Newaz, M T; Davis, P; Sher, W and Simon, L (2022) Factors affecting construction waste management streams in Australia. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(13), pp. 2625-2633. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Construction and Demolition Waste (C&DW) represents a significant proportion of industrial waste going to landfill. The aim of this research was to determine the current factors affecting C&DW management on construction sites in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. In order to achieve this aim, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19C&D practitioners and stakeholders, interview data were analysed using Nvivo software. Key factors that underlined waste management processes on construction sites were identified. These include; identifying economic values of diverted material, potential for onsite sorting, knowledge, experience and training of site operatives, a need for tenders to include accurate predictions of waste management costs and the identification of improved methods of C&DW collection and disposal. This research reveals the key factors identified by the industry specialists in NSW that would potentially hinder C&DW management targets. Accordingly, the findings are valuable to managers and environmental stakeholders concerned with C&DW management.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Australia; demolition; supply chain management; waste management |
| Index terms: | construction site, construction and demolition, manager, interview, site operative, landfill, practitioner, New South Wales, waste management, stream, industrial waste, Australia, onsite, construction waste |
| Subjects: | building construction, water management, Geography, work location, data collection methods, waste management, practitioner |
| Topics: | Site Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
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