I'm a big fan of reusing and if I really need to buy something, I buy it used. For example, I've been using second hand or refurbished phones for many years. However, while that is good for the environment (because fewer phones need to be produced), it doesn't affect the phone market. Phone makers decide which kind of phone to produce based on which phone sells better, and not considering the second hand market.
From that point of view, the people who can influence phone producers' decisions are those who buy new phones. That's the concept of "dollar voting", where your purchase acts like a "vote" for a phone. The phone lines with more "votes" are the ones phone makers will keep producing.
Under that logic, if the phones growing more in sales were the modular, easy to repair, and ethically sourced ones, then companies would privilege the production of those phones. An example of such phone is the FairPhone (in fact the one I'm considering to buy).
Therefore, I tend to think that getting another refurbished phone produces the less short-term environmental impact. However, it doesn't affect the phone market, which is what we need for a reduced long-term impact.
Can anyone help me to find a rationale to decide when it is better to reuse and when it is better to "dollar vote"?.
Note that when I say "dollar vote", I'm referring to buy a product that dramatically changes the market paradigm in a way that is better for the environment.
Or is the "dollar voting" idea just another trick to boost consumption?