2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Systematic Literature Review
2.1.1. Database Selection and Bibliometric Search
2.1.2. Refining and Sample Selection
2.1.3. Key Concepts Extraction
2.1.4. Structuring the Review
2.2. In-Depth Interviews
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. C&DWM in Project Life Cycles
3.2. C&DWM Regulations
3.3. Attitudes and Behaviour of C&DWM Stakeholders
3.4. C&DWM from a Sustainability Perspective
4. Results Verification via In-Depth Interviews
Conflicts of Interest
- Senate, T.; Environment and Communications References Committee. Never Waste a Crisis: The Waste and Recycling Industry in Australia; Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600: Canberra, Australia, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- The Centre for International Economics. Headline Economic Value for Waste Materials and Efficiency in Australia; The Centre for International Economics: Canberra, Australia; Sydney, Australia, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, H.; Zuo, J.; Yuan, H.; Zillante, G.; Wang, J. Cross-regional mobility of construction and demolition waste in Australia: An exploratory study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 156, 104710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, R.; Li, B.; Zhou, T.; Wanatowski, D.; Piroozfar, P. An empirical study of perceptions towards construction and demolition waste recycling and reuse in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 126, 86–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, R.; Yuan, H.; Chen, Q. Science mapping approach to assisting the review of construction and demolition waste management research published between 2009 and 2018. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 140, 175–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pickin, J.; Wardle, C.; O’Farrell, K.; Nyunt, P.; Donovan, S. National Waste Report 2020; Blue Environment Pty Ltd.: Melbourne, Australia, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Hyder Consulting. Construction and Demolition Waste Status Report. 2011. Available online: https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/323e8f22-1a8a-4245-a09c-006644d3bd51/files/construction-waste.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2021).
- Pandey, L.M.S.; Shukla, S.K. An insight into waste management in Australia with a focus on landfill technology and liner leak detection. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 225, 1147–1154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, B.; Wang, X.; Kua, H.; Geng, Y.; Bleischwitz, R.; Ren, J. Construction and demolition waste management in China through the 3R principle. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 129, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Yao, Y.; Zuo, J.; Li, J. Key policies to the development of construction and demolition waste recycling industry in China. Waste Manag. 2020, 108, 137–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kabirifar, K.; Mojtahedi, M.; Wang, C.; Tam, V.W.Y. Construction and demolition waste management contributing factors coupled with reduce, reuse, and recycle strategies for effective waste management: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 263, 121265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yazdani, M.; Kabirifar, K.; Frimpong, B.E.; Shariati, M.; Mirmozaffari, M.; Boskabadi, A. Improving construction and demolition waste collection service in an urban area using a simheuristic approach: A case study in Sydney, Australia. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 280, 124138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teh, S.H.; Wiedmann, T.; Castel, A.; de Burgh, J. Hybrid life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from cement, concrete and geopolymer concrete in Australia. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 152, 312–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, Y.; Watson, M. Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2017, 39, 93–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Snyder, H. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 104, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunne, C. The place of the literature review in grounded theory research. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2011, 14, 111–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choy, L.T. The strengths and weaknesses of research methodology: Comparison and complimentary between qualitative and quantitative approaches. IOSR J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2014, 19, 99–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liamputtong, P. Qualitative data analysis: Conceptual and practical considerations. Health Promot. J. Aust. 2009, 20, 133–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rahman, M.S. The advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in language “testing and assessment” research: A literature review. J. Educ. Learn. 2020, 6, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jalali, S.; Wohlin, C. Systematic literature studies: Database searches vs. backward snowballing. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, Lund, Sweden, 20–21 September 2012; pp. 29–38. [Google Scholar]
- Aghaei Chadegani, A.; Salehi, H.; Yunus, M.; Farhadi, H.; Fooladi, M.; Farhadi, M.; Ale Ebrahim, N. A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian Soc. Sci. 2013, 9, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Q.; Waltman, L. Large-scale analysis of the accuracy of the journal classification systems of Web of Science and Scopus. J. Informetr. 2016, 10, 347–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shooshtarian, S.; Maqsood, T.; Wong, P.S.; Khalfan, M.; Yang, R.J. Extended Producer Responsibility in the Australian Construction Industry. Sustainability 2021, 13, 620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doust, K.; Battista, G.; Rundle, P. Front-end construction waste minimization strategies. Aust. J. Civ. Eng. 2021, 19, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fini, A.A.F.; Forsythe, P. Barriers to reusing and recycling office fit-out: An exploratory analysis of demolition processes and product features. Constr. Econ. Build. 2020, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zillante, G.; Chiveralls, K.; Zuo, J.; Udawatta, N. From green buildings to living buildings? Rating schemes and waste management practices in Australian educational buildings. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shooshtarian, S.; Maqsood, T.; Khalfan, M.; Yang, R.J.; Wong, P. Landfill Levy Imposition on Construction and Demolition Waste: Australian Stakeholders’ Perceptions. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ratnasabapathy, S.; Alashwal, A.; Perera, S. Investigation of waste diversion rates in the construction and demolition sector in Australia. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newaz, M.T.; Davis, P.; Sher, W.; Simon, L. Factors affecting construction waste management streams in Australia. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2020, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shooshtarian, S.; Maqsood, T.; Wong, P.S.; Yang, R.J.; Khalfan, M. Review of waste strategy documents in Australia: Analysis of strategies for construction and demolition waste. Int. J. Environ. Technol. Manag. 2020, 23, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udawatta, N.; Zuo, J.; Chiveralls, K.; Yuan, H.; George, Z.; Elmualim, A. Major factors impeding the implementation of waste management in australian construction projects. J. Green Build. 2018, 13, 101–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tam, V.W.Y.; Le, K.N.; Wang, J.Y.; Illankoon, I.M.C.S. Practitioners Recycling Attitude and Behaviour in the Australian Construction Industry. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forsythe, P.; Ahmadian Fard Fini, A. Quantifying demolition fitout waste from Australian office buildings. Facilities 2018, 36, 600–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Forghani, R.; Sher, W.; Kanjanabootra, S.; Totoev, Y. The Attitudes of Demolition Contractors to Reusing Building Components: A Study in New South Wales, Australia. Eur. J. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 7, 364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Tucker, R. Overcoming barriers to the reuse of construction waste material in Australia: A review of the literature. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2017, 17, 228–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rose, T.M.; Manley, K.; Agdas, D. A conceptual framework to investigate the adoption of on-site waste management innovation in Australian building projects. In Proceedings of the 2016 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), Honolulu, HI, USA, 4–8 September 2016; pp. 1830–1837. [Google Scholar]
- Crawford, R.H.; Mathur, D.; Gerritsen, R. Barriers to Improving the Environmental Performance of Construction Waste Management in Remote Communities. Procedia Eng. 2017, 196, 830–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tam, V.W.-Y.; Lu, W. Construction waste management profiles, practices, and performance: A cross-jurisdictional analysis in four countries. Sustainability 2016, 8, 190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udawatta, N.; Zuo, J.; Chiveralls, K.; Zillante, G. Improving waste management in construction projects: An Australian study. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 101, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Udawatta, N.; Zuo, J.; Chiveralls, K.; Zillante, G. Attitudinal and behavioural approaches to improving waste management on construction projects in Australia: Benefits and limitations. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2015, 15, 137–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, R.Y.M.; Du, H. Sustainable Construction Waste Management in Australia: A Motivation Perspective. In Construction Safety and Waste Management: An Economic Analysis; Li, R.Y.M., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 1–30. [Google Scholar]
- Li, M.; Yang, J. Critical factors for waste management in office building retrofit projects in Australia. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2014, 93, 85–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brennan, J.; Ding, G.; Wonschik, C.; Vessalas, K. A closed-loop system of Construction and Demolition Waste Recycling. In Proceedings of the 31st International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction and Mining, Sydney, Australia, 9–11 July 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Li, M.; Yang, J. Analysis of interrelationships between critical waste factors in office building retrofit projects using interpretive structural modelling. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2014, 14, 15–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, M.; Kühlen, A.; Yang, J.; Schultmann, F. Improvement of the Statutory Framework for Construction and Demolition Waste Management exemplified in Germany and Australia. In Urban Environment; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Tam Vivian, W.Y.; Zeng, S.X. Sustainable Performance Indicators for Australian Residential Buildings. J. Leg. Aff. Disput. Resolut. Eng. Constr. 2013, 5, 168–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tam, V.W.; Shen, L. Behaviour and attitudes towards recycling habits in construction: An Australian empirical study. In Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate (CRIOCM 2011), Chongqing, China, 23–25 September 2011; pp. 213–217. [Google Scholar]
- Li, N.; Han, R.; Lu, X. Bibliometric analysis of research trends on solid waste reuse and recycling during 1992–2016. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2018, 130, 109–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, H.Y.; Zuo, J.; Zillante, G.; Wang, J.Y.; Yuan, H.P. Construction and demolition waste research: A bibliometric analysis. Archit. Sci. Rev. 2019, 62, 354–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, H.; Zuo, J.; Zillante, G.; Wang, J.; Yuan, H. Status quo and future directions of construction and demolition waste research: A critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 240, 118163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kabirifar, K.; Mojtahedi, M.; Wang, C.C.; Vivian, W.Y.T. A conceptual foundation for effective construction and demolition waste management. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2020, 1, 100019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010, 84, 523–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics 2017, 111, 1053–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wu, Z.; Yu, A.T.W.; Shen, L. Investigating the determinants of contractor’s construction and demolition waste management behavior in Mainland China. Waste Manag. 2017, 60, 290–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ling, F.Y.Y.; Nguyen, D.S.A. Strategies for construction waste management in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Built Environ. Proj. Asset Manag. 2013, 3, 141–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Newcomer, K.E.; Hatry, H.P.; Wholey, J.S. Conducting semi-structured interviews. Handb. Pract. Program. Eval. 2015, 492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jamshed, S. Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. J. Basic Clin. Pharm 2014, 5, 87–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- HIA–CORELOGIC. Australia’s 100 Largest Construction Companies. 2016–2017. Available online: https://hia.com.au/-/media/HIA-Website/Files/Media-Centre/Media-Releases/2017/national/Australias-Top-Construction-Companies-Revealed.ashx. (accessed on 20 May 2021).
- Villoria Sáez, P.; Osmani, M. A diagnosis of construction and demolition waste generation and recovery practice in the European Union. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 241, 118400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Z.; Yu, A.T.W.; Poon, C.S. Promoting effective construction and demolition waste management towards sustainable development: A case study of Hong Kong. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 28, 1713–1724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nunes, K.R.A.; Mahler, C.F. Comparison of construction and demolition waste management between Brazil, European Union and USA. Waste Manag. Res. 2020, 38, 415–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menegaki, M.; Damigos, D. A review on current situation and challenges of construction and demolition waste management. Curr. Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 2018, 13, 8–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|No||The Key Concept||Year||Source||Reference|
|1||C&DWM regulations||2021||Sustainability (Switzerland)|||
|2||C&DWM in project life cycles||2021||Australian Journal of Civil Engineering|||
|3||C&DWM in project life cycles||2020||Construction Economics and Building|||
|4||C&DWM in project life cycles/GRB tool for C&DWM||2021||Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management|||
|5||C&DWM regulations||2020||Sustainability (Switzerland)|||
|6||C&DWM regulations||2020||Resources, Conservation and Recycling|||
|7||C&DWM in project life cycles/WDR||2020||Built Environment Project and Asset Management|||
|8||C&DWM in project life cycles||2020||International Journal of Construction Management|||
|9||C&DWM regulations||2020||International Journal of Environmental Technology and Management|||
|10||C&DWM in project life cycles||2018||Journal of Green Building|||
|11||Attitude and behaviour in C&DWM||2018||Sustainability (Switzerland)|||
|12||C&DWM in project life cycles/C&DW quantification||2018||Facilities|||
|13||Attitude and behaviour in C&DWM||2018||European Journal of Sustainable Development|||
|14||C&DWM in project life cycles/Reusing C&DW||2017||International Journal of Construction Management|||
|15||C&DWM in project life cycles||2017||PICMET 2016|||
|16||Sustainable C&DWM||2017||Procedia Engineering|||
|17||C&DWM regulations||2016||Sustainability (Switzerland)|||
|18||C&DWM in project life cycles||2015||Resources, Conservation and Recycling|||
|19||Attitude and behaviour in C&DWM||2015||International Journal of Construction Management|||
|20||Sustainable C&DWM||2015||Book Chapter: Construction Safety and Waste Management: An Economic Analysis|||
|21||C&DWM in project cycles||2014||Resources, Conservation and Recycling|||
|22||C&DWM in project life cycles/C&DW recycling||2014||International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction|||
|23||C&DWM in project life cycles||2014||International Journal of Construction Management|||
|24||C&DWM regulations||2013||Conference Proceedings|||
|25||Sustainable C&DWM||2013||Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction|||
|26||Attitude and behaviour in C&DWM||2011||CRIOCM 2011|||
|Country||Construction and Demolition Waste Generation (Million Tonnes)||C&DW Recycling Rate||Waste Regulations||Refrences|
|Australia||27||60%||National Waste Policy; Less waste, More resources (Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment), National Waste Policy; Action plan, and Jurisdictional regulations for C&DWM across Australian states and territories.||[11,59,60,61,62]|
|Germany||86||80–90%||European Laws (Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC), German Federal Law (1972), State law of Bundesländer, Municipal waste disposal law, and The Circualr Economy Act (KrWG) (2012)|
Key instruments: Selective demolition, C&DW sorting, separate collection, hazardous waste management and green public procurement.
|United Kingdom||58||80–90%||Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC), Hazardous Waste Regulations, Landfill Legislation, European List of Wastes (Decision 2000/532/EC), Waste Producer’s Responsibility, Specific legislation on C&DWM (e.g., site waste management plan in England), Landfill tax, and Restrictions/Ban on specific C&DW|
Key instruments: C&DW sorting, separate collection, hazardous waste management, green public procurement and landfill tax.
|Hong Kong||20||90% and above for inert waste||A major classification for inert/non-inert waste for C&DWM is consdidered, Waste Dispoal Ordinance (1980), Construction Waste Disposal Charging Scheme (2005), Waste management plan, Pilot recycling plant and Trip ticket system.|
|Paper Numbers in Table 1||Main Categories||Major Components||References|
|2–4, 7,8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, and 21–23 (13 articles)||1. C&DWM in project life cycles||1. The culture of construction industry, the role of incentive and organisational support, as-built information of buildings, design and the process of delivery of the project (plan, design, and construction) are factors affecting C&DWM in office retrofit projects. |
2. Pre-sorting and separating facilities have a great impact on reusing and recycling of C&DW.
3. Five solutions for waste management in construction projects were supervision, having guidelines for waste management, accurate design and documentation, innovative decisions and life cycle management of waste.
4. The deficiency in reusing/recycling of C&DW in Australia can be attributed to the technological and attitudinal factors.
5. Social, economic and political issues, as well as attitudinal approaches, are the biggest obstacles in reusing C&DW in Australia.
6. The rigid nature of the construction industry, specific characteristics of construction projects, commitment, experience, and awareness and the embryonic nature of waste management are factors that impede the Australian construction industry from maximum waste management.
7. Mix-waste is a big issue to deal with in office renovation, as well as in residential demolition projects.
8. A lack of unified regulations for C&DWM across Australian states, inappropriate attitude of stakeholders towards waste management and the limited number of recycling facilities are important factors in waste management in Australia.
|1,5,6,9, 17,24, 16, 20, and 25 (9 articles)||2. C&DWM regulations with regards to sustainability||1. C&DWM regulations, benchmarking and supervision should be improved in Australia. |
2. Landfill levy, incentive/punishment mechanisms, adequate number of recycling facilities, market for recycled products and sustainability impact of C&DW are effective factors in C&DWM in Australia.
3. Legislation should mandate sustainable practices of C&DWM.
4. Time and cost associated with waste management, lack of education and common perception towards waste management, unclear guidelines of waste management and having a preference for project priorities rather than waste management are other important factors in C&DWM in Australia.
|11,13, 19, and 26 (4 articles)||3. Attitudes and behaviour of C&DWM stakeholders||1. Attitudes and behaviour of stakeholders involved in C&DWM should be in the same direction for optimum waste management.|
2. Financial return plays a crucial role in altering the attitude and behaviour of C&DWM stakeholders.
3. Training and communication are important factors to improve stakeholders’ attitudes towards better waste management.
|Interviewee||Construction and Demolition Waste Management Gaps||(A) C&DWM in Project Life Cycles *||(B) Attitudes and Behaviour of C&DWM Stakeholders **||(C) C&DWM Regulations with Regards to Sustainability ***||C&DWM in Australia|
|Interviewee 1||1. Insufficient/inefficient data pertinent to C&DW, lack of unified reference for C&DWM in a national scale, and dispersed instructions, standards, reports, etc. for C&DWM across state and territories governments.|
2. Inadequate utilisation of tools and technologies in managing C&DW.
|First priority: C&DWM in construction/demolition stages, Second priority: C&DWM in planning/design stages.||Clients and developers have great impacts on C&DWM in Australia. Contractors and consultants also affect C&DWM in Australia.||All interviewees stated that economic factor is among the most important factors in the structure of C&DWM regulations. Landfill levies, incentive/punishment mechanisms for C&DWM, profit from selling recycled material are important factors in regulating and managing C&DW in Australia.||Priorities: Factors C, B, and A, respectively.|
|Interviewee 2||First priority: C&DWM in construction/demolition stages, Second priority: C&DWM in procurement phase.||All stakeholders including contractors, consultants, clients, etc. have equal impacts on C&DWM in Australia.||Factor C is the most effective factor in C&DWM in Australia; and factors B and A have equal importance.|
|Interviewee 3||First priority: C&DWM in construction/demolition stages, Second priority: C&DWM in planning/design stages.||Clients and developers have great impacts on C&DWM in Australia. This is followed by contractors.||Priorities: Factors C, A, and B, respectively.|
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
© 2021 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).