Construction waste management in India: an exploratory study Mohammed Arif, Deepthi Bendi and Tahsin Toma-Sabbagh School of the Built Environment, University of Salford, Manchester, UK, and Monty Sutrisna University of Salford, Manchester, UK Abstract Purpose – The growth of Indian economy has brought with it significant increase in construction activities. These increased construction activities have further highlighted the problem of waste generation on construction sites. The purpose of this paper is to provide important insights and highlight some issues related to the implementation of effective waste management practices on construction sites in India. Design/methodology/approach – This paper presents two cases and results from semi-structured interviews which shed light on some of the major issues, challenges and drivers associated with the implementation of waste management in construction in India. Findings – One of the key findings was that client preference and enforcement of existing laws could actually facilitate the implementation of waste minimisation effectively. Some of the practices being followed, and which are gaining more popularity, are waste quantification, waste segregation, and the implementation of 3Rs (reduce, recycle, and reuse). Congested construction sites, sites in heavily built-up areas with no ability to have an alternate storage or staging location for materials, lack of ownership of waste due to the presence of multiple contractors on the construction site and lack of awareness and education among the construction workforce were regarded as major challenges associated with the implementation of waste minimisation practices in India. Research limitations/implications – The cases and the interviewees chosen were through the authors’ links with the Indian Green Building Council (IGBC). The cases were LEED registered projects therefore issues dealing with green construction had been taken into account. These cases might not be representative of the entire country, as there are significantly high proportions of construction projects that are not as green, especially in smaller cities in India. However, the two cases do provide important insights and highlight some issues related to the implementation of effective waste management practices on construction sites in India. The individuals interviewed also had link with IGBC. They had been involved with the green building movement in India for a significant length of time. But the length and breadth of their experience gave them the ability to comment on state of the construction sector and its green as well as non-green practices associated with waste management. Originality/value – This paper presents an exploratory study which assesses the implementation of waste management practices in the Indian construction industry. It also highlights activities within different stages of a construction project that can lead to more effective waste management in the construction sector. Keywords India, Construction industry, Waste management, Construction management, Waste reuse, Recycling, Waste generation, Waste minimisation Paper type Research paper The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1471-4175.htm The authors are thankful for help and support extended by the Indian Green Building Council in conducting this study. Construction waste management 133 Construction Innovation Vol. 12 No. 2, 2012 pp. 133-155 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1471-4175 DOI 10.1108/14714171211215912
Transcript
Construction waste managementin India: an exploratory study
Mohammed Arif, Deepthi Bendi and Tahsin Toma-SabbaghSchool of the Built Environment, University of Salford, Manchester, UK, and
Monty SutrisnaUniversity of Salford, Manchester, UK
Abstract
Purpose – The growth of Indian economy has brought with it significant increase in constructionactivities. These increased construction activities have further highlighted the problem of wastegeneration on construction sites. The purpose of this paper is to provide important insights andhighlight some issues related to the implementation of effective waste management practices onconstruction sites in India.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper presents two cases and results from semi-structuredinterviews which shed light on some of the major issues, challenges and drivers associated with theimplementation of waste management in construction in India.
Findings – One of the key findings was that client preference and enforcement of existing laws couldactually facilitate the implementation of waste minimisation effectively. Some of the practices beingfollowed, and which are gaining more popularity, are waste quantification, waste segregation, and theimplementation of 3Rs (reduce, recycle, and reuse). Congested construction sites, sites in heavily built-upareas with no ability to have an alternate storage or staging location for materials, lack of ownership ofwaste due to the presence of multiple contractors on the construction site and lack of awareness andeducation among the construction workforce were regarded as major challenges associated with theimplementation of waste minimisation practices in India.
Research limitations/implications – The cases and the interviewees chosen were through theauthors’ links with the Indian Green Building Council (IGBC). The cases were LEED registeredprojects therefore issues dealing with green construction had been taken into account. These casesmight not be representative of the entire country, as there are significantly high proportions ofconstruction projects that are not as green, especially in smaller cities in India. However, the twocases do provide important insights and highlight some issues related to the implementation ofeffective waste management practices on construction sites in India. The individuals interviewed alsohad link with IGBC. They had been involved with the green building movement in India for asignificant length of time. But the length and breadth of their experience gave them the ability tocomment on state of the construction sector and its green as well as non-green practices associatedwith waste management.
Originality/value – This paper presents an exploratory study which assesses the implementation ofwaste management practices in the Indian construction industry. It also highlights activities withindifferent stages of a construction project that can lead to more effective waste management in theconstruction sector.
Keywords India, Construction industry, Waste management, Construction management, Waste reuse,Recycling, Waste generation, Waste minimisation
Paper type Research paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1471-4175.htm
The authors are thankful for help and support extended by the Indian Green Building Council inconducting this study.
Constructionwaste
management
133
Construction InnovationVol. 12 No. 2, 2012
pp. 133-155q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1471-4175DOI 10.1108/14714171211215912
IntroductionIndia is a growing economy and this growth has brought with it a significant boost inconstruction activities. In India the current annual investment in construction is around$70 billion, with an identified need for an additional $50 billion and a projected annualgrowth rate of 15 per cent (Arif et al., 2009b). It is estimated that supporting infrastructurewill also need an investment of around $163 billion over the next ten years (Syal et al.,2006). With the amount of construction activities taking place in India, it is important toassess the amount of construction waste being generated and analyse the practicesneeded to handle waste in order to propose a greener construction approach (Arif et al.,2009a). The total solid waste generated in India is about 960 million tonnes of which theconstruction waste is 14.5 million tonnes (Pappu et al., 2007). However, this number ismisleading since this only includes the waste that is properly disposed and accounted for(Talyan et al., 2008); there is also the practice of dumping construction waste by theroadside or on an empty plot of land and never documenting it. These kinds of wastedisposal practices are quite prevalent and make the waste estimation process impossiblein Indian context (Bendi, 2010). This paper presents an overview of the impact of greenbuilding movement in India on waste management practices and highlights areas ofimprovement in project management practices to incorporate better waste managementin the construction sector. There are two main objectives of this paper. The first one is toexplore how waste management practices are being incorporated in construction projectsin India, and what are the major challenges faced in implementing these practices. Thesecond objective is to explore the developments taking place regarding the wastemanagement practices in India and how project management practices have changed aswell as explaining the necessity of change for more effective project management – inorder to incorporate waste management in construction. The rest of the paper is dividedinto seven sections. The first two sections present a review of literature in the areas ofwaste management in the construction sector and components of Green BuildingGuidelines, all across the world in general and for India in particular that deal with wastemanagement. It was important to discuss the guidelines as the two case studies coveredin the study are Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) India certifiedbuildings. This helped demonstrate the influence of Green Building Guidelines on theconstruction process. After the two sections on literature review, there is a section onmethodology. This section presents the epistemological and ontological positioning ofthis research. It also outlines the approach adopted for data collection and analysis. Thissection is followed by a section that presents two case studies from India. The sectionfollowing the case study is a section that presents results of the interviews of15 construction professionals. All these professionals are currently affiliated with theactivities of Indian Green Building Council (IGBC). They all have been in the Indianconstruction sector for more than ten years and are familiar with the oldernon-environmentally friendly practices, as well as the recent changes. They are in aunique position to provide the perspective of what is happening right now, what used tohappen, what needs to happen, and what are the challenges facing effective wasteminimisation implementation for the Indian construction sector. The case studies and theinterviews enable the assessment of current practices and challenges and opportunitiesfor improvement using feedback from experienced professionals. This is followed by asection discussing the main element of the work presented in this paper and finally theconclusion section summarizes the major findings of this exploratory study.
CI12,2
134
Waste minimisationConstruction waste is defined as the difference between the values of those materialsdelivered on-site and used appropriately and the value of material that was transferredelsewhere due to damage, over ordering and issues such as design changes (Di Silva andVithana, 2008; Peng and Tan, 1998). Ekanayake and Ofori (2000) have dividedconstruction waste into three categories: material, labour and machinery. Ekanayakeand Ofori (2000) have classified material as most critical of the construction waste, asmost of it comes from non-renewable sources. It is estimated that about 40 per cent ofwaste generated globally comes from construction related activities (Kulatunga et al.,2006; Nitivattananon and Borongan, 2007). There have been several attempts atclassifying construction waste quantitatively (Muller, 2006; Dantata et al., 2005), andqualitatively (Chung and Lo, 2003; Eriksson et al., 2005).
Different authors have classified construction and demolition wastes into categoriesassociated with the stages of construction projects such as: contracting, design,procurement, transportation, material handling, on-site management and operations,and residuals (Kulatunga et al., 2006; Osmani et al., 2008; Ekanayake and Ofori, 2000;Gavilan and Bernold, 1994). One of the major drivers towards the generation orminimisation of construction waste is the knowledge and attitude of people involved indifferent stages of construction, right from design to final handover and beyond(Rocha and Sattler, 2009; Kulatunga et al., 2006; Greenwood, 2003; Keys et al., 2000;Arif et al., 2010). There is still a problem with peoples, attitude towards wastemanagement and it is not used a major decision variable in construction projectmanagement that is monitored and controlled (Su et al., 2007).
Several authors have highlighted strategies for waste minimisation. One of thestrategies that finds repeated mention in the literature is the strategy often referred to as3Rs (reduce, reuse, recycle) (Shekdar, 2008; Wang et al., 2008; Kibert and Languell, 2000;Teo and Loosemore, 2001). However, as Bohne et al. (2008) point out that recycle andreuse are the two most economically feasible approached with high impact. Researchersworldwide have proposed a list of 11 practices that help in the implementation of wasteminimisation. These practices are: standardization of design, stock control to minimiseover ordering, environmental education to the work force, provision of recycling andwaste disposal companies as part of the supply chain, on time/just in time deliveries,penalties for poor waste management, incentives and tender premiums for wasteminimisation, waste auditing, increased use of off-site techniques, use of on-sitecompactors, reverse logistics (Arif et al., 2010, 2009a; Dainty and Brooke, 2004; Sarkis,1998; Tam et al., 2003; Baldwin et al., 2008; Shen et al., 2009). These 11 practices havebeen used to assess the construction sites in the cases presented later in this paper.
Green Building GuidelinesGreen Building Guidelines have gained prominence worldwide in the last decade.Although, they deal with a wider array of issues dealing with greenness of a building,this section highlights only those key sections within differentGreen BuildingGuidelinesthat deal with waste management only. In the last decadeGreenBuildingGuidelineshavebecome an effective vehicle for promoting the implementation of waste minimisationstrategies and practices in the construction sector (Potbhare et al., 2009). One of theprominent green building rating systems is Leadership in Energy and EnvironmentalDesign (LEED) rating system from the USA. LEED has a rating system for different
Constructionwaste
management
135
types of buildings such as new construction, existing buildings, commercial interiors,core and shell, schools, retail, health care, homes and neighbourhood development(USGBC, 2009). Though the building typology is different, the basic measures or prerequisites of the rating system are in the following areas:
(1) sustainable sites;
(2) water efficiency;
(3) energy and atmosphere;
(4) material and resource;
(5) indoor air quality; and
(6) innovation and design.
Out of the six areas water efficiency and material and resources deal explicitly with wastemanagement during the operations of the building. There are also some very specificelements within LEED that highlight the points that could be earned by performingeffective waste management during the construction phase. For example, if 50 per cent ofconstruction waste is diverted away from landfill and reused then it is worth one point, if75 per cent of the construction waste is diverted away efficiently then it is worth two points.
Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM)(BRE, 2007; Bunz et al., 2006) was introduced by BRE in 1990 as the first voluntarybuilding assessment method in the world. The BREEAM credits awarded are in thefollowing categories:
. management;
. health and well-being;
. energy;
. transport;
. water;
. material and waste;
. land use and ecology; and
. pollution.
Material and waste category deals with the waste management practices and thecredits are assigned for:
. responsibly resourced materials; and
. use of recycled materials.
Comprehensive Assessment System for Building Environmental Efficiency (CASBEE,2009) was introduced in Japan as a voluntary building assessment system in 2001 byJapan Sustainable Building Consortium (JSBC). This building assessment system dealswith: building environmental quality and performance (Q) and building environmentalloadings (L). CASBEE designated statistical values of the predicted consumption ofenergy, water, land use, materials and environmental emissions as well as the measurableaspects of indoor environmental conditions. Building environmental quality (Q) evaluatesthe improvement in living amenity for the building users, within the enclosed space,
CI12,2
136
and building environmental loadings (L) evaluates the negative aspects of environmentalimpact which go beyond the enclosed space to the outside (CASBEE, 2009). CASBEEdesign considerations are based on the following categories:
. Q1 – indoor environment;
. Q2 – quality of service;
. Q3 – outdoor environment on-site;
. LR1 – energy;
. LR2 – resources and materials; and
. LR3 – off-site environment.
In the above Energy (LR1), Resource and materials (LR2), and off-site environment(LR3) deal with issues related to waste management practices.
The Canada Green Building Council (CGBC, 2009) is a voluntary rating system thatadopts same of LEED rating system (CGBC, 2009). Further, the rating system includesareas such as:
. sustainable site development;
. water efficiency;
. energy efficiency;
. materials selection; and
. indoor environmental quality.
Waste management practices are dealt with under the areas of water efficiency andmaterials selection.
The IGBC is a voluntary organisation, which has adapted the LEED rating systemand developed LEED India. (IGBC, 2009). The rating system has six areas it deals with:
(1) sustainable sites;
(2) water efficiency;
(3) energy and atmosphere;
(4) materials and resources;
(5) indoor environmental quality; and
(6) innovation and design process.
Just like its American counterpart it addresses issues related to waste managementduring operations under the headings of water efficiency and materials and resources.
Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA, 2006) is the national ratingsystem of India for GRIHA. This is the joint initiative by The Energy and ResourceInstitute (TERI) and Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India. TheGRIHA rating system is categorized under:
. site selection and site planning;
. building planning and construction stage;
. building operation and maintenance; and
. innovation.
Constructionwaste
management
137
This system assesses the building on its predicted performance over the life cycle,i.e. inception through operation. In detail it evaluates:
. pre-construction stage;
. building planning and construction; and
. building operation and maintenance stage.
Table I presents the summary of all the above discussed rating systems and acomparison of how they address waste management within their guidelines. In India,currently there are more buildings registered under the IGBC LEED India compared toTERI GRIHA (120 in LEED Certified and 720 LEED Registered vs 73 Total in GRIHA –data obtained on October 25, 2010).
Summarising the contents of Table I related to waste management practices indifferent Green Building Guidelines we see that LEED NC as well as LEED Canada NCfocuses on issues such as: the use of innovative waste water technologies water usereduction; provisions for storage and collection of recyclables; building reuse;construction waste management; material re use; recycled content; regional materials;and rapidly renewable materials. BREEAM emphasises on the use of responsiblyresourced materials as well as the proportion use of the recycled material in theconstruction. CASBEE assess the treatment of wastes, waste sorting, and reuse ofrainwater once the building is operational. LEED India NC promotes the use ofalternative transportation; reduced site disturbance; storm water design and Qualitycontrol; innovative waste water technologies; building reuse; construction wastemanagement; resource re use; recycled content; local or regional material; and rapidlyrenewable materials. Finally, the GRIHA green building standard proposes the use ofwaste management; reduction in waste during construction; efficient waste segregation;storage and disposal of waste; and resource recovery from waste. The green buildingsystems have strong emphasis waste water treatment, use of environmentally friendlymaterial, reuse of the site waste and proper disposal of the waste. GRIHA also accountsfor reduction is waste due to efficient project management. These tables clearlydemonstrate that waste minimisation and its overall management is a common themeand an area of high emphasis in all the green building rating systems across the world.
Research methodologyMethodology is typically concerned with the logic of research enquiry particularly withinvestigating the potentialities and limitations of certain type of techniques orprocedures. The ontological and epistemological stance of the researcher will influencethe response to the methodological questions (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). In principle,ontology concerns with what is believed in constituting social reality whilstepistemology concerns with the claims of what is assumed to exist can be known(Blaikie, 2000; Creswell, 2007). The Ontological stance of the researchers in this researchcan be considered in line with Constructivism whilst the epistemological stance in linewith interpretivism. Constructivist and interpretivist perceive reality not as objectiveand exterior, but is created and derived by the person involved. Therefore, the truth andreality are social constructs and the researcher should consider the truth and reality fromthe collective opinions of the participants (Fellows and Liu, 2005). In acknowledging thecollective nature of the construction of the social reality, this research uses two differentmethods in order to accomplish the stated objectives of this research, namely case study
CI12,2
138
Des
crip
tion
LE
ED
–N
C(U
SG
BC
-200
8)P
otb
har
eet
al.
(200
8)
BR
EE
AM
(BR
E-2
007)
Pot
bh
areet
al.
(200
8)
CA
SB
EE
(CA
SB
EE
-200
9)(C
AS
BE
E,
2009
)
LE
ED
Can
ada-
NC
(CaG
BC
-200
9)(C
GB
C,
2009
)
LE
ED
Ind
ia–
NC
(IG
BC
-200
9)A
rifet
al.
(200
9b)
GR
IHA
(IN
DIA
-200
6)G
RIH
A(2
006)
Par
ent
org
anis
atio
nU
SG
reen
Bu
ild
ing
Cou
nci
lB
RE
Ltd
JSB
CC
GB
CIn
dia
nG
reen
Bu
ild
ing
Cou
nci
lG
RIH
A
Cou
ntr
yU
SA
UK
Jap
anC
anad
aIn
dia
Ind
iaT
yp
eof
rati
ng
sC
erti
fied
Pas
sP
oor
Cer
tifi
edC
erti
fied
On
est
arS
ilv
erV
ery
goo
dF
airy
poo
rS
ilv
erS
ilv
erT
wo
star
Gol
dG
ood
Goo
dG
old
Gol
dT
hre
est
arP
lati
nu
mA
exce
llen
tV
ery
goo
dP
lati
nu
mP
lati
nu
mF
our
star
Ex
cell
ent
Fiv
est
arM
ajor
div
isio
ns,
cate
gor
ies
and
sub
cate
gor
ies
Su
stai
nab
lesi
tes
Wat
eref
fici
ency
En
erg
yan
dat
mos
ph
ere
Man
agem
ent
Hea
lth
and
wel
l-b
ein
gE
ner
gy
Ind
oor
env
iron
men
tQ
ual
ity
ofse
rvic
eO
utd
oor
env
iron
men
ton
-sit
e
Su
stai
nab
lesi
ted
evel
opm
ent
Wat
eref
fici
ency
En
erg
yef
fici
ency
Su
stai
nab
lesi
tes
En
erg
yan
dat
mos
ph
ere
Min
imu
men
erg
yp
erfo
rman
ce
Sit
ese
lect
ion
and
site
pla
nn
ing
Bu
ild
ing
pla
nn
ing
and
con
stru
ctio
nst
age
Bu
ild
ing
oper
atio
nan
dm
ain
ten
ance
Mat
eria
lan
dre
sou
rces
Wat
erE
ner
gy
Mat
eria
lsse
lect
ion
CF
Cre
du
ctio
nin
HV
AC
and
Req
uip
men
t
Inn
ovat
ion
Ind
oor
air
qu
alit
yM
ater
ial
and
was
teR
esou
rces
and
mat
eria
lsIn
doo
ren
vir
onm
enta
lq
ual
ity
Mat
eria
lsan
dre
sou
rces
Inn
ovat
ion
ind
esig
nL
and
use
and
ecol
ogy
Off
-sit
een
vir
onm
ent
Ind
oor
env
iron
men
tal
qu
alit
yR
egio
nal
pri
orit
yP
ollu
tion
En
vir
onm
enta
lT
obac
coS
mok
e(E
TS
)C
ontr
olIn
nov
atio
nan
dd
esig
np
roce
ss
(continued
)
Table I.Summary of waste
management criteria inGreen Building Guidelines
in developed anddeveloping countries
Constructionwaste
management
139
Rel
ated
tow
aste
Inn
ovat
ive
was
tew
ater
tech
nol
ogie
s
Res
pon
sib
lyre
sou
rced
mat
eria
ls
Tre
atm
ent
ofex
per
imen
tal
was
tes,
was
teso
rtin
g,
reu
seof
rain
wat
er
Inn
ovat
ive
was
tew
ater
tech
nol
ogie
s
Alt
ern
ativ
etr
ansp
orta
tion
Was
tem
anag
emen
t
Wat
eru
sere
du
ctio
nU
seof
recy
cled
mat
eria
ls
Wat
eru
sere
du
ctio
nR
edu
ced
site
dis
turb
ance
Red
uct
ion
inw
aste
du
rin
gco
nst
ruct
ion
Sto
rag
ean
dco
llec
tion
ofre
cycl
able
s
Sto
rag
ean
dco
llec
tion
ofre
cycl
able
sB
uil
din
gre
use
Sto
rmw
ater
des
ign
and
qu
alit
yco
ntr
olIn
nov
ativ
ew
aste
wat
erte
chn
olog
ies
Effi
cien
tw
aste
seg
reg
atio
nS
tora
ge
and
dis
pos
alof
was
teB
uil
din
gre
use
Con
stru
ctio
nw
aste
man
agem
ent
Con
stru
ctio
nw
aste
man
agem
ent
Bu
ild
ing
reu
seR
esou
rce
reco
ver
yfr
omw
aste
Mat
eria
lre
use
Mat
eria
lre
use
Con
stru
ctio
nw
aste
man
agem
ent
Rec
ycl
edco
nte
nt
Rec
ycl
edco
nte
nt
Res
ourc
ere
use
Reg
ion
alm
ater
ials
Reg
ion
alm
ater
ials
Rec
ycl
edco
nte
nt
Rap
idly
ren
ewab
lem
ater
ials
Rap
idly
ren
ewab
lem
ater
ials
Loc
alor
reg
ion
alm
ater
ial
Rap
idly
ren
ewab
lem
ater
ials
Table I.
CI12,2
140
and semi-structured interviews. Conducting a case study research can be thought asconducting an in-depth investigation into the research topic. It is typically considered anempirical enquiry that investigates contemporary occurrences within its real life contextand particularly useful when boundaries between phenomenon and context are notclearly evident (Yin, 2009). Qualitative research interview is particularly appropriatewhere a study focuses on the meaning of particular phenomena to the participants(King, 1994).
As the first step, two cases of buildings that were under construction at the time ofdata collection were studied. These two buildings are LEED registered and will be goingfor certification on completion. The choice of LEED rated building instead of GRIHAwas due to the cooperation extended by IGBC in supporting this study and providingaccess to information and data about these buildings. Since the owners of the twoobserved cases have registered their buildings for LEED certification; this indicates thatthey are environmentally conscience, and it was felt that they should have ensured anenvironmentally friendly construction process given their preference for LEED. Theinformation for the cases was gathered through multiple site visits and collection of datawas facilitated by observations of the researchers as well as feedback from the site staff.The choice of case studies helps in understanding challenges faced in implementation ofeffective waste minimisation and ways to address these challenges. The clients in thetwo case studies were quite environmentally conscience. The first client usedthe elements of LEED India in order to drive waste minimisation in the construction. Thesecond client viewed waste minimisation with reference to the 3R strategy presented inthe literature. It was felt that elements of case studies should include these visions of theclients as well as have a common evaluation approach in order to facilitate comparisonacross the two case studies. When researchers set out to do the exploratory study, theydecided to follow the 11 parameter framework which includes: standardization ofdesign, stock control to minimise over ordering, environmental education to the workforce, provision of recycling and waste disposal companies as part of the supply chain,on time/just in time deliveries, penalties for poor waste management, incentives andtender premiums for waste minimisation, waste auditing, increased use of off-sitetechniques, use of on-site compactors, reverse logistics as discussed in the literatureearlier. However, when the data collection for the case study started, it was observed thatthe thought process of the first case study had a strong underpinning of the LEED ratingsystem as the client was a believer of the system and its ability to deliver a sustainablebuilding. In the second case, the client’s thought process was primarily driven by the 3Rstrategy. He was an ardent follower of the 3R strategy and every project he has done inthe recent past or is thinking about it, he wanted to introduce 3R. Therefore, theresearchers felt that it was important to present the cases in light of LEED and 3Rphilosophies, in addition to the 11 parameter framework developed as a result of theliterature review. Therefore, the presentation of cases include the vision of the client aswell as evaluation of waste management practices along the 11 parameters highlightedin the literature review earlier (Tables III and IV).
The second objective of the research is the investigation of current status as well asthe future potential for waste minimisation in India. It also highlights different activitiesat various stages of a project that can help minimise waste in construction. In order toexplore this issue, as the subsequent step, semi-structured interviews were conducted. Inall, 15 professionals were interviewed in January 2010, of which two were individuals
Constructionwaste
management
141
involved with LEED rating system and are architects by training, there were eightproject managers, two currently practicing architects, two civil engineers and onelawyer who specialises in environmental laws related to the construction sector in India.All these individuals had more than ten years of experience in the construction sector,and were members of IGBC. They were selected on recommendation from IGBC and hadexpressed willingness to talk about the issue of waste management in construction.They were asked three questions:
(1) What did they think of the current state of waste management on constructionprojects in India.
(2) What did they think of the future of waste management on constructionprojects in India.
(3) What activities at different stages of the project can lead to a more effectivewaste management on construction projects.
Between 45 minutes to an hour was spent talking to these individuals and conductingthe interviews. In all but one case interviews were conducted in-person. In the oneexceptional case it was conducted over the phone. The discussion with theseexperienced practitioners provided more insight into how they have seen the growth inawareness of waste management in construction projects and how they thought theproject management practices should be modified in India for more effective wastemanagement. The data was compiled and conclusions drawn using content analysis.This is an exploratory study but the findings will provide future researchers with theability to further investigate each of the issues in-depth.
Case studiesThis section discusses two cases and then analyses the findings from the cases to drawinitial conclusions.
Case 1The first case was an office building located in Hyderabad, India. The building has anarea of 4 million sq. ft. with 16 floors and five basement levels (underground floors). Theproject started in 2006 and at the time of the site visits the outer structure was completedand interior work was pending. Once complete, this would be one of the largest officebuildings in Asia.
The authors conducted three site visits, interacting with the client, consultants andconstruction workers both individually and in groups. The project has beenundertaken by one of the largest developers in India and the project managementfunction is being performed by a multi-national Project Management Consultancy(PMC). Since the client has registered this building for LEED certification, this was asite where the awareness for green principles was immense.
On-site actions have been documented in line with the IGBC guidelines under thetopic of material and resources. There are 13 points under the material and resourceheading and on each point, of which there were seven points on which on-site action hasbeen taken in this case, Table II documents the points and the on-site actions that wereeither observed or were documented based on feedback from site staff.
As described above, the waste management is being followed during the constructionstage. Some of the actions like the use of certified wood will also have implications once
CI12,2
142
the building is operational. In addition, once the building is operational wastesegregation and storage provisions have been designed on the first basement level. Thisis designed in such a way that paper, cardboard, plastic, glass, and metal can besegregated at the collection point and stored in dedicated rooms. For handling of otheroperational waste, as per the IGBC guidelines, one sewage treatment plant (STP) hasbeen designed in the building. This STP will facilitate the treatment of all the wastewater generated, and for it to be reused in landscaping, HVAC Chillers and fireprecautionary sprinklers.
S. no. Prerequisite IGBC requirement On site action
Architects and designconsultants provided thedrawing required and PMC isexecuting this work to finishflaw less
Drawings indicatingcollection bins at floor levels(common areas) are required
2 Construction wastemanagement, divert 50 percent from disposal andconstruction wastemanagement, divert 75 percent from disposal
Account of total constructionwaste (scrap, debris, etc.)generated (by weight orvolume); where and howmuch of it is reused orrecycled; gate passes andscrap vendor’s invoicesrequired
Waste log sheets andquantification aftersegregation took place on-siteby the contractor and PMCexecuted this work
3 Resource reuse 5 per cent andresource reuse 10 per cent
Utilising existing resourcesfrom 5 to 10 per cent
The site has fertile soil andthis was used for landscapepurposes after the excavationof foundations
4 Recycled content 5 per centand recycled content 10 percent
Letters/certificates fromsuppliers/manufacturersstating the recycled content indifferent materials required
Low VOC paints and100 per cent recyclable ply isbeing used in the site
5 Regional materials, 20 percent
letters/certificates fromsuppliers/manufacturersstating the distance betweenthe site and the place ofharvesting raw materials forthe locally manufacturedmaterials
Most of the stone and ashblocks are being suppliedfrom regional market
6 Rapidly renewable materials,5 per cent of buildingmaterials
Letters/certificates fromsuppliers/manufacturersstating the rapidly renewablecontent in different materialsrequired
100 per cent renewable glassand laminates are being usedin the interior works, gypsumalso contributingtowards this
7 Certified wood Minimum 50 per cent of thewood (virgin wood like teak)based material to be FSCcertified
Virgin wood with FSC isbeing used
Table II.Case 1 on-site actions
under the materials andresources heading
Constructionwaste
management
143
During the construction process, waste segregation and quantification was followedthrough waste log sheets. With the help of these log sheets it was easy to monitor thewaste. Since the construction site was very congested there was no provision formaterial storage. Hence a nearby space was rented by the contractor for material storageand carry out pre-fabrication of building components. This further reduced the wasteproduction and prevented the on-site material from spoilage due to on-site activities. Useof pre-fabrication also gave the opportunity to work in a controlled environment andprevented wastage. This project was further assessed for the implementation of the11 waste management practices described earlier in the literature review section. Theresults are documented in Table III.
S. no. Practice Remark Description
1 Standardisation of design Yes At the design stage all the drawings and co-ordination plans were issued with ready-for-construction label. This reduced designchanges and helped in planning resourcesaccordingly
2 Stock control to minimise over ordering Yes As mentioned, the material storage is at anearby site. This helped in maintainingrecords of inflow and outflow of thematerial
3 Environmental education for the workforce
Yes Though seminars were not conducted,during the site visit some of the displayposters were seen which emphasized onissues such as proper waste disposal, andwaste accounting
4 Provision of recycling and wastedisposal companies as part of thesupply chain
Yes Though there was no special mention forany company, the developers discardedwaste to some of the recycling companies aswell as to the waste handlers, as opposed todumping it on the side of a road somewhere,a practice quite prevalent in India
5 On time delivering Yes In practice, there was no delay in materialpurchase or delivery which saved lot of timeand money. Delivery times were plannedproperly and were monitored rigorously
6 Penalties for poor waste management No There was no such control observed in site7 Incentives and tender premiums for
waste minimisationNo There was no such control observed in site
8 Waste auditing Yes Regular auditing is being conducted on-site9 Increased use of off-site techniques Yes Off-site pre fabrication practiced in this
project10 Use of on-site compactors No There was no on-site compactor, due to
limited site space11 Reverse logistics Yes With materials like steel, adhesives, sealant,
paint containers and other interior materialhas been sent back to the manufacturersand suppliers on vehicles from the samesuppliers when they come to supply anotherconsignment
Table III.Waste managementpractices followedin Case 1
CI12,2
144
Thus, out of 11 practices eight were followed on-site and this resulted in waste, time andcost reduction. Some of the senior level site staff pointed out that smooth administration,and reduction in the number of cases of material theft has been achieved due to thissystematic approach towards waste management.
Case 2This is a business park campus comprising of four 8-story buildings, club house,sports field, and a multi-storied car park. The office area is about 3 million sq. ft., andthe campus is located in Bangalore, India. Since the construction was over at the timeof site visit by the authors, information was gathered by talking to the contractors andproject managers of the project. This campus has achieved the LEED platinum rating.Before the inception of the project the client committed to achieving effectiveconstruction waste management through the 3R strategy described earlier in theliterature review. Below is an overview of how the 3R strategy was implemented.
Reduce. Use of pre-fabricated materials and technologies were planned right at thedesign stage itself. This drastically reduced the on-site waste. During construction, theconstruction workers were regularly trained through pep talks and demonstrations tominimise the construction waste and to reuse the waste generated, where possible.
Reuse. While the construction work was going on, the site was provided with acentralized construction waste yard near the project entrance. This yard had wastesegregation facility for different types of waste generated like metal (aluminium frames),civil waste (bricks, mortar), gypsum, plastic (packaging waste), and so on. All the wastegenerated from different floors in the project was segregated and collected at thecentralised construction waste yard on the site. The waste that can be reused waseffectively reused within the site and some content was donated to other sites, where itcan be used effectively. The waste was moved from the yard by trucks for furtherdisposal or transfer purpose. A log book was maintained throughout the duration of theproject to account for the amount of waste generated, waste reused in the project, andwaste diverted to other remote locations and landfills.
Recycle. The recyclable was resent to a leading solid waste management company inthe area, which diverts the waste to the destinations where it can be recycled. This wastemanagement company paid the client if the waste had any monetary value afterrecycling. The money from this was diverted to a charity trust with client’s approval. Allthe civil, interiors and material contractors in the supply chain were asked to beconscious of the waste being generate and were encouraged to minimise it, whenpossible. This project was further assessed for the implementation of the 11 wastemanagement practices described earlier in the literature review section. The results aredocumented in Table IV.
Analysis of casesThe two cases presented above definitely indicate a growing awareness of greenconstruction in general and waste management in particular, a trend that has also beenhighlighted by Arif et al. (2009a, b). However, the waste management practices are notuniform. Different clients follow different practices and in most instances this is still anafterthought. Most green buildings that are being LEED certified focus more onoperational aspects of the building rather than the construction phase. In the first case, theclient was very particular about the construction waste minimisation since it can reducelot of time and cost incurred in the project. In both cases there were awareness activities
Constructionwaste
management
145
for site workers, contractors and suppliers for waste management. As far as practicessuch as on-site compactors or waste handling facilities are concerned, there was evidencein both cases; however with construction sites in congested built-up areas in India, thismight not always be possible. Extensive waste documentation was observed in bothcases. Through discussion the individuals involved in the two projects, it was apparent
S. no. Practice Remark Description
1 Standardisation of design Yes At the design stage all the drawings andco-ordination plans were issued withready-for-construction label. This reduceddesign changes and helped in planningresources accordingly
2 Stock control to minimise over ordering Yes Strict agreements were put in place forcivil and interior contractors, materialsuppliers, vendors in the supply chain.Also, bill of quantities and accurateestimates through rigorous forecastingwas adopted in this project
3 Environmental education for the workforce
Yes At the beginning of the project all the staffand workers were made aware ofenvironmental impacts and the intent ofthe client to be green. This was donethrough seminars and demonstrations tominimise the construction waste and tooptimally reuse the waste generated
4 Provision of recycling and wastedisposal companies as part of thesupply chain
Yes The whole project waste during theconstruction was handed over to anenterprise that deals with recycling anddisposal in the local area
5 On time delivering Yes In practice, there was no documented delayin material purchase or delivery whichsaved lot of time and money
6 Penalties for poor waste management Yes Twice the civil contractor was issuepenalty tickles due to poor wastemanagement
7 Incentives and tender premiums forwaste minimisation
No There was no such practice observed insite
8 Waste auditing Yes During the civil works every day auditingtook place, and for interior works, weeklyauditing was practiced where log sheetswere filled and archived
9 Increased use of off-site techniques Yes Pre fabrication technology was adoptedextensively in this project
10 Use of on-site compactors Yes For the civil extracts such as bricks,concrete and tiles, etc. interior works wastesuch as gypsum, pop were recycled in thetemporary on-site compactors
11 Reverse logistics Yes Unused materials like steel, adhesives,sealant, paint containers and other interiormaterial were been sent back to themanufacturers and suppliers
Table IV.Waste managementpractices followedin Case 2
CI12,2
146
that the awareness of waste management practices, availability of recyclable materialsin the market, private enterprises or consultants’ involvement in the supply chain, wastequantification, waste auditing, and adoption of advanced technologies is growing. Someclients consider it as part of cost saving exercise as was true in the first case and someclients consider it as part of their corporate social responsibility as was observed inthe second case, where the proceeds from material recycling were donated to a charity.One thing that is missing from both cases is incentives and tender premiums for wasteminimisation. Presence of these incentives could have indicated a higher commitment onpart of the client towards waste minimisation during the construction phase. However, inthe two cases documented in this paper there were no incentives for waste minimisationfor the contractors. On talking to site staff and professionals, it was found that a practicelike this is unheard of in India so far. This would be the next step for clients, and willdemonstrate a proactive commitment to waste minimisation in construction.
Analysis of interviewsAll the interviewees expressed that the awareness for waste management has increasedsignificantly in India in the past few years. Some interviewees were surprised at theincrease in waste generation in the last 30 years in the Indian construction industry.They actually regarded this as part of cultural deterioration. Several Indian religiouspractices involve elements of nature in their rituals. Given the high of influence ofreligion in Indian society, the enormous waste being generated in construction, to somerespondents amounted to cultural deterioration. One of the interviewees also pointed outthe views of Mahatma Gandhi, who was promoting environmentally friendly behaviourway back in 1930s and 1940s. One of the interviewees quoted Mahatma Gandhi whosaid: “Our earth has enough for everyone‘s’ need but not enough for everyone’s greed”
Reduce, reuse and recycle are gaining popularity among building contractors.Extensive use of recycled material is taking place in construction. Doors, windows andpartition walls are some of the common components being developed from recycledmaterials. Use of pre-fabrication is also increasing in India which results in significantreduction in the generation of waste. On-site waste management and waste quantificationare two other practices that have gained prominence. The quantification of waste alsohelps in monitoring, and provides a more tangible basis to calculate costs or benefits incase the waste is recycled or reused. This quantification can also provide feedback to moreaccurate lifecycle costing models, that do not exist for Indian construction sector currently.
The Indian constitution states that:
It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environmentincluding forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures.
There are several other provisions under the Indian law such as Environment Law(1986) and Bio-diversity Act (2002). However, both the awareness and the enforcement ofthese laws are low. Environmentally friendly practices could potentially be enforced lotmore effectively by relying on laws rather than voluntary participation was the feelingof some of the interviewees. The construction sector has grown quite rapidly in the lastdecade and this growth has resulted in higher waste generation. The waste managementpractices have not kept pace with the growing construction sector. The complex natureof construction projects and issues such as multiple contractors working on the site atthe same time also results in confusion about the ownership of waste minimisation,
Constructionwaste
management
147
recycling and reuse practices. However, some recent projects such as the new HyderabadInternational Airport were cited as examples of good waste recycling practices. Therehave also been some recent initiatives in the area of power generation using waste fromconstruction waste landfills. This is a new technology and two such small power plantsexist in Hyderabad and Mumbai. Respondents also felt that there need to be morerecycling facilities or recycling companies to meet the demand of construction waste inIndia. Although, the two cases presented in this paper had proper waste auditing andquantification, all the respondents felt that implementation of these auditing andquantification techniques is an exception rather than a rule.
When the respondents were asked about practices at different stages of a projectthat should be implemented in construction projects, different respondents gavefeedback on different phases of the project. This paper has compiled all their responsesand has created a list of practices at different stages. The first stage is the projectbriefing stage. This is the stage where the client declares the parameters for a project.The client should look at providing incentives and tender premiums for wasteminimisation. In case client is not aware it is consultant’s duty to educate him aboutwaste management practices and their benefits. There are laws on the books regardingenvironmental impacts of the project but the enforcement of those laws is quite weak(Arif et al., 2009b). A stricter enforcement regime will motivate clients to move this to ahigher priority item. Raising general awareness among clients and customers will alsoact as a driver for including waste management in construction project briefing itself.
When selecting the site for the construction project it was felt that client should beaware of issues such as ease of transportation both of the raw material to the site andwaste away from the site. The site needs to have provision for material storage, sothere is no damage to material prior to the construction and hence there would be areduction in the waste generated. Site excavation soil can be used for landscaping onthe site or at other places in some cases. Such options should also be explored prior tothe selection of the site. There also needs to be an awareness of techniques such asreverse logistics (Dainty and Brooke, 2004), and those techniques need to be plannedinto the project itself. Bodies such as IGBC have a significant role to play in raisingawareness among clients of the benefits, laws and practices to be followed at thebriefing stage in order to inform the clients, who in turn will influence the constructioncompanies they engage for their projects.
At the design stage, architect and design team should be aware informed aboutclient’s intention for adoption of waste management practices, if the client is not drivingit then the architect and design team need to propose this to the client and see if they canget the buy-in. Detailed and accurate drawings with all the material and processingspecifications can also lead to the reduction in the generation of waste. There also needsto be accurate estimation of material and hence a case for improving the quantitysurveying practices of the Indian construction sector. There also needs to be bettercoordination and communication between other service consultants such as civil,electrical, mechanical, HVAC, fire, and plumbing consultants. One of the causes of wastegeneration is late design changes. This should be avoided by implementing betterconcurrent engineering and collaborative design practices. Involvement of greaternumber of consultants and functions at the design stage will ensure that all the issues arethoroughly analysed early in the process thus eliminating the need for late designchanges. However, some scholars have argued that architects have a decisive role
CI12,2
148
in construction waste management (Osmani et al., 2008). New techniques such asbuilding information modelling (BIM) are being practiced worldwide for reduction inconstruction waste (Weil et al., 2006). These techniques can revolutionise the wastemanagement process in a construction project. Raising awareness about thesetechniques is very important in order to promote them and increase their use in theconstruction sector in India.
At the construction phase there need to be proper quantification and auditing ofwaste. There should also be provision for space to facilitate waste segregation andstorage. Waste compactors should also be provided at the construction site in order tofacilitate proper handling of the waste. The client should encourage and monitor thedeveloper and contractors to ensure effectively handle waste. There also needs to be acoordination committee formed with members from different contractors who areworking on the same project. This committee should have the ownership of wastemanagement and handling during the construction phase. The client should alsodemand that all the documentation and drawings are complete prior to the start of theproject. This will reduce the need for late design changes. The site staffs need to beproperly educated and trained in waste management practices. Management of wastelogs and quantification of waste is also very important for effective waste managementon-site. A detailed planning of the site processes and detailed quantification leads tomore visibility in the amount of waste generated. Proper accounting and quantificationalso helps justify the cost of taking remedial measures to deal with this menace (Muller,2006). Organizations such as IGBC have another important role to play in raisingawareness and training of practitioners in India in waste minimisation in India.
The procurement process for the construction project also needs to improvesignificantly. The material estimation needs to be accurate. Suppliers should beencouraged to deliver in small batches and when possible; just-in-time especially whenthe storage facility at the construction site is not sufficient to prevent damage to thebuilding material. Long term supplier-contractor relationship and the commitment ofsupplier to take away the unused material is also going to be beneficial for effective wastemanagement. There should also be good communication between on-site managementteam and the procurement team in order to ensure that the material is supplied at the righttime, in the right quantity and of appropriate quality. Proper inventory management andhaving closer relationship with suppliers can ensure higher frequency of delivery withlower tonnage. This will ensure that no construction material is wasted being exposed toelements or damaged lying around on the construction site for very long.
A significant amount of waste is also generated due to inefficient transportationpractices in the Indian construction sector. In order to reduce this waste, the transportersneed to ensure that no damage occurs during transportation. This can be ensured by properpackaging and loading-unloading practices. The construction site also needs to have aproper location for material delivery in order to reduce damage during unloading. Theproblem of having construction sites in built-up areas as highlighted in the case studies isthe one that is difficult to tackle. This limits the amount of space and the also limits the useof heavy cranes for loading and unloading, causing damage to construction material.
Before the site construction is over there needs to be an audit to check for left-overmaterial and the potential to reuse and recycle the generated waste either at theconstruction site itself or some other site. At the time of site handover, the client shouldalso look at the waste logs and related documents. The performance in waste management
Constructionwaste
management
149
should also be regarded as a project success measuring criteria. This goes back to thepoint about quantification of waste raised earlier. Detailed quantification will lead to moreinsight into the amount of money being wasted. If clients have a clear visibility of thatamount, it will lead to a more proactive waste management planning for their futureprojects.
DiscussionThis paper presented an exploratory study analysing the waste management practices inthe Indian construction sector. The paper presented two case studies demonstrating theimplementation of different waste management related actions on the construction site.The cases highlighted that there is an awareness of waste management issues onconstruction site. One of the clients used LEED parameters to implement wastemanagement. A clear demonstration of how LEED could be used effectively to facilitatewaste management by others as well. The other client viewed the waste managementimplementation in light of 3R philosophy presented by Teo and Loosemore (2001).Irrespective of how the clients viewed the waste management, what is important to note isthe key role that clients can play in implementation of waste management (Vrijhoef andKoskela, 2000). The waste auditing and quantification practices are being implemented.Techniques such as standardisation of design, recycling and disposal planning, use ofoff-site construction, a more elaborate waste monitoring process, just in time delivery, anduse of reverse logistics are being practiced in India. Arif et al. (2009b) have highlightedthese techniques as effective building blocks towards the implementation of wastemanagement in construction. Other authors such as Dainty and Brooke (2004), Sarkis(1998), Tam et al. (2003), Baldwin et al. (2008) and Shen et al. (2009) have supported theimplementation of these techniques as effective building blocks of an efficient wastemanagement process in construction. Still one practice that was found missing was the useof tender premiums and other incentives for minimisation of the waste. Incentivisation ofcontractors could act as an effective motivation in the implementation of wastemanagement in India. This has been proven to be true for other countries and is aworthwhile opportunity to exploit (Teo and Loosemore, 2001).
The semi-structured interviews conducted on 15 construction related professionalsprovided more insight into waste minimisation practices and the drivers and challengesassociated with them. The interviewees highlighted that the awareness of wasteminimisation is growing, practices such as on-site compactors, on-site waste segregation,waste quantification and auditing, the 3R practices are becoming popular but they have along way to go. Practices to be promoted at different stages of a project to promote wasteminimisation were also highlighted through these interviews. However, some driversthat could facilitate the implementation of waste minimisation on construction site areproper training or site staff, push from the client, and the enforcement of various laws bythe government and regulatory bodies. Just having laws without an effective mechanismof implementation would not be helpful in India (Arif et al., 2009a).
ConclusionThe general approach for this paper has been exploratory. The paper has used elementsfrom the review of literature to develop an assessment framework and present findings inthe perspective of the available literature. Cases and interviews have provided more clarityon actual practices and helped the exploration of current waste management practices.
CI12,2
150
For the evaluation of cases an assessment framework consisting of 11 parameters wasdeveloped from the literature. The 11 parameters were: standardisation of design, stockcontrol to minimise over ordering, environmental education to the work force, provision ofrecycling and waste disposal companies as part of the supply chain, on time/just in timedeliveries, penalties for poor waste management, incentives and tender premiums forwaste minimisation, waste auditing, increased use of off-site techniques, use of on-sitecompactors, and reverse logistics. Figure 1 shows a framework depicting the wastemanagement practices that currently are being used, some that are occasionally used, andsome that have not been incorporated yet. Based on the data collected the majorconclusions that can be drawn from this paper are that the awareness for wastemanagement is growing in the construction sector in India. However, incentives such astender premiums for effective waste management are missing. Green Building Guidelinessuch as LEED India and GRIHA have also contributed to the growing awareness inthe construction sector. People have followed some of the practices for effective wastemanagement but still there is a long way to go. The major drivers for making these
Figure 1.A framework
depicting currentwaste management
practices in India
Constructionwaste
management
151
practices popular are the drive from the clients and effective enforcement of regulations.Eventually, it is the client that has to pay for it. Having a clear visibility on the waste beinggenerated and the amount of money being wasted through this will provide impetus toclients to demand effective waste management on their projects. There are laws thatalready exist regarding environment and they can deal with enforcing wasteminimisation, but there needs to be a more effective enforcement of these laws.Appropriate steps at different stages of a project such as use of BIM, and properquantification can also help significantly in making waste management popular in India.
References
Arif, M., Egbu, C., Al Shawi, M., Srinivas, S. and Tariq, M. (2010), “Promoting green constructionin India through Industry-Academia Collaboration”, ASCE’s Journal of Professional Issuesin Engineering Education and Practice, Vol. 136 No. 3, pp. 128-31.
Arif, M., Egbu, C., Haleem, A., Ebohon, J. and Khalfan, M. (2009a), “Green construction in India:gaining a deeper understanding”, ASCE Journal of Architectural Engineering, March,pp. 10-13.
Arif, M., Egbu, C., Haleem, A., Kulonda, D. and Khalfan, M. (2009b), “State of green constructionin India: drivers and challenges”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, Vol. 7No. 2, pp. 223-34.
Baldwin, A.N., Shen, L.Y., Poon, C.S., Austin, S.A. and Wang, I. (2008), “Modelling designinformation to evaluate pre-fabricated and pre-cast design solutions for reducingconstruction waste in high rise residential buildings”, Automation in Construction, Vol. 17,pp. 333-41.
Bendi, D. (2010), “Challenges and the best practices of waste management in green buildingconstruction in India”, unpublished MSc thesis, University of Salford, Manchester.
Blaikie, N. (2000), Designing Social Research, Polity Press, Cambridge.
Bohne, R.A., Brattebo, H. and Bergsdal, H. (2008), “Dynamic eco-efficiency projections forconstruction and demolition waste recycling strategies at the city level”, Research andAnalysis, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 52-68.
BRE (2007), BRE – How Does BREEAM Work, Building Research Establishment, available at:www.breeam.org (accessed April).
Bunz, K., Henze, G. and Tiller, D. (2006), “Survey of sustainable building design practices inNorth America, Europe and Asia”, Journal of Architecture Engineering (ASCE ), Vol. 12No. 1, pp. 33-62.
CASBEE (2009), available at: www.ibec.or.jp/CASBEE/english/document/CASBEE_brochure.pdf (accessed April 2010).
CGBC (2009), available at: www.cagbc.org/ (accessed November).
Chung, S. and Lo, C.W.H. (2003), “Evaluating sustainability in waste management: the case ofconstruction and demolition, chemical and clinical wastes in Hong Kong”, Resources,Conservation, and Recycling, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 119-45.
Creswell, J.W. (2007), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches,2nd ed., Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Dainty, A.R.J. and Brooke, R.J. (2004), “Towards improved construction wasteminimisation: a need for improved supply chain integration?”, Structural Survey, Vol. 22No. 1, pp. 20-9.
CI12,2
152
Dantata, N., Touran, A. and Wang, J. (2005), “An analysis of cost and duration of deconstructionand demolition residential buildings in Massachusetts”, Resources, Conservation, andRecycling, Vol. 44, pp. 1-15.
Di Silva, N. and Vithana, S.B.K.H. (2008), “Use of PC elements for waste minimisation in theSri Lankan construction industry”, Structural Survey, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 188-98.
Ekanayake, L.L. and Ofori, G. (2000), “Construction material waste sourceevaluation”, Proceedings of Strategies for a Sustainable Built Environment, Pretoria,August, pp. 23-5.
Eriksson, O., Reich, M.C., Frostell, B., Bjorklund, A., Assefa, G., Sundquist, J.-O., Baky, A. andThyselius, L. (2005), “Municipal solid waste management from a systems perspective”,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 241-52.
Fellows, R. and Liu, A. (2005), Research Methods for Construction, 2nd ed., Blackwell Science,Oxford.
Gavilan, R.M. and Bernold, L.E. (1994), “Source evaluation of solid waste in buildingconstruction”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 120 No. 3,pp. 536-52.
Greenwood, R. (2003), Construction Waste Minimisation – Good Practice Guide, Centre forResearch in the Build Environment (CRiBE), Cardiff.
GRIHA (2006), available at: www.grihaindia.org/ (accessed November 2009).
Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1994), “Competing paradigms in qualitative research”,in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage,Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 105-17.
IGBC (2009), Indian Green Building Council, available at: www.igbc.in:9080/site/igbc/index.jsp(accessed September).
Keys, A., Baldwin, A. and Austin, S. (2000), “Designing to encourage waste minimisation in theconstruction industry”, Proceedings of CIBSE National Conference, Dublin, Republic ofIreland, September.
Kibert, C.J. and Languell, J.L. (2000), Implementing Deconstruction in Florida: Materials ReuseIssues, Disassembly Techniques, Economics and Policy, available at: www.floridacenter.org/publications/Kibert.pdf (accessed October 2010).
King, N. (1994), “The qualitative research interview”, in Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (Eds),Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research, Sage, London.
Kulatunga, U., Amaratunga, D., Haigh, R. and Rameezdeen, R. (2006), “Attitudes and perceptionsof construction workforce on construction waste in Sri Lanka”, Management ofEnvironmental quality – An International Journal, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 57-72.
Muller, D.B. (2006), “Stock dynamics for forecasting material flows – case study for housing inThe Netherlands”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 142-56.
Nitivattananon, V. and Borongan, G. (2007), “Construction and demolition waste management:current practices in Asia”, paper presented at Conference Paper in InternationalConference on SWM, India, 5-7 September.
Osmani, M., Glass, J. and Price, A.D.F. (2008), “Architects’ perspectives on construction wastereduction by design”, Waste Management, Vol. 28 No. 7, pp. 1147-58.
Pappu, A., Saxena, M. and Asolekar, S.R. (2007), “Solid wastes generation in India and theirrecycling potential in building materials”, Building and Environment, Vol. 42 No. 6,pp. 2311-20.
Constructionwaste
management
153
Peng, L.S. and Tan, S.K.L. (1998), “How ‘just-in-time’ wastages can be quantified: case study of aprivate condominium project”, Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 16 No. 6,pp. 621-35.
Potbhare, V. (2008), “Adoption of green building guidelines in the developing countries based onUS and India experiences”, Construction Management Program, Research Report,Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
Potbhare, V., Syal, M., Arif, M., Khalfan, M.M.A. and Egbu, C. (2009), “Emergence of greenbuilding guidelines in developed countries and their impact on India”, Journal ofEngineering-Design and Technology, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 99-121.
Rocha, C.G. and Sattler, M.A. (2009), “A discussion on the reuse of building components in Brazil:an analysis of major social, economical and legal factors”, Resources, Conservation andRecycling, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 104-12.
Sarkis, J. (1998), “Evaluating environmentally conscious business practices”, European Journalof Operations Research, Vol. 107 No. 2, pp. 159-74.
Shekdar, A.V. (2008), “Sustainable solid waste management: an integrated approach for Asiancountries”, Waste Management, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 1438-48.
Shen, L.Y., Tam, V.W. and Li, C.Y. (2009), “Benefit analysis on replacing in situ concreting withprecast slabs for temporary construction works in pursuing sustainable constructionpractice”, Resource, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 53, pp. 145-8.
Su, J.P., Chiueh, P.T., Hung, M.L. and Ma, H.W. (2007), “Analysing policy impact potential formunicipal solid waste management decision-making: a case study of Taiwan”, Resources,Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp. 418-34.
Syal, M., Hastak, M., Mullens, M. and Sweany, A. (2006), “United States-India collaborativeresearch directions in urban housing and supporting infrastructure”, Journal ofArchitecture Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 44, pp. 163-7.
Talyan, V., Dahiya, R.P. and SreeKrishnan, T.R. (2008), “State of municipal solid wastemanagement in Delhi, the capital of India”, Waste Management, Vol. 28 No. 7, pp. 1276-87.
Tam, W.Y.V., Tam, C.M., Shen, L.Y. and Lo, K.K. (2003), “Wastage generation on conventionalin-situ and prefabrication construction methods”, CRIOCM 2003 International ResearchSymposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate, 3-5 December,pp. 285-9.
Teo, M.M.M. and Loosemore, M. (2001), “A theory of waste behaviour in the constructionindustry”, Construct Management and Economics, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 741-51.
USGBC (2009), Green Building Research, US Green Building Council, available at: www.usgbc.org (accessed September 09).
Vrijhoef, R. and Koskela, L. (2000), “The four roles of supply chain management inconstruction”, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 6 No. 3,pp. 169-78.
Wang, J.Y., Ping Kang, X. and Yan Tam, V.W. (2008), “An investigation of construction wastes:an empirical study in Shenzhen”, Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, Vol. 6No. 3, pp. 227-36.
Weil, M., Jeske, U. and Schebek, L. (2006), “Closed-loop recycling of construction and demolitionwaste in Germany in view of stricter environmental threshold values”, Waste ManagementResearch, Vol. 24, pp. 197-206.
Yin, R.K. (2009), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th ed., Sage, London.
CI12,2
154
Further reading
Gummesson, E. (2003), “All research is interpretive”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 482-92.
Institute of Building Environment and Energy Conservation (2007), CASBEE for NewConstruction, available at: www.ibec.or.jp (accessed April).
Corresponding authorTahsin Toma-Sabbagh can be contacted at: [email protected]
Constructionwaste
management
155
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
