Construction waste management in India: an exploratory study
Open accessAbstract
Purpose The growth of Indian economy has brought with it significant increase in construction activities. These increased construction activities have further highlighted the problem of waste generation on construction sites. The purpose of this paper is to provide important insights and highlight some issues related to the implementation of effective waste management practices on construction sites in India. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents two cases and results from semi‐structured interviews which shed light on some of the major issues, challenges and drivers associated with the implementation of waste management in construction in India. Findings One of the key findings was that client preference and enforcement of existing laws could actually facilitate the implementation of waste minimisation effectively. Some of the practices being followed, and which are gaining more popularity, are waste quantification, waste segregation, and the implementation of 3Rs (reduce, recycle, and reuse). Congested construction sites, sites in heavily built‐up areas with no ability to have an alternate storage or staging location for materials, lack of ownership of waste due to the presence of multiple contractors on the construction site and lack of awareness and education among the construction workforce were regarded as major challenges associated with the implementation of waste minimisation practices in India. Research limitations/implications The cases and the interviewe…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Positive perception and willingness of stakeholders such as clients, designers and contractors to integrate reused components into their projects are determining.
“However, from a social perspective, positive perception and willingness of the stakeholders such as clients (Arif et al., 2012; Dunant et al., 2017, 2018; Gorgolewski, 2008; Gorgolewski et al., 2008; Sansom and Avery, 2014; Shaurette, 2006; ), designers (Dunant et al., 2017, 2018; Gorgolewski, 2008; Gorgolewski et al., 2008; Rameezdeen et al., 2016; Tingley et al., 2017) and contractors (Chileshe”
From Components reuse in the building sector – A systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as Arif et al., 2012
Lack of systems thinking, ownership, and integration of reuse in the design process decrease reuse rates in the building sector.
“Lack of systems thinking (Rose and Stegemann, 2018), ownership (Arif et al., 2012) and the integration of reuse in the design process of the new projects (Rose and Stegemann, 2018) are factors identified that decrease the reuse rates in the building sector.”
From Components reuse in the building sector – A systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as Arif et al., 2012
Other organizational barriers are proprietary lock-ins, need for infrastructure and equipment to perform deconstruction, and inconsistency in waste management practices.
“Other observed organizational barriers are proprietary lock-ins (Tingley et al., 2017), the need for infrastructure and equipment to perform deconstruction (Chileshe et al., 2016b, Sea-Lim et al., 2018; Shaurette, 2006) and inconsistency in waste management practises (Arif et al., 2012).”
From Components reuse in the building sector – A systematic review (2020) · cites this paper as Arif et al., 2012
Cites
Stock dynamics for forecasting material flows—Case study for housing in The Netherlands
B. Müller, D. (2006) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.09.025 · Cited by 513 · see citing works
da Rocha, C. G., & Sattler, M. A. (2009) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.07.004 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Esa, M. R., Halog, A., & Rigamonti, L. (2017) · Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management · doi:10.1007/s10163-016-0516-x · Cited by 275 · see citing works
Components reuse in the building sector – A systematic review
Rakhshan, K., Morel, J.-C., Alaka, H., & Charef, R. (2020) · Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy · doi:10.1177/0734242x20910463 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
“Other observed organizational barriers are proprietary lock-ins (Tingley et al., 2017), the need for infrastructure and equipment to perform deconstruction (Chileshe et al., 2016b, Sea-Lim et al., 2018; Shaurette, 2006) and inconsistency in waste management practises (Arif et al., 2012).”
BackgroundInfluential
- Authors
- Arif, M., Bendi, D., Toma‐Sabbagh, T., & Sutrisna, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Salford (GB)
- Venue
- Construction Innovation
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2012-04-13
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 133-155
- ISSN
- 1471-4175 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2088755650
- Cited by
- 103
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 4.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- usir.salford.ac.uk
- Licence
- Locations
- Construction Innovation (publishedVersion)
- University of Salford Institutional Repository (University of Salford) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Building Design and Assessment
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Construction Management and Sustainability
- Keywords
- construction waste management, construction site waste, waste reduction, waste sorting, waste quantification, 3Rs, recycling and reuse, sustainable construction, LEED, Indian construction industry, consumer preferences
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
