How many different materials do you think there are in a conventional wired computer mouse? The buttons and casing are usually made of plastic. Then there is a cable containing a few wires, and probably a circuit board somewhere with silicon or a few tin solder joints.
The Nager-IT association is transparent about its entire supply chain, including all the materials used to produce a computer mouse that has been manufactured as ethically as possible. Nager-IT was founded in 2009 by Susanne Jordan, who asked herself the question: “Why is there fair trade coffee, fair trade clothing and fair trade cocoa—but no fair trade technology?” After several versions of their fair computer mouse, they came up with tricks such as a scroll wheel made of local wood or a casing made of sugar cane instead of plastic. What is particularly interesting, however, is that Nager-IT records the entire supply chain for the computer mouse.
Although we deal extensively with sustainable technology, we at RESET were fascinated (and also a little shocked) by how complex the supply chain of such a simple electronic product is. Especially since we are aware of the environmental damage and problems associated with the extraction of many of these raw materials.
After talking to Lucie Hartmann from MNT Research about notebook hardware and developing a short guide to buying the most sustainable laptop possible, we also wanted to talk to Nager-IT. We posed our questions to Susanne Jordan.
What is the idea behind Nager-IT?
We manufacture computer mice under fair working conditions. We believe that transparency is the first step towards fairness. After all, you usually don’t know where the components come from. With electronic products, it’s also difficult to check what exactly is fair, making it hard to purchase truly ethical products.
And why exactly a computer mouse?
It could have been any product, really. But somehow it ended up being the computer mouse—almost by chance, I would say. But in the end, it was a good decision because the mouse is a very simple product. And when it comes to mice, many people can agree on a shape, unlike with computers or notebooks. Everyone has their own needs here—it’s the same with computer mice, where people say, “We want a bigger or smaller mouse”. But it’s easier to accept when that’s not the case.
Essentially, the same mouse has been around for about 20 years. What’s more, it’s a relatively inexpensive product. So even if a mouse is twice or three times as expensive, most people can still afford it.
We see the mouse as a beacon [for ethically produced hardware]. As a USB device, it’s also universal, whether the operating system is Windows, Microsoft or Linux.
Your graphic shows that a single mouse contains 33 different raw materials. Why is technology so complicated?
The complicated thing is that the supply chain has become so specialised. So, there is little variety in what is done in a company. Everything is always outsourced, which means that you have to deal with a large number of companies overall. This makes the supply chain very broad and complex, and it becomes increasingly difficult for all the different companies to cooperate.
This is also a second problem in the electronics industry: it’s still very conservative and doesn’t focus enough on sustainability. I think there is still a lot we can do, at least in manufacturing: How can we use electronics for sustainability? How can we manufacture electronics under sustainable conditions? Unfortunately, answers to these questions haven’t been established yet. In other industries, such as the fashion industry, discussion is much more widespread.
The further down the supply chain you go, the less understanding you find. And then there is the ‘middle management’ in the supply chain. There are a few very large companies that manufacture wires and foils [for the production of our mice], for example, and they simply have no interest in sustainability. For us, this means that we either have to take the products or leave them! And, of course, we often have to take them in the end, as there are few alternatives. This is also one of the challenges we face in our work.
How did you obtain this information? Are there any directories listing manufacturers that have fair working conditions?
No, though that would be ideal! And that was also my expectation when I started working on [sustainable electronics] in 2009. At the time, I expected that I would be preaching to the choir with a fairly produced mouse. I then went to NGOs and human rights organisations that had written reports about poor working conditions and asked if they had a white list. Or at least some recommendations for fair companies, since they had done a lot of research on the subject. But none of them were able to give me anything.
We then did this ourselves on a regional basis. In other words, we visited companies that only have locations in Germany. We were able to visit them easily and never came across any evidence of human rights violations. We then classified them as ‘fair’.
In the companies in China that we were able to visit, there were more differences, and we found them a bit difficult to assess. This is because European ideas about fair working conditions were never met here. Although we saw significant differences [between the companies], we nevertheless classified them all as ‘unfair’. A more precise distinction would have been too complicated, so we pointed this out in lectures and workshops.
Europe now has a supply chain law. Do you think this is a good idea? Based on your experience, how would you change it?
Basically, I think it’s a good thing that direct and indirect suppliers are being held more accountable. And also, the responsibility for working conditions is being made more prominent. However, the law has been watered down more and more. And now there are different requirements for larger and smaller companies.
Larger companies have to track their supply chains more thoroughly than smaller companies. And in many cases, this simply does not happen. There is a relatively high threshold, which means that many companies can shirk their responsibility.
Final question! You would like to pass Nager-IT on to the next generation—what tips would you give to anyone interested in doing so? What do you need to bring to the table?
First of all, one thing is important, which I also had back then: you have to find the topic really important! Because that compensates for a lot of what you may not yet have in terms of prior knowledge or experience. If [the working conditions and production conditions in IT] are important to you, you automatically make progress, and if you show interest, you get the help you need everywhere.
How can we ensure a green digital future?
Growing e-waste, carbon emissions from AI, data centre water usage—is rampant digitalisation compatible with a healthy planet? Our latest project explores how digital tools and services can be developed with sustainability in mind.
But what would be important right now is something that neither I nor anyone else on the team has: a passion for sales and marketing! In other words, a desire to publicise what a great product we make.
Further information on the handover of Nager-IT can be found on the association’s page. If you have any questions, Susanne Jordan concludes, you can simply contact the team by email or write to Nager-IT on Mastodon.
Thank you for the interview, and we’re keeping our fingers crossed that the fair computer mouse has a bright future ahead!
