Dr. Seyed Farzin Faezi - MAGNT Research Report (ISSN 1444

MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939)
Vol.2 (4):PP. 406-4011
Construction Waste Management for Sustainable Environmental Education
Dr. Seyed Farzin Faezi*1
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Payame Noor University (PNU), P.O.Box 19395-3697, Tehran, IRAN
Abstract
Today, the construction industry produces about 35% of the world's waste. Waste management can have a
significant effect on the conservation of resources and the environment, because in some cases, waste may
threaten public health and the environment, and even be an obstacle against economic development. In this study,
two questionnaires were used to collect data. In the first questionnaire, the key factors in management of
construction and destruction waste in Yazd Waste Management organization and its construction companies have
been assessed. These factors have been scored via second questionnaire. For Data analysis in the study, Pearson
and Friedman correlation tests and One-Sample T test were used. According to the obtained results, fifteen
factors were identifies as key factors in implementation of the waste management for construction in Yazd.
Among these fifteen factors, categorization and classification of waste with proper management in place is the
most effective factor and proper maintenance of construction materials is the least important factor in waste
management. Due to the lack of studies with this approach, new achievements in the field of construction
management can be achieved in this study. However, the results of the study can also be applied by policy
makers and planners and practitioners in the fields of construction industry and waste management organizations.
Keywords: Waste Management, Construction debris, Sustainable environment, Destruction
1. Introduction
Today, in most countries, environmental pollution
is of the most important issues which is occurred
mostly by the wide range of industrial and municipal
waste, or material resulting from old buildings
destruction (Zahedian et al, 2009). One of the main
problems emerged in recent years in developed or
developing countries, is the mass construction debris
(waste of construction and deconstruction)
(Shokuhian & Nafafian, 2012).By the development of
cities due to increased value of land and housing and
focus of investment in this sector, old structure of
cities was destroyed and replaced with new buildings
that will increase the production of construction
debris. Thus, construction is the major consumer of
natural resources. The increasing volume of
municipal waste materials and debris resulting from
the deconstruction of the old buildings and structures
has created various problems in big cities (Faniran &
Caban, 1998).
Environmental problems caused by the unethical
and unprofessional disposal of these materials have
attracted researchers and government officials to
recycle these materials. In this regard, the need to
implement waste management system is highly
visible and effective (Tam, 2008). Construction and
deconstruction waste have undesirable chemical and
physical effects on the environment. We should pay
attention to dump of waste in cities’ marginal lands
and its problems (Begum et al, 2007). The illegal
dumping of waste causes many problems including:
1. It causes environmental problems in the streets,
passages and suburban and makes ugly landscapes
(Kofoworola & Gheewala, 2009).
2. It causes environmental pollution on roads and
road margins and makes crossing barriers which
leads to possible events that may cause human and
financial losses (Mortaheb & Kavosian, 2009).
3. It is a good place for rodents and insects, so it
can a factor of various diseases like Leishmaniasis
(Lu & Yuan, 2010).
4. It makes groundwater and surface water
polluted in river banks and gradually blocks the water
path which leads to floods and irreparable damages
when raining (Kofoworola & Gheewala, 2009).
5. It causes loss of soil fertility and quality of
arable land in agricultural lands.
6. In the city, it has enormous financial cost to
clean up again (Saghafi & Hosseini, 2011).
2. Literature Review
In a study entitled Managing and Recycling
Construction Wastes: a Case Study of Shiraz, kinds
of construction wastes caused by destructing
buildings were investigated, and the amount of waste
for Shiraz was presented as a percentage. The authors
of the study concluded that the common method of
construction waste disposal in Iran is transferring
them to areas out of the city. Since using recycled
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.86)
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939)
and used materials is not acceptable in our culture, no
attention is paid to extracting the material intact
during destruction and the material is destroyed
during destruction and is transferred to disposal areas
as a mixture. Some strategies are suggested for
managing construction wastes at the end of the study
(Biddokhti. et al, 2010).
In a study entitled Recycle Management and
Strategies for Optimal Use of Construction Wastes, a
case study of Tehran metropolis was conducted in
which the kinds and volume of produced construction
wastes were investigated and strategies to recycle
them were presented (Zahedian & Montaser
Koohsari, 2009).
In a study entitled Investigating Approaches to
Managing Construction Wastes in Construction
Projects, the reasons behind weak management of
construction wastes were pointed to, after reviewing
the recycling methods of construction wastes. Finally,
design and management were introduced as two
factors having the most significant roles in creating
material wastes (Jalal & Mansoori, 2009).
In a research entitled Key Factors for Assessing
the Effectiveness of Waste Management in
Construction Projects, the phenomenon of using
construction wastes in social, economic, and
environmental realms was investigated. Key
attributes of waste management were introduced in
this study (Yuan, 2013).
In a research study entitled Investigating
Construction Wastes, the relationships between the
intensity of earthquake and the kind of construction
wastes, and between the structure of building (steel,
concrete, masonry and composite) and the kind of
material obtained by destruction were investigated
(Xiao, 2012).
In a study entitled Managing Wastes Caused by
Events, waste management of developed countries
and developing countries, available options for
eliminating wastes caused by events, and the
economic, social, and environmental results of waste
management were investigated (Brown, et al, 2011).
3. Methods
This is a survey research method. In fact, this type of
research is to better understand the nature of the
problem which very few studies have been conducted
on. Also in the survey, researchers collect
quantitative and numerical data using questionnaires
or interviews and they describe the responses process
Vol.2 (4):PP. 406-4011
and test the question or hypothesis using statistical
techniques.
3.1 The population and sample size
The population includes individuals who are
considered for investigation. In other words, the
sample population includes people who have at least
one particular trait. Accordingly, the population of
the study is the municipal waste management and
contractors of building major in the city of Yazd. To
select the sample, Morgan table has been used to
determine the number of samples because the
variance and the probability of success or failure in
the study population is not available. The sample size
was determined by Morgan table 44 according to the
number of associated managers and professionals.
Thus, 44 questionnaires were provided and
distributed among the people. The first questionnaire
is consisted of two parts. In the first part, the
statistical community features such as gender, age,
education and work experience are investigated. And
the second part includes effective factors in waste
management. The second questionnaire assessed 15
factors affecting waste management which is ranked
according to the Likert.
3.2 Validity and reliability
In this research, after extensive studies, a
questionnaire was developed. To assess the validity
of the questionnaire, it has been distributed among
4experts of survey, and finally, after applying their
points of view, the final version of the questionnaire
was obtained. Also, SPSS software is applied using
Cronbach's alpha in order to assess the validity and
reliability of the questionnaire.
3.3 Research Measurement Scale
One of the most common scales in management
attitude survey is Likert scale. As noted in this study,
to measure respondents' attitudes about the key
factors in implementation of construction and
deconstruction waste management, responses are
measured over a range of 5-point Likert scale. This
range of the questionnaire responses includes (very
high) (high) (medium) (low) and (very low) and
codes (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) are considered
respectively to analyze them. In this study, SPSS
software has been used to classify and analyze the
data (Table 1).
Table 1. Score of Questions
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.86)
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939)
Item
Very
Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Score
5
4
3
2
1
4 Results
Characteristics of the under study population in terms
of variables: As previously mentioned, data have
been collected through questionnaire and the
statistical community is the waste management
organization and contractors of building major in the
city of Yazd .Reliability coefficient of the
questionnaire was examined via Cronbach's alpha and
it is equal to 0.737. This result indicates the
appropriate validity of the questionnaire. For
Cronbach alpha, credits less than 0.6are usually
considered to be weak and the range of 0.7 is
considered acceptable (Table 2).
Table 2. Validity Coefficient of Key Factors Structure Affecting
Project Management via Cronbach's alpha
Cronbach
Cronbach alpha based on
N of items
alpha
standardized items
0.737
0.738
44
The questionnaire is consisted of two parts statistical
community characteristics and effective factors. The
first result of statistical community is the distribution
of respondents according to years of service as shown
in Figure 1.
E> 15
10 >E> 15
5 > E > 10
Vol.2 (4):PP. 406-4011
years of service
The results of 44 collected questionnaires show that
the average age of participants is 30.5 years and their
age range is 22-58 years (table 3).
N
44
Table 3. Participants’ age conditions
Mean
Minimum
Maximum
30.5
22
58
In terms of education level of the participants in this
study, 31 participants (77.5%) have a bachelor's
degree and 13 participants (32.5%) have a master’s
degree.
4.1 Test hypotheses
The research contains three hypotheses. The first
hypothesis examines whether the fifteen factors
identified in this research have effects on
construction and deconstruction waste management
practices. If the average of each of these factors is
greater than the mean, can be concluded that all the
fifteen factors have effects on waste management
implementation. One-Sample T Test is used to
answer the first hypothesis. In this test, we examine
that how much the mean of a community is higher or
lower than a fixed amount. If the community
responses’ mean is greater than the average value, it
can be inferred that the considered factor is effective
in
construction
and
deconstruction
waste
management. Results of the first test are summarized
in Table 4.
E< 5
Job History or Experience (years)
Figure 1. Distribution of respondents according to
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Table 4- effective factor in Construction Waste Management
Standard
Mean
Variable title
Mean
deviation
difference
Nearing place of recycling to debris location
0/000
0/921
0/8095
Public and private sector investment
0/000
4/009
0/4447
Technologies to produce less waste
0/000
4/021
0/4447
Waste classification and categorization with
0/000
4/454
0/7900
proper management in place
Preventing illegal dumping
0/000
4/042
0/4800
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.86)
T statistics
significance
9/9029
9/9079
9/9585
0/872
0/487
0/454
9/9455
0/740
9/0500
0/447
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Consideration during the design
Improving conventional construction
Proper maintenance of materials
Industrial programs for Housing construction
Education and Culture
Motivate contractors
Developing waste collection models
Knowledge
Monitoring system
Punishment and reward programs
Nearing place of recycling to debris location
Vol.2 (4):PP. 406-4011
0/000
0/000
0/00
0/000
0/000
0/000
0/000
0/000
0/000
0/000
0/000
As it is shown, according to respondents’ view, at
0.05 reliability the factors’ mean is greater than
average 3 and as a result, hypothesis H1 is accepted
for all these factors and all of them are effective and
significant. The second hypothesis ranks selected
factors in construction and deconstruction waste
management according to the Friedman test mean
rank in terms of rankings’ importance. Friedman test
results for the hypothesis test are summarized in
Table 5.
Table 5. Results of factors’ ranking in construction and
deconstruction waste management
Construction and deconstruction waste
Mean ranking
management
Nearing place of recycling to debris location
9.33
Public and private sector investment
8.30
Technologies to produce less waste
10.12
Waste classification and categorization with
10.48
proper management in place
Preventing illegal dumping
6.32
Consideration during the design
7.37
Improving conventional construction
7.76
Proper maintenance of materials
5.54
Industrial programs for Housing construction
7.21
Education and Culture
10.25
Motivate contractors
9.01
Developing waste collection models
8.45
Knowledge
7.25
Monitoring system
9.02
Punishment and reward programs
9.24
According to data obtained from Friedman test it can
0/748
4/840
2/891
0/424
0/010
4/275
0/824
0/409
2/800
2/891
0/409
0/8547
0/4447
0/4419
0/4744
0/8500
0/7000
0/4788
0/7080
0/8419
0/4419
0/7080
9/9079
9/0485
9/9077
9/9498
9/9118
9/2925
9/9828
9/2710
9/2777
9/9777
9/2710
0/047
0/447
0/841
0/084
0/790
0/200
0/224
0/708
0/041
0/441
0/708
be said that ranking of construction and
deconstruction waste management factors is
significant in terms of importance degree and
Friedman test is accepted because significance is less
than 0.05. And among factors of construction and
deconstruction
waste
management
“waste
classification and categorization with proper
management in place” has the most importance and
“proper maintenance of materials” has the least
importance degree.
5. Discussion and Conclusions
The purpose of this study is to identify key factors in
the
implementation
of
construction
and
deconstruction waste management. To achieve our
goal, we examined the posed questions, the results of
which are summarized below. The results of the first
test indicates that in terms of respondents’ view, key
factors of construction and deconstruction waste
management in all fifteen factors are acceptable
according to 0.05 reliability and the mean greater
than average. The results of the second test obtained
from identifying key factors of construction and
deconstruction waste management in terms of
respondents’ view shows that the most importance
goes to the factor of “waste classification and
categorization with proper management in place”
(10.48) and “proper maintenance of materials” (5.54)
has the least importance. Mean score of participants
in each question is provided in table 4.As it is
shown, after classification and separation of waste
with proper management, the following factors have
the most effects on construction waste management
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.86)
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939)
in the city of Yazd: “education and culture” with the
mean score of 10.25, “technologies to produce less
waste” with the mean score of 10.12, “nearing place
of recycling to debris location” with the mean score
of 9.32, “punishment and reward programs” with the
mean score of 9.24.
Although the importance of other factors are very
close together inrespondents’ view, the results of the
examination of non-equality of these factors’
importance indicates significant difference between
them. Accordingly, it can be said that due to
respondents view “Waste classification and
categorization with proper management in place” is
the factor which is really important in construction
and deconstruction management. So waste
management
organization
and
construction
companies should take necessary measures to
expedite implementation of this factor. “Proper
maintenance of materials” is the least important
factor for construction and deconstruction
management and is less necessary to expedite
implementation in comparison with other factors.
The theoretical framework provided by this study
shows a comprehensive model on key factors of
construction and deconstruction management in
waste management organization and construction
companies in the city of Yazd. Since few studies
have been done in this area, findings of this study
can be compared to concepts developed by experts.
Notably, cost of this management in some projects is
not desirable due to financial constraints but it is
considerable in many cases. Waste management and
recycling financial resources can be provided by
investment return and spending collected taxes.
Acknowledgments
This article is from a research project approved in
PNU. We hereby acknowledge the financial support
of PNU.
References
Begum, R.A., and Siwar, ch., pereira, J.J., and Jaafar,
A.H. Implementation of waste management and
minimisation in the construction industry of
malaysia. Resources Conservation and Recycling,
2007; Vol. 51, No.3, pp.190-202.
Biddokhti, T., Haghayegh, N., and Haghayegh, M.
Managing and Recycling Construction Wastes: a
Case Study of Shiraz, The Fourth Specialist
Conference on Environmental Engineering,
Vol.2 (4):PP. 406-4011
Tehran, University of Tehran, Faculty of
Environment. 2010.
Brown, C., et al. Disaster waste management: A
review article. Waste management, 2011; Vol.31,
No.6, 1085-1098.
Faniran, O.O., and Caban, G. Minimizing waste on
construction
project
sites.
Engineering
Construction and Architectural Management,
1998; Vol.5, No.3, pp. 182-188
Jalal, M. and Mansoori, E. Recycle Management and
Strategies for Optimal Use of Construction
Wastes. The First National Conference on
Engineering and Management of Infrastructures,
Tehran, University of Tehran. 2009.
Kofoworola, O.F., and Gheewala, sh., Estimation of
construction waste generation and management in
Thailand. Waste Management, 2009; Vol.28,
No.1,pp. 71-78
Lu, W., and Yuan, H, Exploring critical success
factors for waste management in construction
projects of China. Resources Conservation and
Recycling, 2010, Vol.55, No.2, pp. 21-28.
Mortaheb M, Kavosian A, Production and
organization of construction waste in developing
countries. Scientific Journal of Sharif University,
2009; Vol.51, No 2, pp. 25-32.
Shokuhian M, Nafafian A, Management strategies
to reduce environmental pollution, construction
waste and recycle them. Proceedings of the
International Congress of civil engineering, Iran,
2012.
Saghafi, M.J., and Hosseini Teshnizi, Z.A, Building
deconstruction and material recovery in Iran: An
analysis of major determinants. Procedia
Engineering, 2011; Vol.21, No.2, pp. 853-863.
Tam, V.W.Y., (2008), On the effectiveness in
implementing waste-management plan method in
construction. Waste Management, Vol. 28, No.2,
pp. 107-108
Xiao, J., et al. Investigation on building waste and
reclaim in Wenchuan earthquake disaster area,
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2012;
Vol.61, No4. Pp. 109-117.
Yuan, H. Key indicators for assessing the
effectiveness
of
waste
management
in
construction projects, Ecological Indicators, 2013;
Vol. 24, No.3, pp.476-484.
Zahedian, T. and Montaser Koohsari, R,
Investigating
Approaches
to
Managing
Construction Wastes in Construction Projects,
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.86)
MAGNT Research Report (ISSN. 1444-8939)
The First National Conference on Engineering
and Construction Management, Tehran, Amir
Kabir Industrial University. 2009.
Zahedian T, Kuhsari R, Rahimi A, Evaluation of
Waste Management Approaches in Building
Construction Projects. Proceedings of the
International Congress of civil engineering, Iran.
2009.
(DOI: dx.doi.org/14.9831/1444-8939.2014/2-4/MAGNT.86)
Vol.2 (4):PP. 406-4011

Download Report