Ilozor, B D (2009) Differential management of waste by construction sectors: A case study in Michigan, USA. Construction Management and Economics, 27(8), pp. 763-770. ISSN 1466433X
Abstract
Waste is a great problem in the world of construction. If dealt with appropriately, there can be many benefits, including lower overall cost, faster production, a higher quality and more sustainable buildings. There are many solutions available for minimizing waste during construction. However, a great amount of waste still exists, whether in residential, commercial, industrial, infrastructural or other constructions. The purpose of this investigation is to ascertain key sources of waste, and whether generation varies with the type and size of the constructors. A sample of 30 general contractors was studied, and several null hypotheses on waste generation and minimization differences among sectors were tested using the Kruskal-Wallis H-test. Although subtle shifts were observed in the aspects of waste behaviour that seemed predicated on construction sectors and capital base, to some extent the proposition that the construction type and size can influence waste generation and minimization was validated. Based on this study, some solutions are provided as viable avenues to managing and minimizing construction waste across sectors.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction sectors; differences; waste management |
| Index terms: | investigation, construction waste, case study, waste generation, waste management, sustainable building, construction sector, minimization, general contractor |
| Subjects: | algorithms, sustainable construction, industry analysis, data collection methods, practitioner, waste management, environmental impact |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Digital Applications |
| 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