Sarcouncil Journal of Multidisciplinary

Abstract: This review synthesizes U.S. policy and practice on electronic-waste (e-waste) data collection and export accountability, by identifying continuing gaps that enable undocumented transboundary flows and associated environmental-health and equity harms. Drawing on a narrative literature review and comparative policy analysis of sources from 2018 to 2025, the paper maps federal and state roles, existing tracking tools, such as paper and electronic manifests, and voluntary registries, and fragmented data architectures with inconsistent classifications and limited interoperability. Findings reveal regulatory and enforcement weaknesses, misclassification of used electronics, variable state permit regimes, limited customs scrutiny, and operational constraints, including funding shortfalls, uneven IT capacity, and staffing shortages that hinder surveillance and foster export loopholes. The paper proposes a targeted reform package into three actionable clusters (1) Data & Standards, a national e-waste taxonomy and harmonized reporting fields, a mandatory, machine-readable national e-manifest and export-permit system with chain-of-custody, interoperable API-based data architecture. (2) Enforcement & trade controls strengthened customs and port screening, targeted audits, clearer legal definitions to reduce misclassification, and international coordination on export documentation and destination monitoring; and (3) Financing, capacity & equity, expanded Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) funding, grants and technical assistance for states and small processors, phased implementation with exemptions/assistance, and third-party verification with public dashboards for transparency. A phased implementation roadmap (0–2 years: taxonomy and pilots, 2–5 years: national rollout and customs integration, 5+ years: full interoperability and serialized tracking where feasible) balances traceability, cost, and equity. Limitations stem from the literature-only scope and state-level diversity. Recommended next steps include empirical pilots, rigorous cost–benefit studies for serialization or blockchain, longitudinal export monitoring, and comparative analyses with EU and Asian models to inform adaptive and equitable policy design. Collectively, these measures aim to reduce harmful exports, protect vulnerable communities, and provide actionable guidance for policymakers and practitioners.