Cited by 180Recycled Aggregate Concrete PerformanceSustainable Supply Chain ManagementSustainable Building Design and Assessment

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Overcoming barriers to the reuse of construction waste material in Australia: a review of the literature

Open access
Park, Jungha, Tucker, Richard·2017·International Journal of Construction Management

Abstract

Although much has been written on how to improve the management of construction waste and increase the use of recycled materials, little progress has been made to address the reuse of construction waste. Yet there is a consensus in the literature that waste reuse practices have a decisive role to play in improving reduction of waste, and that institutional barriers are the most problematic obstacles to implementing identified reuse strategies. This paper examines the literature from the last 10 years on the issues facing different stakeholders around reuse of construction waste in Australia, and the causes and effects of the institutional barriers encountered. Key texts from before this period are also referenced. The findings reveal that institutional impediments are related to problems outside of the construction industry, such as social, economic and political barriers to change. A number of constraints are identified: lack of interest and demand from clients; attitudes towards reuse practices; and training all of which act as disincentives to a proactive and sustainable application of construction waste reuse strategies. Above all, it is argued that legislation should be better implemented to ensure that all states in Australia are required to implement strategies to reuse waste construction materials.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15623599.2016.1192248

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. [ABS] Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2010, Australia's environment: issues and trends
  2. ACT Government, 2011, ACT waste management strategy: towards a sustainable Canberra – reducing waste and recovering resources to achieve a sustainable, carbon-neutral Canberra 2011–2025
  3. Building Commission, 2004, The barriers to best practice in the design, engineering, construction and operation of green buildings
  4. Chini AR., 2001, Deconstruction and materials reuse: technology, economic, and policy
  5. Chiveralls K, 2012, Adelaide, SA: International Society for Ecological Economics
  6. 10.1080/02673030802704337 · DOI
  7. [DEWHA] Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 2010, National waste policy: less waste, more resources.
  8. Dong B, 2007, Proceedings of the Australian Institute of Building Surveyors (AIBS) 2007 International Conference, Adelaide. Sydney: AIBS
  9. [DSEWPAC] Department of Sustainability, Energy, Water, Population and Communities, 2012, Construction and demolition waste guide – recycling and re-use across the supply chain
  10. European Commission, 2011, Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the committee of the regions, Energy Efficiency Plan 2011, Brussels
  11. 10.1258/jrsm.96.3.118 · DOI
  12. Lehmann S, 2013, .
  13. 10.1007/978-3-319-12430-8 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.wasman.2011.01.018 · DOI
  15. Morris S., 2013, Development
  16. 10.1680/warm.2006.159.2.65 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/j.wasman.2007.05.011 · DOI
  18. 10.1108/02637470710753611 · DOI
  19. Reed RG., 2008, Developing real estate markets in Africa
  20. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2004)130:4(472) · DOI
  21. Stewart P, Robinson J, Low S. 2012. The business case for Sustainable Design – the City of Melbourne CH2 Project. Constr Econ Build. 5:58–70. · DOI
  22. 10.1016/j.wasman.2007.04.007 · DOI
  23. 10.1177/0734242X08091864 · DOI
  24. Teo MMM, 2000, Paper presented at: Annual Conference – ARCOM
  25. Thomas D, 2012, Int J Housing Sci Appl, 36, 221
  26. Udawatta N, 2015, Int J Constr Manag, 15, 137
  27. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.05.003 · DOI
  28. Wang J-Y, 2008, J Eng Des Tech, 6, 227
  29. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.1016/j.wasman.2010.10.030 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 180

Metadata

Authors
Park, J., & Tucker, R.
Affiliations
Deakin University (AU)
Corresponding author
Tucker, Richard
Venue
International Journal of Construction Management
Published
2016-06-08
Volume
17
Issue
3
Pages
228-237
ISSN
  • 1562-3599 (ISSN-L)
  • 2331-2327
OpenAlex
W2413968838
Cited by
180
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
6.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • International Journal of Construction Management (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Building Design and Assessment
Keywords
waste recycling in construction, institutional barriers, stakeholder attitudes, consumer demand, legislation implementation, sustainable construction, waste reduction, Australia

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: Overcoming barriers to the reuse of construction waste material in Australia: a review of the literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/15623599.2016.1192248
The paper
Park, J., & Tucker, R. (2017). Overcoming barriers to the reuse of construction waste material in Australia: a review of the literature. International Journal of Construction Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2016.1192248