Skip to content
Get in touch
The Ledger of Remainders

Sources, measures, and limits

Evidence

Evidence constrains the story. It does not choose the response.

Observed claims stay separate from interpretations. Measurements retain their unit, denominator, method, period, and uncertainty where available.

Claim status

Supported directly grounded in the listed sources.

Contested grounded, but meaning or interpretation requires visible disagreement.

Interpretive a bounded synthesis used by this world, not a measured fact.

supported

Efficiency relates achieved results to resources used; effectiveness concerns whether planned activities and results are achieved. A process can improve one without proving the other.

Period
2015–2021
Location
global
Jurisdiction
international standards and evaluation practice
Affected parties
decision makers, workers, users, communities

UncertaintyThese established definitions do not select which result, purpose, stakeholder, or resource boundary should govern a specific decision.

CounterinterpretationSome evaluation practices assess efficiency across outcomes and impacts rather than direct output alone.

Cultural contextWhat counts as a resource, result, or justified cost can differ across institutions and affected groups.

ISO 9000:2015 Quality management systems — Fundamentals and vocabularyInternational Organization for Standardization · 2015 · clauses 3.7.16 and 3.7.17Applying Evaluation Criteria ThoughtfullyOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · 2021 · effectiveness and efficiency criteria
supported

An output is a direct product or service of activity; an outcome is a change that follows for people, institutions, or conditions. Output volume does not by itself establish outcome quality.

Period
2021
Location
global application
Jurisdiction
OECD evaluation framework
Affected parties
program participants, service users, funders, implementing workers

UncertaintyCausal attribution from an output to an outcome may be difficult, and organizations use results-chain terms with some variation.

CounterinterpretationIn tightly controlled processes, a well-specified output may serve as a practical proxy for an outcome, but the proxy should be declared.

Cultural contextOfficial results frameworks can privilege outcomes that institutions can count over changes affected groups consider important.

Applying Evaluation Criteria ThoughtfullyOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · 2021 · effectiveness chapter, results-chain discussion
supported

Under the EU Waste Framework Directive, a production residue may qualify as a by-product only under specified conditions; whether material is legally waste, a by-product, or no longer waste is context- and jurisdiction-dependent.

Period
2008-present
Location
EU member states
Jurisdiction
European Union
Affected parties
producers, regulators, waste holders, recyclers, communities

UncertaintyThis legal distinction does not apply universally outside the European Union and does not by itself measure environmental or social consequence.

CounterinterpretationEveryday and operational uses of “byproduct” are broader than the EU legal category.

Cultural contextClassification changes compliance duties, market access, handling costs, and who bears risk.

Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC and subsequent amendmentsEuropean Union · 2008-present · Articles 5 and 6 and Commission by-product overview
supported

An estimated 62 million tonnes of e-waste were generated globally in 2022, and 22.3 percent was documented as formally collected and recycled in an environmentally sound manner.

62 million tonnesDenominator: global e-waste generatedMethod: UNITAR and ITU global e-waste statistical model

22.3 percentDenominator: global e-waste generated that was documented as formally collected and recycledMethod: UNITAR and ITU global e-waste statistical model

Period
2022
Location
worldwide
Jurisdiction
global
Affected parties
device users, repair workers, recycling workers, communities, ecosystems

UncertaintyThe figures are global statistical estimates; documented formal collection is not the same as complete material recovery or safe handling of every fraction.

CounterinterpretationThe undocumented share includes multiple destinations and should not be described as one uniform informal or disposal pathway.

Cultural contextGlobal totals conceal large regional differences in consumption, trade, collection infrastructure, livelihoods, and exposure.

The Global E-waste Monitor 2024UNITAR and International Telecommunication Union · 2024 · executive summary, pages 14–15Electronic waste (e-waste) fact sheetWorld Health Organization · 2024-10-01 · key facts
supported

The Global E-waste Monitor estimated that 2022 e-waste contained USD 91 billion in metals, while its economic assessment reported recovered-metal and avoided-emission benefits alongside treatment and externalized costs, for an overall annual impact of negative USD 37 billion.

91 billion USDDenominator: estimated metals contained in global e-waste generatedMethod: Global E-waste Monitor economic assessment

-37 billion USD per yearDenominator: modelled overall economic impact of global e-waste managementMethod: Benefits less treatment and externalized costs in the report's monetary model

Period
2022
Location
worldwide
Jurisdiction
global economic assessment
Affected parties
producers, recyclers, workers, communities, ecosystems

UncertaintyThese are monetized global estimates using modelling choices; their categories should not replace the distinct physical, health, labor, or ecological measures beneath them.

CounterinterpretationMaterial value does not mean all material is technically, economically, or safely recoverable, and a monetized externality is not the full lived consequence.

Cultural contextCosts and benefits are distributed unevenly among producers, consumers, formal and informal workers, communities, and future generations.

The Global E-waste Monitor 2024UNITAR and International Telecommunication Union · 2024 · executive summary, overall economic impact, page 16
contested

E-waste afterlives include both livelihoods and hazards: the ILO estimates millions of jobs across repair, collection, recycling, and recovery, while WHO identifies serious exposure risks in unsafe informal recycling conditions.

6.32 million jobsDenominator: modelled global employment in e-waste activitiesMethod: ILO input-output framework linked to labor-force and UNITAR e-waste data

Period
2022–2025
Location
worldwide
Jurisdiction
global
Affected parties
repair workers, collection workers, recycling workers, families, communities

UncertaintyGlobal employment is modelled from input-output and labor data, and “informal” covers heterogeneous work, capability, bargaining power, safety, and regulation.

CounterinterpretationTreating all informal activity as only harm can erase livelihoods and expertise; treating it only as value recovery can hide exposure and unequal conditions.

Cultural contextRepair and recovery systems differ sharply by income, gender, region, infrastructure, law, and worker organization.

E-waste and employment around the worldInternational Labour Organization · 2025-12-22 · key findingsElectronic waste (e-waste) fact sheetWorld Health Organization · 2024-10-01 · key facts and health effects
supported

EU rules applying from June 2025 require covered smartphones and tablets to meet durability and repairability requirements, including key spare-parts availability for seven years after model sales end and operating-system updates for at least five years after the last unit is placed on the market.

Period
2025-present
Location
EU market
Jurisdiction
European Union
Affected parties
users, repairers, manufacturers, resellers

UncertaintyThese are minimum requirements for covered products placed on the EU market; actual service, repair cost, parts quality, and useful life vary.

CounterinterpretationRegulatory availability does not guarantee that every repair is affordable, chosen, technically successful, or environmentally preferable.

Cultural contextRepair options depend on jurisdiction, access to tools and parts, data rights, skill, income, and local service capacity.

New EU rules for durable, energy-efficient and repairable smartphones and tablets start applyingEuropean Commission · 2025-06-20 · Ecodesign Regulation requirements
supported

Virtual services depend on physical infrastructure: the IEA estimated data centres used about 415 terawatt-hours of electricity in 2024, around 1.5 percent of global electricity consumption, with servers, storage, networking, cooling, and resilience equipment contributing differently.

415 terawatt-hoursDenominator: estimated global data-centre electricity consumptionMethod: IEA Energy and AI analysis

1.5 percentDenominator: global electricity consumptionMethod: IEA Energy and AI analysis

Period
2024
Location
worldwide with regional concentration
Jurisdiction
global energy assessment
Affected parties
service users, data-centre workers, utilities, host communities, ecosystems

UncertaintyData-centre electricity estimates and future scenarios carry substantial uncertainty and vary greatly by facility, service, location, grid, and time.

CounterinterpretationA global percentage can appear modest while geographically concentrated facilities can have large local electricity and infrastructure effects.

Cultural contextThe location of infrastructure, energy supply, water and cooling conditions, data governance, and who receives the service shape distributional consequences.

Energy and AIInternational Energy Agency · 2025 · executive summary and energy-demand chapter
supported

Rare use does not prove waste: data-centre backup power and uninterruptible-power systems may be seldom activated yet remain necessary for a declared reliability purpose.

Period
2024
Location
data centres worldwide
Jurisdiction
operational illustration grounded in global energy analysis
Affected parties
service users, operators, utilities, host communities

UncertaintyWhether a particular reserve is proportionate requires service requirements, failure risk, alternatives, cost, and consequence data.

CounterinterpretationA reserve can still be excessive or poorly designed; the claim is only that utilization rate alone is insufficient to classify it as waste.

Cultural contextReliability priorities and the consequences of failure differ across hospitals, public services, businesses, households, and regions.

Energy and AIInternational Energy Agency · 2025 · energy-demand chapter, equipment types
supported

UNEP estimated 1.05 billion tonnes of food waste at retail, food-service, and household levels in 2022, equivalent to 19 percent of food available to consumers; households accounted for 60 percent of the estimate.

1.05 billion tonnesDenominator: food waste at retail, food-service, and household levelsMethod: UNEP Food Waste Index global estimate

19 percentDenominator: food available to consumersMethod: UNEP Food Waste Index global estimate

Period
2022
Location
worldwide
Jurisdiction
global food-waste measurement
Affected parties
households, food-service workers, retailers, farmers, communities, ecosystems

UncertaintyThe global total includes inedible parts and is not a bread-specific estimate; data quality and coverage differ across countries and sectors.

CounterinterpretationFood loss before retail is measured separately, so this claim should not stand for the entire food supply chain.

Cultural contextEdibility, preparation, portioning, storage, redistribution, and household practice vary across places and cultures.

Food Waste Index Report 2024United Nations Environment Programme and WRAP · 2024-03-27 · key messages and chapter 2
supported

Environmental externalities are spill-over consequences not fully reflected in private choices or prices, and full cost internalization is often difficult and incomplete.

Period
2025
Location
OECD and partner-country policy contexts
Jurisdiction
OECD policy analysis
Affected parties
producers, consumers, taxpayers, workers, communities, ecosystems

UncertaintyMonetary valuation depends on modelling, jurisdiction, available data, ethical choices, and whose losses receive a price.

CounterinterpretationA consequence can be important even when monetization is unavailable or inappropriate.

Cultural contextInstitutions with authority to define and price external costs can privilege some harms, timescales, and affected parties over others.

Economic instruments for a resource-efficient circular economyOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · 2025 · motivations for economic instruments and cost internalization
interpretive

In this world, “waste is relational” is an operational lens: observed consequences remain fixed, while purpose changes designation and boundary changes accounting visibility.

Period
contemporary
Location
composite global smartphone scenario
Jurisdiction
operational model for this visual world
Affected parties
decision makers, users, workers, communities, ecosystems

UncertaintyThe instrument is a teaching model, not a universal legal definition or predictive life-cycle assessment.

CounterinterpretationSome hazardous materials require firm handling duties regardless of a visitor's purpose or preferred ledger.

Cultural contextAuthority to name waste and draw boundaries is distributed unequally; classification can transfer duties, value, and burden.

Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC and subsequent amendmentsEuropean Union · 2008-present · distinctions among waste, by-product, and end-of-wasteApplying Evaluation Criteria ThoughtfullyOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · 2021 · context, objectives, results, and affected groupsEconomic instruments for a resource-efficient circular economyOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · 2025 · externality and internalization discussion