Improving waste management in construction projects: An Australian study

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.003Get rights and content

Abstract

Construction waste generation has been identified as one of the major issues in the construction industry due to its direct impacts on the environment as well as the efficiency of the construction industry. As the industry cannot continue to practice if the environmental resources on which it depends are depleted, the significance of waste management needs to be understood in order to encourage stakeholders to achieve related goals. Therefore, this research aims to determine effective approaches to eliminate and/or minimise waste generation in construction projects. Mixed methods were adopted by combining qualitative and quantitative research approaches. Interviews and a questionnaire survey were conducted as the primary data collection methods. The findings reveal twenty six critical solutions for waste management. Five factors of solutions for waste management were extracted from the exploratory factor analysis. These factors were: team building and supervision; strategic guidelines in waste management; proper design and documentation; innovation in waste management decisions; and lifecycle management. The evidence from this study suggests that both technologies and attitudinal approaches require improvement to eliminate/minimise waste generation in construction projects. Similarly, attention should be paid to being mindful of the environmental effects of waste generation and avoiding waste generation as early as possible in construction projects.

Introduction

Construction waste generation has been identified as a major issue due to its direct impacts on the environment as well as the efficiency of the construction industry (Formoso et al., 2002). A study conducted by Ameh and Daniel (2013) found that on average 21–30% of cost overruns occurred in construction projects due to material wastage. Similarly, a low priority is assigned to construction waste management and often few resources and incentives are made available to facilitate waste management (WM) processes (Osmani et al., 2008, Teo and Loosemore, 2001). As a result of waste generation, contractors have to bear loss of profit due to the involvement of additional overhead costs and delays; loss of productivity due to additional time involvement for cleaning (Skoyles and Skoyles, 1987); and considerable waste disposal costs (Lingard et al., 2000). Similarly the responsibility for waste generation is often passed to subcontractors who have to estimate the amount of cost and time associated with waste generation during bidding (Johnston and Mincks, 1995). However, Guthrie et al. (1995) stressed that it is also a burden to the client, since the client ultimately has to bear the cost associated with WM. Manowong (2012) found that clients perceived construction WM as less important than profit maximisation and viewed WM as an activity which contributes strongly to project expenses. Since profit maximisation is the main objective of organisations, they are reluctant to adopt environmentally friendly measures towards WM unless they are profitable (Hao et al., 2008). Johnston and Mincks (1995) argued that a false assumption exists among construction practitioners that time spent in managing construction waste is a loss of productivity and pointed out that the construction industry should consider WM as a profitable venture. Construction waste generation not only has cost implications for handling processes but also consumes valuable land due to disposal activities (Hao et al., 2008). Furthermore, the industry cannot continue to practice if the environmental resources on which it depends are depleted. Thus, the significance of WM needs to be understood in order to encourage stakeholders to achieve goals related to WM (Manowong, 2012). However, the quantity of waste generation varies from country to country depending on the economic and cultural characteristics of a country, definitions used to categorise waste and data recording methods (Kourmpanis et al., 2008). Similarly, the effective implementation of WM plans is influenced by the compatibility of WM plans with the actual situation (Manowong, 2012). There is lack of comprehensive research to explore solutions for construction waste generation in Australia. This research aims to explore effective approaches to eliminate and/or minimise waste generation in construction projects in Australia. Findings of this study provide useful inputs for decision making processes around construction WM.

Section snippets

Literature review

By implementing proper WM practices, the construction industry can gain economic, quality and sustainability benefits (Kulatunga et al., 2006). Lingard et al. (1997) have argued that contractors can reduce the cost of construction by implementing WM plans. Construction WM plans help to achieve such cost benefits due to: cost reduction in material purchasing (Bossink and Brouwers, 1996, Coventry and Guthrie, 1998, Jaillon et al., 2009), transportation costs of materials and waste (Coventry and

Research methodology

Mixed methods from multiple sources provide research rigidity (Sekaran, 2003) which allows researchers to overcome the inherent weaknesses associated with each method (Dawson, 2009). Therefore, mixed methods were adopted in this research by combining qualitative and quantitative research approaches to identify ways of improving WM practices in non-residential building projects as shown in Fig. 1.

Findings of interviews

Results of the interviews were generally in line with the findings of the literature review and additional solutions were identified as shown in Table 2. Interviewees highlighted the importance of addressing both technical and human aspects of solutions for WM to improve the performance of WM.

As shown in Table 2, seven new solutions for WM were identified from the interviews. The three most frequently nominated solutions were: training and education for all stakeholders; reinforce legislation

Conclusions

It is well recognised that construction waste has residual value and its generation can be avoided. The purpose of this study was to determine potential ways to eliminate and/or minimise waste generation in construction projects. Seven new solutions for WM were identified from the interviews and a total of twenty six solutions for WM were identified both from the literature review and interviews, which were tested in a questionnaire survey. The exploratory factor analysis showed a total of five

Acknowledgements

The research project referred to in this paper is supported by an Australian Research Council Linkage grant and the following partners: Zero Waste SA; Australian Institute of Building Surveyors; Australian Institute of Building; Campbelltown City Council; Hodgkinson Architects; Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors; Shenzhen Jianyi International Engineering Consultants Ltd; Shenzhen University and the University of Karlsruhe.

References (68)

  • S. Alwi et al.

    Waste in the Indonesian construction projects

  • O.J. Ameh et al.

    Professionals’ views of material wastage on construction sites and cost overruns

    Org. Technol. Manag. Constr.: Int. J.

    (2013)
  • M. Arif et al.

    State of green construction in India: drivers and challenges

    J. Eng. Des. Technol.

    (2009)
  • J. Baglin

    Improving your exploratory factor analysis for ordinal data: a demonstration using factor

    Pract. Assess. Res. Eval.

    (2014)
  • B.A.G. Bossink et al.

    Construction waste: quantification and source evaluation

    J. Constr. Eng. Manag.

    (1996)
  • S.J. Coakes et al.

    SPSS: Analysis Without Anguish Version 18.0 for Windows

    (2011)
  • A. Costello et al.

    Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis

    Pract. Assess. Res. Eval.

    (2005)
  • S. Coventry et al.

    Waste Minimisation and Recycling in Construction: Design Manual

    (1998)
  • C. Dawson

    Introduction to Research Methods

    (2009)
  • L.R. Fabrigar et al.

    Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research

    Psychol. Methods

    (1999)
  • O.O. Faniran et al.

    Minimizing waste on construction project sites

    Eng. Constr. Architect. Manag.

    (1998)
  • A.P. Field

    Discovering Statistics using SPSS

    (2009)
  • C.T. Formoso et al.

    Material waste in building industry: main causes and prevention

    J. Constr. Eng. Manag.

    (2002)
  • R.M. Gavilan et al.

    Source evaluation of solid waste in building construction

    J. Constr. Eng. Manag.

    (1994)
  • R.L. Gorsuch

    Factor Analysis

    (1983)
  • J. Guthrie et al.

    Using content analysis as a research method to inquire into intellectual capital reporting

    J. Intellect. Cap.

    (2004)
  • P. Guthrie et al.

    Waste Minimisation and Recycling in Construction: A Review

    (1995)
  • J.L. Hao et al.

    Managing construction waste on-site through system dynamics modelling: the case of Hong Kong

    Eng. Constr. Architect. Manag.

    (2008)
  • J.C. Hayton et al.

    Factor retention decisions in exploratory factor analysis: a tutorial on parallel analysis

    Org. Res. Methods

    (2004)
  • R.K. Henson et al.

    Use of exploratory factor analysis in published research common errors and some comment on improved practice

    Educ. Psychol. Meas.

    (2006)
  • K.Y. Hogarty et al.

    The quality of factor solutions in exploratory factor analysis: the influence of sample size, communality, and overdetermination

    Educ. Psychol. Meas.

    (2005)
  • G.D. Hutcheson et al.

    The Multivariate Social Scientist Introductory Statistics Using Generalized Linear Models

    (1999)
  • I. Izquierdo et al.

    Exploratory factor analysis in validation studies: uses and recommendations

    Psicothema

    (2014)
  • H. Johnston et al.

    Cost-effective waste minimization for construction managers

    Cost Eng.

    (1995)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text