Shooshtarian, S; Caldera, S; Maqsood, T; Ryley, T and Khalfan, M (2022) An investigation into challenges and opportunities in the Australian construction and demolition waste management system. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(10), pp. 4313-4330. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The literature shows that the current Australian waste management framework does not meet industry and government expectations. This study, therefore, seeks the key construction and demolition (C&D) stakeholders' insights on various issues identified. It aims to understand the main barriers to effective C&D waste management, examining the role of the federal government and exploring perceptions around waste regulations, policies and schemes. Design/methodology/approach: An online survey was conducted in 2019 to capture stakeholder perceptions. One hundred and thirty-two participants from various industries and government agencies representing Australian jurisdictions took part in the survey. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected. Findings: The results show that the main barriers are “overregulation, tough acceptance criteria and increased testing requirements”, “lack of local market” and “culture, poor education and low acceptance”. The main areas of improvement include “providing a guideline that determines the accepted level of contamination for reusing C&D waste”, “preparation of guidelines on requirements of using recycled C&D materials in different industries” and “setting a target for reduction, reusing and recycling C&D waste”. Research limitations/implications: Some research findings may not be generalisable beyond Australia, but there are interesting insights for an international audience. The results inform policy development within the Australian states and territories context, to support the design and implementation of a circular economy model in the construction industry. The findings are evidence for a broader discussion to solve prevailing issues in C&D waste management, notably in the context of construction materials' end of life management. Practical implications: The study highlights that policy development needs to be further expanded to include new/current waste management schemes including manufacturer's shared responsibility of waste generation, subsidies for C&D waste recycled materials and the proximity principle. Originality/value: This paper provides a clear insight into C&D waste management stakeholders' perceptions towards the current waste management system in Australia.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | c&d waste regulation; circular economy; overregulation; recycled waste materials; sustainable procurement; waste policy |
| Index terms: | implementation, construction industry, testing, recycled materials, contamination, construction material, investigation, recycling, waste generation, Australia, circular economy, subsidy, methodology, regulation, waste management, evidence, end of life, construction and demolition, survey, jurisdiction, manufacturer, government agency |
| Subjects: | environmental health, political science, administrative law, industry analysis, Geography, health safety and environment, sustainable design, research methods, strategic project management, economic analysis, professional practice, contractual arrangements, legal systems, building materials, practitioner, environmental impact, waste management, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Roles and Professions, Governance, Sustainability, Procurement, Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here