On the effectiveness in implementing a waste-management-plan method in construction

Abstract

The increasing awareness of waste management concerns from construction and demolition waste has led to the development of waste management as an important function of construction project management. The Hong Kong government started employing the implementation of a waste-management-plan (WMP) method for all construction projects in 2003. During the trial period, the government received different version of feedback from the industry. It also came out that detailed descriptions of waste management procedures in the WMP method largely affect the productivity of companies. This paper investigates the effectiveness of the existing implementation of the WMP method in the Hong Kong construction industry. A questionnaire survey and structured interviews were conducted. The result showed that "Propose methods for on-site reuse of materials" and "Propose methods for reducing waste" are the main benefits gained from the implementation of the WMP method. However, "Low financial incentive" and "Increase in overhead cost" are considered as the major difficulties in the implementation. From that, "Use of prefabricated building components" is considered as the major effective measure to encourage the implementation of the WMP method.

Characterizing the generation and flows of construction and demolition waste in China

“…The surveys were based on similar questionnaires found in journal articles (Tam, 2008;P. Villoria Saez et al, 2013) but tailored to the Mongolian needs.…”

“…In Hong Kong, the Government has implemented an administrative rule that specifies that CDW containing more than 20% inert material by volume (or 30% by weight) cannot be disposed at landfills (Hong Kong GovernmentEnvironmental Protection Department, 1998). In addition, since 2003, a Waste-ManagementPlan (WMP) method for all construction projects is required (Tam, 2008). However, the lack of financial incentives together with the increase in overhead costs is considered as the major obstacles for its implementation.…”

Construction Waste Management Profiles, Practices, and Performance: A Cross-Jurisdictional Analysis in Four Countries

“…When reduction and reuse become too costly, recycling is desired. Tam [9] summarized that recycling can offer three benefits: (a) reducing the demand for new resources; (b) cutting down transport and production energy cost; and (c) utilizing waste which would otherwise be lost to landfill sites. The 3Rs could take place in a specific stage (e.g., inception, design, construction, maintenance, and demolition) or throughout the whole life-cycle of a construction project.…”

“…During the past decades, construction and demolition (C & D) waste has received increasing attention from both practitioners and researchers around the world [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. C & D activities can generate a wide range of different waste materials, which are not just rubbish and unwanted materials, but also includes excavated materials such as rock and soil, waste asphalt, bricks, concrete, plasterboard, timber and vegetation, asbestos, and contaminated soil [11].…”

“…Prolific studies have reported the amount of C & D waste generated in different economies. For example, in addition to the aforementioned reports on C & D waste generation in the EU-27 member countries, United States, the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, and China, Tam [9] reported that C & D waste forms 19% and 14% of the waste disposed of at landfills in Germany and Finland. These C & D waste volumes, either in absolute terms or as a ratio of overall MSW, reflect the overall C & D waste across different economies.…”