalized waste management systems places rural and remote areas at a significant disadvantage compared to urban centers. With limited infrastructure, waste in these regions frequently ends up in landfills or is improperly disposed of. This gap in waste management infrastructure highlights systemic inequities, as rural communities are left to depend on makeshift solutions. These challenges emphasize the pressing need for a unified and well-resourced approach to waste management. They’re working on a plan for waste management in this area. I think we're behind, like, most areas of the province, especially in urban areas, because they have more resources, more human resources and stuff. So, our garbage, I mean, it has to be trucked up the highway. So right now, without a formalized plan in place, I mean, people are doing what they have to do to move it, people want garbage in their yards. So, we're doing what we have to do to get it out. But I would like to see a more unified approach to disposing of items, much like there is in St. John's and more urban areas. But we just don't even have that here. Like, our garbage is going into the garbage. You know, they come and pick it up once a week. Participants expressed frustration over discontinuing localized hazardous waste collection programs, which once provided accessible and environmentally responsible disposal options. This gap poses significant ecological risks and highlights the consequences of inadequate community-specific waste management solutions. The absence of programs like hazardous waste collection days leaves residents without convenient disposal alternatives, increasing the risk of harmful practices such as illegal dumping or the contamination of natural resources. Reinstating these programs could reduce environmental harm and promote responsible waste management. Furthermore, a member in the band council emphasized the urgent need for funding to develop resources and ensure their proper utilization by the community when discussing immediate solutions for waste management in an Indigenous community. “Funding. Funding to get these resources, make these resources available to the community and the community, to uphold to them and to use these resources.” Local Waste Management Initiatives and Individual Responsibilities This sub-theme highlights the interplay between community-led waste management efforts and the role of individuals in addressing waste disposal challenges. The results emphasize that localized programs and personal responsibility to maintain long-lasting waste practices are the keys to conservation, particularly in Indigenous and remote communities. In the Indigenous community, repair programs are already in progress, allowing people living in Section 95 housing to access this service. This specific initiative is a practical application of CE principles that encourages individuals to repair appliances before discarding them. Taking this model community-wide could dramatically limit waste while offering fair access to repair resources for all income groups. Many participants commented on the cultural change from habits of repairing to an attitude of disposability. In the past, communities practiced sustainability out of necessity, ensuring nothing went to waste. These traditions align with CE principles but have lost prominence in modern consumption culture. I think people reference how things have changed, and they'll reference what it was like for when their parents were growing up or their grandparents. And they'll speak about it in a romantic way, you know, like you never threw anything out or someone always used… you know, my grandmother had a plastic hen on the fridge that was full of buttons because you just didn't throw anything out. You always used it. And so, no one would have used the term circular economy. Well, in the past, I think that people were reluctant to get rid of things they were more inclined to repair. Now we live in a climate where everybody is getting rid of it. As soon as something goes wrong with it, they're chucking it out. I can't say from my experience that that's the case in my house, because I'm fortunate, because now I would have to throw it out because I can't fix it. But my husband, he's handy, and he will fix it if he can. But the climate generally is for people when something breaks or when the newest thing comes on the market, they'll just get rid of it. Whereas before I don't think it was like that. People wanted to repair. Traditions that once embedded behaviors such as repair and reuse in daily life have been replaced by modern-day consumerism, placing convenience and disposability at the forefront of priorities. Education and incentives can re-establish a repair culture to counter this trend. The remote community of Harbour Main has implemented convenient waste disposal services to encourage responsible practices. These include twice-a-year bulk cleanup events, recycling initiatives, and year-round metal dumpsters for large appliances and other items. These services offer convenience, reduce the risk of illegal dumping, and help share waste management's financial and logistical burdens with residents. Moreover, when asked about waste management initiatives, Harbour Main's mayor highlighted ongoing efforts to improve sustainability. In the town right now we're in the process of a lot of recycling. There's going to be a composter soon up in operation at the community garden. So, things are going to be moving along a lot better in town with regards to composting. And also, we have a glass crusher. So that's going to be up and going very soon. I recycle all my cans and stuff really. Municipal programs such as composting and glass recycling are crucial advancements in decreasing landfill reliance and fostering CE practices. When combined with standard recycling efforts, these initiatives demonstrate the capacity of local governments to set a positive example. Discussion Through the integration of community voices, the research locations revealed systemic barriers to the adoption of CE as well as opportunities for TEK integration into waste management strategies. Therefore, this study highlights the need to address systemic barriers to adopting CE practices in remote and Indigenous communities. From themes 1, 6 and 7, it is clear that key obstacles include inadequate infrastructure, such as insufficient repair services, recycling facilities, and localized waste management programs. These challenges are particularly imperative in Indigenous communities, where logistical limitations and economic constraints worsen the difficulties of implementing sustainable waste management practices. In remote areas, limited infrastructure—including the lack of local repair services and recycling facilities—is a significant obstacle. High transportation costs and logistical inefficiencies make the situation worse, as it is often cheaper to buy a new item rather than have the old one repaired. According to McCollough ( 2009 ), repair costs for large appliances often exceed the cost of replacement, making disposal a rational choice for consumers (Marco, 2020 ). In addition, Cooper ( 2010 ) also discusses the barriers created by advancements in appliance technology, particularly with integrated electronics, which require specialized tools and skills to repair (Cooper, 2010 ). Milios, L. ( 2018 ) also emphasized that the logistics of transporting large appliances to remote locations for repair are prohibitively expensive. This issue aligns with findings in the white paper on Durable and Repairable Products: 20 Steps to a Sustainable Europe by the European Environmental Bureau (2020), emphasizing that design choices focusing on functionality over reparability significantly contribute to product disposability (Marco, 2020 ). Furthermore, the complexity of modern consumer goods, characterized by proprietary components and planned obsolescence, further hinders CE practices. Bakker et al. ( 2014 ) identify the trend of planned obsolescence in small appliances, where products are designed for limited lifespans. As they have observed, consumers are discouraged from investing time and money in repairing small appliances due to their perceived low value. Furthermore, Huisman, J. (2007) emphasizes that limited access to spare parts and repair services makes it easier for consumers to replace these items, particularly in rural areas. Economic considerations also play a significant role. Participants frequently mentioned the high cost of repairs relative to the affordability of new products. Likewise, Laitala et al. ( 2018 ) assert that this economic disparity discourages repair, particularly when budgets are limited. As such, this reflects the razor-and-blade business model, in which the primary device (printers, for example) is sold cheaply, while the consumables (ink) are expensive (Armstrong, et al., 2022). As a result of the frequency with which printers are discarded, Mayers et al. ( 2005 ) highlight the detrimental effects of this model on the environment, particularly concerning plastic and electronic waste (Mayers et al., 2005 ). Participants from the Indigenous community emphasized that sustainability principles are rooted in TEK. TEK advocates for repairing, repurposing, and sharing resources to reduce waste. The study also indicated that there are no traditional practices for CDGs, and modernization has diluted existing traditional practices. Limitations and Future Research There were several limitations in this study. First, the research team could not interview garbage collectors, who could have provided insights into operational difficulties and real-world experience with waste handling. Second, in Harbour Main, most participants were from an aging demographic, and younger community members were underrepresented in the interviews. This demographic may have influenced the findings regarding attitudes toward technology and repair. Future research should broaden its scope to encompass a more extensive range of remote and Indigenous communities, ensuring the inclusion of diverse perspectives. Conducting quantitative analyses to evaluate the environmental and economic impacts of CE interventions, such as repair subsidies and localized recycling programs, would offer critical insights for policymakers and practitioners. Conclusions This research presented an original qualitative study aimed at exploring the barriers to implementing CE practices for CDGs in two NL communities: Harbour Main, a remote non-Indigenous community, and Conne River, a Mi'kmaq First Nation community. The study used a community-based participatory approach, where semi-structured interviews were conducted with community members and local governance representatives to assess their perceptions and experiences with the disposal, repair, and reuse of CDGs. The research utilized grounded theory methodology, with thematic coding and analysis conducted using ATLAS.ti software. The study highlighted significant barriers to adopting CE principles in remote and Indigenous communities by incorporating community voices and identified opportunities to incorporate TEK into local-scale waste management practices. Findings from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous participants highlight the gap between circular intent and systemic feasibility, with high repair costs, a lack of local recycling or waste diversion services, and limited infrastructure being the key barriers to CE engagement. Achieving equity in CE implementation requires addressing the infrastructural disparities between urban and rural areas. Indigenous communities should not be left behind in the global transition toward sustainability. By providing these communities with the necessary tools and resources, we can enable them to become leaders in sustainable waste management, contributing meaningfully to global efforts to combat environmental challenges and promote circularity. Abbreviations CE Circular Economy CDGs Consumer durable goods TEK Traditional Ecological Knowledge NL Newfoundland and Labrador Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was duly approved by the McMaster Research Ethics Board (MREB) (McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada) and the Interdisciplinary Committee on Ethics in Human Research (ICEHR) at Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Canada to ensure compliance with ethical guidelines. Ethics approval was granted on July 21, 2023 under MREB #6008. Consent for publication All the coauthors give consent for publication Competing interests: On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no competing interest. Funding The study was funded by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), Canada under the grant, Imagining Canada’s Future (ICF). Author Contribution YAFT: Conducted field study, collected data and analyzed them and wrote the first draft of the manuscript; AS: Conceptualized the study, conducted field study, analyzed and interpretation of data, editing manuscript; SS: Conceptualized the study, interpretation of data; AJ and NF: assisting in field study and framing research questions; DP: project management. Acknowledgement The authors gratefully acknowledge unconditional support from the community leaders and study participants. Availability of data and material The recorded interviews and transcripts are under custody of the corresponding author. As per ethics guidelines of McMaster University and Memorial University of Newfoundland, the audio records and transcripts cannot be shared with public without formal consent of the participants. References Armstrong M, Vickers J (2022) Patterns of Competitive Interaction. Econometrica. ;90:153–91. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ftr/ 10.3982/ECTA18937 ATLAS.ti The #1 Software for Qualitative Data Analysis [Internet]. ATLAS.ti. [cited 2025 Mar 22]. Available from: https://atlasti.com Bakker C, Wang F, Huisman J, den Hollander M (2014) Products that go round: exploring product life extension through design. Journal of Cleaner Production. 69: 10–16. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.028 Cooper T (2010) The significance of product longevity. Longer Lasting Products: Alternatives to the Throwaway Society. Routledge (London), pp 3–36 ECCC. Solid Waste Diversion and Disposal. Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators. Environment and Climate Change Canada (2024) Available from: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/eccc/documents/pdf/cesindicators/solid-waste/2024-nov/solid-waste-diversion-disposal-en.pdf GoC. Solid waste management for northern and remote communities: planning and technical guidance document. En14-263/2016E-PDF. Government of Canada Publications (2017) Available from: https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/eccc/En14-263-2016-eng.pdf Grant K, Goldizen FC, Sly PD, Brune M-N, Neira M, van den Berg M et al (2013) Health consequences of exposure to e-waste: a systematic review. Lancet Glob Health 1:e350–361 Huisman J, Magalini F, Kuehr R, Maurer C, Ogilvie S, Poll J et al (2007) 2008 Review of Directive 2002/96 on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). Available from: http://collections.unu.edu/view/UNU:8733 Kirchherr J, Reike D, Hekkert M (2017) Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. ; 127, 221–232. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005 Korhonen J, Nuur C, Feldmann A, Birkie SE (2018) Circular economy as an essentially contested concept. J Clean Prod 175:544–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111 Laitala K, Klepp I, Henry BK (2018) Use phase of apparel: A literature review for Life Cycle Assessment with focus on wool. Consum Res Nor SIFO. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Science10.13140/RG.2.2.25769.90729 Marco (2020) HOP publie un livre blanc inédit pour mettre fin à l’obsolescence programmée en Europe [Internet]. HOP. Available from: https://www.halteobsolescence.org/hop-publie-un-livre-blanc-inedit-pour-mettre-fin-a-lobsolescence-programmee-en-europe/ Mayers CK, France CM, Cowell SJ (2005) Extended Producer Responsibility for Waste Electronics: An Example of Printer Recycling in the United Kingdom. J Ind Ecol 9:169–189. https://doi.org/10.1162/1088198054821672 McCollough J (2009) Factors impacting the demand for repair services of household products: The disappearing repair trades and the throwaway society. International Journal of Consumer Studies. ;33:619–26. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00793.x Milios L (2018) Advancing to a Circular Economy: three essential ingredients for a comprehensive policy mix. Sustain Sci 13, 861–878 Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0502-9 MMSB. Multi-Materials Stewardship Annual Report. Government of Newfoundland and Labrador (2022) Available from: https://www.gov.nl.ca/ecc/files/Multi-MaterialsStewardshipBoardAnnualReport2022-23.pdf Proske M, Winzer J, Marwede M, Nissen NF, Lang KD (2016) Obsolescence of electronics - the example of smartphones. 2016 Electronics Goes Green 2016+ (EGG) , Berlin, Germany, pp. 1–8. 10.1109/EGG.2016.7829852 Rogers HA, Deutz P, Ramos TB (2021) Repairing the circular economy: Public perception and participant profile of the repair economy in Hull, UK. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 168:105447. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105447 Sonix Automatically convert audio and video to text: Fast, Accurate, & Affordable. Available from: https://sonix.ai/ UNEP UNEP circularity platform. Electronics. 2025. UN Environmental Program. Available from: https://buildingcircularity.org/electronics/ USEPA. Guide to the Facts and Figures Report about Materials, Waste and Recycling (2025) [Last updated on March 28, 2025]. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/guide-facts-and-figures-report-about van Nes N, Cramer J (2006) Product lifetime optimization: a challenging strategy towards more sustainable consumption patterns. Journal of Cleaner Production . ;14 (15–16):1307–1318. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.04.006 Whyte KP (2013) On the role of traditional ecological knowledge as a collaborative concept: a philosophical study. Ecol Process 2(7). https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-1709-2-7 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Supplementaryinformation.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 30 Dec, 2025 Reviews received at journal 18 Sep, 2025 Reviews received at journal 09 Sep, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 04 Sep, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 03 Sep, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 02 Sep, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 24 Aug, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 30 Jul, 2025 First submitted to journal 29 Jul, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7244287","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":510426481,"identity":"ee45aba4-e573-471f-bed2-345a87ce0f28","order_by":0,"name":"Yasamin Atabaki","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Memorial University of Newfoundland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yasamin","middleName":"","lastName":"Atabaki","suffix":""},{"id":510426482,"identity":"d5b56ca7-b81d-45a3-a3f3-392135a6671c","order_by":1,"name":"Atanu Sarkar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Memorial University of Newfoundland","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Atanu","middleName":"","lastName":"Sarkar","suffix":""},{"id":510426483,"identity":"3bd34228-2bd6-4a27-bed3-3b55db4d43b6","order_by":2,"name":"Shegufa Shetranjiwalla-Merchant","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Memorial University of Newfoundland (Grenfell campus)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shegufa","middleName":"","lastName":"Shetranjiwalla-Merchant","suffix":""},{"id":510426484,"identity":"dbc2e8f5-f577-4d45-9df7-0d144c260236","order_by":3,"name":"Ada John","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Miawpukek First Nations","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ada","middleName":"","lastName":"John","suffix":""},{"id":510426485,"identity":"e1f6db98-6b85-44ba-959b-a0561d11b71c","order_by":4,"name":"Devashish Pujari","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"McMaster University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Devashish","middleName":"","lastName":"Pujari","suffix":""},{"id":510426486,"identity":"e6d3b578-63fa-43e5-947e-38a7a6246e6c","order_by":5,"name":"Nicholas Fairbridge","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Memorial University of Newfoundland","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nicholas","middleName":"","lastName":"Fairbridge","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-29 14:23:22","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7244287/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7244287/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":90905292,"identity":"5a33bde2-3be4-46c5-b9aa-aee3b0d3dda6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 13:03:53","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":561147,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe approximate distance of each community from its respective landfill\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figures171.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7244287/v1/10a7bb51ee2cbe483ffd9fd4.png"},{"id":90905295,"identity":"80748d90-d34f-4dfe-86e1-a8a91df293b8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 13:03:54","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":563644,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eData Analysis Flow Chart\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figures172.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7244287/v1/4232285ddf5779821d388a56.png"},{"id":90904618,"identity":"2087fc19-94d9-40a1-93c3-09a7b54f8714","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 12:55:54","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":791304,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThemes and Associated Sub-Themes\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figures173.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7244287/v1/a0907aba2b63d6edfde781c8.png"},{"id":90905293,"identity":"8ce9da0d-12f0-4621-bc66-b7eefd7b6040","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 13:03:54","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":269952,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFrequency of themes mentioned by participants and number of selected quotes\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figures174.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7244287/v1/68501e3a9252128372123ac7.png"},{"id":90904619,"identity":"0f500981-a77f-4519-b55d-4c60dd092118","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 12:55:54","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":251153,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFrequency of sub-themes mentioned by participants and number of selected quotes\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figures175.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7244287/v1/6c649bcd8e3d8b13eaf82b87.png"},{"id":90907065,"identity":"f0d826a1-7382-4a36-9c13-4dcc0f7bb0a5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 13:19:55","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":3054705,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7244287/v1/824b2a27-6e18-4c57-ba27-9ae18370df36.pdf"},{"id":90904627,"identity":"215bbfd9-c170-4be5-9cf7-a49e0c65c459","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-09 12:55:54","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":364053,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Supplementaryinformation.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7244287/v1/94bb0a039c167d67f7eabc0e.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Exploring Barriers in Promoting Circular Economy of Consumer Durable Goods in Remote and Indigenous Communities in Newfoundland and Labrador","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eDurable goods are products that have a lifespan of more than three years, as defined by the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2025). Consumer durable goods (CDGs), such as household appliances and electronics, play a significant role in global consumption, and their production and disposal have serious environmental and health consequences. As planned obsolescence has increased, new technologies have become less durable and not reparable, generating more waste after the end of life (van Nes et al., 2006). Many of these products contain toxic substances, such as heavy metals and flame retardants (UNEP, 2025). For instance, due to the ineffective management of electronic waste (e-waste), precious metals such as gold, silver, copper, nickel, and aluminum, which could otherwise be recovered and reused, are lost, leading to increased demand for virgin resource extraction (Grant et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, toxic and hazardous substances are released into the surrounding environment, contaminating the global environment by releasing persistent organic pollutants and mercury and posing health risks to the workers and communities that reside nearby toxic waste dumps (UNEP, 2025).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite increasing concerns about environmental sustainability, circular economy (CE) principles such as reusing, refurbishing, remanufacturing, etc., remain absent in CDG manufacturing and disposal, intensifying environmental degradation and resource depletion (Milios, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Although CE frameworks have been developed to encourage waste minimization, resource efficiency, and product longevity, limited research has been conducted specifically regarding public perception, consumer behaviors, and socio-economic barriers such as high repair costs compared to replacement, a lack of financial incentives for refurbished goods, limited access to recycling facilities, and consumer preferences for new products over repaired ones (Cooper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Most existing studies focus on general waste management, overlooking cultural and local perspectives that could drive circularity at the community level (Laitala, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Kirchherr et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Korhonen, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The widespread reliance on a linear \"take-use-waste\" model, which prioritizes convenience and disposability over sustainability, discourages consumers from participating in repair, reuse, and material recovery, highlighting a critical gap in transitioning towards CE-based CDG management (Bakker, et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn Canada, particularly in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), waste management challenges are exacerbated by geographic isolation and limited infrastructure (MMSB, 2022). The Canadian government's solid waste diversion report measures the generation, recycling, composting, combustion, energy recovery, and landfilling of these materials from the CDGs in municipal solid waste (MSW). In 2022, Canada's national solid waste diversion rate stood at 27%, meaning that just over a quarter of all MSW was kept out of landfills through recycling, composting, and other recovery processes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHowever, NL had the lowest diversion rate in the country at just 11%, falling well below the national average (ECCC, 2024). This is especially true in rural and Indigenous communities in NL, which often lack access to repair facilities, recycling programs, or sustainable means of disposal, resulting in limited options and a tendency to landfill CDGs (GoC, 2017). These challenges conflict with traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), which emphasizes environmental stewardship and sustainable resource use (Whyte, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Despite these abovementioned issues, no research has specifically focused on CE strategies for CDGs in rural and Indigenous communities of NL. This underscores an urgent need for community-led approaches to explore TEK for Indigenous communities with modern CE practices. This study addresses this gap by identifying obstacles to CE adoption and proposing culturally appropriate waste management solutions for CDGs in rural and Indigenous communities in NL.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eObjectives\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study aims to identify the barriers and challenges in promoting a CE for CDGs in remote and Indigenous communities of NL. To contribute to a sustainable and inclusive CE model, the study will integrate TEK of Indigenous communities and community voices to develop a comprehensive framework. The following objectives of the study are shown below:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo identify the barriers and challenges in the current ‘take-make-waste’ linear economy that hinder recovery, reuse, and regeneration in CDGs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo determine the current/dominant product design's negative impacts on the community in the current linear economy.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo explore how TEK can contribute to understanding the impact of waste from CDGs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo develop an inclusive CE framework based on insights from remote and Indigenous communities to guide the waste management of CDGs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eStudy Design\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUsing a thematic analysis based on TEK and CE principles, this research takes a qualitative, community-based participatory approach. The study design utilizes content-rich, descriptive narratives from a community of members to understand barriers to CE implementation. This approach aligns with the study objectives to first understand perceptions of community experiences with CDGs and waste management practices in remote and Indigenous communities before applying external models of CE implementation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eStudy locations\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt was important to first establish a relationship with communities before co-producing research objectives with their elders and members. For this research, northern non-Indigenous and Indigenous communities were selected based on the established relationships and their expressed interest in the research outcomes. The two communities that helped develop the research objectives and work with the supervisory team in NL are; a) Harbour Main – A rural, non-Indigenous community, and b) Conne River (Miawpukek First Nation) – An Indigenous community. These communities helped the researchers capture both remote and Indigenous perspectives. As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, Harbour Main is located approximately 65 km from its expected waste management facility at Robin Hood Bay. In comparison, Conne River is approximately 172 km from the nearest regional waste site in Norris Arm. The considerable distance and limited transportation resources and facilities make waste disposal a significant challenge for the Miawpukek First Nation community (Conne River). Consequently, many residents dispose of waste, including CDGs, in a local landfill just a few kilometres away from the community. This highlights the systemic waste management disparities affecting remote Indigenous communities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eParticipants\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdults, those 18 years of age and older, were considered eligible to participate in the study. Participants included; a) Community leaders (band members of the council, mayor), b) Community members (youth and seniors of all genders), c) Representatives from the public service sector.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e First, ethics applications were developed with collaborators from these communities, and participants were identified with their assistance. This study was duly approved by the McMaster Research Ethics Board (MREB) and the Interdisciplinary Committee on Ethics in Human Research at Memorial University of Newfoundland to ensure compliance with ethical guidelines. Ethics approval was granted on July 21, 2023 under MREB #6008. The interview questions are provided in Supplementary file 1.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eData Collection\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSemi-structured interviews were prepared with the help of the community collaborators and passed ethics approval. These questions were open ended to allow participants to share their views and provide insights and intended recommendations on waste management practices for various CDGs categories, including large household appliances such as TVs, washing machines, dryers, etc., and electronics. The interview questions were adopted from the validated questionnaire from Rogers et al.’s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) study, \u003cem\u003e\"Repairing the Circular Economy: Public Perception and Participant Profile of the Repair Economy in Hull, United Kingdom,\"\u003c/em\u003e which investigated public perceptions of repair practices in the context of the CE (Rogers et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The interviews were conducted in-person, lasting around 30 to 40 minutes​. Drawing on the study's insights, the study explored themes similarly within the frames of remote and Indigenous communities in NL. Participants were recruited via community leaders (the band chief for Conne River, the mayor of Harbour Main). Recruitment initiatives included postings on community Facebook​ pages, flyers hung in public spaces, and in-person outreach​. The participants received an information letter explaining the study's purpose, interview questions, and their rights, including the option to withdraw at any time​. Informed consent was obtained through a signed consent form, and for those who could not sign in advance, oral consent was accepted​. Data were stored securely following Memorial University's ethics guidelines, and confidentiality was guaranteed. ​After the interview, participants were compensated with a gift card as a gesture of gratitude​.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eQualitative Analysis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe primary data received from interviews were transcribed and analyzed using standard data processing software. In this study, the information from the interviews was transcribed using the Sonix.ai website (Purchased plan and licensed) and was uploaded into ATLAS.ti (version 25.0.0.32864) software for qualitative data analysis. During the primary coding process, emerging codes were developed from the interviews as they arose, incorporating both the software's suggested codes and the researcher's insights (Atlas.ti, 2025; Sonix.ai, 2025). A separate coding process was conducted for each community to capture the unique perspectives and contextual differences within each community. After completing the initial coding, themes were developed based on interview quotes, and the researcher categorized the distribution of these quotes among themes. As a result of the diversity and size of some primary codes, sub-themes were created to provide a more comprehensive and detailed analysis of the data. A structured synthesis of the qualitative data was achieved through this process, thereby allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the barriers and opportunities related to CE practices in each community. This process is illustrated in the flow chart shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eQualitative analysis was crucial for this research because it considers these communities' nuanced experiences, attitudes, and contextual difficulties. Seven themes and sub-themes were developed from the data sourced from the interviews, and the emerging codes developed (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The researchers developed these themes through careful coding and the interpretation of interview transcripts. While ATLAS.ti was used to support this process, it did not generate themes independently; instead, the software suggested potential codes and thematic groupings by highlighting frequently occurring keywords and phrases. These suggestions served as prompts for deeper interpretation, but the researcher determined and defined the final themes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUsing Atlas.ti, from the codes and sub-codes generated during the analysis, broader themes and sub-themes were constructed to represent the main challenges (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). The sub-themes provide more granular insight into specific issues raised by participants. Two figures have been provided to provide a better understanding of the categories. As shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, the number of quotes for each created theme category is accompanied by the significance of each category compared to the other categories, and as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, the number of quotes corresponds to each of the various sub-themes identified by participants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDisclaimer 1: “The numbers in this chart represent selected, illustrative quotes and may not reflect the full range of data collected.”\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDisclaimer 2: “Some quotes may appear in multiple theme groups due to their relevance to more than one category. This overlap reflects the interconnected nature of the themes and sub-themes identified in the qualitative analysis.”\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eDemographic Profiles of Participants\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants recorded their demographic profile, which included self-identification of their gender, educational level, income, and occupation. Eighteen members were interviewed in the Conne River community and 14 in the Harbour Main community. Out of thirty-two participants, 18 members identified as women (56%) and 14 identified as men (44%). Figure S2.1 (supplementary information) shows that most participants achieved higher education levels, with the majority (13 participants, 40%) holding post-secondary or bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degrees (10 participants, 31%). Other education levels, such as college diplomas and trades in specific technical programs, were less common, with minimal representation from participants with Grade 11 or 12 education or specialized certifications.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants were also asked about their income as shown in Figure S2.2 (supplementary file). The figure comparing individual and household incomes reveals a clear trend: household incomes are significantly higher than individual incomes, indicating the impact of multiple earners within households. Income levels vary widely, with some participants reporting household incomes above \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e200,000 while others fall into much lower ranges. Individual incomes tend to concentrate on lower brackets, with relatively few exceeding \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e100,000. This variation likely impacts participants' ability to engage with CE practices and access repair and waste management services. Participants were also asked about their occupation (Figure S2.3 (supplementary file)). The figure highlights a diverse array of participant occupations, with retired individuals, teachers, healthcare, administration and trade jobs representing the most common roles among participants. This occupational diversity spans fields such as health, education, finance, and manual labor, offering the study a wide range of expertise and perspectives. The themes in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e are discussed in detail here, and quotes from community members that provide the frequency in Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e are indicated in this discussion.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThemes\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt is clear from Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e that the community members showed a great interest in applying CE principles (45 to 50 quotes) as indicated by the maximum quotes on the theme of challenges in applying CE principles (blue bar), in their attitudes towards CE principles (pink bar) and the decision-making drivers in their choices for CE (orange bar). They were also interested in waste management related to CE (darker green bar) but had less interest in applying TEK or knowledge about the transportation and product design in the CE (light green, red and yellow bars, 15\u0026ndash;22 quotes) as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. From Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, it is evident that community members had barriers to CE and waste management at the consumer level highest on their mind, as these showed up as the most frequent themes in the interviews (blue and darker green bars, 30\u0026ndash;35 quotes). Repair and reuse including costs and price considerations were second and overshadowed environmental sensitivities, and any good intentions clearly indicate opportunities for systemic and policy changes in these areas.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTheme 1: Challenges in Applying CE Principles\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on the themes and sub-themes identified, participants identified large and small appliances and electronics as the most challenging product categories to apply CE principles. These categories were highlighted due to frequent struggles related to repair costs, the accessibility of repair services, and the complexity of modern technology. The following analysis further examines these categories and identifies their core barriers that inhibit participants from practicing CE successfully. More quotes from participants are provided in the supplementary documents for each theme.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLarge Appliances\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs a result of their complexity, high repair costs, and technological advancements, large appliances, such as washing machines, refrigerators, and dryers, present significant barriers to implementing CE principles. Due to the integration of electronic and specialized components in modern large appliances, repairs are more challenging and costlier than those of older models.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVan Nes and Cramer (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e) state that the lack of accessible repair services and expensive proprietary parts contribute to higher rates of replacement for large appliances [2]. Milios, L. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) highlights that this issue is exacerbated in rural or remote areas, where repair services are scarce, and that geographical isolation often discourages repairs due to logistical costs [5].\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIf my dryer, if it was broken, and if there was somebody around here who could fix it, uh, fairly quickly. And if I didn't have to drive, I guess 150km to Grand Falls, wait 3 or 4 weeks to get it fixed and then get it shipped back to me. So, I still would need something in the meantime. Not like there's a laundromat around here so probably just as easy to get one delivered the next day. So, I still have a dryer, right? It's just we're isolated down here. We don't have repair shops and stuff like that.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSmall Appliances\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe low cost and short lifespan of small appliances such as toasters and coffee makers often lead to their replacement. The repair cost often exceeds the replacement cost, resulting in a culture of throwaway consumption. Moreover, due to their affordability and perceived disposability, small appliances are discouraged from being repaired.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThey're just cheap to buy. I just wouldn't, I don't know. And then one of them, I guess it's just it's accessibility that no one says, hey, I'm a toaster repairman or I'm a hairdryer repair person, right? You just so and they're just cheap to buy and go down to Walmart and get one for \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e12. So, it cost me more in gas to get a repairman out here than it would be to go to Walmart and get a new one.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eElectronics\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe topic of this theme is based on the most frequently mentioned electronic categories highlighted by participants, including mobile phones, larger electronics such as televisions, and printers. Each category presents unique challenges related to planned obsolescence, repair costs, and replacement behavior, which hinder the adoption of CE principles. Many participants reported that fully functional phones became obsolete due to the discontinuation of software updates or compatibility issues.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI just somehow think these high-tech companies are aware of how old your phone is, and then they start pop ups, start coming on your phone of issues. There's no more storage space. There's no more backup. You can't back up your Gmail and all this kind of stuff, and the phone becomes basically dysfunctional. So, I was at the point where none of my calls would go through, or I'd try to call from places where the calls would work before and they would no longer work. So, it becomes so frustrating trying to operate that you're driven to get another one. So, I hated to give up on my phone because it was perfect. It wasn't damaged, it was no scrapes on it. I kept it meticulous, but I felt I had to.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, Proske et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) highlight that younger consumers are influenced by trends and a desire for the latest technology, which can lead to the disposal of older devices, even if they are still functional (Proske et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Over time, the declining cost of larger electronic devices, such as TVs, makes replacement more cost-effective than repair. Participants noted that the cost of repairing a TV often equals or exceeds the price of a new one. Printers illustrate a unique challenge in applying CE principles due to the high cost of ink refills compared to the price of new printers. Consumers are driven to frequently replace their printers due to this cost imbalance.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTo get the ink for it was more expensive... than just buying a printer at Costco with ink in it. The printer we have upstairs was $80, and new ink would be $140.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlso, without any facilities for extended producer responsibility and access to returning obsolete hardware, disposal is only limited to landfilling instead of recycling or refurbishing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCE Principles Barriers\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA broader understanding of the barriers to applying CE principles can be divided into three main categories: Cost of Repair versus Replacement, Availability of Repair Services, and Technological Complexity. The high cost of repairs relative to the low cost of replacements has been identified as a significant obstacle.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn Grand Falls, there's somebody who could do it. But I have to pay him to come from Grand Falls to do that and then go back up. So that's a full day for him. So, he's going to want his mileage. He's going to want an eight-hour day on top of the repair costs and everything else. So, I'm paying \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e1,500 to get him to repair a \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e1,000 fridge.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother significant barrier is the lack of access to repair services, particularly in rural and remote areas. Participants frequently mentioned the difficulty of finding repair professionals nearby, long wait times, and high transportation costs, making repairs impractical. Moreover, from the interviews, we learned that modern electronics become increasingly challenging to repair due to their cutting-edge designs, proprietary components, and failure to standardize components. Participants mentioned that even a minor problem with a device will often require an extensive diagnosis and require one-of-a-kind components that cannot be replaced without professional help.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTheme 2: Community Attitudes Toward CE Principles\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAn examination of community behaviors, preferences, and challenges associated with the adoption of CE principles is presented in this theme. It is divided into two main sub-themes: 1) Reuse, Repair, and Disposal Preferences and 2) Environmental and Economic Considerations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eReuse, Repair, and Disposal Preferences\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants demonstrated a range of attitudes toward reusing, repairing, and disposing of products that were often shaped by the type of product, the resources available, and their confidence in repair attempts. Community members are also interested in repair and reuse, especially with sentimental or high-value items. However, time, cost, and accessibility are common barriers to repair. While emotional attachment motivates some repair efforts, a lack of convenience often leads to disposal instead.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrequent Repair Attempts: Several participants expressed a willingness to repair certain items, particularly furniture and tools, which they viewed as durable and worth maintaining. One participant explained how they often repair tools to extend their lifespan:\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe share tools in our neighborhood, and if something breaks, we try to fix it. Tools are expensive, so it\u0026rsquo;s better to keep them working for as long as possible.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eEase of Online Resources: The availability of online tutorials (e.g., YouTube) has enabled some community members to attempt repairs themselves. Those with do it yourself confidence used these platforms to repair smaller appliances and household items. More complex repairs, however, remain challenging.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u0026hellip;Getting repair guys out here is a challenge. So, the last two things\u0026mdash;my dryer and fridge\u0026mdash;I fixed myself with YouTube's help. Once you get the part numbers, it's straightforward\u0026hellip;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eRecycling and Disposal Challenges: Small appliances are often disposed of despite efforts to repair them due to limited recycling options and repair feasibility. Individual circumstances, such as time constraints, life stages, and resource availability, play a significant role in disposal decisions. Disposal often becomes the default option when repairing or recycling requires considerable effort.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs someone with limited time and two kids, I think how you answer that question is based on your support network and where you live and like where you're privileged or what space you're in in your life. Because when the kids were small, I would have put anything in the garbage because if it... the overhead to get something done.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe participants also identified significant logistical and infrastructure barriers to responsible disposal. A lack of nearby disposal facilities often makes proper disposal inconvenient or impossible, especially in remote communities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResponses showed that there is genuine interest among the community members to repair and reuse items, particularly high-value or sentimental items, yet systemic barriers such as time constraints, high repair costs, low technical skills, local repair service options, and a lack of disposal and recycling\u0026ensp;infrastructure undermine engagement with circular behaviors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEnvironmental and Economic Considerations\u003c/b\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCommunity attitudes reflect a mix of environmental awareness and economic considerations. In some cases, sustainability is prioritized, while short-term financial convenience is the priority in other cases. Despite the tension between environmental values and financial realities, cost remains an important factor in decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, some participants noted a growing awareness of the environmental impact of waste, encouraging behaviors such as repurposing, recycling, and passing on items. As this consciousness has spread, people have become more resourceful within their community, making new use of older furniture or other possessions. They expressed how these practices not only minimize waste but also provide economic benefits, from earning cash back on recycled materials to saving money by reusing household items.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eI just find that people are more, uh, have a bit more awareness. They understand, like, you know, the impact of waste and on our environment. So, I find that people they're just more aware. So, they repurpose more, they sell more. You'd see people putting out stuff for the bulk garbage. But then there's always people who drive around looking, um, and can repurpose some of these things. Like we've noticed we had a gentleman that would cut the cords off TVs and stuff to kind of get the metal and the wire and stuff, to bring. And when he collects so much, then he would get, um, get a refund for the items when he stripped off the plastic. And the same thing goes for recycling batteries and different items. So, you can see the awareness, you can see people being smarter and passing on items.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTheme 3: Decision-Making Drivers in Community Choices for CE\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis theme investigates drivers of community decisions on CE practices. The results show that decisions arise from value-driven considerations, economic realities, warranty effects, and environmental consciousness. These elements address the complexity of decision-making at the community level and the nuanced trade-offs involved. This helps in understanding which products are more likely to be repaired or replaced, operationalizing CE principles in practice.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eValue-based decision making\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral participants emphasized the importance of value-based considerations in their decision-making, particularly when evaluating the quality, durability, and practicality of new or second-hand items. This is particularly evident when purchasing large appliances and high-cost items like large electronics. Purchasing a higher-quality item highlights a community preference for investing in reliable products that offer greater longevity and reduce the need for frequent repairs or replacements. Participants frequently compared this approach to choosing cheaper, lower-quality items, which may have a lower upfront cost but are perceived as less durable and having limited long-term value.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eI would say most of those items that you mentioned, the thing I would look at would be the quality of the item, right? So yeah, there is a price point, but I'd rather spend a little bit extra money on a brand that I knew would last as compared to one that, you know, some of these TVs are a prime example, you can go to Walmart and pick up a 60-inch TV for 400 bucks. Now, I don't know how long it lasts, there's only so many TV manufacturers out there and they're all swapping parts in and out. So, you know, uh, but I would generally look at price, and I guess the quality of the item would be my biggest thing when we purchase.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite varying levels of skepticism, value-based decision-making was also applied to the purchase of second-hand goods. Some individuals view second-hand items as a practical and affordable option, whereas others are concerned about their reliability and condition.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSome second-hand things are sort of better than others. You know, a second vehicle is certainly no issue. Secondhand furniture is okay. I am not sure if I'd be keen to buy a second-hand fridge or something like that. Cause I don't know if. cause with the car, you can look at the mileage and look at the shape of the vehicle. And that can give you an indication. That might give you an idea of what you're getting and maybe this is just some ignorance on my part of an understanding of those things. But I wouldn't be able to look at a fridge and say, oh yeah, it's got another five years in it for sure\u0026hellip; so, I don't know if I have the, the ability to make a good judgment call on those sorts of second-hand things, but say, for instance, vehicles or furniture and that sort of things you can do.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs a result of these attitudes, it is evident that a critical decision-making driver is a trade-off between perceived value and risk when purchasing second-hand goods, with a preference for items whose quality can be more easily determined (such as cars and furniture) and hesitation around goods such as appliances.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCost and Price Sensitivity\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEconomic considerations primarily influenced repair, reuse, and replacement decisions. Participants often weighed the repair cost against the replacement price, with many opting to replace when repair costs were deemed excessive. Many participants noted that they make repair or replacement decisions based on the relative costs involved.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSo, it would really be the availability of a repair person to come here specifically in rural, because that's shifted 20 years ago, you'd be able to find someone easily, and now it's not so easy. And so, it's the availability of someone who would physically come to your house and then how much that would cost, and the likelihood of the age of the object on how much money you would potentially spend on it. And so, if that was, you know, if we could get someone to come here and they came here and they said it was \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e500, but a new fridge is like a thousand, then it would be a conversation of like, what's the best investment, fixing it or buying a new one?\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe balance between short-term affordability and long-term risks and the financial implications of unforeseen issues often influences the decision to purchase second-hand. This view reflects the\u0026ensp;security and reliability of purchasing something new, especially when given a warranty. For many, warranties provide protection against having to pay out-of-pocket costs\u0026ensp;for repairs and peace of mind. In contrast, when purchasing second-hand, buyers generally accept more significant financial uncertainty since if something purchased is defective, the\u0026ensp;buyer bears the risk of having to repair/replace that property. Participants were particularly concerned about these issues for specific categories of items (e.g., electronics or appliances) as the potential\u0026ensp;repair cost could outweigh the initial savings of buying second-hand.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEnvironmental and Economic Trade-offs\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants often discussed how historical changes in consumption patterns influence present-day attitudes toward environmental and economic decisions. One participant reflected on generational differences, recalling how their mother, born in 1937, witnessed the transformation in waste patterns firsthand. Waste patterns have changed dramatically in a short period\u0026mdash;especially since the 1950s\u0026ensp;and 1960s, when disposable items became widespread. People owned fewer things, and those things were often made from more durable materials like wood. However, the\u0026ensp;rise of plastics and mass-produced materials like Formica created a disposable culture. Furthermore, participants often had difficulty choosing between environmental values and practical experience when replacing older appliances with new, energy-efficient models.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen it comes to the appliances I don't know. I haven't had good success I haven't really. It kind of discourages me actually going and buying new appliances. But I know new is better because it's better for the environment. And, you know, it's all low efficient, energy efficient. Um, but the old stuff lasts us forever.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis perspective reveals the tension between older appliances' perceived durability and newer models' environmental advantages. Although participants recognized that energy-efficient appliances are better for the environment, many were reluctant to purchase\u0026ensp;them based on earlier experiences involving reduced reliability or a shorter lifespan. The\u0026ensp;trade-off between the durability and sustainability benefits of modern options is still seen as a dilemma that naturally leads to delayed decisions and an unwillingness to replace items.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese findings emphasize the importance of addressing durability concerns in modern appliances while promoting their environmental benefits to encourage broader adoption. By bridging the gap between environmental efficiency and product longevity, manufacturers and policymakers can help reduce the hesitancy associated with sustainable choices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWarranty and Guarantee Influence\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants noted that their relationship with products often changed once the warranty period expired. Sometimes, items were discarded or replaced once warranty coverage was no longer available. Moreover, participants expressed frustration with the limitations of warranty periods and the challenges associated with their use.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe got warranty on that stuff, so we would send it away for warranty work. And then probably once the warranty was gone, we'd get rid of it and get something new.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eProactive engagement must be undertaken with companies since the expiration of a warranty often serves as a psychological and financial tipping point that influences the decision to replace instead of repair.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTheme 4: Influence of Product Lifespan on CE Principles\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe product lifespan significantly impacts participants' decisions regarding repair, reuse, or replacement. In line with CE principles, items with longer lifespans were considered more valuable, while those with shorter lifespans were disposed of more frequently.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eProduct Longevity and Ownership History\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants praised the durability of older appliances and furniture compared to newer models. Participants often reminisced about older products' superior durability and repairability, noting that they were designed for easy maintenance and built to last.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eI think that before people knew each other really well. And so, it would be more apt to pick up something that somebody else wasn't using, like down the street or whatever, because they knew each other, but that's just not necessarily the case. Products were more easy. They were built more durable. and a better quality. And they were built in a way that was meant to be fixed and live on for a long time. And now it's not. And I think that that's not necessarily a knowledge that I could share and fix in some way. It's just an unfortunate way that our society has moved towards making things more convenient and less expensive. So, nothing that I think would be very useful. Just unfortunate kind of the way society has moved.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral examples have been cited of decades-old appliances still being used compared to newer products that have a shorter lifespan. One respondent stated that furniture retailers now tell them that major appliances only last an average of 5 to 6 years, compared with older appliances that remained functional for decades.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral participants expressed disappointment at the decline in product quality, emphasizing that modern items are often viewed as disposable. Another participant reflected that products were considered valuable investments in the past, with appliances like microwaves being expensive luxury items. However, in today's world, mass production and lower-quality materials have made household goods cheaper and more disposable, reinforcing a culture of frequent replacement rather than long-term use.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese insights bring a sense of nostalgia for durable goods that lasted longer and aligned better with sustainable practices. Across the diverse group of participants, they expressed\u0026ensp;that modern products are often designed to prioritize convenience and affordability rather than longevity and/or repairability, creating challenges for integrating CE principles into everyday life.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWarranties and Guarantees\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA warranty can provide financial security and influence choices, particularly for high-cost items; however, participants also expressed frustration with the limitations and challenges associated with warranty processes. Many participants noted that the availability of a warranty encouraged them to seek repairs rather than replacements. Warranties were seen as a safety net that reduced the financial risk associated with repair costs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIf it was covered under warranty, yeah, I would go for repairs, but warranty work sometimes really hard to get done. And, repairs like, I've gone through probably three fridges, four fridges since, you know, in the last 20 years. And it seems like they don't last half as long as the older technology. this newer technology with the displays in them and the apps for the cell phone where you can go like to me, that's only just, it's a waste. You know, and it's way too expensive to repair.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants highlighted the importance of engaging directly with manufacturers to address repair needs, especially when warranties have expired. The level of support manufacturers provide plays a significant role in whether consumers choose to repair or replace their products, highlighting inconsistencies in key areas. While some manufacturers go the extra mile by offering repairs or replacements beyond the warranty period as a goodwill gesture, others are less flexible, leaving customers dissatisfied. Furthermore, accessibility is another challenge; some manufacturers lack local repair services, especially in remote areas, discouraging people from attempting repairs and pushing them toward replacements. Moreover, repair costs vary widely. While some manufacturers offer reasonably priced options, others impose high fees that make repairs unfeasible. Addressing these challenges by making repair services more accessible, affordable, and transparent could build consumer trust, encourage repairs over replacements, and align manufacturers\u0026rsquo; practices with the principles of a CE.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTheme 5: TEK-specific Themes and Further Business Models for Communities\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis theme examines the role of TEK and innovative business models tailored to the needs of local communities. It discusses the contribution of TEK to sustainable practices, especially in Indigenous communities, and identifies methods through which local businesses can align with CE principles. The analysis focuses on three sub-themes: Perception of TEK for CDGs, Education of New Generations on TEK, and Waste Management Plans for Indigenous Communities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePerception of TEK for CDGs\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants expressed a variety of viewpoints regarding TEK's role in managing life cycle stages of CDGs. While traditional knowledge remains a vital part of Indigenous culture, its role in managing CDG has been limited and often overshadowed by modern approaches and systemic challenges.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eCultural Values and Community Support: TEK strongly emphasizes community support and reducing waste, values deeply rooted in Indigenous practices today. Participants shared that they prioritize repairing and repurposing items rather than throwing them away, particularly when these items can serve others in their community.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLike us Indigenous, I guess we really like to help out family members and people in our own community. Like, instead of throwing something away, if we can get it fixed and it could serve someone else a better purpose, I would much rather do that.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis approach reflects TEK principles, prioritizing the community's well-being over individual convenience. By repairing items for redistribution, they minimize waste and foster sustainability within their community.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTraditional Practices vs. Modern Challenges\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHistorically, lifestyles guided by TEK naturally generated minimal waste, as they were shaped by resource scarcity. In contrast, modern living has brought about a disposable culture and new challenges in managing waste associated with CDGs. Many participants expressed frustration with current waste management systems, often citing landfills as a symbol of systemic inefficiency and environmental harm.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTraditional knowledge passed down through generations\u0026mdash;through parents, grandparents, and elders\u0026mdash;has long emphasized social and cultural norms that promote well-being and environmental stewardship. Following the principle of sustainability, teachings about respect and cleanliness were shared through daily interactions rather than formal schooling. However, one participant noted that modern practices often violate such\u0026ensp;teachings as current behaviors increasingly disregard the principles of environmental responsibility once deeply embedded in everyday life.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThey find it appalling. Every one of them. Actually, if you speak to 90, I say 90% of the community will say they're blown away by the landfill. And I think, and you spoke of being in the position that I am in. And it's really frustrating. It is frustrating and I remember when I first got on the council, somebody looked up and said, you must feel powerful. And I said, I never felt so weak before in my life. And that's the God's honest truth because you feel like.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThese concerns reflect a deep alignment with TEK's principles of environmental stewardship. Participants also highlighted the lack of infrastructure and support needed to apply these principles to managing CDGs effectively. Another participant mentioned that several traditional practices have been diminished due to modernization. This observation emphasizes the challenge of balancing the preservation of traditional practices with modern life's economic and cultural demands, where affordability and convenience frequently take priority.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eContrasts Between Past and Present Waste Practices\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants reflected on how waste generation and management have changed over time, comparing the minimal waste of earlier generations to the modern disposable culture.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;It definitely not, well it kind of got the pros and cons too, because back in the day you didn't have a whole lot. I mean, for our community, you were lucky if you had TVs. I remember when we were growing up, we didn't have a TV. And the disposal of those kinds of things wasn't so much in your face kind of thing. But we didn't have, back when we were growing up, we didn't have a disposal site\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ekind of thing. So, you could have been something like, if you walked around the beach, you could see a mic, it wouldn't be a microwave back then, but whatever, over there. But right now, even though it's not the best, but it's in a confined area.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis contrast highlights how TEK was rooted in sustainable living, with little interaction with CDGs, which were nonexistent or considered luxuries. The emergence of consumer culture and the accessibility of inexpensive, disposable items have significantly transformed these practices, posing new challenges in applying TEK to today's waste management needs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEducation of New Generations on TEK\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants from Indigenous communities frequently emphasized the importance of passing down ecological values to younger generations; however, these teachings were available for broader sustainability principles rather than specific methods for managing or disposing of CDGs.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI don't know if it's concentrated but have it incorporated into the schooling, the different aspects of Aboriginal content kind of thing, you know, like the food, taking care of mother Earth, like that kind of thing. So, yeah, you could go off to universities and get degrees and stuff like that, but be conscious of your history like you are kind of what you've been exposed to, kind of thing. We were kind of not very well off and we didn't have much. So, you took care of your things. You learned how to repair things when you can, or whatever the case may be, you could follow that through. It doesn't matter that you get 80 or 90 or \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e100,000. You still could do the same thing because it was instilled into you.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWaste Management Plans for Indigenous Communities\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants from Indigenous communities highlighted ongoing challenges and emerging solutions in managing waste, particularly for CDGs. A critical need for community-driven waste management programs was highlighted, as no structured waste management systems are available. As identified by participants, the absence\u0026ensp;of local infrastructure was a common barrier to effective waste management. The logistical burden of transporting waste to distant facilities, which requires personal time, effort, and money, discourages responsibility for disposal, highlighting the need for community-driven solutions like mobile collection programs to alleviate some of the environmental burden on communities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eProactive efforts to partner with regional waste management entities demonstrate a strong commitment to enhancing waste disposal practices; however, challenges such as disagreements over tipping fees must be addressed to ensure the success of these collaborations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo address these challenges, participants proposed innovative solutions that emphasize a locally driven and collaborative approach. There has been discussion about establishing community recycling and disposal depots and leveraging existing resources and programs for support. Electronics and other recyclable materials could be collected at these depots. A community-operated depot offers two key advantages: enhancing access to recycling services and creating local job opportunities. Moreover, these depots could generate revenue by processing and tagging recyclable items.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere's things you can do. So that's one thing I'm interested in now is, can we set up a depot here? Something simple, and it's not necessarily that somebody's going to own this and make money off of it, but it's in the community, it's offering that recycling service, and we have employees that we can utilize for this through that program. So, it's not costing the depot any money to hire anybody. And now we've got people being put to work. People can drop off their stuff. Tag it. Money goes into an account. When they want to pull it out, they can pull it out.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe research objective to explore TEK as a potential framework for managing CDGs faced a significant limitation: transportation and access to services emerged as the primary barriers in Indigenous communities. Participants often identified logistical challenges as a\u0026ensp;barrier to proper disposal. The lack of infrastructure and geographic isolation prevent Indigenous communities from fully participating in CE practices despite their cultural alignment with sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTheme 6: Transportation and Accessibility of Repair Services in Remote and Indigenous Communities\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis theme delves into the challenges remote and Indigenous communities face in accessing repair services, emphasizing transportation barriers, logistical limitations, and their impact on CE practices. Interviews highlight that limited repair infrastructure and high costs often force residents to replace items rather than repair them, leading to increased waste and missed opportunities for sustainable practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTransportation and Access to Services\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral participants mentioned geographic isolation as a significant barrier to receiving repair services. The lack of local repair professionals and the distances required to access services result in inconvenience and costs.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eWell, one of the things, I guess, in where we're so far away from a, you know, service center is that it's very difficult to get stuff repaired, even from a personal perspective with my house. You know, if there was an opportunity to get it repaired, it would have to do it. But a lot of cases, you have to buy new because you can't take it somewhere to get it repaired unless you have to drive two hours away and then you're two weeks getting someone to look at it. So, you almost have to purchase. You have to purchase a new product.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe lack of local services also means fewer repair opportunities for CDGs, discouraging attempts to extend their lifespan.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTransportation Costs and Logistics\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe financial strain of transporting items for repair was a recurring theme. For larger appliances, the combined cost of transportation and repair frequently surpasses the expense of purchasing a new item. Consumers often anticipate that large companies will include transportation and installation services with their products; however, rural areas frequently encounter obstacles such as limited-service availability and added transportation costs, making access to these services more challenging.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIt\u0026rsquo;s not worth the hassle of taking it up the highway. You know, for the actual cost of a new one. Traveled up the highway, get a service personnel to look at it, get it repaired and go out and pick it up. It's just as, probably even cheaper to purchase a new one. You know, if you had a bigger ticket item, then you can weigh the pros and cons and see what the cost would be.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor large and small appliances, the logistical challenges and high costs associated with transporting items for repair often outweigh the benefits, particularly when replacement costs are comparable. The economic burden of transportation costs often creates a tipping point where replacing an item becomes more cost-effective than repairing it. This challenge is widespread with mid-range appliances, which usually fall between inexpensive and high-end options.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eImpact on Community Decision-Making\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTransportation challenges also have a direct and significant impact on community decision-making, especially in remote and Indigenous\u0026ensp;communities. Logistical and financial obstacles often drive whether people repair, replace, or even buy CDGs, as analyzed in a\u0026ensp;previous section on the Decision-Making Drivers in Community Choices for CE analysis. The absence of integrated services, such as delivery, installation, and old equipment removal, aggravates these challenges, influencing purchasing behavior and waste management practices.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I'm reluctant to buy anything in St. John's because I figure that they're going to charge me whack of money for transportation. I think we bought the fridge and stove from Sears in Bay Roberts when it existed. And they end up giving us a number of somebody who would do the transportation. And, that was an annoyance, because it seems to me a big company like Sears should do the deliveries and do the installation and take away the old equipment.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe absence of extended services from large companies is viewed as a missed opportunity to promote sustainable practices. If delivery and installation were included, community members would face fewer barriers to acquiring or maintaining CDGs, fostering alignment with CE principles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eReliance on Self- Repair and Local Networks\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe limited availability of repair services and the high transportation costs in remote and Indigenous communities often drive residents to depend on self-repair and local networks to maintain CDGs. This behavior demonstrates community resilience and resourcefulness but also highlights systemic barriers to professional repair services.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants often shared that their first response to malfunctioning appliances or other CDGs was to attempt repairs themselves. With professional repair services typically located hours away, self-repair has become a practical necessity in many cases.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHe would work really hard first to repair it himself. We have had things break down before. So, if a Maytag or if a fridge or a freezer or anything breaks down and you call the manufacturer, they'll say, okay, what's the closest repair person? And it's six hours away, it's St. John's. You don't get anything closer. So normally the company will sell, send the parts out to us, and we will try to repair it ourselves first. If that fails, then we replace it. So, then we dispose of it then. Yeah, but we try to repair it ourselves first if we can.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn addition to self-repair, community members frequently turn to informal networks, including neighbors or local professionals, for help with diagnosing and repairing items. These networks are essential in areas with limited or unavailable professional repair services.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, as was mentioned in previous sections by participants, to enhance their self-repair efforts, they increasingly utilize online resources like YouTube tutorials, which offer step-by-step instructions and guidance for troubleshooting and fixing a variety of issues. These tools empower those with limited technical expertise to take on repairs themselves, minimizing their dependence on professional services.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTheme 7: Waste Management and CE\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis theme examines the integration of waste management practices with CE principles in remote and Indigenous communities. Sub-themes such as Local Waste Management Initiatives and Challenges in Waste Disposal highlight how these communities address unique environmental and logistical challenges to align with CE principles.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eChallenges in Waste Disposal\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants often pointed out that the absence of formalized waste management systems places rural and remote areas at a significant disadvantage compared to urban centers. With limited infrastructure, waste in these regions frequently ends up in landfills or is improperly disposed of. This gap in waste management infrastructure highlights systemic inequities, as rural communities are left to depend on makeshift solutions. These challenges emphasize the pressing need for a unified and well-resourced approach to waste management.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThey\u0026rsquo;re working on a plan for waste management in this area. I think we're behind, like, most areas of the province, especially in urban areas, because they have more resources, more human resources and stuff. So, our garbage, I mean, it has to be trucked up the highway. So right now, without a formalized plan in place, I mean, people are doing what they have to do to move it, people want garbage in their yards. So, we're doing what we have to do to get it out. But I would like to see a more unified approach to disposing of items, much like there is in St. John's and more urban areas. But we just don't even have that here. Like, our garbage is going into the garbage. You know, they come and pick it up once a week.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants expressed frustration over discontinuing localized hazardous waste collection programs, which once provided accessible and environmentally responsible disposal options. This gap poses significant ecological risks and highlights the consequences of inadequate community-specific waste management solutions. The absence of programs like hazardous waste collection days leaves residents without convenient disposal alternatives, increasing the risk of harmful practices such as illegal dumping or the contamination of natural resources. Reinstating these programs could reduce environmental harm and promote responsible waste management.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, a member in the band council emphasized the urgent need for funding to develop resources and ensure their proper utilization by the community when discussing immediate solutions for waste management in an Indigenous community.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Funding. Funding to get these resources, make these resources available to the community and the community, to uphold to them and to use these resources.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLocal Waste Management Initiatives and Individual Responsibilities\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis sub-theme highlights the interplay between community-led waste management efforts and the role of individuals in addressing waste disposal challenges. The results emphasize that localized programs and\u0026ensp;personal responsibility to maintain long-lasting waste practices are the keys to conservation, particularly in Indigenous and remote communities.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the Indigenous community, repair programs are already in progress, allowing people living in Section 95 housing to\u0026ensp;access this service. This specific initiative is a practical application of CE principles that encourages individuals to repair appliances before discarding them. Taking this model community-wide\u0026ensp;could dramatically limit waste while offering fair access to repair resources for all income groups.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMany participants commented on the cultural change from habits of repairing\u0026ensp;to an attitude of disposability. In the past, communities practiced sustainability out of necessity, ensuring nothing went to waste. These traditions align with CE principles but have lost prominence in\u0026ensp;modern consumption culture.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI think people reference how things have changed, and they'll reference what it was like for when their parents were growing up or their grandparents. And they'll speak about it in a romantic way, you know, like you never threw anything out or someone always used\u0026hellip; you know, my grandmother had a plastic hen on the fridge that was full of buttons because you just didn't throw anything out. You always used it. And so, no one would have used the term circular economy.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWell, in the past, I think that people were reluctant to get rid of things they were more inclined to repair. Now we live in a climate where everybody is getting rid of it. As soon as something goes wrong with it, they're chucking it out. I can't say from my experience that that's the case in my house, because I'm fortunate, because now I would have to throw it out because I can't fix it. But my husband, he's handy, and he will fix it if he can. But the climate generally is for people when something breaks or when the newest thing comes on the market, they'll just get rid of it. Whereas before I don't think it was like that. People wanted to repair.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTraditions that once embedded behaviors such as repair and reuse in daily life have been replaced by modern-day consumerism, placing convenience and disposability at the forefront\u0026ensp;of priorities. Education and incentives can re-establish a repair culture to counter this trend.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe remote community of Harbour Main has implemented convenient waste disposal services to encourage responsible practices. These include twice-a-year bulk cleanup events, recycling initiatives, and year-round metal dumpsters for large appliances and other items. These services offer convenience, reduce the risk of illegal dumping, and help share waste management's financial and logistical burdens with residents.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoreover, when asked about waste management initiatives, Harbour Main's mayor highlighted ongoing efforts to improve sustainability.\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the town right now we're in the process of a lot of recycling. There's going to be a composter soon up in operation at the community garden. So, things are going to be moving along a lot better in town with regards to composting. And also, we have a glass crusher. So that's going to be up and going very soon. I recycle all my cans and stuff really.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMunicipal programs such as composting and glass recycling are crucial advancements in decreasing landfill reliance and fostering CE practices. When combined with standard recycling efforts, these initiatives demonstrate the capacity of local governments to set a positive example.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThrough the integration of community voices, the research locations revealed systemic barriers to the adoption of CE as well as opportunities for TEK integration into waste management strategies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTherefore, this study highlights the need to address systemic barriers to adopting CE practices in remote and Indigenous communities. From themes 1, 6 and 7, it is clear that key obstacles include inadequate infrastructure, such as insufficient repair services, recycling facilities, and localized waste management programs. These challenges are particularly imperative in Indigenous communities, where logistical limitations and economic constraints worsen the difficulties of implementing sustainable waste management practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn remote areas, limited infrastructure\u0026mdash;including the lack of local repair services and recycling facilities\u0026mdash;is a significant obstacle. High transportation costs and logistical inefficiencies make the situation worse, as it is often cheaper to buy a new\u0026ensp;item rather than have the old one repaired. According to McCollough (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e), repair costs for large appliances often exceed the cost of replacement, making disposal a rational choice for consumers (Marco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In addition, Cooper (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e) also discusses the barriers created by advancements in appliance technology, particularly with integrated electronics, which require specialized tools and skills to repair (Cooper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). Milios, L. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) also emphasized that the logistics of transporting large appliances to remote locations for repair are prohibitively expensive. This issue aligns with findings in the white paper on Durable and Repairable Products: 20 Steps to a Sustainable Europe by the European Environmental Bureau (2020), emphasizing that design choices focusing on functionality over reparability significantly contribute to product disposability (Marco, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the complexity of modern consumer goods, characterized by proprietary components and planned obsolescence, further hinders CE practices. Bakker et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e) identify the trend of planned obsolescence in small appliances, where products are designed for limited lifespans. As they have observed, consumers are discouraged from investing time and money in repairing small appliances due to their perceived low value. Furthermore, Huisman, J. (2007) emphasizes that limited access to spare parts and repair services makes it easier for consumers to replace these items, particularly in rural areas.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEconomic considerations also play a significant role. Participants frequently mentioned the high cost of repairs relative to the affordability of new products. Likewise, Laitala et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) assert that this economic disparity discourages repair, particularly when budgets are limited. As such, this reflects the razor-and-blade business model, in which the primary device (printers, for example) is sold cheaply, while the consumables (ink) are expensive (Armstrong, et al., 2022). As a result of the frequency with which printers are discarded, Mayers et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) highlight the detrimental effects of this model on the environment, particularly concerning plastic and electronic waste (Mayers et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants from the Indigenous community emphasized that sustainability principles are rooted in TEK. TEK advocates for repairing, repurposing, and sharing resources to\u0026ensp;reduce waste. The study also indicated that there are no traditional practices for CDGs, and modernization has diluted existing traditional practices.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLimitations and Future Research\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere were several limitations in this study. First, the research team could not interview garbage collectors, who could have provided insights into operational difficulties and real-world experience with waste handling. Second, in Harbour Main, most participants were from an aging demographic, and younger community members were underrepresented in the interviews. This demographic may have influenced the findings regarding attitudes toward technology and repair.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFuture research should broaden its scope to encompass a more extensive range of remote and Indigenous communities, ensuring the inclusion of diverse perspectives. Conducting quantitative analyses to evaluate the environmental and economic impacts of CE interventions, such as repair subsidies and localized recycling programs, would offer critical insights for policymakers and practitioners.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis research presented an original qualitative study aimed at exploring the barriers to implementing CE practices for CDGs in two NL communities: Harbour Main, a remote non-Indigenous community, and Conne River, a Mi'kmaq First Nation community. The study used a community-based participatory approach, where semi-structured interviews were conducted with community members and local governance representatives to assess their perceptions and experiences with the disposal, repair, and reuse of CDGs. The research utilized grounded theory methodology, with thematic coding and analysis conducted using ATLAS.ti software.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e The study highlighted significant barriers to adopting CE principles in remote and Indigenous communities by incorporating community voices and identified opportunities to incorporate TEK into local-scale waste management practices. Findings from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous participants highlight the gap between circular intent and systemic feasibility, with high repair costs, a lack of local recycling or waste diversion services, and limited infrastructure being the\u0026ensp;key barriers to CE engagement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAchieving equity in CE implementation requires addressing the infrastructural disparities between urban and rural areas. Indigenous communities should not be left behind in the global transition toward sustainability. By providing these communities with the necessary tools and resources, we can enable them to become leaders in sustainable waste management, contributing meaningfully to global efforts to combat environmental challenges and promote circularity.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionList\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eCE\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCircular Economy\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eCDGs\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsumer durable goods\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eTEK\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTraditional Ecological Knowledge\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"DefinitionListEntry\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Term\"\u003eNL\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"Description\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNewfoundland and Labrador\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e This study was duly approved by the McMaster Research Ethics Board (MREB) (McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada) and the Interdisciplinary Committee on Ethics in Human Research (ICEHR) at Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John\u0026rsquo;s, Canada to ensure compliance with ethical guidelines. Ethics approval was granted on July 21, 2023 under MREB #6008.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e All the coauthors give consent for publication\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eCompeting interests:\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eOn behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no competing interest.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study was funded by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), Canada under the grant, Imagining Canada\u0026rsquo;s Future (ICF).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eYAFT: Conducted field study, collected data and analyzed them and wrote the first draft of the manuscript; AS: Conceptualized the study, conducted field study, analyzed and interpretation of data, editing manuscript; SS: Conceptualized the study, interpretation of data; AJ and NF: assisting in field study and framing research questions; DP: project management.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors gratefully acknowledge unconditional support from the community leaders and study participants.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAvailability of data and material\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe recorded interviews and transcripts are under custody of the corresponding author. As per ethics guidelines of McMaster University and Memorial University of Newfoundland, the audio records and transcripts cannot be shared with public without formal consent of the participants.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArmstrong M, Vickers J (2022) Patterns of Competitive Interaction. Econometrica. ;90:153\u0026ndash;91. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ftr/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ftr/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3982/ECTA18937\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3982/ECTA18937\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eATLAS.ti The #1 Software for Qualitative Data Analysis [Internet]. ATLAS.ti. [cited 2025 Mar 22]. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://atlasti.com\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://atlasti.com\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBakker C, Wang F, Huisman J, den Hollander M (2014) Products that go round: exploring product life extension through design. Journal of Cleaner Production. 69: 10\u0026ndash;16. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.028\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.028\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCooper T (2010) The significance of product longevity. Longer Lasting Products: Alternatives to the Throwaway Society. Routledge (London), pp 3\u0026ndash;36\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eECCC. Solid Waste Diversion and Disposal. Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators. Environment and Climate Change Canada (2024) Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.canada.ca/content/dam/eccc/documents/pdf/cesindicators/solid-waste/2024-nov/solid-waste-diversion-disposal-en.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/eccc/documents/pdf/cesindicators/solid-waste/2024-nov/solid-waste-diversion-disposal-en.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGoC. Solid waste management for northern and remote communities: planning and technical guidance document. En14-263/2016E-PDF. Government of Canada Publications (2017) Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/eccc/En14-263-2016-eng.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/eccc/En14-263-2016-eng.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGrant K, Goldizen FC, Sly PD, Brune M-N, Neira M, van den Berg M et al (2013) Health consequences of exposure to e-waste: a systematic review. Lancet Glob Health 1:e350\u0026ndash;361\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuisman J, Magalini F, Kuehr R, Maurer C, Ogilvie S, Poll J et al (2007) 2008 Review of Directive 2002/96 on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://collections.unu.edu/view/UNU:8733\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://collections.unu.edu/view/UNU:8733\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKirchherr J, Reike D, Hekkert M (2017) Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. ; 127, 221\u0026ndash;232. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKorhonen J, Nuur C, Feldmann A, Birkie SE (2018) Circular economy as an essentially contested concept. J Clean Prod 175:544\u0026ndash;552. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.111\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLaitala K, Klepp I, Henry BK (2018) Use phase of apparel: A literature review for Life Cycle Assessment with focus on wool. Consum Res Nor SIFO. Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Science10.13140/RG.2.2.25769.90729\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMarco (2020) HOP publie un livre blanc in\u0026eacute;dit pour mettre fin \u0026agrave; l\u0026rsquo;obsolescence programm\u0026eacute;e en Europe [Internet]. HOP. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.halteobsolescence.org/hop-publie-un-livre-blanc-inedit-pour-mettre-fin-a-lobsolescence-programmee-en-europe/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.halteobsolescence.org/hop-publie-un-livre-blanc-inedit-pour-mettre-fin-a-lobsolescence-programmee-en-europe/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMayers CK, France CM, Cowell SJ (2005) Extended Producer Responsibility for Waste Electronics: An Example of Printer Recycling in the United Kingdom. J Ind Ecol 9:169\u0026ndash;189. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1162/1088198054821672\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1162/1088198054821672\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcCollough J (2009) Factors impacting the demand for repair services of household products: The disappearing repair trades and the throwaway society. International Journal of Consumer Studies. ;33:619\u0026ndash;26. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00793.x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00793.x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMilios L (2018) Advancing to a Circular Economy: three essential ingredients for a comprehensive policy mix. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 13, 861\u0026ndash;878 Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0502-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11625-017-0502-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMMSB. Multi-Materials Stewardship Annual Report. Government of Newfoundland and Labrador (2022) Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.gov.nl.ca/ecc/files/Multi-MaterialsStewardshipBoardAnnualReport2022-23.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.gov.nl.ca/ecc/files/Multi-MaterialsStewardshipBoardAnnualReport2022-23.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eProske M, Winzer J, Marwede M, Nissen NF, Lang KD (2016) Obsolescence of electronics - the example of smartphones. \u003cem\u003e2016 Electronics Goes Green 2016+ (EGG)\u003c/em\u003e, Berlin, Germany, pp. 1\u0026ndash;8. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1109/EGG.2016.7829852\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1109/EGG.2016.7829852\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRogers HA, Deutz P, Ramos TB (2021) Repairing the circular economy: Public perception and participant profile of the repair economy in Hull, UK. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 168:105447. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105447\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105447\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSonix Automatically convert audio and video to text: Fast, Accurate, \u0026amp; Affordable. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://sonix.ai/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://sonix.ai/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUNEP UNEP circularity platform. Electronics. 2025. UN Environmental Program. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://buildingcircularity.org/electronics/\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://buildingcircularity.org/electronics/\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUSEPA. Guide to the Facts and Figures Report about Materials, Waste and Recycling (2025) [Last updated on March 28, 2025]. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/guide-facts-and-figures-report-about\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/guide-facts-and-figures-report-about\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003evan Nes N, Cramer J (2006) Product lifetime optimization: a challenging strategy towards more sustainable consumption patterns. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Cleaner Production\u003c/em\u003e. ;14 (15\u0026ndash;16):1307\u0026ndash;1318. Available from: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.04.006\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jclepro.2005.04.006\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWhyte KP (2013) On the role of traditional ecological knowledge as a collaborative concept: a philosophical study. Ecol Process 2(7). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1186/2192-1709-2-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1186/2192-1709-2-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"environment-systems-and-decisions","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"envr","sideBox":"Learn more about [Environment Systems and Decisions](http://link.springer.com/journal/10669)","snPcode":"10669","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10669/3","title":"Environment Systems and Decisions","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Consumer durables, circular economy, Indigenous, traditional ecological knowledge, Canada","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7244287/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7244287/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eConsumer durable goods (CDGs), including large appliances and electronics, substantially contribute to global waste generation. Managing CDGs waste in rural and remote communities encounters challenges like, lack of access to repair services, recycling programs, and sustainable disposal options. This study explores the implementation of circular economy (CE) as a strategy for two remote and rural communities (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada) and examine the barriers to implementing CE. The study also examined the challenge of implementing CE practices in the communities despite their alignment with sustainability principles, a qualitative approach rooted in traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) that considers the voices of these communities in CDG design with CE principles was explored. Semi-structured interviews were conducted covering areas of waste disposal behaviors, repair and reuse practices, economic and cultural influences on product lifespan decisions, and the role of TEK in sustainable waste management. The study emphasised significant barriers to adopting CE principles in remote and Indigenous communities by incorporating community voices and identified opportunities to incorporate TEK into local-scale waste management practices. Findings from both Indigenous and non-Indigenous participants highlight the gap between circular intent and systemic feasibility, with high repair costs, a lack of local recycling or waste diversion services, and limited infrastructure being the\u0026ensp;key barriers to CE engagement. The findings underscored the critical need for targeted infrastructure investments such as those aimed at improving waste management, repair accessibility, and recycling capabilities in remote and Indigenous communities, coupled with policy reforms tailored to the specific requirements.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Exploring Barriers in Promoting Circular Economy of Consumer Durable Goods in Remote and Indigenous Communities in Newfoundland and Labrador","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-09 12:55:49","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7244287/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-12-30T21:42:25+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-09-18T13:07:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-09-09T09:58:27+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"12241632991511284880300561830012270798","date":"2025-09-04T19:42:25+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"318513365820227110405064218525713584616","date":"2025-09-03T06:31:03+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-09-02T15:14:21+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-08-24T20:44:10+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2025-07-30T14:46:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Environment Systems and Decisions","date":"2025-07-29T14:15:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"environment-systems-and-decisions","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"envr","sideBox":"Learn more about [Environment Systems and Decisions](http://link.springer.com/journal/10669)","snPcode":"10669","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10669/3","title":"Environment Systems and Decisions","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"ec0338af-8e13-416a-b802-de1489e9646b","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 9th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-01-27T22:23:14+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-09 12:55:49","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7244287","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7244287","identity":"rs-7244287","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}