Planned obsolescence

Manipulated product life cycles
Premature obsolescence
Deliberately limited product life
Constructed product death
Intentional dependency on product upgrades
Inbuilt shortened product life

Nature

Since product 'death' is inevitable – that is, because its design will be superseded by a new fashion or technology, or because its materials will wear out – and since industry is geared to the need for product replacement, products are engineered to die by material or mechanical failure. This makes a science out of replacement production when it is known that the product will not last more than ten years (automobiles) or not more than several weeks (batteries). Such planned obsolescence is a characteristic of every variety of consumer product and in some cases has resulted in serious accidents due to inadequate quality. The costs to the economy of planned obsolescence are incalculable.

Background

Planned obsolescence emerged as a recognized global issue in the early 20th century, notably with the Phoebus cartel’s lightbulb lifespan restrictions. Its significance grew post-World War II, as consumer goods industries increasingly adopted strategies to shorten product lifespans. Public awareness intensified in the 1960s and 1970s, with critics linking the practice to environmental degradation and resource waste, prompting international debate and policy scrutiny in subsequent decades.

Incidence

Planned obsolescence is a pervasive issue affecting a wide range of consumer goods, from electronics and appliances to automobiles and fashion. Globally, billions of products are intentionally designed with limited lifespans, leading to increased waste, resource depletion, and financial burdens for consumers. The scale of the problem is evident in mounting e-waste figures, with the United Nations reporting over 53 million metric tons generated worldwide in 2019, much of it attributed to prematurely discarded devices.
In 2020, France fined Apple €25 million for deliberately slowing down older iPhone models through software updates, a practice that encouraged users to purchase new devices. This case highlighted the ongoing prevalence of planned obsolescence in the technology sector.

Claim

The planned obsolescence of many items is notorious. Possibly toys might top the list and, in some countries, clothing articles. Automobiles, batteries and some home appliances are well-known for failure, although the electric light bulb might also be given first place. In addition, the arms race is justified by military procurement based on planned obsolescence of aircraft, ships and weapons, and of delivery and support systems.

A product which can be constantly upgraded so that it never becomes obsolete would be the answer to a consumer's prayer. It would also be less wasteful and therefore more environmentally friendly.

Counter-claim

Product death transpires through competition, substitution, technology, cost-economies or changes in market demand. Products have a life-cycle that is necessary to understand and to anticipate in order to serve end-user needs at the most efficient cost levels. Users will not pay for over-engineered items. Automobiles and personal computers for example, can only be purchased cheaply if one is not looking for life-time usage.

As more product markets become saturated, the only way manufacturers can generate new sales is by introducing a fresh model which tempts the consumer back into the shop.