The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Architects’ perspectives on construction waste reduction by design
Open accessAbstract
The construction, demolition and excavation waste arising in England was estimated at 91 million tonnes in 2003. The current thinking on construction waste minimisation is heavily focussed on several issues relating to physical construction waste and recycling guides. Indeed, much had been published on ways to improve on-site waste management and recycling activities but very few attempts made to address the effect of design practices on waste generation. However, there is a consensus in the literature that the architect has a decisive role to play in helping to reduce waste by focussing on designing out waste. This paper examines previous studies on architects' approach towards construction waste minimisation; and by means of a postal questionnaire, investigates: the origins of waste; waste minimisation design practices in the UK; and responsibilities and barriers within the UK architectural profession. The findings reveal that waste management is not a priority in the design process. Additionally, the architects seemed to take the view that waste is mainly produced during site operations and rarely generated during the design stages; however, about one-third of construction waste could essentially arise from design decisions. Results also indicate that a number of constraints, namely: lack of interest from clients; attitudes towards waste minimisation; and training all act as disincentives to a proactive and sustainable implementation of waste reduction strategies during the design process.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Designing buildings to close the material resource loop
Sassi, P. (2004) · Engineering Sustainability · doi:10.1680/ensu.157.3.163.48643 · Cited by 34
Cited by
Construction and demolition waste best management practice in Europe
Gálvez-Martos, J.-L., Styles, D., Schoenberger, H., & Zeschmar-Lahl, B. (2018) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.04.016 · Cited by 816
Yeheyis, M., Hewage, K., Alam, M. S., Eskicioglu, C., & Sadiq, R. (2013) · Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy · doi:10.1007/s10098-012-0481-6 · Cited by 640
A framework for understanding waste management studies in construction
Lu, W., & Yuan, H. (2011) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.01.018 · Cited by 353
A model for quantifying construction waste in projects according to the European waste list
Llatas, C. (2011) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.01.023 · Cited by 326
Ajayi, S. O., Oyedele, L. O., Bilal, M., Akinade, O. O., Alaka, H. A., Owolabi, H. A., & Kadiri, K. O. (2015) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.06.001 · Cited by 282
Metadata
- Authors
- Osmani, M., Glass, J., & Price, A. D. F.
- Venue
- Waste Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1147-1158
- ISSN
- 0956-053X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2011689479
- Cited by
- 496
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Architects’ perspectives on construction waste reduction by design. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.05.011
- The paper
- Osmani, M., Glass, J., & Price, A. D. F. (2008). Architects’ perspectives on construction waste reduction by design. Waste Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2007.05.011
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.