In a world that moves so fast, technological innovation has become the main focus. Every year, Apple introduces its latest iPhone, which amazes users with its advanced features and attractive design. It is no wonder that millions of people around the world are willing to leave their old devices behind in order to get their hands on the latest model. However, behind the glitz of the screen and the promise of progress lies one big question that often crosses many people’s minds: is this all really about innovation, or is there a deeper strategy, a hidden plan to keep us constantly craving new products?
This is not just a story about a brand or product. It is a reflection of a broader phenomenon. It is about how modern products are often designed not only to last but also to be quickly replaced. Let’s explore this further. Let’s look at a concept called Planned Obsolescence. What is its history, and how does this practice affect our daily lives?
What is Planned Obsolescence?
In the world of modern technology, Apple is often in the spotlight. The company, known for its iconic products, is no stranger to controversy surrounding the practice of planned obsolescence. In 2017, the public was shocked by the discovery that Apple deliberately slowed down the performance of older iPhones through software updates. According to Apple, the aim was to prevent devices with weak batteries from suddenly shutting down. However, many consumers and critics viewed this as a covert way to encourage users to replace their devices more quickly.
This controversy sparked a series of lawsuits and investigations in various countries, including the United States and Europe. The impact was significant. Not only did it damage user trust, but it also drew widespread attention to the practice of planned obsolescence, which had been hidden behind technological innovation.
However, in response, Apple launched a discounted battery replacement program to address this issue and restore its image. So what exactly is planned obsolescence? Simply put, planned obsolescence is a business strategy in which products are deliberately designed to have a short lifespan. Or to quickly become obsolete.
The goal is clear: to accelerate the repurchase cycle. This allows companies to continuously increase sales and profits. This strategy is indeed very effective from a business perspective. However, behind all that, there is another side that involves consumers and the environment. We will explore this further later on.
The history and origins of planned obsolescence.
To understand this planned obsolescence, it is important for us to know its long and winding history. It all began in the early 20th century, when the industrial revolution and mass production began to change the face of the world economy. At that time, manufacturers realized a major challenge: how to keep the wheels of business turning amid an abundance of durable products.
One of the most historic moments was the formation of a secret cartel in 1924 known as The Phoebus Cartel. This cartel brought together the world’s giant light bulb manufacturers, such as Philips, Osram, General Electric, and other large companies from various countries. The cartel openly agreed to limit the lifespan of the light bulbs they produced. Previously, these bulbs could last up to 2,500 hours. However, the cartel deliberately shortened the lifespan of the bulbs to around 1,750 hours.
The goal was very clear: to force consumers to buy new light bulbs more often so that sales would remain high. In addition, they imposed heavy fines on members who produced light bulbs with a longer lifespan than the agreed standard. This practice was a clear example of the early systematic application of planned obsolescence.
It didn’t stop there; similar practices began to spread to other industries. In 1924, Alfred P. Sloan Jr., CEO of General Motors, introduced the concept of Dynamic Obsolescence. In the midst of a sluggish American automotive market, he pushed for annual model changes so that consumers would feel that their old cars were outdated and be encouraged to buy new ones.
This strategy then became an industry standard that drastically reduced the average lifespan of cars. From 5 years in the 1930s to around 2 years in the 1950s. The term “planned obsolescence” itself was only widely popularized in 1954 by Brooks Steven, an American industrial designer. He defined planned obsolescence as the art of instilling in consumers the desire to have something that is a little newer, a little better, and a little faster than it should be.
In the late 1950s and early 1960s, this idea gained widespread attention from social observer and cultural critic Vance Packard. In his 1960s book The Waste Maker, he exposed how industry used this strategy to create a wasteful society that was never satisfied and constantly buying. He distinguished between two categories of obsolescence. First, psychological obsolescence, which stems from changing trends and advertising that make old products seem obsolete. Second, functional obsolescence, where products are made to break down quickly or no longer function optimally.
As technology develops, especially in electronic products and software, this form of obsolescence is becoming increasingly varied and complex. Despite criticism, planned obsolescence remains a widely adopted practice to drive the market and economic growth.
The negative impact of planned obsolescence.
The strategy of planned obsolescence does drive business and boost economic growth. However, behind the short-term profits lie far more widespread and serious impacts, especially on the environment and our lives. Products that are deliberately made with a limited lifespan or to become obsolete quickly lead to an increase in the production of new goods at a higher frequency.
As a result, electronic waste and consumer goods waste accumulate rapidly. This waste, especially from high-tech devices like smartphones, contains toxic materials such as mercury, lead, cadmium, and other hazardous chemicals. If not managed properly, this waste contaminates soil, water, and even the atmosphere. This ultimately leads to ecosystem damage and health risks for humans.
In addition, the ongoing production process to meet the demand for new products requires abundant natural resources. Mining raw materials such as metals and minerals depletes the earth’s resources, destroys habitats, and produces carbon emissions that contribute to global climate change.
The impact is not limited to the environment; consumers also feel the pressure of a culture of consumption that is designed to be sustainable. They have to spend money repeatedly to buy replacement products. This often becomes a financial burden, especially for the lower-middle class.
The rapid obsolescence of goods also means that consumer investment is not maximized. This causes frustration and dissatisfaction. Pressure is also felt by waste management infrastructure, which is often overwhelmed by the growing volume of waste. Electronic waste, which is difficult to decompose and recycle, adds to this burden. It triggers health and environmental problems in surrounding communities. All of this shows that planned obsolescence is not just about products that break quickly. It is a major challenge for environmental sustainability, consumer welfare, and the future of the planet.
Types of Planned Obsolescence
After understanding its history and impact, we will now examine the various forms of planned obsolescence commonly practiced by companies in various products. The first is physical obsolescence, where products are designed with components that are deliberately made to be less durable. For example, batteries in smartphones that cannot be easily replaced or electronic components that break down quickly. When one critical part breaks down, the entire device becomes difficult to use or must be replaced.
Second is psychological obsolescence, which occurs when manufacturers change the design, color, or features of a product to make older models appear outdated and less appealing. We often see this happening in the world of gadget fashion, where trends are constantly changing even though older products still function well. Social pressure and the desire to own the latest products cause consumers to quickly switch to newer models.
Third, technological obsolescence. This is especially common in the digital age, which often brings software updates. Older products are deliberately made incompatible with the latest updates.
Fourth, systematic obsolescence. This is where the system or ecosystem of a product is changed so that older products become difficult to use. Each type of planned obsolescence affects consumers in different ways. However, the main goal is the same: to accelerate repeat purchases and maintain the company’s profits.
Reflections and solutions for planned obsolescence.
Looking at the history of planned obsolescence from the past to the present, we realize that this strategy has two sides. On the one hand, it can encourage innovation and economic growth. However, on the other hand, its consequences for the environment, consumers, and our sustainability are enormous.
As consumers, we can start to take a more conscious and critical stance, choosing products that are designed to be durable, supporting environmental improvement movements, and not being easily tempted by artificial consumer trends. We can also demand transparency from manufacturers so that we know the products we buy are not designed to become obsolete quickly.
On the regulatory side, some countries have already begun to take decisive action. France, for example, has established strict rules prohibiting the practice of planned obsolescence and imposing heavy penalties on manufacturers who violate them. Initiatives such as the right to repair are also an important solution to ensure that products can be used longer and electronic waste can be minimized.
True technology and innovation should extend the useful life of products, not the other way around. The world needs new, more responsible and sustainable consumption patterns in order to protect the availability of natural resources and future generations. With awareness and collaboration between consumers, producers, and governments, the hope of reducing planned obsolescence and creating a more equitable and sustainable economic ecosystem is not impossible.
Here are the references in English for your article about Planned Obsolescence:
References for Planned Obsolescence
Phoebus Cartel and Lightbulb History:
www.bbc.com/future/article/20160629-the-planned-obsolescence-of-everyday-products
www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/09/a-history-of-lethal-lightbulbs/501563/
Apple’s Controversy Over Slowing Down Old iPhones:
www.bbc.com/news/technology-42438745
www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/technology/apple-iphone-battery.html
www.cnbc.com/2018/02/07/apple-battery-slowdown-explained.html
“The Waste Makers” by Vance Packard:
www.theguardian.com/books/2009/may/16/vance-packard-consumerism-history
Environmental and E-Waste Impact:
www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/e-waste-electronics-recycling-environment
www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/e-waste-electronic-waste-recycling/
Regulation and Solutions (Right to Repair, France’s Law):
www.euronews.com/green/2021/01/27/france-s-pioneering-new-right-to-repair-law-explained
www.theverge.com/2021/7/21/22587166/right-to-repair-federal-trade-commission-antitrust
Disclaimer
The information provided on this website, including but not limited to articles about technology, finance, stock markets, investment, business, self-development, trading, sales & marketing, music, and other related topics, is intended solely for general informational and educational purposes. While every effort is made to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the content, neither the website nor its authors make any warranties or representations regarding the completeness, accuracy, or suitability of the content for any specific purpose.
The contents of this website do not constitute professional, financial, investment, legal, or other expert advice. Readers are advised to consult with suitably qualified professionals regarding specific issues or decisions. Any reliance placed on such information is strictly at your own risk.
Neither the website nor its owners, authors, or affiliates shall be held responsible or liable for any loss or damage—direct or indirect—that may arise from the use of, or reliance on, information provided herein. Past performance in financial markets or business is not indicative of future results. The website may include links to third-party websites for your convenience; however, we do not endorse or take responsibility for the content or accuracy of external sites.
By using this website, you agree to assume full responsibility for any actions taken based on the information presented, and acknowledge that the website expressly disclaims all liability to the maximum extent permitted by law.