A CE is defined as an economy that emphasizes protection of environment and in turn leads to socio-economic benefits [35]. It pushes for reduction in utilization of primary resources and emphasizes waste minimization by closing the loop of products, product parts, and materials [35]. In CE, companies see cost-saving opportunities in strategies such as resource efficiency, resource loop closing, enhanced reuse, remanufacturing, and recycling [36]. With worldwide increase in e-waste, it is imperative that e-waste management is encompassed in global CE. As most of the e-waste management is done through the informal sector, a push for global CE will lead to a push for technical innovation and also lead to financial incentives for poorer regions of the world, as e-waste dumping and dismantling mainly occur there [37]. In their paper, Marinello and Gamberini [38] conducted a comprehensive literature review of studies on decision-making approaches towards e-waste management and found that the decision-making approaches covered dimensions such as environmental, economic, social, technical, and legal. Further, Tong et al. [39], who studied the flow of e-waste in China, found that even though a subsidy was provided to the formal recycling plants to take e-waste from the informal sector, a significant amount still remained in the informal sector due to complex marketing transactions. In their study, Hartley et al. [40] identified that policies must be conducive to enhance CE. Through interviews conducted with experts in CE, it was found that a push towards CE required more vigorous norms in production, tax relief for circular products, liberalization of waste trading and facilitation through virtual platforms, push for eco-industrial parks, and awareness campaigns [40].

For sustainable business, Rahman [41] proposed that companies adopt reverse supply chain process for reuse, recycle, or disposal of computers. This can also give a strategic advantage to companies who take up sustainability issues. Moreover, Maranesi and De Giovanni [42] suggested that CE should be considered as a part of corporate strategy. It would enhance business and allow the firm to achieve high targets, which not only would help social and environmental causes but also enhance circular supply chain, eco-innovations, and industrial symbiosis. Another key approach to enhance sustainability and green growth in CE was to promote industrial symbiosis and data utilization, as there was huge practical problem of information on material availability. In their qualitative study in Finland, Järvenpää et al. [43] sought Finland to understand how to enhance the efficiency of material by-products flows and concluded that development needs to be achieved on a larger scale and involve all the stakeholders.

Industrial symbiosis (IS) is a collective approach in which separate industries have a cooperative network to exchange materials, energy, water, and by-products. It necessitates bringing together industrial ecology (IE) and CE by bringing together companies in such a way that the waste material of one company can be utilized by another company as its raw material. This can lead to reduction in virgin raw material usage and waste, resulting in better pollution management. As the CE involves closing the loop, industrial symbiosis can lead to reduction in energy use and emissions. CE explains how a cluster functions from the business standpoint, while IE explains the development and its impact on the environment and society [44]. Currently, Europe has some industrial symbiosis systems in place, for example, European Innovation Partnerships, National Industrial Symbiosis Program (UK), and Cleantech Östergötland (Linköping, Sweden). In their study, Wen and Meng [45] utilized the resource productivity (RP) indicator to evaluate the contribution of IS to the development of CE. It was observed that in the eco-industrial parks, which followed industrial symbiosis mechanisms, the resource productivity was enhanced in a waste-utilization scenario when compared to exclusion of waste utilization in the production of printed circuit board (PCB) in the utilization of copper. Likewise, Lopes [46] studied the waste-management regulations in small- and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs) in Portugal and suggested that regulatory compliances will result in a positive impact on innovation in different industries related to waste from WEEE.

The authors of Cao et al. [47] studied the e-waste awareness after the Chinese government put policies and environment management systems in place that were based on extended producer responsibility (EPR). The surveyed population was aware of the e-waste and its harmful effects but had very poor knowledge about the formal e-waste-recycling mechanisms and were not aware of the collection points. They observed that lower awareness about recycling of e-waste was a hindrance to CE. A tax subsidy should be provided for EEE that has DfE (Eco-design) for better recycling purposes. Chibunna et al. [48] studied the challenges faced in the management of e-waste in institutions through a case study in a single institution. They identified various drawbacks, such as poor data management, low awareness on e-waste, collection and disposal problems, lack of specific regulations, and policy on end-of-life WEEE equipment. In their study, Jayaraman et al. [49] studied household e-waste-management practices and observed that there was no formal e-waste recycling happening except that done informally by buyers and non-governmental organizations. Mahat et al. [50] studied e-waste awareness in a Malaysian community, and the findings were that there was an awareness regarding e-waste. The variables used for studying e-waste disposal were e-waste-disposal knowledge, e-waste-disposal attitudes, and e-waste-disposal practices. Each variable was divided into sub-variables, such as environmental, social, and economic. The study found that awareness level was very high, but disposal levels did not match it.

A study by Arain et al. [27] indicated that free access to disposal, lack of consumer knowledge about products and disposal sites, and access to a recycling facility within a reasonable distance are all important factors in consumer decisions. They suggested that the policy makers and waste-management professionals should focus on promotion of e-waste-recycling behaviors through increased access to free or low-cost recycling as well as through the creation of recycling incentives. Islam et al. [51] studied the university students’ awareness, perception, and disposal patterns of e-waste. The results showed that awareness existed, but the population severely lacked knowledge about the e-waste-collection points and the recycling programs available. Respondents in this study showed an inclination for e-waste recycling, which positively influences laptop recycling. In their study, Sari et al. [52] conducted a survey in Indonesia among consumers of smartphones and found the positive effect of government drivers, facility accessibility, and personal attitudes on consumer intentions to participate in e-waste collection. In their study, Attia et al. [22] studied the disposal behavior of cell phone e-waste in Dubai, UAE, and found that the household awareness of e-waste was poor, and households also had poor recycling of e-waste.