Received: 23 June 2020 Revised: 13 July 2020 Accepted: 26 July 2020

DOI: 10.1002/sd.2119

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Promoting effective construction and demolition waste

management towards sustainable development: A case study
of Hong Kong

Zezhou Wu1,2 | Ann T.W. Yu3 | Chi Sun Poon4

1
Sino-Australia Joint Research Centre in BIM
and Smart Construction, Shenzhen University, Abstract
Shenzhen, China Construction and demolition (C&D) waste accounts for a large proportion of solid
2
Key Laboratory of Coastal Urban Resilient
waste, thus effective C&D waste management is essential for promoting sustainable
Infrastructures (MOE), Shenzhen University,
Shenzhen, China development. In Hong Kong, the government has promulgated a series of policies to
3
Department of Building and Real Estate, The encourage related stakeholders to implement effective C&D waste management.
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon,
Hong Kong However, the overall status remains not satisfactory and has a great potential for fur-
4
Department of Civil and Environmental ther improvement. In this circumstance, the aim of this study is proposing solutions
Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic
for further improvement of effective C&D waste management in Hong Kong. Based
University, Kowloon, Hong Kong
on a comprehensive content analysis of seven selected countries and two rounds of
Correspondence
focus group meetings with local experienced professionals, prevailing C&D waste
Chi Sun Poon, Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong management policies and successful practices were identified and their feasibility of
Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
implementation in Hong Kong was discussed. Results revealed that non-inert waste
Email: cecspoon@polyu.edu.hk
recycling is a key for improving the C&D waste management in Hong Kong to a
Funding information
higher level. A “3R + I” principle was suggested to be implemented in Hong Kong
Construction Industry Council of Hong Kong;
Foundation for Basic and Applied Basic instead of the currently employed “3R” principle. Four solutions, namely promulga-
Research of Guangdong Province, Grant/
tion of more specialized regulations, adoption of advanced recycling technologies,
Award Number: 2019A1515110247; Research
Start-up Funding of SZU; The Hong Kong development of mature recycling markets, and implementation of high landfilling
Polytechnic University (Project of Strategic
costs, were identified as the key directions for future improvement of C&D waste
Importance) and G-YBQD
management in Hong Kong. The identified C&D waste management policies and the
research methods used in this study can be employed in other countries or regions
which are at different C&D waste management levels and economic status to form
their own applicable policy framework.

KEYWORDS

construction and demolition waste management, environmental policy, non-inert waste,

sustainable development

1 | I N T RO DU CT I O N utilized as secondary resources (Cardoso, Silva, Brito, & Dhir, 2016;

As a by-product of construction activities, construction and demolition
(C&D) waste has a great potential to make contributions to the environ-
mental pollution (Bakshan, Srour, Chehab, El-Fadel, & Karaziwan, 2017;
Jin, Yuan, & Chen, 2019; Lu, 2019; Yuan, 2017; Yuan & Shen, 2011).
Nevertheless, if C&D waste receives appropriate treatment, it can be
Chen, Hua, & Liu, 2019; Hossain & Poon, 2018; Park & Tucker, 2017).
Under this background, establishing an effective C&D waste manage-
ment system has become a globally important research topic, which
attracts the interests of not only academia but also local government.
Governmental policies can guide producers' waste management
behavior (Bao, Lu, Chi, Yuan, & Hao, 2019; Halkos & Petrou, 2018;

Sustainable Development. 2020;1–12. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/sd © 2020 ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1
2 WU ET AL.

Liu, Gong, Wang, Lai, & Zhu, 2019; McCauley, 2015; Wei, Li, Liu, &
Wu, 2019; Yuan & Yang, 2020; Zhang et al., 2019). To promote C&D
waste management, relevant policies have been implemented in many
countries (Ajayi & Oyedele, 2018; Bao & Lu, 2020; Chen & Lu, 2017;
Di Maria, Eyckmans, & Van Acker, 2018; Tam & Lu, 2016; Wang, Wu,
Tam, & Zuo, 2019; Wu et al., 2020; Wu, Zuo, Yuan, Zillante, &
Wang, 2020). In literature, C&D waste management policies in differ-
ent countries or regions have been studied. Calvo, Varela-Candamio,
and Novo-Corti (2014) revealed the driving C&D waste management
policies in Spain were based on economic incentives and tax penalties.
Yuan and Wang (2014) investigated the waste disposal charging pol-
icy in Shenzhen. Seror, Hareli, and Portnov (2014) evaluated the
effectiveness of vehicle impoundment policy in Israel. Arm et al. (2016)
assessed the effect of European Recovery Target on C&D waste man-
agement. Ajayi and Oyedele (2017) explored the policy directions for
C&D waste minimization in the UK. Liu, Teng, Jiang, and Gong (2018)
suggested several policy proposals for promoting C&D waste reuse
and recycling in Guangzhou. Besides, a number of studies claimed the
important role of government in effective C&D waste management
(Duan, Li, & Liu, 2017; Liu, Nie, & Yuan, 2020; Udawatta et al., 2018;
Wu, Zuo, Zillante, Wang, & Yuan, 2019).
In Hong Kong, C&D waste management has been emphasized by
the local government for several decades (Wu, Yu, Wang, Wei, &
Huo, 2019). To increase the recycling rate of C&D waste, the Environ-
mental Protection Department (EPD) divided C&D waste into two
categories: inert waste and non-inert waste. The inert C&D waste
(e.g., concrete, earth) refers to the waste streams that are inactive in
chemical reactions, while the non-inert substances include bamboo,
timber, packaging waste, etc. (EPD, 2015). The non-inert waste is
supposed to be not suitable for land reclamation, thus it is disposed
of at landfills. A series of policies have been implemented by different
governmental departments. In 1980, the Waste Disposal Ordinance
was proposed to guide an environmental manner of waste disposal.
In 2005, a Construction Waste Disposal Charging Scheme was
launched to encourage the reduction and recycling of C&D waste. It
was revealed that the charging scheme was effective in the early
years of its implementation, however, its effect was found to be not
so satisfactory after several years' implementation because construc-
tion practitioners had got used to the charging standards (Hao,
Hills, & Tam, 2008; Poon, Yu, Wong, & Yip, 2013; Yu, Poon, Wong,
Yip, & Jaillon, 2013). Thus, the charging scheme was further
improved by increasing the charging standards (e.g., the landfill dis-
posal fee was increased from 125 Hong Kong Dollars to 200 Hong
Kong Dollars for each ton of C&D waste) (EPD, 2017). In addition,
other policies were also employed by the Hong Kong government to
improve C&D waste management, such as waste management plan,
trip ticket system, pilot recycling plant. (Chen, Lu, Xue, & Xu, 2018;
Lu & Tam, 2013).
contributor (i.e., 27%) (EPD, 2019). In addition, the reused or recycled
C&D waste was mainly inert materials, thus it is of great significance
to increase the reuse and recycling rates of non-inert C&D waste so
as to improve C&D waste management in Hong Kong to a higher
level.
The aim of this study is to propose potential solutions, which can
facilitate the promotion of C&D waste management in Hong Kong.
The next section introduces the research methods used in this study.
This is followed by presenting the research findings regarding C&D
waste management situations in the selected countries and suggested
solutions. Furthermore, a policy framework and discussions are made
in relation to the derived outcomes. Finally, this paper ends with a
conclusion.
2 | RE SE AR C H ME T H OD S
The research methods used in this study involved two rounds of focus
group meetings with experienced professionals from different parties
and a comprehensive content analysis of the official websites of the
selected countries.
In the first round of focus group meeting, the invited participants
included industrial practitioners, academia scholars and government
officers, as shown Table 1. The industrial practitioners involved repre-
sentatives from developers, contractors and designers, while the
invited government officers were from the Environmental Protection
Department (EPD), which is responsible for non-inert C&D waste
management, the Civil Engineering and Development Department
(CEDD), which is responsible for inert C&D waste management, and
the Development Bureau (DB), which is responsible for promulgating
C&D waste management policies. All the participants had rich experi-
ences in C&D waste management. A brainstorming session was con-
ducted to discuss the current situations and problems of C&D waste
management in Hong Kong and to identify the countries, which are
regarded having good performance in C&D waste management. After
the brainstorming session, it came into a consensus that the level of
TABLE 1 Participants of the focus group meeting
Number of
Category Affiliation participants
Industrial Fraser Construction Co., Ltd. 1
practitioner Hong Kong Construction 2
Industry Council
Hong Kong Green Building 1
Council
Academia The Hong Kong Polytechnic 3
scholar University

Though great efforts have been paid on C&D waste management Government Environmental Protection 1
officer Department
and the reuse/recycling rate of C&D waste has reached 92% in 2017,
Hong Kong is still facing a serious situation of running out of landfill Civil Engineering and 1
Development Department
space (EPD, 2019). Each day, a total of 15,516 tons of solid waste was
Development Bureau 1
discharged at landfills, and C&D waste was regarded as a main
WU ET AL. 3

C&D waste management in Hong Kong still has a great potential for
improvement, and increasing the recycling rate of non-inert waste is a
key for future improvement. In addition, seven developed countries
which may exert insightful inspirations to Hong Kong were deter-
mined, namely United States, Sweden, the Netherlands, Japan, Singa-
pore, Korea, and Australia.
After the first round of focus group meeting, the governmental
official websites (see Table 2) of these selected countries were
thoroughly investigated to identify relevant policies and successful
practices concerning C&D waste management. Through the compre-
hensive content analysis, it was found that C&D waste management
is generally in charged by the government departments relating to
environmental protection; however, the construction-related govern-
ment departments could also play an important role. For example, the
Building and Construction Authority of Singapore also paid extensive
attentions to C&D waste management. Based on the thorough inves-
tigations, the successful experiences in the selected countries were
identified and summarized, a comparison was further made between
the selected countries and Hong Kong in terms of C&D waste man-
agement practices.
Based on the outcomes derived from the content analysis,
another round of focus group meeting was held with the same partici-
pants of the first round to discuss the identified experiences. The
potential solutions to Hong Kong were suggested and their possibili-
ties of implementation were discussed.
3 | RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
3.1 | Overview of C&D waste management in
selected countries
The C&D waste management situations of the selected countries
were examined by comprehensively investigating the governmental
official websites. The C&D waste generation and recycling situations,
relevant policies and practices were investigated.
TABLE 2 Official websites of C&D waste management
Region Official data source Website
3.1.1 | United States
In the United States, C&D waste management is supervised by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Specifically, a website is
designed for C&D waste management. According to the definition
given by EPA, C&D waste is “generated when new building and civil-
engineering structures are built and when existing buildings and civil-
engineering structures are renovated or demolished” (EPA, 2018c).
Examples of C&D waste include concrete, wood, asphalt, gypsum,
metals, bricks, glass, plastics, salvaged building components, trees,
stumps, earth, and rocks. In the most recent report, it was stated that
the generated C&D debris was 548 million tons in 2015, of which
demolition waste accounted for more than 90% EPA (2018a).
There is a specific website designed for sustainable management
of C&D waste on the official website of EPA; however, there is no
regulation for C&D waste management at the national level. Relevant
regulations are different from state to state due to the varying geo-
graphic and economic development situations. Because of the same
reasons, the attentions paid on C&D waste management vary
between different states. For example, Massachusetts has published
two specific reports for C&D waste management while Louisiana
has none.
The EPA suggested four principles for C&D waste minimization:
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, and Rebuy (EPA, 2018c). Some technical strat-
egies were recommended, such as source reduction and deconstruc-
tion. Source reduction is recommended because it can prevent waste
before it is actually generated. Particular suggestions include preserv-
ing existing buildings rather than constructing new ones, designing
new buildings for adaptability to prolong their useful lives, etc. To facil-
itate C&D reduction waste through proper design, several innovative
pilot projects were provided on the EPA official website (EPA, 2018b).
Due to the large contribution of demolition activities to waste
generation, deconstruction is highly recommended. Two manuals have
been published for guiding the implementation of deconstruction,
such as “Design for Deconstruction Manual” (EPA, 2015) and “Resi-
dential Deconstruction Manual” (EPA, 2005). Some commonly reused
C&D materials and applications during the deconstruction process
were suggested. For example, reusing scrap wood as mulch or ground-
cover (EPA, 2018c).
In the situation that “Reduce” and “Reuse” principles cannot be

United Environmental Protection www.epa.gov

implemented, the EPA suggested “Recycle” and “Rebuy” principles. For
States Agency single family homes, a report was published to indicate how to recover
Sweden European Commission ec.europa.eu C&D materials (EPA, 2013). The markets for buying and selling reus-

Netherlands European Commission ec.europa.eu able and recyclable materials are mature in the United States. Both
physical warehouses and virtual websites that connecting buyers and
Japan Ministry of the Environment www.env.go.jp
sellers can be utilized for C&D waste trades. For example, a website
Singapore National Environmental Agency www.nea.gov.sg
Building & Construction www.bca.gov.sg has been established for seeking proper recyclers (CDRA, 2016).
Authority
South Ministry of Environment www.me.go.kr
Korea 3.1.2 | Sweden
Australia Department of the www.
Environment and Energy environment. Exact definition and amount of C&D waste was not found on the gov-
gov.au
ernmental websites of Sweden; however, relevant information could
4 WU ET AL.
be found on the official website of the European Commission (EC).
According to the EC, the amount of C&D waste generated in 2012
was 7.7 million tons, which was decreased by 18% compared to the
generation in 2010 (9.4 million tons) (EC, 2015a).
Waste sorting is implemented well in Sweden. As the Ordinance
on Landfilling of Waste required, combustible waste fractions are
prohibited to be disposed of at landfills. Meanwhile, the Building Code
requires an inventory of hazardous waste before buildings can be
demolished. These requirements promoted the sorting of C&D waste
in Sweden.
In addition to regulation requirements, there are also non-
legislative initiatives (e.g., high charge of landfilling, implementation of
BREEAM, pre-demolition audits). High charge of landfilling is regarded
an effective solution for improving waste recycling. As Ger-
shman (2013) estimated, the charge for landfilling was roughly US$
193 per ton in Sweden, thus landfilling is the most expensive option
compared with other alternatives.
3.1.3 | The Netherlands
In the Netherlands, similar with Sweden, C&D waste amount informa-
tion could not be found on the national governmental websites; how-
ever, this information was available on the EC's official websites.
According to the report published by the EC, a total of 25.71 million
tons of C&D waste were generated in the Netherlands, of which 93%
was recovered (EC, 2015b).
In the Netherlands, the Environmental Protection Act was carried
out and a national waste management plan was established. It was
stipulated that C&D waste sorting is the minimum requirement for
processing; waste cannot be landfilled there is another way for waste
processing. In addition to the regulations, the high charge of waste
disposal at landfills can also facilitate C&D waste sorting. As
EC (2015b) reported, the renting fee of a C&D waste container was
US$ 376. In this circumstance, source sorting is preferred by the con-
tractors with the aim of reducing logistics cost.
The markets for reusing and recycling C&D waste are well
established in the Netherlands. Project clients and contractors are not
reluctant to use recycled materials because there are quality labels to
ensure the quality of recycled materials. In addition, using of recycled
materials can facilitate in obtaining green building certificates
(EC, 2015b).
3.1.4 | Japan
In Japan, the Japanese Ministry of the Environment (JME) is responsi-
ble for supervising C&D waste management. Similar with Sweden and
the Netherlands, the exact C&D waste definition could not be found
as well. However, there was a report stating the status of waste man-
agement in Japan. It was reported that the C&D waste recycling rate
was 93.8%, while the recycling rates of asphalt-concrete blocks and
concrete blocks were 98.4 and 97.3%, respectively (JME, 2014).
The Japan Ministry of the Environment (JME) attributed the high
recycling rate of C&D waste to the implementation of the “Construc-
tion Material Recycling Act” which was enacted in May 2000
(JME, 2014). The law specified the roles of stakeholders for C&D
waste management in details: contractors are required to sort and
recycle demolition waste, and the relevant costs must be prescribed in
the contract agreement. A guideline for the flow of sorting and
recycling waste was suggested in the law.
Recycling technologies are highly emphasized by the government.
JME (2016) lists a total of 32 technologies for construction related
waste, such as “3R promotion and solid waste management consulting
and engineering technology”, “Mixed waste recycling system
(Construction mixed waste residue sorting system)”, “Crushing of
waste”, and so forth. The technical information of each listed technol-
ogy is presented in a specific sheet, explaining the technology from
the aspects of technology type, description, classification, and so
forth. The information of companies which are relevant to the listed
technologies is also given on the JME official website (JME, 2016).
3.1.5 | Singapore
In Singapore, both Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and
National Environment Agency (NEA) provide information for C&D
waste management. As early as 2008, the BCA published a report on
using of recycled materials. In this report, C&D waste was defined as
“the materials resulting from construction, alteration or demolition of
buildings and other structures” (BCA, 2008). The majority of C&D
waste examples given by the BCA overlapped the ones provided by
the EPA in the United States; however, it was noted that the earth
excavated during foundation work is not included in C&D waste in
Singapore. The C&D waste generation and recycling information was
provided by the NEA. In a recent report, it was stated that the total
generation of construction debris was 1,609,300 tons of which
1,599,900 tons was recycled in 2017, exceeding 99% of the total
amount (NEA, 2018). Besides the high recycling rate, it should also be
noted that steel re-bars, wood and glass wastes were excluded from
counting of construction debris; as they were accounted under sepa-
rate item headings called “Ferrous Metals”, “Wood,” and “Glass,”
respectively.
The recycling rate of C&D waste in Singapore is very high, how-
ever, little information of successful experiences can be found from
the governmental official website. Limited information can be found
on the National Environmental Agency (NEA) website for describing
the recycling process of C&D waste. It is specified that aggregates
derived from crushed concrete can be recycled for producing recycled
aggregates for structural and non-structural applications (NEA, 2016a).
Though C&D waste management is not specifically focused on
the NEA website, the management of general waste is introduced. It
is stated that illegal dumping of any kind of waste is a serious offence
in Singapore; contracts for reporting illegal dumping are provided on
the NEA website (NEA, 2016b). Furthermore, the NEA provides a
“General Waste Collection System” for waste recycling. In the system,
WU ET AL.
C&D waste is categorized into “Type A" (i.e., inorganic waste), which
also includes excavated earth, discarded furniture, appliances. A high
solid waste disposal fee of US$ 57/ton is imposed in order to increase
the waste recycling rate (NEA, 2016a).
Compared with NEA, the Building and Construction Authority
(BCA) official website provides more C&D waste management infor-
mation. In the “Sustainable Construction” category, a site segregation
plan is suggested for sorting different kinds of materials (BCA, 2016b).
Additionally, a Construction Productivity Capability Development
Fund was established for encouraging the purchase of demolition
equipment that facilitates concrete recovery (BCA, 2016a). The BCA
also published a series of Green Mark Schemes to motivate construc-
tion stakeholders to promote their green behavior including waste
management (BCA, 2016b).
Recycling of C&D waste is particularly introduced by the BCA.
The process of crushing and recycling structural concrete components
was presented (BCA, 2017). A guide book on the use of recycled
materials was published by the BCA, specifying the types of waste
materials and applications of recycled materials (BCA, 2008). An
accreditation scheme was introduced for recycled aggregate suppliers.
Meanwhile, recycling plants for different waste streams and suppliers
of recycled products were recommended (BCA, 2008).
3.1.6 | South Korea
In South Korea, the responsible governmental department is the Min-
istry of Environment (ME). From the internet search, no specific defi-
nition was given to C&D waste, but the generation and recycling
information was provided. It was reported that the amount of C&D
waste reached 186,627 tons per day, of which 97.2% (i.e., 181.493
tons) were recycled (ME, 2018). However, due to negative perception
and reluctance to use recycled products, the recycling rate of high-
value-added waste (e.g., aggregates and asphalt) remained at a low
level of 32.3% (ME, 2018).
In order to increase the waste recycling rate, the Ministry of Envi-
ronment (ME) of South Korea promulgated the “Construction Waste
Recycling Promotion Act” in January 2005. This Act has provided a
legal basis for promoting C&D waste management in the past years.
According to the Act, recycled aggregates are mandatorily required to
be used in the construction of roads, industrial complexes and envi-
ronmental infrastructure (ME, 2018). To enhance the requirements in
the Act, revisions concerning the treatment methods were made
in 2013.
To help the information exchange between waste suppliers and
waste consumers, an online market, which is named “Exchange of
Resources used by the Circulation” was established (ME, 2018). The
online system contains several assistance functions, such as GIS-based
search, bidding for waste. Through this system, users can exchange
waste information (e.g., waste type, quantity and quality, prices) con-
veniently. The government also implemented quality standards and
introduced a quality certification system for the recycled aggregate
products to enhance the confidence of potential consumers.
5
3.1.7 | Australia
In Australia, C&D waste is supervised by the Department of the Envi-
ronment and Energy (DEE). It was defined as “waste produced by
demolition and building activities, including road and rail construction
and maintenance and excavation of land associated with construction
activities” (DEE, 2018). C&D waste was regarded as a main waste
stream in Australia, a total of 20.4 Mt of C&D waste was generated
from 2016 to 2017, of which 43% was recovered (DEE, 2018).
In Australia, C&D waste management is supervised by the
Department of the Environment and Energy (DEE). In 2011, the DEE
commissioned two consultancy companies (i.e., Hyder Consulting
(HC) and Edge Environment Propriety Limited (EEPL)) to investigate
the status of C&D waste management throughout the whole country
and to provide guidance on C&D waste reuse and recycling across its
supply chain.
According to HC's report, there is no specific regulation on C&D
waste management at national level, however, each state has its own
regulations for supervising C&D waste management. As the circum-
stance in each state, the targets for C&D waste recycling rate are dif-
ferent between states. For example, in 2011, Victoria aimed to
achieve a recovery rate of 80% by 2014 while Queensland's target
was 50% by 2014 (HC, 2011).
Market demand was recognized as the primary driver for promoting
the C&D waste recycling status. Currently, the market for masonry
products has been well established in Australia, it is expected the
demands for other recycled produces can also be stimulated (HC, 2011).
The recycling potentials of mainstream construction materials have been
identified and successful cases have been examined for future develop-
ment of C&D waste recycling market (EEPL, 2011; HC, 2011).
3.1.8 | Summary of the identified successful C&D
waste management experiences
Based on the in-depth examination of the official websites of the
selected developed countries, the major successful C&D waste man-
agement experiences have been identified, as listed in Table 3. From
Table 3, it can be seen that some policies and practices were
implemented in different countries, such as promulgating particular
regulations on C&D waste management. Thus, the identified policies
and practices were further integrated and compared with the current
C&D waste management in Hong Kong, as shown in Table 4. From
Table 4, it can be seen that Hong Kong has paid efforts on C&D waste
management; however, there are successful experiences that Hong
Kong may learn from the other countries.
3.2 | Suggested solutions for C&D waste
management improvement in Hong Kong
Based on the discussions of the professionals in the second round of
focus group meeting, four directions, such as promulgation of relevant
6 WU ET AL.
TABLE 3 Identified successful experiences in the selected
countries
Country Identified successful experience
United National official guideline for C&D waste
States management;
C&D waste regulations in different states;
Implementation of source reduction;
Implementation of deconstruction;
Illustrative manuals and practical cases;
Mature C&D waste trade market.
Sweden Implementation of Ordinance on Landfilling of Waste;
High charges of C&D waste disposal at landfills;
Ban on landfilling of combustible waste fractions;
Advanced technologies for C&D waste incineration;
Implementation of pre-demolition audits.
Netherlands Implementation of Environmental Protection Act;
High charges of C&D waste disposal at landfills;
Mature C&D waste reuse/recycling markets;
Improved and better controlled quality of C&D waste;
Stimulation from green building rating system.
Japan Implementation of Construction Material Recycling
Law;
Mature C&D waste recycling technologies and
facilities;
List of recycling companies.
Singapore Strict supervision on illegal dumping;
Implementation of General Waste Collection System;
High charges of waste disposal fee;
Efficient waste sorting;
Implementation of Green Mark Schemes
Mature C&D waste recycling technologies and
facilities;
List of recycling companies.
South Implementation of Construction Waste Recycling
Korea Promotion Act;
Mandatory use of recycled aggregates;
Quality certification system for recycled aggregates;
Information management system for waste exchange.
Australia C&D waste regulations in different states;
Comprehensive understanding of the C&D waste
management status of each state;
Mature market for recycled masonry products;
Introduction of successful C&D waste management
cases.
specific regulations, adoption of advanced recycling technologies,
development of mature recycling markets, and implementing a high
landfilling cost, were highlighted by the professionals.
3.2.1 | Promulgation of specific regulations
Relevant regulations are important for driving stakeholders to act
good C&D waste management behavior (Wu, Yu, & Shen, 2017). In
the investigated countries, Japan and South Korea have their national
regulations particularly for dealing with C&D waste, such as the “Con-
struction Material Recycling Act” in Japan and the “Construction
Waste Recycling Promotion Act” in South Korea. Both regulations
were regarded playing a determinant role in C&D waste minimization
in the two countries (JME, 2014; ME, 2018). In United States and
Australia, though there is no national law for C&D waste manage-
ment, there are relevant regulations, which are promulgated based on
geographic and economic development situations at state level.
The compulsory requirements in regulations can play the role of
governing stakeholders to mandatorily adopt actions that are effective
to better C&D waste management. For example, in South Korea, it is
mandatorily required to use recycled aggregates for the construction
of roads, industrial complexes and environmental infrastructure
(ME, 2018). Meanwhile, regulations can also indirectly motive stake-
holders to perform better C&D waste management from the eco-
nomic perspective. For example, a high charging fee can be enacted
for landfilling of mixed C&D waste, thus contractors are stimulated to
sort waste at source.
In Hong Kong, there is a good practice that a website has been
established particularly for C&D waste management (EPD, 2009).
Management strategies and good examples of C&D waste manage-
ment have been introduced and recommended to the C&D waste
management stakeholders on this website. However, the waste mini-
mization strategies listed on the website are just suggestive rather
than compulsory. In addition, the latest updates of the suggested
strategies and case studies were mainly made in 2009, which has been
ten years before. According to the industrial professionals who
attended the second focus group meeting, these strategies have not
been emphasized in practical construction processes because they are
not compulsory and stakeholders can earn few benefits from imple-
mentation of these strategies. Thus, the Environmental Protection
Department suggested that, just like Japan and South Korea, specific
regulations should be promulgated specifically focusing on C&D waste
management in Hong Kong. It is expected that, through the promulga-
tion of specific regulations, the practitioners can be forced to imple-
ment the currently suggestive waste management measures.
3.2.2 | Adoption of advanced recycling
technologies
According to the hierarchy model proposed by Peng et al. (2018),
“reduce”, “reuse,” and “recycle” are the three most favorable principles
for C&D waste management. The first two principles can minimize
C&D waste to a certain extent; however, waste generation is unavoid-
able due to procurement plan and other reasons (Bakchan &
Faust, 2019). In other words, C&D waste is always generated regard-
less of how well the “reduce” and “reuse” principles are implemented.
Thus, advanced recycling technologies are important for minimizing
the environmental problems caused by C&D waste.
Recycling technologies have been emphasized in some of the
investigated countries. In Singapore, the Building and Construction
Authority illustrated the typical process of reclaiming recycled con-
crete aggregates and specified the conditions for potential use
(BCA, 2008). In Japan, a list of potential recycling technologies with
detailed specifications was provided (JME, 2016). In Australia, the
WU ET AL. 7

TABLE 4 Comparison of identified C&D waste management in Hong Kong and the selected countries

United The South Hong

Successful experience States Sweden Netherlands Japan Singapore Korea Australia Kong
Specific regulations for C&D waste √ √ √ √
Recommendation of source reduction √ √ √
Recommendation of deconstruction √ √ √
Recommendation of waste sorting √ √ √ √ √ √
Illustrative manuals and practical cases √ √ √
Mature C&D waste trade market √ √ √ √ √
High charges of C&D waste disposal at √ √ √
landfills
Ban on landfilling of combustible waste √ √
fractions
Advanced mature technologies for C&D √ √ √ √
waste recycling
Controlled quality of recycled C&D waste √ √
Stimulation from green building rating √ √ √
system
Information management system for waste √
exchange

EEPL (2011) conducted case studies of how C&D waste can be
recycled, such as recycling glass into insulation materials.
Besides waste recycling, combustion technologies should also be
considered. Peng et al. (2018) regarded “incineration” as a low-priority
strategy due to its unanswered questions about the environmental
impacts (e.g., emissions of acid gases and other pollutants). However,
after twenty years' development, most of the uncertain environmental
impacts of combustion technologies could be well controlled. In Singa-
pore, due to the limited land spaces, there is only one landfill, the
other disposal facilities are incineration plants, which are also known
as waste-to-energy plants. In Sweden, it is prohibited to disposal of
unsorted combustible waste at landfills. The combustible C&D waste
are transformed into energy by using of advanced incineration
(or waste-to-energy) technologies.
In Hong Kong, as argued by the invited professionals, the
recycling status of C&D waste was far from satisfactory, thus the
adoption of advanced recycling technologies was recommended by
the academic scholars for further improvement. In recent years,
though researchers have paid efforts on using construction waste
to produce recycled materials, such as Duan and Poon (2014), Lu
et al. (2019), the industrial implication has not attracted attentions.
Since 2005, the Hong Kong EPD has issued a charging scheme to
encourage sorting of the inert waste and the non-inert compo-
nents, however, the sorted non-inert waste was generally dis-
charged at landfills other than recycling at plants. As timber
formwork is very popular in Hong Kong, the industrial profes-
sionals suggested that incineration strategy of the waste manage-
ment hierarchy model should be enhanced. Through the adoption
of advanced technologies in both recycling and incineration
aspects, it is expected that the pressure of landfill spaces can be
reduced significantly.
3.2.3 | Development of mature recycling markets
From the economic perspective, mature markets play an important
role in sustainable development of the construction industry (Wang,
Li, & Wu, 2019). At the generation stage, a mature market can pro-
mote building contractors to carry out on site sorting as they are able
to sell the recyclables. At the trading stage, effective information
exchange can be achieved through supporting online systems. At the
recycling stage, purchasers of recycled products in a mature market
can avoid questions raised from potential clients.
Waste information (e.g., waste category, amount, location, etc.)
exchange is important for waste trading (Lu, Webster, Peng, Chen, &
Zhang, 2017). Good examples of waste trading can be found in the
investigated countries. For example, in United States, the information
of both physical warehouses and virtual websites has been provided
on the official websites for seeking proper recyclers (CDRA, 2016). In
South Korea, an online system has been established for information
exchange between waste producers and recyclers. Japan and Singa-
pore also listed relevant recycling companies on their official
websites.
Besides information exchange, to promote the development of
recycling markets, a certification system authorized by the govern-
ment or industrial association is very essential for increasing market
demand of recycled products. In many cases, the public are reluctant
to use recycled products because they are produced by so-called
“waste” (He & Yuan, 2020; Peng et al., 2018). A government or indus-
trial association authorized certification for a recycled product can
reduce the anxiety of public to a large extent. In South Korea, an offi-
cially recognized quality certification system has been introduced for
recycled aggregates. In Australia, wasted masonry has been well
recycled because the recycled masonry products are supported by
8 WU ET AL.
Austroads which is the association of Australian road transport and
traffic authority. In the Netherlands, quality labels could be issued to
the secondary materials to guarantee their quality, and the secondary
materials which obtain quality labels have higher chances to be
selected by project clients and contractors with the aim of complying
with green building rating requirements (EC, 2015b). To facilitate
waste recycling, the information of potential recyclers of C&D waste
has been posted on the official websites in several countries, such as
United States, Japan, and Singapore.
In Hong Kong, there is also a website that lists potential waste
recyclers. However, the contractor representative participating the
focus group meeting argued that they seldomly use this website to
identify the potential C&D waste recyclers as the listed material col-
lection points mainly focus on general waste streams that are not pop-
ular at construction sites (e.g., computer electronical appliances,
paper). In addition, though the green building assessment tool in Hong
Kong (i.e., HK-BEAM) also has requirements to encourage using of
recycled materials, as there is a lack of an officially authorized quality
certification system and the assessment scores could be obtained
from other requirements, the contractors had no willingness to use
recycled products proactively. Thus, the development of more mature
recycling markets is essential to stimulate industrial practitioners' will-
ingness to adopt waste sorting actions and to use recycled products.
3.2.4 | Implementation of high landfilling costs
Mak et al. (2019) conducted an investigation of C&D waste recycling
in Hong Kong and found that economic incentive is a key factor of
influencing stakeholders' recycling behavior. For example, contractors
may be not very positive to implement on-site waste sorting as the
payback is not so optimistic. In this circumstance, the invited profes-
sionals argued that a high landfilling cost may be helpful for improving
C&D waste management behavior.
The cost for landfilling in some of the investigated countries are
very expensive. In Sweden, the cost for landfilling involved two
aspects: disposal fee and tax. In 2011, the landfilling cost for each ton
of waste was appropriately US$ 193, including US$ 126 for disposal
fee and US$ 67 for landfilling tax. It is much higher than sending
waste to waste-to-energy plants (US$ 84 per ton). In the Netherlands,
though the landfilling tax (US$ 16) is not as high as Sweden, however,
the logistics cost is very high. For example, the average renting fee of
a C&D waste container reached US$ 376. In this circumstance, con-
tractors are more willing to sort and reuse waste in order to reduce
logistics cost.
In Hong Kong, a charging scheme, which was enacted in January
2005, has been established for C&D waste disposal. According to this
scheme, C&D waste could be categorized into three types (i.e., public
fill reception facilities, sorting facilities, landfills), which determines the
destinations of the collected waste (see Table 5). The public fill recep-
tion facilities only receive inert waste and the charge is the lowest. In
case that the proportion of non-inert waste exceeds 50%, waste must
be disposed at landfills, which cost more money than the other two
options. The purpose of this charging scheme is to encourage contrac-
tors to implement waste sorting before disposal, and the charging
standards have been increased in 2017 in order to enhance the pur-
pose. However, the contractor representative participating in the
group meeting argued that the differences between the charges
would hardly be the key reason of stimulating them to perform waste
sorting, because the waste sorting cost is much higher due to the lim-
ited site spaces and labor cost in Hong Kong. In this circumstance, the
academic experts suggested that increasing the landfilling cost may be
the solution of improving stakeholders' waste sorting behavior. It is
expected that the practitioners would improve their waste manage-
ment practices to reduce waste generation at source and send the
produced C&D waste to appropriate recycling facilities or incineration
plants.
3.3 | Discussions
Based on the results of the second focus group meeting, a framework
was formulated to illustrate the suggested directions of promoting
more effective C&D waste management in Hong Kong, as shown in
Figure 1. From Figure 1, it can be seen that, instead of the currently
implemented “3R” principle, a “3R + I” principle was suggested to be
adopted in Hong Kong. Compared with the traditional “3R” principle,
the strategy of incineration is also emphasized in the “3R + I” princi-
ple. In Hong Kong, the “3R” principle has been recommended for sev-
eral decades and the inert components have been minimized to a
large extent; however, the non-inert components in C&D waste were
not sufficiently utilized (EPD, 2019).
From the focus group meeting, the professionals claimed that
contaminated timber which is not recyclable is the main contributor
of non-inert waste. This argument has been proved by Wu, Li, Feng,
Luo, and Chen (2019) who conducted empirical investigations of the
C&D waste composition in Hong Kong. The results showed that
wood & timber was the largest contributor of non-inert waste in the
current construction projects, while paper, plastic, and rubber also
took larger proportions than other waste streams. Thus, the incinera-
tion strategy, which has been well implemented in Sweden, the Neth-
erlands, Japan, and Singapore, was recommended to be emphasized in
Hong Kong for better C&D waste management.
As for what proportion to be incinerated and whether incinera-
tion strategy is economically worthy, more efforts are suggested to be
paid to find out the thresholds. However, though the incineration
strategy may be not economically feasible, it brings along environmen-
tal and social benefits (Yolin, 2015). In some countries (e.g., Sweden),
the combustible waste is banned from discharging at landfills regard-
less of economic costs (AvfallSverige, 2019).
Currently, the C&D waste management strategies in Hong Kong
are mainly suggestive rather than compulsory. As the invited profes-
sionals argued, in practice, the construction stakeholders usually focus
more on economic benefits, thus C&D waste management could
hardly be emphasized because it cannot provide attractive profits. An
example is that, though a waste management plan is generally
WU ET AL. 9

TABLE 5 Charging standards for construction waste disposal facilities (EPD, 2017)

Charge (US$/ton) Charge (US$/ton)

Waste disposal facilities Type of C&D waste accepted before 2017 after 2017
Public fill reception Consisting entirely of inert waste 3.44 9.05
facilities
Sorting facilities Containing more than 50% by weight of inert waste 12.75 22.32
Landfills Containing not more than 50% by weight of inert 15.94 25.50
waste

3R+I Principle Policy Directions recommendations have been proposed to enhance the maturity of the
recycling markets in Hong Kong, such as establishing platforms for

Reduction
Promulgation of waste information exchange, setting up quality certification systems
specific regulations
for recycled products. These suggestions can improve the public
Adoption of advanced acceptance to recycled waste products; however, the key concern of
Reuse
Effective recycling technologies the developers or contractors is whether they can gain satisfactory
C&D waste
profits from their waste management actions. Thus, there is a poten-
management Development of mature
Recycling tial constraint that the developers or contractors have little willingness
recycling markets
to buy recycled products if they regard the benefits are not so attrac-
Implementation of high tive. In addition, there is another potential challenge that the recycling
Incineration
landfilling costs
plants cannot receive continuous C&D waste input for recycling.

F I G U R E 1 Policy framework for promoting C&D waste
management in Hong Kong
required before the commencement of a construction project, the
enforcement of the waste management plan is lacking. In this circum-
stance, a specific regulation which lists compulsory requirements
could be very helpful. For example, the regulations could specify what
C&D waste components to be compulsorily recycled or what penalties
to be levied to illegal dumping, etc. The invited professionals believed
this policy would reduce the generation amount of C&D waste to a
large extent. However, this action faces a potential constraint that the
required standards might be too strict for the stakeholders to follow.
Thus, it is claimed that the specific requirements should be deter-
mined very carefully to match the practical construction status in
Hong Kong.
The purpose of promulgating specific regulations is minimizing
waste generation at source; however, waste is produced unavoidably.
Thus, it is suggested that more attentions should be paid on the
recycling principle to reduce generated waste. In Hong Kong, as esti-
mated by the EPD (2019), the recycling of non-inert waste has a great
potential for increasing the overall rate of C&D waste recycling. In
recent years, along with the improvement of C&D waste recycling
technologies, many waste components can be recycled with low envi-
ronmental impacts. However, there is a potential constraint in Hong
Kong that there are not enough sites to building waste recycling
plants. In addition, another potential constraint is that the recycled
products may encounter poor sales due to the not maturely devel-
oped recycling markets.
Developing mature recycling markets is essential for increasing
the use of recycled products and promoting waste reuse. Several
Levying high landfilling costs may be a solution for developers or
contractors to actively join in the recycling markets. Though the waste
disposal charging scheme in Hong Kong has been established since
2005, the current disposal charges are relatively low, which limits
developers' or contractors' intentions for better waste management.
The invited professionals agreed with this argument and further spec-
ulated that higher landfilling costs would stimulate waste sorting
actions, which could be beneficial for the recyclers. However, there is
a potential constraint of increasing the possibility of illegal dumping if
the charges exceed the affordability too much. Thus, reasonable
benchmarks should be set up and an effective monitoring system on
illegal dumping should be established.
It should be noted that the proposed four solutions and the “3R
+ I” framework may be not suitable in other regions, as various local
climates and economic development status may be different from
region to region. For example, the timber waste accounted for a large
proportion of non-inert waste in Hong Kong, thus the “3R + I” frame-
work is proposed from the focus group meeting. Nevertheless, the
incineration strategy may be not appropriate in other regions which
has low generation of timer waste.
In addition, though the seven selected countries in this study are
all developed countries, this does not mean there is no good C&D
waste management practice in developing countries. For example,
smart technologies have been used to facilitate C&D waste manage-
ment in China. Wu et al. (2016) proposed an innovative approach
which incorporates GIS to manage demolition waste in Shenzhen. Xu,
Shi, Xie, and Zhao (2019) used a BIM-based model to accurately esti-
mated C&D waste generation and proposed suggestions for green-
house gas emission reduction. The implementation of smart
technologies also has a great potential for improving C&D waste
management.4.
10
4 | C O N CL U S I O N S
C&D waste policies are important for regulating and guiding stake-
holders' waste management behavior. Though the C&D waste
recycling rate reached 92% in Hong Kong, there is an urgent need of
improving C&D waste management to a higher level as the landfill
space is extremely limited. This study conducted two rounds of focus
group meetings and a comprehensive investigation of C&D waste pol-
icies in seven selected countries. It was revealed that, in addition to
the classical “3R” principle, incineration strategies should also be
emphasized in Hong Kong. Furthermore, four policy directions were
suggested, including promulgation of specific regulations, adoption of
advanced recycling technologies, development of mature recycling
markets, and implementation of high landfilling costs.
Due to various local climates and economic development status,
the appropriate C&D waste management strategies may be different
from region to region. Thus, in order to formulate a more effective
C&D waste policy framework, it is of necessity to investigate the local
C&D waste management policies and to compare the local practices
with successful experiences in other regions. The research methods
used in this study can be employed in other countries or regions
which are at different C&D waste management situations and eco-
nomic status to establish their own applicable policy framework.
ACKNOWLEDGEMEN TS
The work described in this paper was supported by The Hong Kong
Polytechnic University (Project of Strategic Importance) and G-YBQD,
the grants from the Construction Industry Council of Hong Kong, the
Research Start-up Funding of SZU, and the Foundation for Basic and
Applied Basic Research of Guangdong Province (2019A1515110247).
ORCID
Zezhou Wu https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8687-0466
Ann T.W. Yu https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1792-6024
RE FE R ENC E S
Ajayi, S. O., & Oyedele, L. O. (2017). Policy imperatives for diverting con-
struction waste from landfill: Experts' recommendations for UKpolicy
expansion. Journal of Cleaner Production, 147, 57–65. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.075
Ajayi, S. O., & Oyedele, L. O. (2018). Critical design factors for minimising
waste in construction projects: A structural equation modelling
approach. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 137, 302–313.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.06.005
Arm, M., Wik, O., Engelsen, C. J., Erlandsson, M., Hjelmar, O., &
Wahlström, M. (2016). How does the European recovery target for
construction & demolition waste affect resource management? Waste
and Biomass Valorization, 8, 1491–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12649-016-9661-7
AvfallSverige. 2019. Swedish Waste Management 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.avfallsverige.se/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationer/
Avfallshantering_2018_EN.pdf.
Bakchan, A., & Faust, K. M. (2019). Construction waste generation esti-
mates of institutional building projects: Leveraging waste hauling
tickets. Waste Management, 87, 301–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2019.02.024
WU ET AL.
Bakshan, A., Srour, I., Chehab, G., El-Fadel, M., & Karaziwan, J. (2017).
Behavioral determinants towards enhancing construction waste man-
agement: A Bayesian Network analysis. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 117, 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.
10.006
Bao, Z., & Lu, W. (2020). Developing efficient circularity for construction
and demolition waste management in fast emerging economies: Les-
sons learned from Shenzhen, China. Science of the Total Environment,
724, 138264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138264
Bao, Z., Lu, W., Chi, B., Yuan, H., & Hao, J. (2019). Procurement innovation
for a circular economy of construction and demolition waste: Lessons
learnt from Suzhou, China. Waste Management, 99, 12–21. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.08.031
BCA, 2008. Sustainable construction—A Guide on the use of recycled mate-
rials. Retrieved from https://www.bca.gov.sg/sustainableconstruction/
others/sc_recycle_final.pdf.
BCA. 2016a. Construction productivity capability development fund.
Retrieved from https://www.bca.gov.sg/CPCF/cpcf.html.
BCA. 2016b. Sample of storage area for waste segregation on-site.
Retrieved from https://www.bca.gov.sg/SustainableConstruction/
others/sc_swmp.pdf.
BCA. 2017. Recycled materials for construction. Retrieved from https://
www.bca.gov.sg/SustainableConstruction/sc_crd_waste.html.
Calvo, N., Varela-Candamio, L., & Novo-Corti, I. (2014). A dynamic
model for construction and demolition (C&D) waste management
in Spain: Driving policies based on economic incentives and tax
penalties. Sustainability, 6(1), 416–435. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su6010416
Cardoso, R., Silva, R. V., Brito, J.d., & Dhir, R. (2016). Use of recycled aggre-
gates from construction and demolition waste in geotechnical applica-
tions: A literature review. Waste Management, 49, 131–145. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.12.021
CDRA. 2016. Find a C&D recycler. Retrieved from http://www.
cdrecycling.org/find-a-c-d-recycler.
Chen, J., Hua, C., & Liu, C. (2019). Considerations for better construction
and demolition waste management: Identifying the decision behaviors
of contractors and government departments through a game theory
decision-making model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 212, 190–199.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.262
Chen, X., & Lu, W. S. (2017). Identifying factors influencing demolition
waste generation in Hong Kong. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141,
799–811. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.164
Chen, X., Lu, W. S., Xue, F., & Xu, J. Y. (2018). A cost-benefit analysis of
green buildings with respect to construction waste minimization using
big data in Hong Kong. Journal of Green Building, 13(4), 61–76. https://
doi.org/10.3992/1943-4618.13.4.61
DEE. 2018. Australian National Waste Report 2018. Retrieved from http://
www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/7381c1de-31d0-429b-
912c-91a6dbc83af7/files/national-waste-report-2018.pdf.
Di Maria, A., Eyckmans, J., & Van Acker, K. (2018). Downcycling versus
recycling of construction and demolition waste: Combining LCA and
LCC to support sustainable policy making. Waste Management, 75,
3–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.01.028
Duan, H., Li, J., & Liu, G. (2017). Growing threat of urban waste dumps.
Nature, 546, 599. https://doi.org/10.1038/546599b
Duan, Z. H., & Poon, C. S. (2014). Properties of recycled aggregate con-
crete made with recycled aggregates with different amounts of old
adhered mortars. Materials & Design, 58, 19–29. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.matdes.2014.01.044
EC. 2015a. Construction and demolition waste management in Sweden.
Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/studies/
deliverables/CDW_Sweden_Factsheet_Final.pdf.
EC. 2015b. Screening template for construction and demolition waste
management in the Netherlands. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/
WU ET AL.
environment/waste/studies/deliverables/CDW_The%20Netherlands_
Factsheet_Final.pdf.
EEPL. 2011. Construction and demolition waste guide—recycling and re-
use across the supply chain. Retrieved from http://www.environment.
gov.au/protection/national-waste-policy/publications/construction-
and-demolition-waste-guide.
EPA. 2005. Residential deconstruction manual. Retrieved from https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/stardust
demolitionsalvagemanual_0.pdf.
EPA. 2013. Analysis of the lifecycle impacts and potential for avoided impacts
associated with single family homes. Retrieved from https://www.epa.
gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/sfhomes.pdf.
EPA. 2015. Design for deconstruction manual. Retrieved from https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/designforde
constrmanual.pdf.
EPA. 2018a. Construction and demolition debris generation in the United
States, 2015. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
2018-09/documents/construction_and_demolition_debris_generation_
in_the_united_states_2015_final.pdf.
EPA. 2018b. Fact sheets on the sustainable design, disassembly and
deconstruction of buildings. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/
smm/fact-sheets-sustainable-design-disassembly-and-deconstruction-
buildings.
EPA. 2018c. Sustainable management of construction and demolition
materials. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/smm/sustainable-
management-construction-and-demolition-materials.
EPD. 2009. Construction waste management. Retrieved from https://
www.epd.gov.hk/epd/misc/cdm/management_intro.htm.
EPD. 2015. Introduction to construction waste. Retrieved from http://
www.epd.gov.hk/epd/misc/cdm/introduction.htm.
EPD. 2017. Construction waste disposal charging scheme. Retrieved from
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/misc/cdm/scheme.htm.
EPD., 2019. Monitoring of solid waste in Hong Kong —waste statistics for
2017. Retrieved from https://www.wastereduction.gov.hk/sites/
default/files/msw2017.pdf.
Gershman, H.. 2013. The US can Learn from Sweden. Retrieved from
http://www.wastetodaymagazine.com/article/rew0213-sweden-
waste-leader/.
Halkos, G., & Petrou, K. N. (2018). Assessing waste generation efficiency
in EU regions towards sustainable environmental policies. Sustainable
Development, 26(3), 281–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1701
Hao, J. L., Hills, M. J., & Tam, V. W. Y. (2008). The effectiveness of Hong
Kong's construction waste disposal charging scheme. Waste Manage-
ment & Research, 26(6), 553–558. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0734242x07085345
HC, 2011. Construction and demolition waste status report—management
of construction and demolition waste in Australia.Retrieved from
https://www.environment.gov.au/protection/national-waste-policy/
publications/construction-and-demolition-waste-status-report.
He, L., & Yuan, H. (2020). Investigation of construction waste recycling
decisions by considering consumers' quality perceptions. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 259, 120928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2020.120928
Hossain, M. U., & Poon, C. S. (2018). Comparative LCA of wood waste
management strategies generated from building construction activi-
ties. Journal of Cleaner Production, 177, 387–397. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.233
Jin, R., Yuan, H., & Chen, Q. (2019). Science mapping approach to assisting
the review of construction and demolition waste management
research published between 2009 and 2018. Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, 140, 175–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.
2018.09.029
JME. 2014. History and current state of waste management in Japan.
Retrieved from https://www.env.go.jp/en/recycle/smcs/attach/
hcswm.pdf.
11
JME. 2016. Japanese waste management and recycling industry. Retrieved
from http://www.env.go.jp/recycle/circul/venous_industry/en/target_
waste/index_i.html.
Liu, J., Gong, E., Wang, D., Lai, X., & Zhu, J. (2019). Attitudes and behaviour
towards construction waste minimisation: a comparative analysis
between China and the USA. Environmental Science Pollution Research,
26(14), 13681–13690.
Liu, J., Nie, J., & Yuan, H. (2020). Interactive decisions of the waste pro-
ducer and the recycler in construction waste recycling. Journal of
Cleaner Production, (256, 120403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2020.120403
Liu, J., Teng, Y., Jiang, Y., & Gong, E. (2018). A cost compensation model
for construction and demolition waste disposal in South China. Envi-
ronmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s11356-018-2887-0
Lu, J.-X., Zhou, Y., He, P., Wang, S., Shen, P., & Poon, C. S. (2019). Sustain-
able reuse of waste glass and incinerated sewage sludge ash in insulat-
ing building products: Functional and durability assessment. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 236, 117635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2019.117635
Lu, W. (2019). Big data analytics to identify illegal construction waste
dumping: A Hong Kong study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
141, 264–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.039
Lu, W., & Tam, V. W. Y. (2013). Construction waste management policies
and their effectiveness in Hong Kong: A longitudinal review. Renew-
able and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 23, 214–223. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.rser.2013.03.007
Lu, W., Webster, C., Peng, Y., Chen, X., & Zhang, X. (2017). Estimating and
calibrating the amount of building-related construction and demolition
waste in urban China. International Journal of Construction Manage-
ment, 17(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2016.
1166548
Mak, T. M. W., Yu, I. K. M., Wang, L., Hsu, S.-C., Tsang, D. C. W., Li, C. N.,
… Poon, C. S. (2019). Extended theory of planned behaviour for pro-
moting construction waste recycling in Hong Kong. Waste Manage-
ment, 83, 161–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.11.016
McCauley, D. (2015). Sustainable development in energy policy: A gover-
nance assessment of environmental stakeholder inclusion in waste-to-
energy. Sustainable Development, 23(5), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.
1002/sd.1584
ME. 2018. Waste recycling. http://eng.me.go.kr/eng/web/index.do?
menuId=372.
NEA. 2016a. Collectors, traders and local recycling facilities. Retrieved
from http://www.nea.gov.sg/energy-waste/3rs/collectors-traders-
and-local-recycling-facilities.
NEA. 2016b. Waste management—Overview. Retrieved from http://
www.nea.gov.sg/energy-waste/waste-management/overview#top.
NEA. 2018. Waste statistics and overall recycling. Retrieved from https://
www.nea.gov.sg/our-services/waste-management/waste-statistics-
and-overall-recycling.
Park, J., & Tucker, R. (2017). Overcoming barriers to the reuse of construc-
tion waste material in Australia: a review of the literature. International
Journal of Construction Management, 17(3), 228–237. https://doi.org/
10.1080/15623599.2016.1192248
Peng, Y., Zhu, X. T., Zhang, F. Y., Huang, L., Xue, J. B., & Xu, Y. L. (2018).
Farmers' risk perception of concentrated rural settlement develop-
ment after the 5.12 Sichuan Earthquake. Habitat International, 71,
169–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.11.008
Poon, C. S., Yu, A. T. W., Wong, A., & Yip, R. (2013). Quantifying the
impact of construction waste charging scheme on construction waste
management in Hong Kong. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 139(5), 466–479. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.
1943-7862.0000631
Seror, N., Hareli, S., & Portnov, B. A. (2014). Evaluating the effect of vehi-
cle impoundment policy on illegal construction and demolition waste
12
dumping: Israel as a case study. Waste Management, 34, 1436–1445.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.03.026
Tam, V. W. Y., & Lu, W. (2016). Construction waste management profiles,
practices, and performance: a cross-jurisdictional analysis in four coun-
tries. Sustainability, 8(2), 190. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8020190
Udawatta, N., Zuo, J., Chiveralls, K., Yuan, H. P., Zillante, G., & Elmualim, A.
(2018). Major factors impeding the implementation of waste manage-
ment in Australian construction projects. Journal of Green Building, 13
(3), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.3992/1943-4618.13.3.101
Wang, J., Wu, H., Tam, V. W. Y., & Zuo, J. (2019). Considering life-cycle
environmental impacts and society's willingness for optimizing con-
struction and demolition waste management fee: An empirical study
of China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 206, 1004–1014. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.170
Wang, Y., Li, H., & Wu, Z. (2019). Attitude of the Chinese public toward
off-site construction: A text mining study. Journal of Cleaner Produc-
tion, 238, 117926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117926
Wei, Y. G., Li, Y., Liu, X. J., & Wu, M. Y. (2019). Sustainable development
and green gross domestic product assessments in megacities based on
the emergy analysis method-A case study of Wuhan. Sustainable
Development, 28, 294–307. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2003
Wu, H., Wang, J., Duan, H., Ouyang, L., Huang, W., & Zuo, J. (2016). An
innovative approach to managing demolition waste via GIS (geo-
graphic information system): a case study in Shenzhen city, China.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 112(1), 494–503. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.096
Wu, H., Zuo, J., Yuan, H., Zillante, G., & Wang, J. (2020). Cross-regional
mobility of construction and demolition waste in Australia: An explor-
atory study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 156, 104710.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104710
Wu, H., Zuo, J., Zillante, G., Wang, J., & Yuan, H. (2019). Status quo and
future directions of construction and demolition waste research: A
critical review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 240, 118163. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118163
Wu, Y., Shuai, C. Y., Wu, L., Shen, L. Y., Yan, J. Z., Jiao, L. D., & Liao, S. J.
(2020). A new experience mining approach for improving low carbon
city development. Sustainable Development, (in press, 28, 922–934.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2046
Wu, Z., Li, H., Feng, Y., Luo, X., & Chen, Q. (2019). Developing a green
building evaluation standard for interior decoration: A case study of
China. Building and Environment, 152, 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.buildenv.2019.02.010
Wu, Z., Yu, A. T. W., & Shen, L. (2017). Investigating the determinants of
contractor's construction and demolition waste management behavior
in Mainland China. Waste Management, 60, 290–300. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.wasman.2016.09.001
WU ET AL.
Wu, Z., Yu, A. T. W., Wang, H., Wei, Y., & Huo, X. (2019). Driving factors
for construction waste minimization: empirical studies in Hong Kong
and Shenzhen. Journal of Green Building, 14(4), 155–167. https://doi.
org/10.3992/1943-4618.14.4.155
Xu, J., Shi, Y., Xie, Y., & Zhao, S. (2019). A BIM-Based construction and
demolition waste information management system for greenhouse gas
quantification and reduction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 229,
308–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.158
Yolin, C., 2015. Waste management and recycling in japan opportunities
for European Companies (SMEs focus). Retrieved from https://www.
eu-japan.eu/sites/default/files/publications/docs/waste_management_
recycling_japan.pdf.
Yu, A. T. W., Poon, C. S., Wong, A., Yip, R., & Jaillon, L. (2013). Impact of
construction waste disposal charging scheme on work practices at
construction sites in Hong Kong. Waste Management, 33(1), 138–146.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.09.023
Yuan, H. (2017). Barriers and countermeasures for managing construction
and demolition waste: A case of Shenzhen in China. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 157, 84–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.
04.137
Yuan, H., & Shen, L. (2011). Trend of the research on construction and
demolition waste management. Waste Management, 31(4), 670–679.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.10.030
Yuan, H., & Yang, Y. (2020). BIM Adoption under Government subsidy:
Technology diffusion perspective. Journal of Construction Engineering
Management, 146(1), 04019089. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.
1943-7862.0001733
Yuan, H. P., & Wang, J. Y. (2014). A system dynamics model for determin-
ing the waste disposal charging fee in construction. European Journal
of Operational Research, 237(3), 988–996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ejor.2014.02.034
Zhang, Y., Shen, L. Y., Shuai, C. Y., Tan, Y. T., Ren, Y. T., & Wu, Y. (2019). Is
the low-carbon economy efficient in terms of sustainable develop-
ment? A global perspective. Sustainable Development, 27(1), 130–152.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1884
How to cite this article: Wu Z, Yu ATW, Poon CS. Promoting
effective construction and demolition waste management
towards sustainable development: A case study of Hong Kong.
Sustainable Development. 2020;1–12. https://doi.org/10.
1002/sd.2119