The need for sustainable construction waste

management in developing countries

Literature Review
1.0 Abstract

2.0 Introduction

3.0 Method

Several procedures were followed to ensure a high quality literature review on the need for
sustainable construction waste management in developing countries. First a comprehensive search
for reports, journals, news articles and legislations. This was completed by using key terms including
sustainable, waste management and developing countries. The primary database used was Google
Scholar. The articles that matched the study were chosen by reading the abstract, introductions and
contents looking for relevant information in the reports. Secondly, the reference section for each
report was searched using connected papers to find additional articles and reports. A total of 23
literatures were used for this review by filtering the economic, social, environmental, health risks and
management strategies. The aim was to focus on articles published between 2018-2024 however
older articles were incorporated too as they were the primary researched and referenced literature in
most recent articles due to the specific question and to increase accuracy with the review.

3.1 Economic Impacts

The findings of Olusanjo et al. (2014) underscore the significant impact of construction waste on
project cost overruns, revealing that waste accounts for a substantial portion, approximately 30%, of
the total overrun in material costs. This highlights the pressing need for efficient waste management
practices within construction projects to mitigate the financial burdens imposed by waste
accumulation. However, the study lacks granularity in assessing the specific factors influencing waste
generation and cost overruns.

Complementing this insight, Adewuyi and Odesola (2016) provide a nuanced perspective on the
variability of material waste percentages contributing to project cost overruns. Their findings reveal
that the percentage of material waste varies significantly depending on factors such as material type,
ranging from 8.47% to 16.61%. This variability underscores the complex nature of waste generation
across different construction projects and highlights the need for targeted waste reduction strategies
tailored to specific project requirements. However, the study's focus on Nigeria limits the
generalisability of its findings to broader contexts.

Moreover, Powell (2024) iterates the additional costs incurred by companies due to waste disposal,
including expenses related to landfill taxes and transportation. This underscores the financial burden
imposed by inefficient waste management practices and underscores the imperative for implementing
cost-effective waste reduction and disposal strategies. However, the study primarily addresses the
financial aspect of waste management and lacks deeper exploration of environmental and social
dimensions.

Turning to the impact of construction waste on project timelines, Memon et al. (2020) delve into the
mechanisms through which waste accumulation disrupts project schedules. Their findings highlight
that waste accumulation necessitates additional time for cleaning, removal, replacement, and rework,
thereby contributing to project delays. This underscores the interconnectedness of waste
management practices and project efficiency, emphasising the need for proactive waste mitigation
strategies to optimise project timelines. However, the study primarily focuses on operational aspects
and could benefit from considering broader systemic implications.
Expanding the discussion to the broader consequences of construction waste, Eze et al. (2016)
demonstrate that waste mismanagement poses systemic economic risks, contributing to business
failures among building stakeholders in developing countries. This highlights the profound
socioeconomic implications of inefficient waste management practices, underscoring the need for
holistic approaches to address systemic vulnerabilities and enhance business sustainability. However,
the study's focus on developing countries limits its applicability to global contexts and warrants
consideration of diverse socio-cultural and institutional factors influencing waste management
practices.

Collectively, these studies shed light on the varied economic ramifications of construction waste,
emphasizing its impacts on project costs, timelines, business outcomes, and overall project success.

3.2 Social Impacts

Continuous and improper waste disposal practices contribute significantly to environmental

degradation, resulting in air and water pollution, as emphasised by Rodríguez et al. (2020). These
pollutants pose severe threats to human health and have far-reaching consequences for community
well-being. However, the negative impacts of waste extend beyond pollution, particularly in the
context of construction waste, as highlighted by Aboginije et al. (2020). The detrimental effects include
aesthetically unattractive surroundings, land degradation, increased disease transmission,
compromised community health near waste accumulation sites, and further degradation of air and
water quality. This comprehensive assessment underscores the multifaceted nature of waste
management challenges and the urgent need for effective solutions.

Moreover, transportation and traffic congestion emerge as significant concerns exacerbated by

construction waste, according to ELARD and GAA (2009). This suggests that waste generated from
construction projects not only contributes to environmental pollution and health risks but also impacts
urban infrastructure and mobility patterns. However, a critical analysis reveals that waste
management issues extend beyond physical waste materials expand on this!. Geibler et al. (2006)
highlight additional dimensions of waste, including suboptimal working conditions, loss of jobs, and
lack of education.

Poor working conditions lead to increased waste production as they do not provide the tools,
materials, spaces, ergonomic support, and knowledge required to carry out a job (Geibler et al.,
2006). This inefficiency, in utilizing resources not only results in more waste being made but also
poses risks to the safety and productivity of workers. Similarly, a lack of job opportunities leads to
wasted economic resources when there is a lack of job creation, inconsistent employment, or job
mismanagement (Geibler et al., 2006). Additionally insufficient education contributes to waste
generation by hindering individuals’ ability to perform tasks efficiently and restricting their growth and
development (Geibler et al., 2006).

By incorporating these viewpoints into discussions on waste management it becomes clear that waste
is not an outcome but also encompasses issues, with resource allocation efficiency, human capital
utilization and socio economic progress. Tackling waste management challenges necessitates
strategies that tackle social, economic, and human aspects. Improving waste management practices
should involve not reducing and correctly disposing of waste but also promoting sustainable
development, social fairness, and human welfare.

Unused innovation often leads to wasted employee creativity, resulting in the loss of valuable
improvement ideas, and contributing to employee dissatisfaction (Liker and Meyer, 2006). Similarly,
underestimating social acceptance can result in wastage due to insufficient client and stakeholder
involvement, leading to missed opportunities for societal benefits (Geibler et al., 2006). Furthermore,
lack of societal dialogue intensifies waste generation by hindering communication with project
stakeholders, including inadequate reporting activities, limited engagement with local communities,
exclusion from decision-making processes, and neglect of political dialogue (Geibler et al., 2006).
Integrating these perspectives reveals that waste in organisational contexts extends beyond physical
materials to include inefficiencies in utilizing human creativity, social resources, and stakeholder
engagement. Addressing these forms of waste requires holistic strategies that promote innovation,
social inclusivity, and transparent dialogue among all stakeholders involved in a project.

3.3 Environmental Impacts

Construction waste produced at building sites poses a danger to the environment by releasing harmful
substances and materials into it as pointed out by Hossain and NG (2019). This pollution of the
environment is seen as one of the consequences of construction waste according to their research.
Moreover, the substantial amount of waste generated by the construction industry significantly adds to
pollution as highlighted by Ajayi et al. (2015). This waste contaminates the environment but also
contributes to over 33% of global CO2 emissions as stressed by Baek et al. (2013). Additionally
improper handling of waste within the construction sector has resulted in the exhaustion of resources
as observed by Castellano et al. (2016). Through an examination of these viewpoints, it is clear that
managing construction waste plays a crucial role in environmental sustainability efforts with
implications, for conserving resources and mitigating climate change. To address the repercussions of
construction waste comprehensive strategies are necessary that prioritise reducing waste proper
disposal methods and sustainable resource management practices.

The polluting of soil by chemicals and other materials resulting from construction waste is identified as
the third most significant environmental impact of construction waste, as perceived by respondents
(Tafesse, 2022). This finding underscores the direct contact between construction waste and soil,
highlighting the absence of policy implications, waste characterization, and proper disposal methods
in Ethiopia. This lack of regulation aligns with the argument presented by Olusanjo et al. (2014),
emphasising the detrimental effects of waste accumulation on land use and soil contamination,
ultimately impacting agricultural productivity and forestation. Conversely, Liu et al. (2020) suggest that
reducing construction waste can mitigate the environmental impact by decreasing the volume of
hazardous waste generated. Integrating these perspectives reveals the urgent need for
comprehensive waste management strategies to address soil pollution and minimize the
environmental impact of construction activities. However, it's important to critically assess the
effectiveness of such strategies, considering factors such as regulatory frameworks, implementation
challenges, and stakeholder engagement in waste management practices.

The statistics reveal that urban garbage, predominantly household and construction waste, constitutes
over 80% of the total waste generated. Kong and Ma (2020) estimate that China's construction area
will increase by approximately 40 billion square meters by 2020, based on a standard estimation of
0.5–0.6 tons per square meter. To address waste generation, prefabrication techniques have been
implemented in Hong Kong and Malaysia, aiming to minimize waste during the design phase, as
noted by Nagapan (2012). However, effective waste prevention requires precise coordination among
all stakeholders involved in the construction process. Despite efforts to mitigate waste, construction
waste significantly impacts municipal waste quality, hindering further treatment such as composting,
and contributing to surface drain blockages, with 10-20% of construction waste finding its way into
surface drains, according to Ajayi et al. (2015). Incorporating these perspectives highlights the
complex challenges associated with construction waste management, emphasising the need for
coordinated efforts and innovative solutions to address waste generation and its adverse effects on
waste treatment infrastructure and environmental health.

3.4 Health risks associated with construction waste

The management of solid waste (SW) in developing countries is fraught with challenges aggravated
by unsustainable practices, amplifying environmental contamination and the proliferation of diseases
(Ferronato and Toretta, 2018). Specifically, a myriad of health risks stemming from various diseases,
alongside traffic congestion, conflicts with construction firms, obstruction of drainage systems leading
to floods, and the dispersal of waste by rainwater, underscore change this word underscore used it
too many times! the significant social impacts of construction waste (Aboginije et al., 2020). These
findings highlight the multifaceted consequences of inadequate waste management practices within
the construction sector in developing nations. The prevalence of unsustainable practices not only
complicates environmental degradation but also poses serious threats to public health and safety. As
construction activities continue to intensify in these regions, addressing the social impacts of
construction waste becomes paramount for sustainable development efforts. By elucidating the social
ramifications of construction waste mismanagement, research such as that by Ferronato and Toretta
(2018) and Aboginije et al. (2020) underscores the urgency of implementing effective waste
management strategies in developing countries. Through comprehensive policies, innovative
technologies, and collaborative efforts among stakeholders, it is imperative to mitigate these social
impacts and foster sustainable waste management practices that promote environmental stewardship
and safeguard public health.

Sustainable construction waste management aims to minimise material waste and associated costs
by implementing efficient procurement practices, optimising material use, and promoting recycling and
reuse. The findings by Olusanjo et al. (2014) pronounce that material waste contributes significantly to
project cost overruns, with approximately 30% of total project costs attributed to waste. Effective
waste management plays a role, in reducing impacts and minimising health hazards linked to waste
incineration and open dumping. The research conducted by Ferronato and Toretta (2018) sheds light
on the presence of pollutants like polychlorinated dibenzo p dioxins (PCDDs) polychlorinated
dibenzofurans (PCDFs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in soils near disposal sites across
countries. Adopting waste management strategies, such as waste disposal methods, identification of
hazardous materials and implementation of pollution prevention measures is vital, for safeguarding
both the environment and human wellbeing. The environmental contaminants generated by waste
combustion, as highlighted by Ferronato and Toretta (2018), exacerbate health risks for nearby
communities. Exposure to pollutants such as PCDDs and PCBs can lead to a range of adverse health
outcomes, including respiratory problems, neurological disorders, and cancer. These health risks
underscore the social impacts of construction waste mismanagement, as vulnerable people,
particularly those living in proximity to waste disposal sites, bear the brunt of environmental pollution
and its associated health consequences.

The combined information highlights how economic, environmental, and social factors are closely
linked due to the mismanagement of construction waste. Material handling and disposal methods not
only increase project expenses but also harm the environment and jeopardize public health. The
overall impact of these issues emphasises the importance of implementing practices, in managing
construction waste. By considering the environmental and social aspects of waste management
stakeholders can reduce risks preserve resources and encourage growth.

The Black, Velis and Cook (2022) report discusses the ongoing occupational deaths caused by
asbestos exposure, estimating annual fatalities ranging from 90,000 to 250,000, primarily in HICs
where asbestos use was prevalent. It also highlights the risks posed by asbestos-containing materials
during demolition and renovation activities. Similarly, the legislation (The Control of Asbestos
regulation 2012) underscores the health risks associated with asbestos exposure, particularly when
asbestos fibres become airborne during construction work. It underlines the cumulative risk posed by
regular exposure to asbestos fibres, which can lead to asbestos-related diseases.

The occupational hazards associated with asbestos exposure further underscore the importance of
prioritising worker safety in construction activities (Black, Velis, and Cook, 2022). While Black, Velis,
and Cook's report highlights the prevalence of asbestos-related deaths and the disparities in risk
perception and regulatory frameworks across different economic contexts, it's essential to recognize
that occupational health risks extend beyond asbestos exposure alone. For instance, a study by
Zhang et al. (2022) suggests that construction workers in developing countries face a multitude of
occupational hazards, including exposure to hazardous chemicals, physical injuries, and ergonomic
strains, which may not receive adequate attention in policy and regulatory frameworks. This broader
perspective emphasises the need for comprehensive occupational health and safety measures that
address various hazards faced by construction workers.

Overall, these sources highlight the global nature of asbestos-related risks and the importance of
addressing these risks through coordinated efforts to implement and enforce effective regulatory
frameworks, raise awareness about the hazards of asbestos exposure, and prioritise worker safety in
construction and demolition activities, irrespective of the country's economic level.

3.5 Construction waste management strategies

Construction waste recycling has emerged as a prominent strategy across various industries,
including construction, aiming to mitigate the environmental impact of waste disposal, particularly
landfilling, which is considered the oldest and most environmentally harmful form of waste treatment
(Ajayi et al., 2015). Recycling occupies the fourth position in the waste management hierarchy,
reflecting its significance in waste reduction efforts. Developed countries like Germany and Hong
Kong have prioritized recycling initiatives to decrease waste disposal in landfills, with Germany's
government actively supporting recycling activities (Nagapan, 2012). However, effective control of
construction waste requires more than just recycling efforts. Tafesse (2021) emphasises that waste
minimisation and management strategies are essential for achieving meaningful waste control
outcomes. Integrating these perspectives highlights the multifaceted nature of waste management in
the construction industry, demonstrate the importance of holistic strategies that encompass waste
reduction, recycling, and effective waste management practices.

Materials reuse presents a crucial avenue for diverting waste from landfill sites, offering a sustainable
alternative to traditional disposal methods. Unlike recycling, materials reuse involves utilising
materials without significant alteration to their physical or chemical state, making it an attractive option
for waste diversion in the construction industry (Ajayi et al., 2015). Germany has demonstrated
advanced waste handling technologies focused on material reuse, such as Siemens Company's
three-step process involving drying, distillation, and burning to facilitate reuse (Nagapan, 2012).
Similarly, in Hong Kong, construction practitioners engage in on-site sorting of inert and non-inert
waste materials to promote reuse, enabling the recycling of some generated waste (Nagapan, 2012).
By effectively implementing construction waste management strategies, the potential economic,
environmental, and social benefits are significant, underscoring the importance of adopting
sustainable waste management practices (Tafesse, 2021). Integrating these perspectives portrays the
multifaceted nature of materials reuse in construction waste management, highlighting its potential to
mitigate environmental impacts, conserve resources, and promote sustainable development.

Designing buildings for flexibility and deconstruction is recognized as an effective approach to

construction and demolition (C&D) waste management, as it allows for the adaptation of structures to
both external and internal changes (Ajayi et al., 2015). A flexible design optimises materials to
industry standards, facilitating their reuse in subsequent projects and reduce waste generated from
offcuts, a significant contributor to waste in construction projects. Additionally, prefabrication
techniques, utilized in Hong Kong and Malaysia, have proven effective in preventing waste generation
during the design phase (Nagapan, 2012). However, the successful prevention of waste necessitates
meticulous coordination among all stakeholders involved in the construction process, highlighting the
importance of effective communication and collaboration within the construction community.
Integrating these perspectives underscores the critical role of design strategies and prefabrication
techniques in waste prevention, punctuate? doesnt make sense this word the need for
comprehensive approaches that address waste generation at various stages of the construction
process.

The trend towards waste minimization in prefabrication and modular construction is evident, with
reported reductions of 52% and 84.7%, respectively, as highlighted by Ajayi et al. (2015). This
approach involves manufacturing building elements offsite and assembling them onsite, effectively
mitigating factors that typically contribute to waste generation, such as materials handling, poor
storage, and design changes. Similarly, Singapore's construction sector has embraced a minimization
approach to address land scarcity and promote sustainability, as noted by Nagapan (2012). However,
the successful implementation of these strategies relies heavily on contractor support and active
participation in advancing sustainable practices. Incorporating these perspectives underscores the
potential of waste minimisation techniques in construction projects to reduce environmental impact
and enhance sustainability, while also highlighting the importance of stakeholder collaboration in
achieving these objectives.

Governments worldwide have implemented legislative and tax measures aimed at diverting waste
from landfills, with initiatives such as the "Pay as You Throw" (PAYT) system representing a
significant step in waste management (Ajayi et al., 2015). PAYT operates on the polluter pays
principle, imposing charges based on the volume or weight of waste disposed of in landfills, thereby
incentivizing waste reduction, reuse, and recycling practices. Similarly, the Alex Fraser Group's
utilisation of recycled waste materials in Western Ring Road projects demonstrates a commendable
effort towards sustainable waste management (Nagapan, 2012). However, challenges persist, as
construction companies often resist the use of recycled products despite formal accreditation,
highlighting barriers to widespread adoption. Additionally, government policies in Korea mandate the
use of recycled aggregates in construction projects, with regulations outlining minimum requirements
to promote the incorporation of recycled materials (Nagapan, 2012). Integrating these perspectives
shows the importance of both regulatory measures and industry initiatives in promoting sustainable
waste management practices, while also highlighting the need to address barriers to adoption and
ensure compliance with recycling mandates.

conclusion?
5.0 References

Aboginije, A., Aigbavboa, C., Thwala, W., & Samuel, S. (2020). Determining the impact of
construction and demolition waste reduction practices on green building projects in Gauteng province,
South Africa. Proceedings of International Engineering & Operations Management, Dubai, UAE, 10-
12.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340129188_Determining_the_Impact_of_Construction_and_
Demolition_Waste_Reduction_practices_on_Green_Building_Projects_in_Gauteng_Province_South_
Africa

Adewuyi, T. O., & Odesola, I. A. (2016). Material waste minimisation strategies among construction
firms in south-south, Nigeria. International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and
Technology, 7(1), 11-29.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Material%20waste%20minimization%20strategies
%20among%20construction%20firms%20in%20south-south
%20Nnigeria&publication_year=2016&author=T.O.%20Adewuyi&author=I.A.%20Odesola

Ajayi, S. O., Oyedele, L. O., Bilal, M., Akinade, O. O., Alaka, H. A., Owolabi, H. A., & Kadiri, K. O.
(2015). Waste effectiveness of the construction industry: Understanding the impediments and
requisites for improvements. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 102, 101-112.
https://www.scopus.com/record/display.uri?eid=2-s2.0-
84938863440&origin=inward&txGid=eae99457a2ea5d034e0fd1db23d310ca

Baek, C., Park, S. H., Suzuki, M., & Lee, S. H. (2013). Life cycle carbon dioxide assessment tool for
buildings in the schematic design phase. Energy and Buildings, 61, 275-287.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037877881300056X

Castellano, Jordi, Albert Ribera, and Joaquim Ciurana. "Integrated system approach to evaluate
social, environmental and economics impacts of buildings for users of housings." Energy and
Buildings 123 (2016): 106-118.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378778816303024

Chunbo Zhang (2022),An overview of the waste hierarchy framework for analyzing the circularity in
construction and demolition waste management in Europe,
Science of The Total Environment,
Volume 803, 2022,149892, ISSN 0048-9697,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149892.
Ed Cook, Costas A Velis & Leon Black. (2022). Construction and Demolition Waste Management: A
Systematic Scoping Review of Risks to Occupational and Public Health, Volume 3.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frsus.2022.924926/full

ELARD, GAA (2009). Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of construction and operation of
Syria cement plant and captive power plant, and associated quarrying activities. Syrian cement
company SCC

Eze, E. C., Seghosime, R., Eyong, O. P., & Loya, O. S. (2017). Assessment of materials waste in the
construction industry: A view of Construction Operatives, Tradesmen and Artisans in Nigeria. The
International Journal of Engineering and Science, 6(4), 32-47.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar

Fadiya, O. O., Georgakis, P., & Chinyio, E. (2014). Quantitative analysis of the sources of
construction waste. Journal of Construction Engineering, 2014, 9.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Quantitative%20analysis%20of%20the%20sources
%20of%20construction%20waste&publication_year=2014&author=O.F.%20Olusanjo&author=G.
%20Panos&author=C.%20Ezekiel

Ferronato, N., & Torretta, V. (2019). Waste Mismanagement in Developing Countries: A Review of
Global Issues. International journal of environmental research and public health, 16(6), 1060.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16061060

Justin Von Geibler (2006). Accounting for the social dimension of sustainability: experiences from the
biotechnology industry, Volume 15, Issue 5
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.540

Liu, J., Yi, Y., & Wang, X. (2020). Exploring factors influencing construction waste reduction: A
structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 276, 123185.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652620332303

Lingji Kong, Biao Ma, 2020. Evaluation of environmental impact of construction waste disposal based
on fuzzy set analysis, Environmental Technology & Innovation, Volume 19,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2020.100877.

Md. Uzzal Hossain, S. Thomas Ng, (2019), Influence of waste materials on buildings’ life cycle
environmental impacts: Adopting resource recovery principle, Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, Volume 142, Pages 10-23,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.11.010.

Memon, M. A., Mangnejo, D. A., Sohu, S., Hussain, A., & Hassan, M. (2020). Identification of causes
for construction waste material in construction projects of Sindh province. International Research
Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology, 4(10), 7.
https://jkmc.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/MEDICAL/article/view/255
Powell, A. (2024, March 7). Construction waste to materials. Nationwide Waste Services.
https://nationwidewasteservices.co.uk/construction-waste-to-materials/#:~:text=Moreover%2C
%20waste%20disposal%20often%20incurs,such%20as%20concrete%20and%20steel.

Rachael E. Marshall. (2013). Khosrow Farahbakhsh, Systems approaches to integrated solid waste
management in developing countries, Waste Management
Volume 33, Issue 4, Pages 988-1003, ISSN 0956-053X
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2012.12.023.
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956053X13000032)

Rodríguez, G., Sáez del Bosque, I. F., Asensio, E., Sánchez de Rojas, M. I., & Medina, C. (2020).
Construction and demolition waste applications and maximum daily output in Spanish recycling
plants. Waste Management & Research, 38(4), 423-432.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0734242X20904437

S. Nagapan, I. A. Rahman, and A. Asmi (2012). “Factors Contributing to Physical and Non-Physical
Waste Generation in Construction Industry,” International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences,
vol. 1, no. 1
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/12008295.pdf

Shitaw Tafesse, Yidnekachew Esayas Girma, Eliyas Dessalegn, 2022. Analysis of the socio-
economic and environmental impacts of construction waste and management practices, Heliyon,
Volume 8, Issue 3,ISSN 2405-8440,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09169.

The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012

https://www.hse.gov.uk/construction/healthrisks/cancer-and-construction/
asbestos.htm#:~:text=Asbestos%20materials%20present%20a%20risk,high%20levels%20of
%20asbestos%20fibres.

United Nations. (2018). Urbanization | Population Division. United Nations.

https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/content/urbanization-0#:~:text=Today%2C%20more
%20than%20half%20of,both%20developed%20and%20developing%20countries.