2013 IEEE Business Engineering and Industrial Applications Colloquium (BEIAC)

Initial Findings on Perspectives of Local Contractors

on Waste Minimization Barriers and Incentives on
Construction Sites
1 2 3
Roseline Ikau , Rudy Tawie , Corina Joseph
I Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
2
Faculty of Civil Engineering
3
Faculty of Accountancy
UiTM Sarawak
94300 Kota Samarahan, Malaysia
roseI548@sarawak.uitm.edu.my
rudy@sarawak.uitm.edu.my
corina@sarawak.uitm.edu.my

Abstract-The construction industry is generally a high producer any value to the product from the point of view of the client"
of waste. The implementation of waste minimization strategies on [3]. In the US, construction waste is defined as waste resulting
construction sites can potentially make a significant contribution from construction, demolition, renovation, real estate
to the sustainability of construction industry. However, there are development, earthworks and land clearing operation [4].
several pitfalls to waste control on construction sites. This study
was a preliminary effort to identify relative importance of factors Disposing waste in landfill sites is widely considered to
influencing waste minimization barriers and incentives on have adverse effects on the environment and public health [5].
construction sites in Kuching, Sarawak. Questionnaires were The industry is under increasing pressure to adopt effective
distributed to 50 practitioners who worked for contractors working practices at all stages of construction to initiate the
engaged in various types of construction projects in Kuching, reduction of construction waste. The construction industry in
Malaysia. The list of contractors was obtained from the CIDB Malaysia is contributing sector in term of the consumption of
directory. Survey responses were analysed using the Statistical natural resources and waste production [6]. Reducing waste
Package for Social Science (SPSS). From this study, useful would thus have a major impact on improving the
information concerning barriers to waste minimization and environmental performance of the built environment.
incentives practices from the perspectives of local contractors in
Kuching City was obtained. The results obtained also provided The aim of this preliminary study is to identify relative
some insights for further work. importance of factors influencing waste minimization barriers
and incentives on construction sites in Kuching, Sarawak.
Keywords-waste minimization; barriers; incentives Kuching is the capital and most populous city of the East
Malaysian state of Sarawak, Malaysia. The city has an
I. INTRODUCTION
estimated population of 650,000 [7]. In recent years, the
Waste is not always preventable in the construction number of construction projects has increased dramatically due
industry. Waste occurs throughout the construction process to demands and need for residential houses, schools, private
irrespective of size, type, method and value of contract and commercial buildings and civil infrastructure projects like
involved in the project. In Malaysia, construction waste is one roads and bridges. In addition, house buyers can apply for
of the single largest waste stream and yet despite a number of longer housing loans up to 70 years of age from the Malaysian
government policy initiatives to address this issue, sustainable banks and financial supports have been promised by the federal
h
resource and waste management on site remains a low priority government in the 10t Malaysian Plan to build better roads,
for the majority of the contractors [1]. Wastes are generally structures and facilities for the people in Sarawak.
understood as the materials that were not completely consumed
Consequently, the generation of wastes from construction
for its intended use.
activities is expected to increase significantly in the future if
In the construction industry, this definition is still vague the current plans become reality. Therefore, the waste
because for example, waste may occur due to bad weather that minimization is an important area of concern in the
caused damage to materials or inefficiencies in using raw implementation of the construction waste management in the
materials on site during construction processes which result in construction industry of Malaysia. Further, waste minimization
wastages. Wastages on construction site could also be due to has been included as one of the policy goals in the 8th
design variations, mishandling, inappropriate storage and Malaysian Plan (2001 - 2005).
defective works [2]. Waste is defmed as "any losses produced
Three main waste minimization strategies used in
by activities that generate direct or indirect costs but do not add
construction projects were identified from the literature. These

978-1-4673-5968-9/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE 506

were: (1) avoiding waste; (2) re-using materials; and (3) choice of materials selected for the development were chosen
recycling waste. Minimizing waste on construction project sites with minimization of waste in mind. This included waste from
refers to any practice or process that avoids, eliminates or extraction, processing, transport and building, as well as fmal
minimizes waste at source. Avoiding waste is also referred to disposal or recycling. Secondly, the actual process of
as minimization of waste at source. Reusing and recycling construction was monitored to assess the main areas where
waste refers to the re-using and recycling of waste materials, waste arose and to identify ways in which this waste could be
thereby reducing the volume of waste material to be disposed reduced. [5].This is indicates a need for full monitoring of
of and discharged into the environment [8]. Another defmition waste minimization procedure in the construction process.
of waste minimization is "the reduction of waste at source, by
Interviews were carried out with practtioners to gauge
understanding and changing processes to reduce and prevent
commitment toward Site Waste Management Plan (SWMPs)
waste" [9].
[15]. The interviewees felt that the main factors preventing
II. LITERATURE REVIEW contractors from using SWMPs in Malaysia are the lack of
promotion and encouragement by the Government and CIDB,
This section reviews past studies related to waste
and the perception that appropriate solid waste management
minimization incentives and barriers. A unique waste reduction
practices reduce contractors' profits. 57 per cent of contractors
strategy i.e. an incentive reward program (IRP) was designed
stated the perceived cost implications of SWMPs as the main
to encourage construction workers to reduce waste by
reason why they would not implement one, whereas 43 per
rewarding them based on the amounts and values of the
cent identified the lack of available information and guidance,
materials they saved [lO]. Bar coding technique was used to
incentives and practical tools about SWMPs as the main
facilitate easy data recording and transfer. It was found that
barrier.
skills, enthusiasm and collectivism were the main factors
affecting the amount of waste produced by the workers. The Many new and innovative management and procurement
fmdings show that there is a need to improve the way of systems in construction are introduced such as partnering, joint
managing wastes by encouraging and educating workers to venture, alliances, supply chain management, enterprise
reduce avoidable wastes. As claimed by [11], workforce can resource planning (ERP), just in time (JIT), and total quality
avoid waste by participating actively in waste management management (TQM) to meet challenges in relation to waste
process. management in construction. However, these construction
management and procurement systems are meaningless
There are several commonly cited impediments to waste
without coordination, a vital managerial principle and activity,
minimization in general construction projects. Among them
which provide the best cooperation among team members [16].
are: available space and time restrictions that have been shown
to limit on site sorting of the waste stream; work practices and III. METHODOLOGY
attitudes that may militate against reuse and recycling,
Questionnaires were randomly distributed to 50 contractors
management and building project team relationship, role of
from different companies currently involved in various on­
supply chain, transfer of information, market, role of waste
going construction projects for public or private use. The list
management companies, funds, and, small quantities of a
of contractors was obtained from the Construction Industry
recyclable material that may be uneconomic to sort and
Board (CIDB) directory (www.cidb.gov.my). The respondents
transport to a recycling facility [11] [12] [13]. Barriers are
who worked for the contractors were chosen for having the
divided into three types: attitudinal, industrial and institutional
knowledge of the construction processes on site and were
[14]. Attitudinal barriers (adversarial attitudes, lack of ethics
familiar with all kinds of construction wastes.
and morality, focus on projects instead of processes and a
short-term focus) and industrial barriers (traditional The previous studies were used as a guide to develop the
organization of the construction process, conservative industry questionnaire in this study [2], [17]. To obtain some
culture, industry structure and traditional production processes) information (A) about the respondents, they were asked to state
are perceived to be important, whereas institutional barriers their education level and experience; type of company
(standard contracts, laws and traditional procurement organization and class; and type of construction project they
procedures) are not perceived to be critical [14]. were currently involved in. Sections B and C were included to
assess the respondents' perception on the importance of waste
Hence, it is asserted that the impediments could be further
minimization barriers and incentives respectively. In the above,
categorised into: controllable and uncontrollable factors. The
capital letters in the brackets denote sections in the
controllable factors include the availability of space, time
questionnaire. For questions in sections B and C, relative
management and amount of recycled materials used in the
importance of each factor (i n) can be calculated by the ratio
construction project which are also categorized under
=

of summation of weight value (SWV) and the total number of

institutional barriers. Meanwhile, uncontrollable factor includes
response to factor i [2]:
workers' behaviour towards waste management activity, which
is categorized as attitudinal barrier. Hence, the stringent swv = �X/Yi (1)
monitoring is required from the top management to ensure the
discontinuation of unpleasant working attitudes among workers Relative index (RJ) = SWV / �Xi (2)
in relation to the waste minimization practices.
where n is total number of factors evaluated in the question; Y
Waste minimisation element deployed comprises two is rating value given by the respondents using a five-point
distinct stages. Firstly, the construction method and the detailed

507
Likert scale as shown in Table I; X, is number of response to Majority (78.95%) of the respondents worked for private
rating y for item i and y, is value of rating corresponding to the limited companies. 65.79% of the construction companies were
factor i evaluated. In equation 2, RI can be used to show degree Class A licensed contractors. Only 1 respondent or 2.63%
of importance (DOl) of the factors. The higher the DOl, the completed minimum certificate of technical education while
mean RI to 5 and the highest value corresponding to the about 80% with at least first degree. The percentage of
categorized factor means the factor has the highest degree of respondents with less than 5 years of experience in the
importance among the other factors. construction industry was about 20%, while more than half of
the respondents had above 10 years of experience. The
TABLE I. RATING USED IN THE QUESTIONNAIRE respondents were involved in various on-going construction
projects such as residential houses (10.53%), commercial
Rating Li kert Scale buildings (18.42%), schools (2.63%) and infrastructures
I Not important (NI)
(15.79%).
2 Fairly important (F1)
3 Important (I) A. Waste Minimization Barriers
4 More important (MI)
5 Very important (VI) Table III shows that the highest relative important index for
waste minimization barriers is 3.53. i.e waste accepted as
IV. RESULTS AND FINDINGS inevitable. This finding is supported by [11], whereby attitude
of workers was regarded as one of the impediments towards
Only 38 out of the 50 questionnaires distributed to the
effective waste management practice. This is crucial because
selected contractors were analysed in this study because the
the top management need to instill the best practices in the
rest were rejected due to inconsistency and errors observed in
waste minimization activity throughout the construction
the questionnaires analysed. All data from the survey were
process. Table III also indicates that the waste minimization
tabulated and analysed using Statistical Package for Social
index for the lack of interest from the client is 3.26. The least
Science (SPSS) Version 20.0. Table II shows the profile of the
importance waste minimization barrier index perceived by
respondents.
respondents was contributed by poorly defined individual' s
responsibilities i.e. 3.02. This result differs from [10] that
TABLE II. PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
indicated lack of interest from client as the most important
Details Frequency 0/0
waste minimization barrier which was followed by the
Type of business organisation
perception on waste as inevitable.
Public company 2 5.26
Private limited company 30 78.95
TABLE Ill. PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
Partnership 6 15.79
Total 38 100.00 VI MI I FI NI
Factors (5) (4) (3) (2) (1) SWV RI
Category of company Waste accepted as
Class A 25 65.79 inevitable 8 8 18 4 0 134 3.53
Class B 9 23.68 Lack of interest from
Class E I 2.63 clients 10 4 14 6 4 124 3.26
Class F 3 7.89
Total 38 100.00 Lack of training 4 II 16 4 3 123 3.24
Poorly defined
Level of education individual 4 9 19 16 0 145 3.02
Post graduate 13 34.21 responsibilities
Degree 18 47.37
Diploma 6 15.79
Certificate I 2.63 B. Waste Minimization Incentives
Total 38 100.00 Table IV shows that training has the highest index value i.e.
3.58. This signifies that workers perceived training as a driver
Experience in construction industry
for improving knowledge in the waste minimization activity.
More than 25 years 8 21.05
This is supported by [17] that lack of knowledge was the major
21-25 years 8 21.05
16-20 years 2 5.26 drawback in the waste management practice in the Northern
11-15 years 6 15.79 Region of Malaysia. As well, this could explain the result in
6-10 years 6 15.79 Table III earlier on i.e. one reason for not supporting the waste
Less than 5 years 8 21.05 minimization practice is due to the ambiguity as a result of lack
Total 38 100.00 of training provided by the top management. Hence, training
plays an important role in motivating the workers to comply
Type of on-going project
with the waste minimization practices on construction sites.
Private 17 44.74
Residential 4 10.53 Meanwhile, waste management policy in workplace and
Commercial 7 18.42 financial reward has relative important index value of 3.55 and
School I 2.63
3.37 respectively. Finally, legislations as waste minimization
Infrastructure 6 15.79
incentive have a relative important index value of 3.32. The
Other 3 7.89
Total 38 100.00 findings from this study differ from [16] that identified

508
legislation and financial rewards as the two key drivers for ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
waste minimization incentives.
This research was supported by the Excellent Fund grant (600-
TABLE IV. RELATIVE IMPORTANCE INDEX OF CAUSE OF RMU/DANA 5/3 (6/2012)) received from Universiti Teknologi
WASTE MINIMIZATION INCENTIVES
MARA (UiTM) through the Research Management Unit,
VI MI I FI Nt UiTM Sarawak. The authors are very grateful to all
Factors (5) (4) (3) (2) (1) SWV RI
respondents for their helpful cooperation in completing the

Training 9 14 6 8 1 136 3.58 questionnaires.

Waste management
policy in place REFERENCES
10 13 6 6 3 135 3.55 [1] For papers published in translation journals, please give the English
citation first, followed by the original foreign-language citation [6]. R.A.
Financial rewards 5 11 15 7 0 128 3.37 Begum, C. Siwai, J.J.Pereira and AH.Jaafar, "Attitude and behavioral
factors in the construction industry of Malaysia", Resources,
Legislations 12 5 10 5 6 126 3.32 Conservation and Recycling, vol. 53, pp. 321-328, 2009.
[2] AB. Wahab, and AF. Lawai" "An evaluation of waste control measures
in construction industry in Nigeria". African Journal of Environmental
V. CONCLUSION AND FURTHER WORK Science and Technology, vol. 5(3), pp. 246-254, 2011.
[3] C.T Formoso, E.L Isatto, and E.H. Hirota, "Method for waste Control in
From this preliminary study, a better understanding of the the Building Industry". IGLC-7 proceedings, 325-33 4, 1999.
waste minimization barriers and incentives on construction [4] United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA)
sites in Kuching, Sarawak was obtained. The most important .Characterization of building-related construction and demolition debris
waste minimization barrier perceived by survey respondents in the United States, report no. EPA530-R-98-010, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division Office
was the perception of waste as inevitable. On the other hand,
of Solid Waste, 1998.
the most important waste minimization incentive perceived by
[5] Wren & Bell, "Waste Minimization in Construction: Lower London
respondents was training provided by top management. The Road Sustainable Housing Project", 1-6 November, 2000.
findings from the study suggests that the top management [6] N.I.Boehm, 'Taking Action on Construction Waste: An analysis of
should play a more proactive role in instilling values / culture construction waste minimisation practices and their barriers"2nd People
that the construction waste should be minimized and not and Buildings proceedings, /-6 September 20/2.
[7] Borneo Post .Chinese popUlation drops. Retrieved 27 Sept 2012 from
acceptance as an acceptable norm in the construction project. A
Borneo Post Online:
penalty or punishment should be imposed if the waste occurred http://www.theborneopost.com/2012/04/12/chinese-population-drops/
achieve certain acceptable rate or percentage. As well, training [8] A A Famran, and G.Caban, ."Minimizing Waste on Construction
is important to ensure that workers are more committed Project Sites." Engineering, Construction and Architectural
towards their responsibilities in mlmmlzmg waste on Management. vol. 5(2), pp. 182-188, 1998.
[9] Environment Agency. Waste Minimization Good Practice Guide -
construction sites. Inadequate training may result in declining
Revised. The Environment Agency, Lincoln United Kingdom, 2001.
in staff morale and productivity, which in turn, lead to [10] Li H. Chen., and C. T. C Wong. "An application of bar-code system for
competitive disadvantage in the long run. reducing construction wastes", Automation in Construction, vol. 11, pp.
521-533, 2002.
Further work will be conducted to document causes and [11] M. Hardie, G. Miller and S. Khan, "Waste Minimisation in Office
underlying reasons for findings gathered from this preliminary Refurbishment Projects: An Australian Perspective.". The Open Waste
study via interviews. As well, interviews will be conducted to Management Journal, vo. 4, pp. 21-27, 2011.
discuss with key practitioners in the industry on practical waste [12] R. Greenwood, "Barriers in Minimising Construction Waste". Welsh
School of Architecture, Cardiff University, UK
minimization measures that could be employed to eliminate or
[13] Defra, "Government review of waste policy in England, London :
reduce construction wastes in a sustainable way. Future
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2011.
research would also employ theoretical framework, for [14] A.VennstrOm & P.E. Eriksson "Client perceived barriers to change of
example, the institutional theory to explain the behaviours of the construction process" Construction Innovation: Information,
contractors towards waste minimization barriers and incentives Process, Management, Vol. 10 Iss: 2 pp. 126-137,2010

in the construction industry. The findings from the research [15] E. Papargyropoulou, C. Preece, R. Padfield, and AA Abdullah.
"Sustainable Construction Waste Management in Malaysia: A
would raise awareness of all parties in Malaysia of the need to
Contractor's Perspective", a paper prsented at Management and
adopt sustainable waste control practices in line with Innovation for a Sustainable Built Environment, 20 - 23 June,
international standards. Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2011.
[16] T.K.Hai, AM.Yusof, S.lsmail and L.F.We."Conceptual Study of Key
Barriers in Construction Project Coordination" IBIMA Journal of
Organizational Management Studie,s Vol. 2012, Article ID 795679, 14
pages,2012
[17] S.H.Hassan, N.Ahzahar, M.A.Fauzi and lEman. "Waste Management
Issues in the Northern Region of Malaysia". Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, vol. 42, pp. 175 -181, 2012.

509