From Waste Management to Component Management in the Construction Industry
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Review of C&D Waste Interventions
2.1. Design of New Additions to Building Stocks
2.2. Management of Existing Building Stocks
2.3. Maintaining and Enhancing Utility of Removals from Stock
2.4. Creating More Opportunities for Reuse, Repurposing, and Upcycling
3. Methods
3.1. Multiple Case Study Approach
3.2. Sources of Evidence
- fieldwork observations on construction sites and through regular visits to the waste transfer stations (WTSs) used in the case study projects, reported in Section 4.1;
- documentation, which was largely in the form of contractors’ SWMPs and waste reports, reported in Section 4.2; and
- in-depth semi-structured interviews with 21 interviewees from the contractors, waste management companies, and members of the two client organisations (Table S1), reported in Section 4.3. Although an interview length of at least 60 min was sought for in-depth investigation [99], the average length was 48 min.
3.3. Data Analysis
4. Case Study Findings
4.1. Fieldwork Observations of C&D Waste Logistics
4.2. Documentation and Reporting of C&D Waste
4.3. Interview Findings
5. Discussion
5.1. ‘Where We Are’: Systemic Mechanisms Leading to Components Being Discarded as Waste
5.2. ‘Where We Want to Be’: A Triage Process to Support Reuse, Repurposing, and Upcycling
5.3. Limitations and Further Research
6. Conclusions
- a failure to identify components in advance—current waste reporting is retrospective and classified in coarse material categories, is geared towards waste management, and does not identify specific components’ qualities;
- uncertainty over the utility or value of components to others—unlike recycling, reuse suffers from a vantage point problem of knowing what is of use elsewhere; as a means of overcoming this problem, RMMs have drawbacks that impede uptake;
- a perception of cost and programme risk in undertaking reclamation—in the context of (1) and (2), an inability to assess the merit of reclamation; and
- acceptance of the preferential order of the waste hierarchy—recycling (in any form) becomes the preferred option where direct reuse appears impractical, such that exploration of the potential for upcycling is not supported.
Supplementary Materials
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Haas, W.; Krausmann, F.; Wiedenhofer, D.; Heinz, M. How Circular is the Global Economy? An Assessment of Material Flows, Waste Production, and Recycling in the European Union and the World in 2005. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19, 765–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tukker, A.; Jansen, B. Environmental Impacts of Products: A Detailed Review of Studies. J. Ind. Ecol. 2006, 10, 159–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS). Low Carbon Construction Innovation & Growth Team—Final Report; HM Government: London, UK, 2010.
- Steele, K.; Hurst, T.; Giesekam, J. Green Construction Board Low Carbon Routemap for the Built Environment: 2015 Routemap Progress—Technical Report; Green Construction Board: London, UK, 2015; pp. 1–28. [Google Scholar]
- Eurostat. Generation and Treatment of Waste in Europe 2008; Eurostat: Luxembourg, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on Waste and Repealing Certain Directives (Waste Framework Directive); European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2008; pp. 3–30. [Google Scholar]
- Hobbs, G. (Ed.) United Kingdom. In Construction Waste Reduction around the World; CIB Publication 364; International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB): Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 122–131. ISBN 978-90-6363-067-6. [Google Scholar]
- Symonds Group Ltd. Construction and Demolition Waste Management Practices, and Their Economic Impacts; Report to DGXI; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). UK Statistics on Waste; Defra: York, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- BRE SMARTWaste Summary Data, Watford. 2013. Available online: http://pinpoint.ukgbc.org/resource/8142-bre-smartwaste-summary-data.php (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Anderson, C. Zero waste theory and practice. In Proceedings of the Philosophy and Waste: Building Bridges Graduate Conference, Carbondale, IL, USA, 4–5 November 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Mineral Products Association. Whole-Life Carbon and Buildings: Concrete Solutions for Reducing Embodied and Operational CO2; Mineral Products Association: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Allwood, J.M. Squaring the circular economy: The role of recycling within a hierarchy of material management strategies. In Handbook of Recycling: State-of-the-Art for Practitioners, Analysts, and Scientists; Reuter, M., Worrell, E., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 445–477. ISBN 9780123965066. [Google Scholar]
- Schut, E.; Crielaard, M.; Mesman, M. Circular Economy in the Dutch Construction Sector; Rijkswaterstaat WVL: Lelystad, The Netherlands, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP). Designing out Waste Tool for Buildings; Waste & Resources Action Programme: Banbury, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). Waste Strategy for England 2007, Annex C3: Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste; Defra: London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Ferguson, J. Managing and Minimizing Construction Waste: A Practical Guide; Thomas Telford Ltd.: London, UK, 1995; ISBN 0-7277-2023-6. [Google Scholar]
- Guthrie, P.; Mallett, H. Waste Minimisation and Recycling in Construction—A Review; Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA): London, UK, 1995; ISBN 0-86017-428-X. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, Z.; Osmani, M.; Demian, P.; Baldwin, A. A BIM-aided construction waste minimisation framework. Autom. Constr. 2015, 59, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Won, J.; Cheng, J.C.P.; Lee, G. Quantification of construction waste prevented by BIM-based design validation: Case studies in South Korea. Waste Manag. 2015, 49, 170–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP). Resource Efficiency through BIM: A Guide for BIM Users; Waste & Resources Action Programme: Banbury, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Lacy, P.; Rutqvist, J. Waste to Wealth; Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, UK, 2015; ISBN 978-1-349-58040-8. [Google Scholar]
- Debacker, W.; Manshoven, S. D1 Synthesis of the State-of-the-Art: Key Barriers and Opportunities for Materials Passports and Reversible Building Design in the Current System. 2016. Available online: http://www.bamb2020.eu/library/ (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Circularity in the Built Environment: A Compilation of Case Studies from the CE100. 2016. Available online: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/Built-Env-Co.Project.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Pomponi, F.; Moncaster, A. Circular economy research in the built environment: A theoretical contribution. In Building Information Modelling, Building Performance, Design and Smart Construction; Dastbaz, M., Gorse, C., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmann, R.; O’Brien, H.; Hargrave, J.; Morrell, M. The Circular Economy in the Built Environment; Arup: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Addis, W.; Schouten, J. Design for Reconstruction: Principles of Design to Facilitate Reuse and Recycling; Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA): London, UK, 2004; ISBN 0-86017-607-X. [Google Scholar]
- Guy, B.; Shell, S.; Esherick, H. Design for deconstruction and materials reuse. In Proceedings of the CIB Task Group 39; Chini, A.R., Schultmann, F., Eds.; International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB): Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2002; Volume 39, pp. 189–209. [Google Scholar]
- Morgan, C.; Stevenson, F. Design for Deconstruction—SEDA Design Guides for Scotland: No. 1; Scottish Ecological Design Association: Glasgow, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Durmišević, E. Buildings as material banks. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on the Importance of Place, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 21–24 October 2015; Popovac, M.R., Idrizbegović-Zgonić, A., Klarić, S., Rustempašić, N., Čausević, A., Eds.; CICOPBH: Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 2015; Volume 2, pp. 139–152. [Google Scholar]
- Luscuere, L.M. Materials Passports: Optimising value recovery from materials. Waste Resour. Manag. 2017, 170, 25–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ness, D.; Swift, J.; Ranasinghe, D.C.; Xing, K.; Soebarto, V.; Terziovski, M. Smart steel: New paradigms for the reuse of steel enabled by digital tracking and modelling. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 98, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heiskanen, A. The technology of trust: How the Internet of Things and blockchain could usher in a new era of construction productivity. Constr. Res. Innov. 2017, 8, 66–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brand, S. How Buildings Learn: What Happens after They’re Built; Viking Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994; ISBN 0670835153 9780670835157. [Google Scholar]
- London Waste and Recycling Board (LWARB). London, the Circular Economy Capital: Towards a Circular Economy—Context and Oppoprtunities. 2015. Available online: http://www.lwarb.gov.uk/what-we-do/circular-london/towards-a-circular-economy/ (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Bell, M. Energy efficiency in existing buildings: The role of building regulations. In COBRA 2004, Proceedings of the RICS Foundation Construction and Building Research Conference, Leeds, UK, 7–8 September 2004; Ellis, R., Bell, M., Eds.; RICS Foundation: London, UK, 2004; p. 16. [Google Scholar]
- Hinnells, M.; Boardman, B.; Layberry, R.; Darby, S.; Killip, G. The UK Housing Stock 2005 to 2050: Assumptions used in Scenarios and Sensitivity Analysis in UKDCM2; Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford: Oxford, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Van der Flier, K.; Thomsen, A. Life cycle of dwellings and demolition by Dutch housing associations. In Sustainable Neighbourhood Transformation; Gruis, V., Visscher, H., Kleinhans, R., Eds.; IOS Press: Delft, The Netherlands, 2006; pp. 23–41. ISBN 9781586037185. [Google Scholar]
- Poelman, W.A. Supply Driven Architecture (SDA). In Lifecycle Design of Buildings, Proceedings of the Systems and Materials: CIB W115 Construction Material Stewardship, Enschede, The Netherlands, 12–15 June 2009; Durmišević, E., Ed.; International Council for Building Research Studies and Documentation: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 110–117. [Google Scholar]
- Hammond, G.; Jones, C. Embodied Carbon: The Inventory of Carbon and Energy (ICE). 2011. Available online: https://www.bsria.co.uk/information-membership/bookshop/publication/embodied-carbon-the-inventory-of-carbon-and-energy-ice/ (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Ness, D.; Field, M.; Pullen, S. Making better use of what we’ve got: Stewardship of existing buildings and infrastructure. In Proceedings of the Fabricating Sustainability: The 39th International Architectural Science Association Conference, Wellington, New Zealand, 17–19 November 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Giesekam, J.; Barrett, J.R.; Taylor, P. Construction sector views on low carbon building materials. Build. Res. Inf. 2015, 3218, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moffatt, S.; Russell, P. Assessing Buildings for Adaptability: Annex 31, Energy-Related Environmental Impact of Buildings. 2001. Available online: http://www.iea-ebc.org/Data/publications/EBC_Annex_31_Assessing_Building.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Bowes, H.; Golton, B. Obsolescence and demolition of local authority dwellings in the UK—A case study. In Deconstruction and Materials Reuse: Technology, Economics and Policy; CIB Publication 266 CIB Task Group 39: Deconstruction Meeting; Chini, A., Ed.; International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB): Wellington, New Zealand, 2001; pp. 87–97. [Google Scholar]
- Thomsen, A.; van der Flier, K. Replacement or renovation of dwellings: The relevance of a more sustainable approach. Build. Res. Inf. 2009, 37, 649–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Power, A. Housing and sustainability: Demolition or refurbishment? Proc. ICE Urban Des. Plan. 2010, 163, 205–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomsen, A.; van der Flier, K. Understanding obsolescence: A conceptual model for buildings. Build. Res. Inf. 2011, 39, 352–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crawford, K.; Johnson, C.; Davies, F.; Joo, S.; Bell, S. Demolition or Refurbishment of Social Housing? A Review of the Evidence; Just Space and the London Tenants Federation: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Iacovidou, E.; Purnell, P. Mining the physical infrastructure: Opportunities, barriers and interventions in promoting structural components reuse. Sci. Total Environ. 2016, 557–558, 791–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nixon, P.J. The use of materials from demolition in construction. Resour. Policy 1976, 2, 276–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- BigREc Survey: A Survey of the UK Reclamation and Salvage Trade. 2007. Available online: http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/BigREc Survey report.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Sassi, P. Designing buildings to close the material resource loop. Proc. ICE Eng. Sustain. 2004, 157, 163–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sassi, P. Study of current building methods that enable the dismantling of building structures and their classifications according to their ability to be reused, recycled or downcycled. In Proceedings of the International Conference for Sustainable Building, Oslo, Norway, 23–25 September 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Hemström, K.; Palm, D.; Lindblom, J.; Vegas, I.J.; Lisbona, A.; Horckmans, L.; Ratman-kłosińska, I. Characterisation of supply chain for reused building components in Europe. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on the Environmental and Technical Implications of Construction with Alternative Materials (WASCON 2012), Gothenburg, Sweden, 30 May–1 June 2012; Arm, M., Vandecasteele, C., Heynen, J., Suer, P., Lind, B., Eds.; The International Society for the Environmental and Technical Implications of Construction with Alternative Materials (ISCOWA): Gothenburg, Sweden, 2012; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Gorgolewski, M. The recycled building project. In Sustainable Building; Aeneas: Maastricht, The Netherlands, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Jones, K.; Stegemann, J.; Sykes, J.; Winslow, P. Adoption of unconventional approaches in construction: The case of cross-laminated timber. Constr. Build. Mater. 2016, 125, 690–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gorgolewski, M. Designing with reused building components: Some challenges. Build. Res. Inf. 2008, 36, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geyer, R.; Jackson, T. Supply loops and their constraints: The industrial ecology of recycling and reuse. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2004, 46, 55–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chileshe, N.; Rameezdeen, R.; Hosseini, M.R.; Lehmann, S. Barriers to implementing reverse logistics in South Australian construction organisations. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 2015, 20, 179–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chong, W.K.; Hermreck, C. Understanding transportation energy and technical metabolism of construction waste recycling. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54, 579–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gustavsson, L.; Sathre, R. Variability in energy and carbon dioxide balances of wood and concrete building materials. Build. Environ. 2006, 41, 940–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nixon, P.J. Recycled concrete as an aggregate for concrete—A review. Matériaux Constr. 1978, 11, 371–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silva, R.V.; De Brito, J.; Dhir, R.K. Properties and composition of recycled aggregates from construction and demolition waste suitable for concrete production. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 65, 201–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hradil, P.; Talja, A.; Wahlstr, M.; Huuhka, S.; Lahdensivu, J.; Pikkuvirta, J. Re-Use of Structural Elements: Environmentally Efficient Recovery of Building Components. 2014. Available online: http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/technology/2014/T200.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Huuhka, S.; Kaasalainen, T.; Hakanen, J.H.; Lahdensivu, J. Reusing concrete panels from buildings for building: Potential in Finnish 1970s mass housing. Resourc. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 101, 105–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allwood, J.M.; Cullen, J.M.; Carruth, M.A.; Cooper, D.R.; McBrien, M.; Milford, R.L.; Moynihan, M.C.; Patel, A.C.H. Sustainable Materials: With Both Eyes Open; UIT Cambridge Limited: Cambridge, UK, 2012; pp. 222–230. ISBN 978-1-906860-05-9. [Google Scholar]
- Cooper, D.R.; Allwood, J.M. Reusing steel and aluminum components at end of product life. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, 10334–10340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Densley Tingley, D.; Cooper, S.; Cullen, J. Understanding and overcoming the barriers to structural steel reuse, a UK perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 148, 642–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunant, C.F.; Drewniok, M.P.; Sansom, M.; Corbey, S.; Allwood, J.M.; Cullen, J.M. Real and perceived barriers to steel reuse across the UK construction value chain. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 126, 118–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pongiglione, M.; Calderini, C. Material savings through structural steel reuse: A case study in Genoa. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 86, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drewniok, M.P.; Dunant, C.F.; Allwood, J.M.; Cullen, J.M. Successful steel reuse in the UK—Key aspects why it happened. In Proceedings of the HISER International Conference on Advances in Recycling and Management of Construction and Demolition Waste, Delft, The Netherlands, 21–23 June 2017; Maio, F., Di Lotfi, S., Bakker, M., Hu, M., Vahidi, A., Eds.; TU Delft Library: Delft, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 331–334. [Google Scholar]
- Fujita, M.; Iwata, M. Reuse system of building steel structures. Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 2008, 4, 207–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gorgolewski, M.; Straka, V.; Edmonds, J.; Sergio, C. Facilitating Greater Reuse and Recycling of Structural Steel in the Construction and Demolition Process. 2006. Available online: http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/mineralsmetals/pdf/mms-smm/busi-indu/rad-rad/pdf/re-ste-fin-eng.pdf (accessed on 16 January 2018).
- Kay, T. “Reiner Pilz”. Salvo Monthly. 11 October 1994, pp. 11–14. Available online: http://www.nrutech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/1994_Salvo_Reiner_Pilz_Upcycling.pdf (accessed on 16 January 2018).
- Allwood, J.M.; Ashby, M.F.; Gutowski, T.G.; Worrell, E. Material efficiency: A white paper. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 55, 362–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sung, K. A Review on upcycling: Current body of literature, knowledge gaps and a way forward. In Proceedings of the ICECESS 2015: 17th International Conference on Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability, Venice, Italy, 13–14 April 2015; Volume 17, pp. 28–40. [Google Scholar]
- Baker-Brown, D. The Re-Use Atlas: A Designer’s Guide Towards a Circular Economy; RIBA Publishing: London, UK, 2017; ISBN 1859466443. [Google Scholar]
- Nielsen, S. Final Report: Nordic Built Component Reuse. 2016. Available online: http://vandkunsten.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/NBCR-20161013-web.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Baker-Brown, D. Developing the Brighton Waste House: From zero waste on site to re-use of waste. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Built Environment Developing, Hamburg, Germany, 7–11 March 2016; pp. 342–351. [Google Scholar]
- Geels, F.W. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 2002, 31, 1257–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, C.; Pun, S.K.; Itoh, Y. Information technology applications for planning in deconstruction. In Designing, Managing and Supporting Construction Projects through Innovation and IT Solutions, Proceedings of the World IT Conference for Design and Construction (INCITE 2004), Langkawi, Malaysia, 18–24 February 2004; Construction Industry Development Board: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2004; pp. 97–102. [Google Scholar]
- Pun, S.K.; Liu, C.; Treloar, G.; Langston, C.; Itoh, Y. Development of a web-based information system for cascading utilisation of construction materials. In Aubea 2003: Working Together: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Australasian Universities Building Educators Association; Deakin University: Geelong, Victoria, 2003; pp. 293–300. [Google Scholar]
- Pun, S.K.; Liu, C.; Langston, C.; Treloar, G. Electronic Waste Exchange for Just-in-Time Building Demolition. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2007, 7, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pun, S.K.; Liu, C. A Framework for Material Management in the Building Demolition Industry. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2006, 49, 391–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hurley, J.W. Valuing the pre-demolition audit process. In Proceedings of the 11th Rinker International Conference on Deconstruction and Materials Reuse, Gainesville, FL, USA, 7–10 May 2003; Chini, A.R., Ed.; International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction (CIB): Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2003; pp. 151–164. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Z.; Li, H.; Kong, S.C.W.; Hong, J.; Xu, Q. E-commerce system simulation for construction and demolition waste exchange. Autom. Constr. 2006, 15, 706–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, A.K. Re-Defining the Architectural Design Process through Building a Decision Support Framework for Design with Reused Building Materials and Components. Ph.D. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Ratman-Kłosińska, I. Reducing by reusing—A demo of a Stock-Exchange service for C&DW recovered elements. In Final Conference of the IRCOW Project (Innovative Strategies for High-Grade Material Recovery from Construction and Demolition Waste); European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Looney, J.H. Long term whole life cycle perspectives—Cradle to Cradle and BIM to DRIM. In Steel and the Circular Economy: Steel Reuse and Design for Deconstruction; Steel Construction Institute: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Akinade, O.O.; Oyedele, L.O.; Omoteso, K.; Ajayi, S.O.; Bilal, M.; Owolabi, H.A.; Alaka, H.A.; Ayris, L.; Henry Looney, J. BIM-based deconstruction tool: Towards essential functionalities. Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ. 2017, 6, 260–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Enviromate Reuse Marketplace. Available online: https://www.enviromate.co.uk/marketplace (accessed on 4 October 2017).
- Resource Efficient Scotland Construction Materials Exchange: Search for Surplus Materials in Your Area. Available online: http://cme.resourceefficientscotland.com/ (accessed on 1 October 2017).
- Loop The Circular Economy Platform for the Built Environment. Available online: http://loop-hub.co.uk/ (accessed on 1 October 2017).
- Salvo Materials Information Exchange. Available online: http://salvomie.co.uk/ (accessed on 1 October 2017).
- Trade Leftovers Don’t Skip It—List It! Swap Spare and Surplus Building Supplies. Available online: http://www.tradeleftovers.com/ (accessed on 1 October 2017).
- Danermark, B.; Ekstrom, M.; Jakobsen, L.; Karlsson, J.C. Explaining Society: Critical Realism in the Social Sciences; Taylor & Francis e-Library: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2005; ISBN 0203996240. [Google Scholar]
- Denzin, N.K. The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods; Methodological Perspectives; Aldine Transaction: New Brunswick, NJ, USA, 2009; pp. 297–313. ISBN 9780202362489. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th ed.; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014; pp. 103–132. ISBN 978-1-4522-4256-9. [Google Scholar]
- McCracken, G. The Long Interview; SAGE Publications: Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1988; Volume 13, ISBN 978-0803933538. [Google Scholar]
- Martin, J.N. The seven samurai of systems engineering: Dealing with the complexity of 7 interrelated systems. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual International Symposium of the International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE), Toulouse, France, 20–24 June 2004; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Toulouse, France, 2004; Volume 14, pp. 459–470. [Google Scholar]
- NFDC/IDE. Demolition and Refurbishment: Resource Protocol. Hemel Hempstead. 2016. Available online: http://demolition-nfdc.com/files/en/group/download/file/76_nfdcpredemolitionbrochurefinal.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- European Commission. Commission Decision of 3 May 2000 Replacing Decision 94/3/EC Establishing a List of Wastes Pursuant to Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC on Waste (European Waste Catalogue); European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2000; pp. 1–31. [Google Scholar]
- BioRegional Development Group. Reuse and Recycling on the London 2012 Olympic Park: Lessons for Demolition, Construction and Regeneration; BioRegional Development Group: Wallington, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Regulation (EC) No 2150/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2002 on Waste Statistics; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2002; pp. 1–45. [Google Scholar]
- Carris, J. Learning Legacy: Demolition Waste Management on the Olympic Park; London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Limited: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- McGinley, T. JunkUp: Supporting e-procurement of used materials in the construction industry using eBay and BIM. In Proceedings of the Unmaking Waste 2015, Adelaide, South Australia, 22–24 May 2015; pp. 241–251. [Google Scholar]
- Kay, T.; Essex, J. Pushing Reuse: Towards a Low-Carbon Construction Industry; BioRegional: Wallington, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Van Ewijk, S.; Stegemann, J.A. Limitations of the waste hierarchy for achieving absolute reductions in material throughput. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 132, 122–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- The Great Recovery-RSA. Report: North Sea Oil and Gas Rig Decommissioning and Re-use Opportunity. 2015. Available online: https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/reports/north-sea-oil-and-gas (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Adams, K.T.; Osmani, M.; Thorpe, T.; Thornback, J. Circular economy in construction: Current awareness, challenges and enablers. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Waste Resour. Manag. 2017, 170, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahlbo, H.; Bachér, J.; Lähtinen, K.; Jouttijärvi, T.; Suoheimo, P.; Mattila, T.; Sironen, S.; Myllymaa, T.; Saramäki, K. Construction and demolition waste management—A holistic evaluation of environmental performance. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 107, 333–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zou, P.; Hardy, R.; Yang, R. Barriers to building and construction waste reduction, reuse and recycling: A case study of the Australian Capital Region. In Building Today—Saving Tomorrow, Proceedings of the Sustainability In Construction and Deconstruction, Auckland, New Zealand, 15–17 July 2015; Panko, M., Kestle, L., Eds.; Unitec Institute of Technology: Auckland, New Zealand, 2015; pp. 27–35. [Google Scholar]
- Chini, A.; Bruening, S. Deconstruction and materials reuse in the United States. In The Future of Sustainable Construction; IeJC: Gainesville, FL, USA, 2003; pp. 1–22. ISBN 1886431094. [Google Scholar]
- McKinsey Global Institute. Resource Revolution: Meeting the World’s Energy, Materials, Food, and Water Needs. 2011. Available online: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/resource-revolution (accessed on 11 January 2018).
- Robert, K.-H.; Schmidt-Bleek, B.; Aloisi de Larderel, J.; Basile, G.; Jansen, J.L.; Kuehr, R.; Price Thomas, P.; Suzuki, M.; Hawken, P.; Wackernagel, M. Strategic sustainable development—Selection, design and synergies of applied tools. J. Clean. Prod. 2002, 10, 197–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antosiewicz, M.; Lewandowski, P.; Witajewski-Baltvilks, J. Input vs. output taxation-A DSGE approach to modelling resource decoupling. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committe and the Committee of the Regions: Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2011; pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
- Nakajima, N. A Vision of Industrial Ecology: State-of-the-Art Practices for a Circular and Service-Based Economy. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2000, 20, 54–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allwood, J.M.; Cullen, J.M.; Milford, R.L. Options for achieving a 50% cut in industrial carbon emissions by 2050. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 1888–1894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stahel, W.R. Policy for material efficiency—Sustainable taxation as a departure from the throwaway society. Philos. Trans. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 2013, 371, 20110567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wijkman, A.; Skånberg, K. The Circular Economy and Benefits for Society: Jobs and Climate Clear Winners in an Economy Based on Renewable Energy and Resource Efficiency. 2015. Available online: https://www.clubofrome.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/The-Circular-Economy-and-Benefits-for-Society.pdf (accessed on 16 January 2018).
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Rose, C.M.; Stegemann, J.A. From Waste Management to Component Management in the Construction Industry. Sustainability 2018, 10, 229. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010229
Rose CM, Stegemann JA. From Waste Management to Component Management in the Construction Industry. Sustainability. 2018; 10(1):229. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010229
Chicago/Turabian StyleRose, Colin M., and Julia A. Stegemann. 2018. "From Waste Management to Component Management in the Construction Industry" Sustainability 10, no. 1: 229. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010229
APA StyleRose, C. M., & Stegemann, J. A. (2018). From Waste Management to Component Management in the Construction Industry. Sustainability, 10(1), 229. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10010229