Yu, A T W; Mok, K S H and Wong, I (2023) Minimisation and management strategies for refurbishment and renovation waste in Hong Kong. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(2), pp. 869-888. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: The capacity of landfills will reach saturation in the 2020s. There are more than 50,000 buildings in Hong Kong over 30 years old and which may require extensive refurbishment under the Mandatory Building Scheme. Additionally, most new owners/tenants tend to renovate their premises before moving in. Hence, there is an urgent need in Hong Kong, to explore strategies and measures to enable the development of effective refurbishment and renovation (R&R) waste management for such projects. The objectives of this paper are to investigate the process of R&R for identifying the perceived barriers and thereby the strategies for minimisation and management of R&R waste in Hong Kong. Design/methodology/approach: Desktop study, semi-structured interviews, site observations and document reviews were used as the data collection methods to achieve the objectives of this research. Considering the nature and characteristics of the industry structure, the snowball sampling process was deployed for data collection. Thematic analysis and content analysis were used for data analysis. Waste minimisation and management strategies for R&R projects were then discussed and developed by the research team and a focus group meeting was held to validate the research findings. Six strategies were then proposed to the government. Findings: R&R projects contribute 10–20% of the construction and demolition waste. The barriers to recycling of R&R waste can be grouped into six major categories: (1) lack of sorting and storage spaces, (2) high cost, (3) insufficient government supporting policy, (4) complicated recycling processes, (5) immature recycling market and (6) insufficient public education. Also, six strategies are proposed in this study, which include (1) pre-refurbishment audit, (2) development of recycling market, (3) sea reclamation, (4) incineration, (5) government support and (6) education and research. Originality/value: The strategies and measures proposed in this research could most adequately serve as reference for the government officials, building professionals and academic researchers. Such knowledge would make possible the development of effective strategies and measures for minimising and managing R&R waste.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction and demolition waste; refurbishment and renovation waste; waste minimisation and management and Hong Kong |
| Index terms: | Hong Kong, management strategy, government support, recycling, owner, audit, building professional, renovation, sampling, interview, data analysis, focus group, minimization, tenant, content analysis, construction and demolition, strategy, methodology, thematic analysis, waste management, reclamation, landfill |
| Subjects: | government bodies, profession, data collection methods, practitioner, waste management, data analysis and analytics, research methods, algorithms, performance measurement, management, renovation and retrofit, land management, Geography, methods and analysis, sociology |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Governance |
| 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