“A Case Study on Construction Waste Management in

Infrastructure Projects in Jammu And Kashmir State”

Basharat Hamid1, Er Anuj Sachar2, Dr Sandeep Singla3
1
M.Tech Student, 2Assistant Professor, 3Professor
Civil Engineering Department, RIMT University, Punjab

Abstract: Construction is an important link between India's infrastructure and growth. The construction of roads, bridges and other
construction sites plays an important role in designing the future of society. As a result, the construction industry has produced a lot of waste
that is unsatisfactory to the environment and is of great value to the project budget. The purpose of the thesis is to find out how much waste is
spent on construction investment and has advised the industry how maximum profits can be maximized and how waste can be reduced. For
practical studies, a mixed approach was used to combine quizzes and interviews with stakeholders in the field of road construction along with
data, records and observation data to investigate construction waste and cost management. The study shows that some construction
companies in Jammu and Kashmir do not comply with the best international practices and standards. Implementation, such as waste
management plans in the area of waste reduction strategies, has been identified as not in these companies. A number of recommendations
have been made to improve construction practices in Kashmir. For example, the requirements for training all construction workers on waste
management requirements for government agencies to monitor and implement waste management measures in the construction industry.
Index Terms: Waste Management, Construction, Factors, Develop framework, Recycling

I. INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines construction waste and destruction (waste and residual waste), a waste
debris created by construction, repair and demolition of buildings, roads and bridges. C & D materials often contain the following
materials: concrete, asphalt, wood, metal, gypsum, plastic, and building components that are maintained. It is a difficult task to
manage C & D waste because it is large, heavy, and has a variety of materials with different properties. It is also difficult to
choose an appropriate method of disposal, for example, it can not be burned due to its high density and serenity. With the
emergence of Sustainable Implementation in the Construction Industry, C & D Waste is the central focus of achieving sustainable
goals for our common future. The philosophy of reducing, reusing, and recycling waste (3R) is very useful in treating C & D
wasteBetter C and D management practices are to reduce the production of C and D but sometimes construction waste from 2-3
tonnes is calculated, of which 30 to 40% is produced. C & D waste is inevitable because of problems such as structural damage or
demand destruction. Globally, they are important to emerging developing countries or entering the country. According to an
annual report by the Dubai Department of Waste Management, a total of 27.7 million tons of construction waste was taken out of
the city's construction sites in 2007, an increase of 163% compared to waste Which was created in 2006 only 10.5 million tons.

C and D WASTE IN INDIA:

Wood C & D Waste Distribution Other

2% 1%
Bitumen
Metal 2%
5%

Soil, Sand &

Gravel
Concrete
36%
24%

Brick & Masonry

30%

Figure 1. Percentage Distribution of C & D waste in India

 Table 1. Quantity of various constituents generated per year.

Constituent million tonnes/year

Soil, Sand and gravel 4.20 to 5.14

Bricks and masonry 3.60 to 4.40

Concrete 2.40 to 3.67

Metals 0.60 to 0.73

Bitumen 0.25 to 0.30

Wood 0.25 to 0.30

Others 0.10 to 0.15

CLASSIFICATION OF WASTES:
 Recyclable waste:
Steel, Plastic, Bricks, Glass
 Non- recyclable waste:
Concrete, Timber, Sanitary Works

II. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The construction and demolition waste management is one of the vast aspects of the construction industry. The main purpose of
the project is to reduce construction waste and damage caused by recycling and recycling of wastes and residues. The main
objectives of the project are:

• To study construction and demolition waste management policies in Jammu and Kashmir state
• To study the role of regulatory authorities in demolition waste management in JandK.
• To study the C and D waste generation, its sources and streams in JandK.
• To understand the recycling of C and D waste for reutilization in JandK.
• To study the feasibility of C & D waste in terms of reuse, recycle and reduce disposal.

III. LITERATURE REVIEW

Effie Papargyropoulou et al. (2011) focuses on Malaysia's construction sector, the current management status and the level of
sustainable implementation of construction waste management, and the study of the behavior and reaction of Malaysian waste
contractors through interviews with Malaysian contractors. The level of industry awareness and involvement with waste
management is low and frustrating.

Al-Hajj A. et al. (2012), which is determined by data collection from two case studies on construction implementation for
construction projects to reduce construction waste in the United Arab Emirates by reviewing research papers. And has come to the
conclusion that people lacked less understanding of waste management in the area, and it was shown that contractors believe waste
management is an additional cost for the project.

Mansi Jain et al. (2012) focuses on the economic aspect of the minimum waste of construction waste in terms of reducing costs in
Indian construction projects. It has been found that because of a lack of waste management systems there is no awareness of
reducing waste in the Indian construction industry due to the large amount of waste generated. This not only reflects the
environment but also economic costs, such as treating waste. Other causes of waste generation have been identified as a lack of
understanding between owners and contractors, lack of knowledge, lack of training and education for waste disposal systems.

Nitish Bagdi et al. (2013) uses secondary data on the implementation of waste management practices in the construction sector in
India. Data based on a shareholder interview that focuses on key issues and challenges related to the implementation of the Waste
Management System in India. It has been found that a lack of understanding of contractors and construction workers is a major
challenge related to the implementation of minimum practices in the Indian building industry.

Job Thomas et al., (2013) clarifies the reduction of 3R System Waste Reduction for Recycling and Recycling for Building
Management Waste in India. And building and building waste resources (C & D) are another benefit to India's industrial
processing equipment. And it also determines that some waste is reduced by a proper design at an early stage. Can reduce the level
of C & D wastes created by construction methods and destruction.

Manal S. et al. (2014) has developed a detailed process for calculating waste management methods and destruction using the
matrix technique for decision-making. Procedures are designed to help decision makers such as C & D contractors or transporters
as well as policy makers at the strategic level to take many influential factors. Data provide planning, change, or implementation
of systems and methods for waste management and waste management. It is advisable to analyze the cost of each stakeholder in
the CDWM system, taking into account the weight of the advantages and disadvantages of each method.

Shishir Bansal et al. (2014) concludes that there is little natural resources for construction, so it is essential to reduce C & D waste
and increase recycling / recycling in the construction industry. Recycled waste can be used during construction. The City's
municipal waste law has an obligation to change and make plans more efficient, and strict laws and regulations are important to
keep in mind. And new processing products are important to promote consumption.

Nuria Calvo et al. (2014) outlines a law-based system that is key to creating a 3R model (Reducing, Reuse, Recycling) to include
in waste management, technology, technology for savings and spending. For the main purposes, such as reducing waste, reducing
unnecessary waste disposal and counterfeit waste from C & D, and finding a comprehensive social economic performance, linked
to waste management in time and policy markets. The recycled and targeted collection is 30% of C & D waste for 12 years or less.

Abhijith Harikumaret Al. (2014) that the recycling of waste material is beneficial and especially useful, especially when it is
useful to reduce the damage to the rock cover and cover the green forest to reduce the yield. By proper cleaning and reuse, the use
and waste will not add waste to the waste disposal site. They have shown that the construction industry can help by encouraging
the use of processed concrete bricks and bricks. For your commitment to environmental protection.

Sadhan K Ghosha et al. (2015) proposes a model for shipping and scrap selling rates using an easily accessible data that can
provide an intuitive modeling and simpler simplification workflow for basic principles of reducing the use of upscaling. Recycling
and Processing in Action. The most common cause of on-site waste has been identified. And it limits the benefits of building
waste.

Sumit Arora et al. (2015) that natural resources are limited in nature and will be fatigue over time. To conserve natural resources,
the loss of unnecessary natural resources is limited and regulated. The design and implementation of appropriate waste
management plans in the life cycle of the project can reduce C & D waste. Controlled circuit resources, including most of the
construction and recycling materials, can be recycled or recycled, and more natural resources can be reserved for our next
generation. The success of recycling requires media outreach through education and additional information on the rules of relevant
institutions.

Harris. P. Gayakwad et al. (2015) concluded that it was difficult to manage construction waste and damage in the future. Data
should be created based on the creation of waste from construction and destruction of the area. And promote. Distribution of
construction waste and destruction. The waste collection method should be found and modified to be appropriate for the future.
Reuse and recycling of waste materials must also be approached, so the charge should apply to a generation of construction and
demolition waste.

Nur Najihah Osman et al. (2016) noted that improvements to construction waste management among stakeholders in the industry,
especially in Malaysia, are crucial to ensure that the industry continues to be involved. In addition, developing countries, such as
Malaysia, are yet to realize the importance of best practices for waste management issues, given the increasing monetary value
that has become the first target for stakeholders in the industry. Understanding stakeholder industries is likely to be critical to
narrow the gap between developing and developed countries.

Thangjam Somchand Singh et al. (2015) examines a systematic study of material management, construction and construction
waste. This review demonstrates the need for change in the construction materials management process. Machinery management
guidelines will help improve the efficiency and profitability of construction. It showed that the reduction of construction materials
during the construction phase was beneficial for reducing the cost of the project.

Sawant Surendra B. et al. (2016) Construction waste management plays an important role in the cost of the project. It can estimate
the value of construction waste and its impact on the value of the project. And also noted that through the generation of
construction waste, the project not only increased costs, but a large amount of waste-generated land generated in the construction
industry, and had a negative impact on Environment. And it shows that by reducing construction waste, it can reduce the cost of
the project.

Noor zalikhasaadiet al. (2016) examines the current state of construction waste management in the Malaysian manufacturing
industry through literature. And the creativity introduced in Malaysia, the construction industry is not interested in building waste
management. And he concludes that government support is effective and ensures effective management and reduction of
construction waste. Otherwise, sustainability, resources and environmental issues will not be effectively mitigated and eliminated.

RoselineIkauet al. (2016), sets a better understanding of the sources, causes and factors influencing the waste from the destruction
of architecture with current practices to reduce waste at a construction site in Malaysia, which identifies several factors To the
construction of construction waste in Malaysia's construction sector and concluded that lack of knowledge lacked experience. Bad
checks incorrectly stock shortages causing damage to storage and processing. The conclusion is that construction in Malaysia
needs worldwide awareness of waste management.

Saheed O et al. (2016) shows that waste management practices in construction sites can be important for reducing waste. Like
strict construction waste management, drawing, design, there is no change to design in the construction process. And they
concluded that poor understanding, poor project documents and a lack of understanding of waste minimization would increase the
generation of construction waste. Managerial items must be familiar with minimizing waste that can reduce the generation of
waste in the area.

R. Shreena Shankari et al. (2017) emphasized the importance of waste management in the construction of the amount of waste
generated in the construction project, the method for minimizing waste, and the best practices in the construction industry to
reduce waste. Factors that can contribute to minimal cleaning materials have been identified. It needs to be focused even on lost
equipment, at least due to the slight improvement in every waste reduction that further creates the benefits of enhancing the overall
efficiency of this project and Improve the productivity of the construction industry with benefits to reduce costs. And provide a
plan for waste management, which reduces only material, improves waste, reduces profitability, and reduces the risk of spending.

Eyong O. P. et al. (2017) assessed the perception of construction workers, traders and craftsmen to create waste materials in the
construction industry to encourage better construction projects in Nigeria using a survey. And they have analyzed that standard
systems, designing bad machinery and stealing and destruction are the most important factors that affect the generation of waste
material during construction and proper techniques for managing and managing the site and stockpiling. Store sufficient material
and training. Employees and the management of waste management are measures to reduce waste from construction materials. It
is recommended that regional operators and craftsmen decide on any carrier management in the development of related waste
management plans, as they represent many of the relevant countries of the site.

IV.RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
A survey should be designed in accordance with the following stages:
 Stage one: Identify the topic and set some objectives.
 Stageitwo:iPilotiaiquestionnaireitoifindioutiwhatipeopleiknowiandiwhatitheyiseeiasitheiimportantiissues.i
 Stageithree:iListitheiareasiofiinformationineedediandirefineitheiobjectives.i
 Stageifour:iReviewitheiresponsesitoitheipilot.i
 Stageifive:iFinaliseitheiobjectives.i
 Stageisix:iWriteitheiquestionnaire.i
 Stageiseven:iRe-pilotitheiquestionnaire.i
 Stageieight:iFinaliseitheiquestionnaire.i
 Stageinine:iCodeitheiquestionnaire.

The survey design to be used in this instance is both the quantitative and qualitative methods.

SELECTING THE CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES AND AREA OF STUDY:

Collis and Hussey (2003:56), defined the population as "a definite set of people or the collection of items that were considered".
Collis and Huxus (2003: 155-160) define the model of population (target population), which later refers to a group of people or
other collection objects that are considered to be the object of the research. For this study, people are building a construction
company.

JKERA (Jammu and Kashmir Economic Reconstruction Agency) and JKPCC (Jammu and Kashmir Project Construction
Company) are both selected for this study. These are naturally small and medium enterprises, and will involve this study,
especially the idea of reducing prices through the use of waste disposal tools.

Srinagar, the first town in Kashmir, has been the site for the study. I was encouraged to focus on Srinagar as it was a big city in the
Kashmir context, and thus gave the opportunity to explore waste issues with many road projects.

METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION:

After carefully examining the matter, the natural data needed for general analysis and research conditions, it is clear that the best
way to collect enough data for this study is to combine quantitative and qualitative methods. This is because some of the data
needed are quality and can be obtained very well through interviews, while others are quantitative and can be obtained through
quizzes.
In addition, the data view is monitored by the body and can be collected through field control or direct surveillance. There are
many published newspapers, newspapers and other publications that can provide useful data for learning.
Considering this, I was convinced that it was useful to combine different approaches, both quantitative and quantitative methods,
in attempting to collect the data needed for the investigation. Thus, semi-structured interview questions on the website and
document analysis are used in the study using the strengths of these different approaches to improve the quality or validity of the
data.

V.ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

A. Waste detection and waste rate
Even though the two companies do not have a waste disposal mechanism, they seem to have the idea of the current waste.
JKERA estimates their waste rate is 10% while JKPCC estimates their waste is 9%. Both companies believe that the acceptable
waste rate is 5%.
WASTE RATE

JKPCC
35%

JKERA
65%

Figure 1.1: waste rate

Researchers are struggling with the reliability of these statistics, because the company's rating of their current waste rate is
different because there is no mechanism to find the waste. Lack of waste and lack of systematic evidence shows the accuracy of
the cost of most projects. It is recognized that a certain percentage of the cost is allocated for waste, but since no waste system is
available, the proposed distribution may be less than the actual waste produced or more than the waste generated.
B. Company Practices:
After carefully evaluating the answers to the questionnaire, the researchers followed up the similarity of the collected answers,
so the analysis would not show the comparison between the two companies.
 The forms waste take in these firms:

Excess Material

JKPCC
37%

JKERA
63%
 Poor
Causes Poor
Design
Specifica Planning
tion 20%
30%

Lack of
Cordinati
on
50%

Figure 1.2: Cause of excess material

infestation & spoilage of materials

JKERA JKPCC

27%

73%

Causes of infestation & spoilage

inadequate use excessive quantity

poor quality

28%

56%

16%

Figure 1.3: infestation &spoilage of material figure

C. Major categories of waste:
The respondents from the two companies acknowledged the following as the categories of waste they generate. The table (2)
indicates the aggregate percentages of the various waste categories.

Categories of Waste
40
30
20
10
0

Figure 1.4: categories of waste

From this diagram the waste categories that were mostly represented were concrete and masonry (33.3%), cardboard (8.3%),
mental (4.7%), wood (4.0%), brick (25.0%), plastering (4.0%), drywall (13%), flooring (4.0%) and tile (4.0%).

D. Waste Rate Detection:

All foremen noted that they did not have the mechanism to be used by the waste management. This statement confirms the
Operator's statement. Both companies can identify waste but can not measure the speed due to the lack of mechanisms.
Mechanism shortages are also caused by a lack of interest in the part of the company or due to a lack of knowledge about the
existence of a mechanism or system.
Table 2: waste rate detection.

Question : Does your company have a system of

determining the rate of waste

JKERA JKPCC

YES NO YES NO

- 10 - 10

E. Current Rate of Waste:

There is a huge difference in the percentage of current waste rates. However, the average rate is 6%. In addition, the masters are
different to the percentage of waste that their company considers acceptable. The average value is 5%. The difference is because
companies do not have official and acceptable amount of waste.

Table 3: current rate of waste

Variable Aggregate Average

What is the 14% 7.5%

company’s current
rate of waste?

F. Reuse Of Waste:
The majority (75%) of the divisions believe that the waste generated can be reused. A small number (25%) also disagree. Those
who disagree with the nature of the waste created can not be used for recycling. They note that most of these was mixed or
sometimes baked and cut into pieces. Approved respondents said reuse could be difficult, but possible.

REUSE OF WASTE

AGREE DISAGREE

25%

75%

Figure 1.5: Reuse of waste

G. Ways of Minimizing or Reducing Waste:

They listed the following ways of reducing waste;
 Table 4: Ways of Minimizing Waste

COMPANIES

SUGGESTIONS JKERA JKPCC

% %

 Buying
qualitative 37 63
materials
 Performing to
53 47
specification
Proper storage 60 40
Employ experienced
63 37
workers
Effective supervision 46 54

Discourage stealing 51 49

Sell the generated waste 45 55

Respondents were asked to grade a statement with a score to express the point of view. The score ranges from 1 to 5, where 1
mean strongly agree; 2 means agree; 3 undecided, 4 disagree and 5 means disagree strongly. An aggregate is found for each
perception for the purposes of analysis;

Table 5: perception 1

No. Variable Scale Tota

l

Constrtuction 1 2 3 4 5
Companies perform
well in the are of
construction
1 management

JKERA 2 2 2 2 2 10

JKPCC 1 2 2 4 1 10

Aggregate 3 5 5 6 3 20

Table 6: perception 2

No Variable Scale Tota

. l

Constrtuction 1 2 3 4 5
Companies have
waste management
2 strategies

JKERA 1 4 1 2 2 10

JKPCC - 5 1 3 1 10
 Aggregate 1 9 2 5 3 20

The table above shows that most respondents (9) agree that the construction company has a waste management strategy. This is
the result of the respondents (5) who disagree with the statement. The respondents' allegations are contradictory to the evidence
collected by their own companies. There is no waste management strategy in both companies. This may mean that workers know
about this from other companies with these strategies. This can be true especially when most workers work very briefly. Those
who disagree can reflect their position on the business.Table 7: perception 3

No Variable Scale Tot

. al

Cost of waste 1 2 3 4 5
doesn’t have
much effect on
project
3
JKERA 1 3 1 4 1 10

JKPCC - - - 6 4 10

Aggregate 1 3 1 10 5 20

Table 8: perception 4

No. Variable Scale Tot

al

Waste 1 2 3 4 5
Management is
important as other
functions of
construction
3
management

JKERA 4 3 1 1 1 10

JKPCC 6 1 1 1 1 10

Aggregate 1 3 1 10 5 20

A total of 14 respondents strongly agreed with the statement. Waste management is an important function. This results in some
insights into waste management of workers. The lack of practice by these companies is a product of hesitation, not ignorance.
Table 9: perception 5

No. Variable Scale Total

Attention of 1 2 3 4 5
Waste
Management in
actual practice is
3
not sufficient

JKERA 2 4 1 2 1 10

JKPCC 1 5 2 2 - 10
 Aggregate 3 9 3 4 1 20

Approximately 12 respondents agree with the statement. In theory, there is a belief and understanding of the importance of waste
management, but there is no hesitation in the management of waste. It seems to me that the lack of encouragement explains the
lack of practice.
VI.FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS
FINDINGS:
 There is no clear mechanism for waste detection.
 There are no system to measure waste
 There are no acceptable and approve rate of waste
 There is no plan and strategy for reducing waste
 Lack of implementation of waste management plan for construction sites
 No recycling and reuse policies
CONCLUSIONS:
 82% of the workforces agreed that waste management is worthwhile regardless of cost. However, the attitudes of
construction workers in the workplace show a lack of positive attitudes and behavior towards reducing the amount of
waste. It has been found that the lack of implementation of waste management principles is due to other priorities in pre
and post-construction, such as profit, time, cost, etc.
 A number of causes were identified as the major causes of most types of waste.
 Lack of government controls and their control are the reasons for not conforming to international best practices and
standards.

REFERENCES
[1] Andersson,iR.,iEriksson,iH.i&iTorstensson,iH.i2006.iSimilaritiesiandidifferencesibetweeniTQM,iSixiSigmaiandiLean.iTheiTQMiMagazine.iVol.i18(3
).i
[2] Barr,iS.i(2004).iWhatiweibuy,iwhatiweithrowiawayiandihowiweiuseiourivoice.iSustainableihouseholdiwasteimanagementiinitheiUK.iSustainableiDeve
lopment,i12,i32-44.i
[3] Beall,iJ.i(1997).iPolicyiarena:isocialicapitaliiniwastei-iaisolidiinvestment?iJournaliofiInternationaliDevelopment,i9(7),i951-961.i
[4] Blaikie,iN.i(2000).iDoingiSocialiResearch.iCambridge:iPolityiPress/Blackwelli
[5] Blake,iJ.i(1999).iOvercomingithei'Value-
ActioniGap'iinienvironmentalipolicy:itensionsibetweeninationalipolicyiandilocaliexperience.iLocaliEnvironment,i4(3),i257-278.i
[6] Bossink,iB.iA.iG.,iandiBrouwers,iH.iJ.iH.i(1996)i‘‘Constructioniwaste:iQuantificationiandisourceievaluation.’’iJ.iConstr.iEng.iManage.,i122(1),i55–
60.i
[7] Brooks,iK.iA.,iAdams,iC.,iandiDemsetz,iL.iA.i(1994).i‘‘Germanyiconstructioniandidemolitionidebrisirecyclingiinfrastructure:iwhatilessonsidoesiitihav
eiforitheiUSA?’’
[8] Sustainableiconstruction,iKibert,iC.iJ.,ied.,iProc.,i1stiConf.,iCIBiTaskiGroupi16,iGainesville,iFla.i647–656.
[9] Creswell,iJ.W.i(2003).iResearchiDesign:iQualitative,iQuantitativeiandiMixediMethodsiApproachesi(2ndiEdition).ThousandiOaks,iSagei
[10] CSIR.i(2004).i“AiReviewiofitheiSouthiAfricaniConstructioniIndustry”.iTheiBuiltiEnvironmentiProfessionsiReport.iParti3.i[Online].iAvailableifrom:iht
tp://www.buildnet.co.za/akani/2004/mar/pdfs/ci_review_p03.pdf.i[Accessedi2011-febi11]i
[11] Davies,iA.iR.i(2008).iTheiGeographiesiofiGarbageiGovernance:iInterventions,iInteractionsiandiOutcomes.iLondon,iAshgateiDelgado-
Hernandez,iD.J.i&iAspinwall,iE.M.i(2005).iImprovementitoolsiinitheiUKiconstructioniindustryi
[12] Denscombe,iM.i(2002).iGroundiRulesiforiGoodiResearch.iAi10iPointiGuideiforiSocialiResearchers.iBuckingham,iOpeniUniversityiPressi
[13] DeiSilva,iN.i&iVithana,iS.B.K.H.i(2008).iUseiofiPCielementsiforiwasteiminimizationiinitheiSriiLankaniconstructioniindustry.iStructurediSurvey.iVol.
i26i(3).i
[14] DtiiReviewiofisustainableiconstructioni(2006)iDurhamiCountyiCouncil,i2007.iSustainableiWasteiManagement.iAccessediat:ihttp://www.durham.gov.u
k/durhamcc/usp.nsf/pws/Waste+Management+-+Sustainablei+Wastei+Management.i04/01/2011i
[15] Edwards,iB.i(2005)iRoughiGuideitoisustainability,i2ndiEdition,iRIBIiEnterprises:iLondonipp34-35.i
[16] Ekanayake,iL.L.i&iOfori,iG.i(2000).iConstructionimaterialiwasteisourceievaluation,iProceedingsiofithei2ndiSouthiAfricaniConferenceioniSustainablei
DevelopmentiinitheiBuiltiEnvironment,iPretoria,iSouthiAfricai
[17] Ekanayake,iL.L.iandiOfori,iG.i(2004)iBuildingiwasteiassessmentsiscore:idesignibaseditool,iBuildingianditheiEnvironment,iVol.i39i(7)i851-
861,iavailableifrom:ihttp://www.engineeringvillage2.org/controller/servlet/Controller?CID=quickSearchCitatiioniFormati[assessedi16/2/2011]i
[18] Entwistle,iT.i(1999).iTowardsiSustainableiWasteiManagement:icentralisteering,ilocalienablingioriautopoiesis?iPolicyiandiPolitics,i27(3),i375-388i
[19] Envirowisei(2005).iSavingimoneyiandirawimaterialsibyireducingiwasteiiniconstruction:icaseistudiesifromiScotland,iGG500,iAvailableifrom;ihttp://ww
w.envirowise.gov.uk/page.aspx?o=194769i(Accessedi20/01/2011)i
[20] Ford,iH.i(1926).iTodayianditomorrow,iDoubleday,iGardeniCity,iN.Y.iForsythei
[21] Formoso,iC.T.,iIsatto,iE.L.i&iHirota,iE.H.i1999.iMethodiforiwasteicontroliinitheibuildingiindustry.iJournaliofitheiUniversityiofiCalifornia,iBerkeley,i
USA.i
[22] Forsyth,iT.i(2005).iBuildingideliberativeipublic-privateipartnershipsiforiwasteimanagementiiniAsia.iGeoforum,i36,i429-439.i
[23] Gbekor,iA.i(2003).iDomesticiWasteiManagement.iGhanaiEnvironmentaliProtectioniAgencyi(EPA)iNewsletteriVol.i47iNo.i5.iAccra,iGhanaiEPAi
[24] Gilpin,iA.i(1996).iDictionaryiofiEnvironmentiandiDevelopment.iChesteriandiNewiYork,iJohniWileyiandiSonsi
[25] Girling,iR.i(2005).iRubbish!iDirtioniOuriHandsiandiCrisisiAhead.iEdeniProjectiBooks.iLondon,iTransworldiPublishersiLtd.
[26] Holloway,iI.i1997.iBasiciConceptsiforiQualitativeiResearch.iOxford,iBlackwelliHongiKongiPolytechniciandiTheiHongiKongiConstructioniAssociatio
niLtd.i(1993).iReductioniofiConstructioniWaste:iFinaliReport,iHongiKongi
[27] Jessen,iM.i(2002).iZeroiWasteiServices.iAccessediat:ihttp://www.zerowaste.ca/articles.html.i21/03/2011i
[28] Johnson,iH.,i&iWilson,iG.i(2000).iInstitutionalisustainability:i'community'iandiwasteimanagementiiniZimbabwe.iFutures,i32,i301-316.i
[29] Jones,iG.iandiHollier,iG.i1977.iResources,iSocietyiandiEnvironmentaliManagement.iLondon,iPauliChapmaniPublishingiLtd.i
[30] Keys,iA.,iBaldwin,iA.i&iAustin,iS.i(1999).iDesigningitoiencourageiwasteiminimizationiinitheiConstructioniIndustry.iDepartmentiofiCiviliandiBuildin
giEngineering,iLoughboroughiUniversity,iUKi