Search

Despite the guidelines framed by the Indian government, there is non-compliance with site waste-management plans (SWMPs) as well as recycling at construction sites. This paper identifies the existing barriers and potential benefits and enforcement measures for implementing SWMP and recycling of construction and demolition (C&D) waste. Data gathered by means of a questionnaire survey, structured interviews and case studies are analysed using the beneficial index value (BIV) and relative mapping approach. From the results, it is concluded that factor B4 ('no guidelines are available in the company') has the highest BIV (6.70) and is the major barrier in implementing SWMPs. Factors BF4 (BIV: 7.42) with an efficient SWMP ('there will be conservation of natural resources) and MI8 (BIV: 7.32) ('legal requirements on environmental protection') are the most significant benefit and enforcement measure for SWMP implementation, respectively. Probable behavioural, legal, technical and marketing barriers for enforcement of recycling are identified, and the suggested measures for efficient recycling are as follows: (a) behavioural – enforcement of construction in government projects using recycled materials; (b) technical – development of code provisions for acceptable quantity of recycled construction waste (CW) in various building components; (c) legal – higher landfill charge with strict penalties for illegal dumping; and (d) marketing – increasing sales outlets for recycling material. Also, successful European C&D waste-management practices are compared with Indian initiatives to improve the CW management status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Construction industries are bulk generators of waste globally; improper management leads to environmental catastrophes. This paper identifies the significant factors through exploratory factor analysis and presents a novel approach to determining the causal relationships of various factors that lead to waste generation at construction sites by structural equation modelling. The analysis identifies maintaining and managing a site waste-management plan (SMP) as the top factor, with a path coefficient of 0·96. The impacts on waste generation of factors such as the operation stage (0·91), ordering and purchasing stage (0·84), hauling and handling stage (0·76), material handling stage (0·73), documentation (0·60) and culture (0·46) are quantified. Appropriate documentation provides the framework for SMP, on the basis of which other mitigation measures may be enforced, thus reinforcing the analysis results of SMP variables. Standardised documentation procedures for SMP need to be initiated and incentivised within existing green building performance rating frameworks, such as Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design–India. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Construction waste needs to be managed in order to minimize environmental burden in India and conserve existing natural resources. Despite numerous policies and guidelines there is improper construction waste management. Towards addressing this issue, a novel approach is presented to unraval and investigate waste management in India using four methods: quantification of waste by wastivity; grouping of influence factors (IFs) by factor analysis; ranking of IFs by analogous importance index; and determination of attitude by concordance among construction crew. The outcomes forecast wastivity of concrete (4.14%) and steel (1.62%), respectively. Exploratory factor analysis groups factors into five categories. The top influence factor (CMT6, 0.901) according to contractors and academicians is: workers should be given training in identifying recyclable material. Engineers favor enforcement of strict punishment for illegal disposal of wastes in violation of Environmental Protection Agency regulations (CMT7, 0.895). Computed concordance indicates: moderate agreement (0.68) among variables under the construction method; strong agreement among variables in documentation (0.76) and construction equipment (0.81); and very strong agreement among variables in worker intention (1.00) and materials (1.00). The variation in attitude of the workforce towards waste management and the proclivity of policy developers towards protocols which include training of workers in efficient waste management are quantified.