Long-term responsibility for repairing consumer wearable devices should be distributed across three accountable parties: manufacturers, governments and regulators, and independent repair providers, with meaningful roles for consumers and civil-society groups. Evidence and advocacy from repair experts show that design and policy choices determine whether repairability is feasible and affordable. Kyle Wiens of iFixit has documented how sealed components, proprietary screws, and software locks limit repair options and push replacement instead of repair. Those design choices make manufacturers primary actors in enabling or blocking repair.
Why manufacturers must enable repair
Manufacturers control product architecture, spare parts, diagnostic tools, and software updates. When companies design devices with modular batteries, documented disassembly steps, and widely available spare parts, repairs become practical and safe. Conversely, proprietary software locks or glued assemblies increase waste and consumer cost. Regulatory pressure and market incentives can change manufacturer behavior; industry practices learned from larger consumer electronics show that small design changes can extend device lifetimes substantially when producers commit to repair-friendly standards.
The role of policy and regulators
Governments and regulators should set baseline obligations that protect consumers and the environment. The European Commission has prioritized product sustainability through ecodesign and related measures that push manufacturers toward repairable designs. In the United States the Federal Trade Commission enforces consumer-protection rules and has expressed concern about repair restrictions, highlighting that public policy can lower barriers to repair and prevent anti-competitive practices. Regulation should require access to spare parts, reasonable diagnostic information, and firmware that does not intentionally impede legitimate repairs while safeguarding user data.
Independent repair providers and local repair businesses translate these rights into practical services. Trained technicians and community repair hubs provide timely, affordable fixes and preserve technical skills important in many regions. In the Global South, informal repair economies are essential livelihoods and reduce waste, but they often lack access to genuine parts and documentation; this territorial nuance argues for inclusive policies that support small repair businesses as well as consumers.
Failure to share responsibility leads to environmental harm through increased e-waste, economic burdens on consumers, and concentration of market power. A balanced approach that combines manufacturer accountability, clear legal frameworks, and support for independent repair ecosystems best serves long-term repairability, consumer rights, and environmental sustainability.