DPP for critical raw materials: reuse and recycling

Critical Raw Materials DPP: Infrastructure for Circular Resource Recovery

The global economy’s dependence on critical raw materials—rare earth elements, cobalt, lithium, and other strategically important minerals—faces mounting pressure from supply constraints and geopolitical risk. Electrical and electronic waste (e-waste) represents a significant secondary source for these materials, yet current recycling infrastructure recovers only a fraction of available resources. A Digital Product Passport designed specifically for critical raw materials creates the informational backbone required to enable efficient reuse and targeted material recovery throughout the circular supply chain. By establishing physical-digital linkages and standardised data structures, organisations can transition from labour-intensive, low-recovery manual sorting to precision-guided automated and semi-automated recovery processes.

The Material Recovery Challenge in E-Waste

Electronic waste streams contain substantial quantities of critical raw materials embedded in complex assemblies. However, recovery rates remain suboptimal due to information fragmentation across the product lifecycle. Manufacturers typically possess detailed material composition data at the point of sale, but this information rarely reaches recyclers or disassembly operators who need it most. Recycling facilities instead rely on visual inspection, product model numbers, and incremental testing—approaches that are labour-intensive, imprecise, and often result in contaminated material streams or incomplete extraction.

Koppelaar et al. (2023) developed a conceptual framework demonstrating how a structured Digital Product Passport system addresses this gap by encoding material composition, component-level recyclability status, and hazardous substance information in machine-readable, product-linked formats. The physical-digital connection—typically via QR codes, RFID tags, or similar identifiers—ensures that recyclers and automated systems can retrieve relevant data at the point of disassembly rather than relying on archival searches or external databases. This architecture enables two critical shifts: first, from whole-product recycling to component-level and material-level targeting; second, from reactive waste processing to predictive, material-flow-optimised operations.

Bridging Standards and Automated Processing

Recent EU legislation, including the Net Zero Industry Act and the Critical Materials Act, establishes requirements for material recovery and recycling efficiency. However, translating regulatory intent into operational practice requires both data standards and process specifications that automated systems can execute. Saenz et al. (2024) addressed this challenge by developing data models and process requirements that connect product information schemas with robotic disassembly systems. Their work integrated top-down analysis of emerging standards—including those aligned with EPCIS 2.0 and GS1 frameworks—with bottom-up empirical testing on real electronic products.

The authors demonstrated that automated disassembly systems require standardised, machine-readable documentation of component locations, fastening mechanisms, material compositions, and hazardous substance locations. Where a human operator might infer that a smartphone screen is glued (and thus requires thermal or chemical separation), an automated system needs explicit data: adhesive type, curing temperature, separation energy requirements, and post-separation material purity targets. Saenz et al. (2024) found that products with comprehensive digital documentation could be processed by automated systems with significantly higher material recovery rates and lower contamination levels compared to products lacking such data, even when operator skill levels were held constant.

This requirement creates a feedback loop: regulatory compliance increasingly mandates not just that products be recyclable, but that they be documented as recyclable. A critical raw materials DPP becomes both a compliance instrument and an operational requirement for modern recycling infrastructure.

Data Architecture and Circular Economy Interoperability

The technical architecture of a critical raw materials DPP must address a persistent challenge in circular economy systems: information fragmentation across independent actors. Plociennik et al. (2022) proposed a Digital Lifecycle Passport framework built on the Asset Administration Shell (AAS) standard, which structures product data in machine-readable layers accessible to different stakeholders—manufacturers, logistics operators, retailers, consumers, and recyclers—each with appropriate permission and access controls.

The AAS architecture proved particularly valuable for critical raw materials because it separates different data categories: material composition (typically proprietary at manufacturing but recyclable-relevant), hazardous substance declarations (regulated and standardised), component sourcing and supply chain origin (increasingly demanded by due diligence regulations), and end-of-life routing recommendations (determined by material recovery economics and regulatory constraints). Plociennik et al. (2022) demonstrated that electronic waste sorting efficiency improved measurably when recycling facilities had access to this structured, layered data: sorting accuracy increased because operators and automated systems could prioritise materials by recovery value and hazard level rather than processing everything as undifferentiated e-waste.

Critically, the AAS framework enables evolution of product passports across a product’s lifecycle. A smartphone’s passport might contain manufacturing-stage data (bill of materials, hazardous substances) during retail distribution, gain use-phase data (repair history, battery cycle counts) during its operational life, and acquire end-of-life routing data and disassembly specifications as it approaches recycling. This accumulated information becomes progressively more valuable for downstream circular processes.

Material-Specific Tracking and Verification

While metals and rare earth elements embedded in electronics benefit from the passports’ composition data, plastics present additional complexity. Rumetshofer and Fischer (2023) conducted a comprehensive review of material-tracking technologies for circular economy applications, evaluating physical markers, blockchain systems, digital product passports, and certification standards across their lifecycle. They identified that digital product passports offered superior compatibility with existing supply chain infrastructure and regulatory frameworks compared to blockchain-only approaches, particularly for high-volume commodity streams.

For critical raw materials, this distinction matters operationally. A digital product passport linked to a specific physical product (via GS1 Digital Link or similar) can reliably convey that a particular unit contains a certain rare earth element concentration, enabling recyclers to segregate and process batches by material rather than attempting universal recovery protocols. Rumetshofer and Fischer (2023) emphasised, however, that widespread adoption across the entire value chain—not just manufacturers or leading recyclers, but all intermediate processors and traders—is essential to overcome circularity barriers. This requirement has implications for GovGDS platform scope and interoperability standards.

Practical Implementation: From Concept to Operations

Critical raw materials DPPs must transition from frameworks to operational systems. Implementation requires convergence of several technical and organisational elements. First, product manufacturers must encode material composition and disassembly data at manufacturing stage, typically during product design. Second, physical-digital linking must be durable and functional throughout the product’s use phase—meaning QR codes or RFID tags must withstand handling, environmental exposure, and repairs without degradation. Third, recycling infrastructure must be equipped with systems capable of reading and interpreting passport data, whether through operator interfaces or direct integration with automated disassembly equipment.

Koppelaar et al. (2023) highlighted that the information architecture must account for proprietary sensitivity: manufacturers are often reluctant to disclose full bill-of-materials data publicly, yet recyclers require sufficient detail to optimise recovery. The passport framework addresses this through role-based access: a consumer viewing a product’s environmental profile sees aggregated material recovery potential, while an authorised recycling facility retrieves component-level composition and disassembly sequences. This permissioning approach balances competitive protection with circular economy efficiency.

Implementation also benefits from sector-focused models. The battery passport represents an exemplary instance of sector-specific DPP development, addressing the high material and regulatory complexity of energy storage systems. Similar targeted implementations for rare earth element-bearing components (motors, magnets, optical elements) can establish practitioner expertise and regulatory alignment before broader sector deployment.

Frequently Asked Questions

How does a critical raw materials DPP improve recycling efficiency compared to current practice?

Current e-waste recycling relies heavily on visual inspection and incremental testing to identify material composition and component value. A digital product passport provides machine-readable data about material location, concentration, and hazardous substances linked directly to the physical product. This enables recyclers to sort and process materials with higher precision, targeting specific critical elements rather than processing everything through universal protocols. Saenz et al. (2024) found that automated disassembly systems using standardised product documentation achieved significantly higher recovery rates and lower contamination levels compared to manual identification.

What happens if a product’s passport data is inaccurate or outdated?

Accuracy assurance depends on manufacturer accountability and regulatory oversight. Under emerging EU regulations like the ESPR (Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation) and Digital Product Passport requirements, manufacturers become legally responsible for passport accuracy throughout the product’s declared lifecycle. Digital architectures like the Asset Administration Shell enable version tracking and amendment history, allowing recyclers to identify when data was recorded and by whom. Third-party verification through certification standards provides additional assurance, particularly for critical material declarations that affect recovery economics and supply chain due diligence.

Can smaller recyclers access and use critical raw materials DPP systems?

Accessibility depends on implementation design. A well-structured DPP system requires minimal investment to access—typically a mobile device capable of reading QR codes or similar identifiers, plus integration with the passport backend system. However, Rumetshofer and Fischer (2023) emphasised that widespread adoption requires support infrastructure, including training, standardised data formats, and regulatory alignment, to avoid creating barriers for smaller operators. Platform providers like GovGDS are developing accessibility-focused implementations to ensure that medium and smaller recycling enterprises can participate without disproportionate investment.

References

• Koppelaar R.H.E.M.; Pamidi S.; Hajósi E.; Herreras L.; Leroy P.; Jung H.-Y.; Concheso A.; Daniel R.; Francisco F.B.; Parrado C.; Dell’Ambrogio S.; Guggiari F.; Leone D.; Fontana A. (2023). A Digital Product Passport for Critical Raw Materials Reuse and Recycling. Sustainability (Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021405
• Saenz J.; Felsch T.; Walter C.; König T.; Poenicke O.; Bayrhammer E.; Vorbröcker M.; Berndt D.; Elkmann N.; Arlinghaus J. (2024). Automated disassembly of e-waste—requirements on modeling of processes and product states. Frontiers in Robotics and AI. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2024.1303279
• Plociennik C.; Pourjafarian M.; Nazeri A.; Windholz W.; Knetsch S.; Rickert J.; Ciroth A.; Precci Lopes A.D.C.; Hagedorn T.; Vogelgesang M.; Benner W.; Gassmann A.; Bergweiler S.; Ruskowski M.; Schebek L.; Weidenkaff A. (2022). Towards a Digital Lifecycle Passport for the Circular Economy. Procedia CIRP. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2022.02.021
• Rumetshofer T.; Fischer J. (2023). Information-Based Plastic Material Tracking for Circular Economy—A Review. Polymers. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15071623