ASSESSMENT OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL

STRATEGIES. THE CASE OF GELAN CONDOMMINIUM CONSTRUCTION

PROJECT SITE

ENDALE TEFERI
ID NO.GSR 019/08

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT

FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS IN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT.

ADVISOR: - ALULA TESSEMA (PHD)

FEBRUARY, 2017

i
ii
 Declaration
I hereby, declare that this thesis entitled “Assessment of Affordability of Condominium Houses: The Case of

Addis Ababa Housing Construction Project Office at Tuludimtu Site” was composed of myself, with the

guidance of my advisor, that the work contained herein is my own except where explicitly stated otherwise in

the text, and this work has not been submitted, in whole or in part, for any other degree or professional

qualification.

Endale Mekonnen Signature____________________ Date______________

ii
 ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY
FACULITY OF NATURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

ASSESSMENT OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL

STRATEGIES. THE CASE OF GELAN CONDOMMINIUM CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT SITE.

BY
ENDALE TEFERI

APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF EXAMANIERS

__________________________ __________________ _______________________

Dean Graduate Studies Signature Date

__________________________ __________________ _______________________

Advisor Signature Date

__________________________ __________________ _______________________

External Examiner Signature Date

__________________________ __________________ _______________________

Internal Examiner Signature Date

iii
 ABSTRACT
Construction waste can adversely affect economy, human and environmental health if it is

not managed and disposed properly. Hence an effective Construction Waste Management

and Disposal System (CWM&DS) is necessary for sustainable and healthy environment.

This research investigated the CWM&DS of Gelan Project site and examined if it has

proper guidelines and strategies to manage and remove construction waste. Its objective is

to assess the economic, health and environmental effects of the CWM&DS. It is significant

as it identifies the challenges in the CWM&DS and possible solutions to prevent its negative

consequences. The research used primary and secondary data collected through qualitative

and quantitative methods. It collected data through survey questions, face-to-face interviews

and field survey . It used Likert’s evaluation techniques and statistical analysis software

(SPSS) to analyze data. The research found out Gelan Project site does not have CWM&DS

plan and strategy and the CWM&DS is ineffective. Among other things, storage facilities

are inadequate, materials are mishandled, deteriorate and are exposed to theft. There is

delay in waste disposal and the manner is adverse to health and the environment.

Procurement inefficiency, poor storage, material mishandling, lack of proper CWM&DS,

inadequate management attention, weak law enforcement, theft and lack of awareness of

CWM&DS are major challenges. The study recommends improved supervision, security and

storage, CWM&DS training, systematic CWM&DS plan, due management attention and

stronger legal enforcement for stakeholders and policy makers. It is expected that the

findings and the recommendations will serve as a benchmark for future knowledge and as

an input to improve the CWM&DS of AAHCPO.

Key words: Construction Waste Management, Waste Disposal, Addis Ababa Housing
Construction Project Office, Gelan Housing Project Site

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It is my pleasure to thank my advisor Dr. Alula Tessema, for his unreserved

professional guidance and encouragement for the completion of this thesis

successfully.

I thank my family for their support and encouragement and Kumssa Mekonnen for

commenting on this thesis.

__________________ _______________ ________________

Name Signature Date

v
 Table of Content

DECLARATION .................................................................................................................................... II

APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF EXAMANIERS .......................................................................... III

ABSTRACT ..........................................................................................................................................IV

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................................... V

LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................................. VIII

LIST OF FIGURES ...............................................................................................................................XI

ACRONYMS ....................................................................................................................................... XII

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ................................................................................................................ 1

1.2. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................... 2
1.3. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .......................................................................................................... 3
1.4. BASIC RESEARCH QUESTIONS........................................................................................................... 4
1.5. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY .............................................................................................................. 4
1.5.1. GENERAL OBJECTIVE ..................................................................................................................... 4
1.5.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................. 4
1.6. OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................. 5
1.7. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................... 6
1.8. SCOPE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................................................ 6
1.9. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................................. 7
1.10. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY ....................................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER TWO: - LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 9

2.1. CONCEPTUAL THEORIES OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT .............................................. 9

cont. . . .

vi
2.1.1. DEFINITION OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE ........................................................................................ 9
2.1.2. CLASSIFICATIONS OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE ........................................................................... 11
2.1.3. SOURCES OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE......................................................................................... 14
2.2. THE ROLE OF MANAGEMENT IN CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT ..................................... 16
2.2.1. CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT AND STRATEGIES ......................................................... 16
2.3. THE EXPERIENCES OF OTHER COUNTRIES ................................................................................... 19
2.3.1. NETHERLANDS ............................................................................................................................. 19
2.3.2. SWEDEN ....................................................................................................................................... 23
2.3.3. UK ................................................................................................................................................ 25
2.4. CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT IN ETHIOPIA .................................................................... 27
2.4.1. POLICY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAME WORK ................................................................................... 27
2.5. THE PRACTICE OF WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL IN ETHIOPIA ......................................... 30
2.6. THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT ............................................................... 31
2.6.1. IMPACT ON HUMAN HEALTH ....................................................................................................... 31
2.6.2. ECONOMIC IMPACT ...................................................................................................................... 33
2.6.3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ........................................................................................................... 34
2.7. THE ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF GELAN PROJECT OFFICE LOCAL ADMINISTRATION ON CWM
............................................................................................................................................................... 35

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ............................................... 37

3.1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ 37
3.2. THE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 37
3.3. POPULATION AND SAMPLING METHODS......................................................................................... 39
3.4. DATA COLLECTION TOOLS ............................................................................................................. 40
3.4.1. QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................................................................................................... 41
3.4.2. FACE TO FACE INTERVIEWS ......................................................................................................... 41
3.4.3. NON-PARTICIPANT OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................. 41
3.5. PROCEDURES OF DATA COLLECTION .............................................................................................. 42
3.6. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................ 44

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ................................................... 45

cont. . . .

vii
4.1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 45
4.2. RESULTS AND FINDINGS OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................... 45
4.2.1. RESPONDENTS DEMOGRAPHY CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................... 45
4.2.2. RESPONDENTS RESPONSES .......................................................................................................... 48
4.2. FACE TO FACE INTERVIEW RESULTS CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION WASTE MANAGEMENT AND
DISPOSAL STRATEGY AT GELAN SITE ................................................................................................... 63

CHAPTER FIVE - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................. 69

5.1. CONCLUSIONS OF THE STUDY ......................................................................................................... 69

5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 71

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 74

APPENDIX............................................................................................................................................ 78

LIST OF TABLES

viii
Table 1: Sources of Construction Waste ....................................................................................... 155

Table 2: Waste Reduction Hierarchy ............................................................................................ 177

Table 3: Age Characteristics of Respondents ............................................................................... 477

Table 4: Gender Characteristics of the Respondents ................................................................... 477

Table 5: Educational Level of Respondents ................................................................................... 57

Table 6: Current Work Institution of the Respondents ................................................................... 58

Table 7: Respondents Work Experience in the Construction Industry .......................................... 58

Table 8: Respondents Work Experience at Gelan Housing Project Site ........................................ 58

Table 9: Types of Waste and Generation Rate................................................................................ 59

Table 10: Awareness and Implementation of Waste Monitoring System....................................... 60

Table 11: Causes of Construction Waste ........................................................................................ 51

Table 12: Effectiveness of Site CWM & DS .................................................................................. 52

Table 13: Timeliness of Waste Disposal from Site...................................................................... 53

Table 14: AAHCPO Waste Disposal Supervision .......................................................................... 53

Table 15: Efficiency of Storage System and Facilities ................................................................... 54

Table 16: Material Handling ........................................................................................................... 54

Table 17: Security of Construction Materials .............................................................................. 54

Table 18: Measures to Improve CWM & DS ................................................................................. 55

Table 19: Policy, Legislation and Contracts on CWM & DS ......................................................... 57

Table 20: Awareness of CWM & DS Core Issues .......................................................................... 68

Table 21: Awareness of CWM & DS Health Impact ...................................................................... 69

Table 22: Awareness of Site CWM& DS Economic Impact ........................................................ 600

cont. . . .

ix
Table 23: Awareness of Relationship between CWM& DS and Environment .............................. 60

Table 24: Environment Impact of CWM&DS at the Site ............................................................... 60

Table 25: Supervision to Ensure Environmental friendliness of Construction Waste Disposal ..... 61

Table 26: Adverse Potential of CWM&DS on Environment......................................................... 61

Table 27: Environmental Impact Assessment of CWM&DS ......................................................... 62

x
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Construction wastes store .............................................................................................. 100

Figure 2: Classifications of Construction Waste........................................................................... 144

Figure 3: Sources of Construction Waste ....................................................................................... 15

xi
 ACRONYMS

AAHCPO: Addis Ababa Housing Construction Project Office

C & DW: Construction & Demolition Waste

CWM: Construction Waste Management

CAB: Country Administrative Board

CAN: Clean Neighborhood Act

DEMA: Dutch Environmental Management Act

DEPA: Dutch Environmental Protection Act

EEA: Environmental Enforcement Authorities

EMA: Environmental Management Act

EPCP: Environmental Pollution Control Proclamation

EPA: Environmental Protection Authority

EU: European Union

IHDP: Integrated Housing Development Program

MSE: Micro & Small scale Enterprise

NEL: Netherland Environmental Law

NDP: National Development Plan

cont. . . .

xii
SEC: Swedish Environmental Code

SEPA: Swedish Environmental Protection Agency

SWPP: Swedish Waste Prevention Program

SWMP: Solid Waste Management Plan

UK: United Kingdom

UNEP: United Nations Environmental Protection

WRFP: Waste Reduction Frame Work Plan

xiii
 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Study

Construction waste management is about prevention, minimization and proper disposal of

waste. Effective waste management has significant economic advantages and prevents

negative impacts to human health and the environment.

The role of the construction industry in Ethiopia has drastically increased over the past couple

of decades partly due to the construction of residential houses by the government. Hundreds

of thousands of condominiums were built in the past and the construction of many more is

underway to solve the severe housing problem. The situation of waste generated from the

construction of residential houses, however, is not well assessed and understood.

This study endeavors to examine the situation of construction waste management of the

AAHCPO through an assessment of waste management strategy of Gelan condominium

building project site located in Akaki-Kaliti sub-city.

The study aims to identify the construction waste management strategy implemented, its

problems and roots with a view to understand and contribute in finding solutions. With this in

mind, it exposes and discusses the findings of the study and forwards appropriate

recommendations.

It also provides an overview of the concept of construction waste and management strategies,

economic, human and environmental impacts of waste management, the experiences of other

countries on construction waste management and other related concepts.

1
1.2. Background of the Study

The housing demand in Addis Ababa has been increasing due to urbanization, population

growth and migration. The Integrated Housing Development Program (IHDP) has been

implemented to meet growing housing demand in the city. The Addis Ababa Housing

Construction Project Office (AAHCP), a federal body mandated to execute the program has

built 175,000 condominium buildings in the past and plans to build around 750,000 by 2020

in the capital. The government intends to strengthen and expand the housing program to

address housing problem in regional cities as well. Given the number of people, waiting on

line for condominium houses and rate of increase in population several hundreds of thousands

of condominiums will be built in the future.

The necessity of addressing the housing problem is indisputable but of no lesser importance is

the management of waste resulting from the construction of these condominiums. Their

construction generates waste, which adversely affects the economy, human and environmental

health in the absence of proper management.

Construction waste management is a relatively new practice for Ethiopian construction

industry. However, in developed countries it has been practiced through institutional, policy

and legal methods and implementation of construction waste management strategies based on

waste management hierarchy Shen et, al (2002), Poon et, al (2004). It is an endeavor to

prevent and minimize construction waste in line with economic, health and environmental

concerns. There are several strategies to be considered in construction waste management in

order to prevent waste to reuse it and to deposit it properly. The effort to properly manage

construction waste needs administrative, policy and legal measures.

2
Most studies in developing countries indicate the construction process is absent of effective

construction management strategies Guerrero (2014). The construction industry has boomed

in different countries as well as the Ethiopian too. The construction waste management in the

construction industry in general and specifically in the house sector is not as effective as it

should be.

This study assesses construction waste management situation at the Gelan housing project site

administered by Addis Ababa Housing Construction Project Office. It examines how

construction waste is managed at the site with a view to understand the challenges and

forward appropriate recommendations.

1.3. Statement of the Problem

Construction waste management has significant health, economic and environmental impacts.

Rational waste management is necessary, among other things to reduce cost, prevent health

problems and alleviate damage to the environment. Construction has drastically increased in

Ethiopia in the last few decades but effective waste management systems are not in place to

prevent the negative impact of the rising construction waste. The same is true of Gelan

Housing project, one of the projects run by Addis Ababa Housing Construction Project Office

(AAHCPO).

The project site generates several types of waste that are not managed properly. At the site, it

is common to see expensive imported construction material buried in soil, aggregate not

placed appropriately, broken concrete blocks littered around here and there and large

quantities of cement turned to stone. Such mishandling of construction materials has negative

economic impacts. The project does not have an effective storage system. Waste materials are

3
crammed in the stores unsystematically. Judging from media reports of theft of construction

materials from the stores, they are not also well secured.

The waste management and disposal strategy at the Gelan condominium-housing site is

inadequate and the consequences are obvious. This thesis aims to identify the specific

problems in waste disposal strategies at the site and the consequent economic and

environmental impacts.

1.4. Basic Research Questions

This research aims to answer the following questions:

1. What types and quantity of waste materials does the Gelan condominium housing

project generate?

2. What strategy does the site employ and the major challenges in waste management

and disposal?

3. How does the waste management disposal at the site affect human, economy and

environmental health?

4. What solutions apply to improve the construction waste management system and

alleviate its negative consequences?

1.5. Objectives of the Study

1.5.1. General Objective

To assess building construction waste management and waste disposal strategy of Gelan

condominium site and its health, economic and environmental impacts.

1.5.2. Specific Objectives

• To identify waste management and disposal strategy of the study site.

4
 • To identify the problems and challenges of the waste management and disposal

strategy.

• To identify negative impacts of the strategy.

• To forward recommendation to improve the strategy, prevent and alleviate its harmful

consequences.

1.6. Operational Definitions

Construction Waste management – An efficient material handling, reduction, reuse,

recycling and disposal of construction waste materials.

Construction Waste - Wasted or damaged materials generated from construction site which

need to be transported elsewhere to the construction sites or used within the construction site

itself for the purpose of land filling, incineration, recycling, reusing, or composting rather than

the intended specific purpose of the project due to material change, excess nonuse, or

noncompliance with the specifications or being a byproduct of the construction process.

Construction Waste Disposal – The land filling, incineration, recycling, reusing, or

composting of construction waste materials.

Waste Management Strategy- An all-encompassing strategy to effectively utilize

construction resources, with the view to reducing the quantity of waste and utilizing the

generated waste in the most effective manner constituting avoiding waste, re-using and

recycling waste materials. Avoiding waste refers to any practice to avoid or minimize waste at

source. Re-using and recycling refer to the re-using and recycling of waste materials.

5
1.7. Significance of the Study

The researcher believes that the findings of this study will help to overcome the challenges on

the construction waste management strategy of the study site as well as other sites of the

AAHCPO. The study will introduce new concepts, plans and strategies of construction waste

management, which will help individuals and entities to properly manage waste in

construction. By indicating the problems in construction waste management and its negative

impacts the paper will also initiate positive responses from concerned bodies. It is significant

as it possibly leads to an in depth study of the situation of construction waste management and

motivates administrative legal and policy measures. The study will also be useful as a

reference and stepping stone for academic and practical research on construction waste

management.

1.8. Scope of the Study

This research is limited to an assessment of Addis Ababa Gelan condominium housing

construction project. It may however provide a useful insight regarding the situation of other

condominium housing sites administered by the AAHCPO, which practice a similar waste

management strategy. Substance wise the research is limited to construction waste

management system relating to the construction process of buildings at the site, health,

economic and environmental impacts. It mainly focuses on assessing the management of

construction waste resulting in during construction. It does not provide in-depth expose of

construction material management techniques applicable before construction such as those

relating to the production and manufacturing of materials employed as mechanisms of waste

prevention.

6
1.9. Limitations of the study

The major problem is lack of adequate information and data like the types and quantity of

waste at the site. No previous studies were carried out to assess the impact of condominium

building construction waste management in general or particularly relating to Gelan project.

Thus, finding accurate data on the type and quantity of waste and the time of their disposal

has been difficult. There was also lack of data with respect to other components of waste as

well as its impacts. There is serious lack regarding data on the specific health, environmental

and economic impacts. In assessing the health, economic and environmental impacts the

researcher had to rely on analysis of data, he has collected by means of primary tools and

exploration of literature and research on other countries.

The research would have been more elaborate and informative with a broader scope.

However, financial and time constraints limited its scope to the Gelan condominium project.

While this is true, it will provide useful insight about the main problems in other sites and its

recommendations will be helpful.

1.10. Organization of the Study

This research is organized under five chapters:

Chapter one is introductory. It gives a background of the study, states the research problem,

the objectives of the study, delineation of the Study, the research questions. It also shows the

method employed in the research, its scope and limitations, it lists the definition of key terms

and portrays the organization of the research.

Chapter two reviews literature on what constitutes construction waste, its classification,

generation and deals with the concept of construction waste management and strategies. It

7
also discusses, health, economic and environmental impacts of construction waste

management, national practices of construction waste management systems. This chapter

provides a brief overview of construction waste management in Ethiopia, discusses relevant

policies and laws and the construction waste management system of AAHCPO.

In chapter three, the research methodology used for this research is explained in detail.

Chapter describes and explains the research design, the sample selection, data collection,

measuring instruments and data analysis techniques used in the research. Chapter four

incorporates data analysis, the findings of study and interpretation of the findings. Finally,

Chapter five outlines the conclusions of the research and the recommendations forwarded by

the researcher.

8
 CHAPTER TWO: - LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Conceptual Theories of Construction Waste Management

2.1.1. Definition of Construction Waste

Researchers and authors have different views as to what constitutes construction waste and

provided various definitions in relevant literature. Cheung, (1993) defines construction waste

as the by-product generated and removed from construction, renovation and demolition

workplaces or sites of building and civil engineering structures. As Shen et al, (2003) defines

it is the difference between the value of materials delivered and accepted on site and those

properly used as specified and accurately measured in the work, after deducting the cost

savings of substituted materials transferred elsewhere, in which unnecessary cost and time

may be incurred by material wastages.

The wider definitions of construction waste include the concept of value. According to

Formoso et al, (2002), for instance, ‘waste is defined … as the loss of any kind of resources—

materials, time (labor and equipment), and capital—produced by activities that generate direct

or indirect costs but do not add any value to the final product from the point of view of the

client’.

Skoyles (1976) defines waste broadly as the difference between the value of materials

delivered and accepted on site and those properly used as specified and accurately measured

in the work after deducting the cost saving of substituted materials transferred elsewhere, in

which unnecessary cost and time may be incurred by materials wastage. His definition

includes and indirect waste due to substitution or inefficiency as well as monetary loss such

as, waste due to concrete slab thickness larger than specified by the structural designs.

9
Shen,et al (2002 ) also defined construction waste broadly as the difference between the value

of materials delivered and accepted on site and those properly used as specified and

accurately measured in the work after deducting the cost saving of substituted materials

transferred elsewhere in which unnecessary cost and time may be increased by the material

wastage.

Serpell and Alarcon (1998) presented a similar concept stating that all construction activities

that produce direct or indirect cost, but do not add value or process to the product can be

called waste. Construction waste is also considered as losses resulting from activities that

consume direct or indirect costs but do not add value to the product.

This study focuses on direct material waste produced during the construction process and

lifecycle of the study sides and excludes indirect waste such as those relating to

manufacturing, production and transport.

Figure 1: Construction wastes store (Source: Own Survey (2017)

10
2.1.2. Classifications of Construction Waste

One common categorization of material wastage in building construction is as avoidable and

unavoidable. What is commonly known as unavoidable or natural waste is an acceptable level

of material waste the reduction of which, according to Formoso (2002), requires a higher cost

or investment than the economy produced. The level of unavoidable waste may vary

depending on the process, technology employed and other factors but it always exists and

considered as acceptable. The other category, avoidable waste as defined by Formoso (2003),

and others is waste the cost of which is significantly higher than the cost to reduce or prevent

it.

Another common classification of building construction waste is based on the sources of

waste. Though classification by waste is common, there are differences as to which sources it

should cover. The widely accepted classification of waste by source is based on what is

known as Shingos seven wastes (UFRGS, 1989), and is as follows;

 Processing Waste- Relating to the processing (conversion) activity commonly

exemplified by the amount of mortar wasted during ceiling plastering;

 Storage related- The deterioration, and loss of materials due to inadequate and poor

storage conditions and monetary loss due to storage related costs;

 Movement related- Caused by unnecessary or inefficient movements caused by due to

inadequate equipment, inefficient working methods, or inconvenient work place at

site;

11
  Production related waste- The production of defective materials incompatible with

specifications that may be caused by a wide range of reasons like poor design,

specification, etc.

 Waste caused by other reasons such as robbery, theft and vandalism, weather,

accidents, etc.

Building construction waste is also classified as direct and indirect. Formoso (et al 2002),

defines direct waste is as materials which are completely lost because of damage and indirect

waste refers to inaccurate works which are inconsistent with the design, for example, the

construction of concrete slab which is inconsistent with the specification.

Skoyles (1976), provide an example of such classification. Skoyles defines direct material

wastage as a complete loss or damage of materials in the process of construction process and

classifies the following types of waste as direct;

• Supply or delivery waste that constitutes material loss during transit, due to unloading

and the initial placement of materials;

• Site storage and internal site transit waste comprising all losses inappropriate stacking

and storage;

• Conversion waste like those that may result due to inappropriate cutting of materials;

• Fixing waste which comprising the loss of dropped, spoiled, or discarded materials in

the process fixing;

• Cutting waste, material loss due to inappropriate cutting to size and specified shapes;

12
 • Application waste, loss of materials such as mortar for brickwork, paintings, painting

and other application materials that may deteriorate because they are left in unsealed

containers, mixture of materials like mortar and plaster left to harden;

• Management waste that may arise from wrong decision or lack of decision by

management;

• Criminal waste, loss of materials due to theft and vandalism;

• Waste that may be caused because of incorrect type or quality of materials such as

wrongly specified materials,

• Waste due to errors in the bills of quantities and specification.

The second category, indirect material waste includes waste such as those caused by materials

substitution, use of excess of quantities than specified and errors. Concrete slab thickness

larger than specified, size deviations of cast in structural elements like footings, slabs, beams,

and columns, brick and block work due to excessive consumption of mortar in joints are

examples of indirect waste. The classification of direct and indirect waste. According to him

indirect waste includes Brent et al (2006);

• Production waste: The production of materials incompatible to contractual

specification like additional concrete in trenches dug wider than was designed,

because of inappropriate sized bucket;

• Operational waste: The use of materials for which no quantity or other allowances are

contractually made at site;

• Negligent waste: The additional or excess use materials than the amount required due

to negligent behavior.

13
Construction waste materials are also sorted by type, as inert and non-inert (Jaillon et al

2009). What is known as inert waste in building construction includes materials like rocks,

rubbles, concrete, cement, bricks, tiles, stones, soil, sand and asphalt. Inert waste is considered

suitable for land reclamation and some of its types can be used for recycling. Non-inert

building construction waste includes materials such as wood, timber, paper, metals, glass,

plastics and fixtures. Non-inert waste is unsuitable for land reclamation because it

decomposes slowly and may affect environment and health without due care.

Figure 2: Classifications of Construction Waste (Source: Mulualem Merid (2013)

2.1.3. Sources of Construction Waste

Construction waste is caused due to several factors. The most common and widely recognized

factors in literature are categorized and summarized under Table 1 below.

14
 Figure 3: Sources of Construction Waste( Source: Photograph from the Gelan Site )

Table 1: Sources of Construction Waste

Management
Material
Design Construction Operation Others
management
process

Use of incorrect
Incompatible market Materials
Ordering errors material thus requiring Theft
standard sizes supplied
replacement
Lack of attention paid Lack of
Use of incorrect Damage to work done
to dimensional Damages while material
material requiring due to subsequent
coordination of transporting control on
replacement trades
products site
Lack of
Design changes while Required quantity
Lack of possibility to Inappropriate site waste
construction is in unclear due to improper
order small quantities storage management
progress planning
plan
Delays in providing
Unfriendly
Lack of knowledge Purchases not information to
attitudes of Natural
about standard sizes complying with contractors regarding
project team and disasters
available in market specifications types and sizes of
workers
products to be used

Lack of
Designers unfamiliarity
Design changes while environmental Accidents due to Inclement
with alternative
construction is in awareness of negligence weather
products
progress employees on site

Errors by trades persons

Lack of technical
quality products or laborers
Complexity of drawings direction for
Selection of low Malfunctioning of
workers on site
equipment
Source: -Researchers analysis (2017)

15
2.2. The Role of Management in Construction Waste Management

2.2.1. Construction Waste Management and Strategies

Construction waste management is efficient material handling, reduction, reuse, recycling and

disposal of construction waste materials. The practice of waste management for construction

activities has been promoted with economic reasons and the recognition that waste from

construction and demolition works contribute significantly to the polluted environment (Shen

et al, 2002, cited in Shen et al, 2004). According to Coventry and Guthrie (1998), there are

two fundamental reasons for reducing, reusing and recycling waste: the economic advantages,

and the environmental advantages. The environmental advantages include the minimization of

the risk of immediate and future environmental pollution and harm to human health while the

economic advantages include lower project costs, increased business support, lower risk of

litigation regarding waste amongst others. The increasing awareness of economic and

environmental impacts from construction waste has led to the development of waste

management as an important function of construction project management (Shen et al 2004).

There are several approaches to construction waste management. The process of managing

construction waste goes far beyond the disposal of the waste itself. It is an all-encompassing

strategy to effectively utilize construction resources, with the view to reducing the quantity of

waste and utilizing the generated waste in the most effective manner. The most common

approach to management of construction waste is dumping in landfill sites. However,

decreasing landfill space has led to increasing costs of landfill disposal to the contractor (BIE,

1993, cited in Lingard et al, 2000). In addition, a relatively large amount of materials is being

wasted because of poor material control on building sites (Poon, et al, 2004). This has

prompted the need for alternative approaches and strategies for waste prevention.

16
Current waste management strategies are commonly based on what is known as the ‘waste

hierarchy approach’. The waste hierarchy is concerned with the need to address waste along

the full lifecycle of production. A 2003 study by Gertsakis and Lewis provided an

interpretation of the hierarchy as depicted in the table 2 adapted from their study.

Table 2: Waste Reduction Hierarchy

Goal Attribute Outcome

Avoid Preventative Most desirable

Reduce Preventative

Reduce at source Preventative

Reuse Predominantly ameliorative, partially
preventative
Recycle Predominantly ameliorative
Part preventative
Treatment Predominantly assimilative,
Partially ameliorative
Least desirable
Disposal Assimilative

Source: Gertsakis and Lewis, (2003, pp7)

In general, terms the strategies of construction waste management are avoiding waste, re-

using and recycling waste materials. Avoiding waste refers to any practice to avoid or

minimize waste at source. Re-using and recycling refer to the re-using and recycling of

waste materials, and thus, reducing the volume of waste needed to be disposed to the

landfills (Ferguson et al. 1995). Minimization of waste at source is given the highest

priority (Crittenden and Kolaczkowski 1995), because it is always more efficient to

minimize the generation of waste at source than to develop ways for treating or handling

the waste. Although re-using and recycling allow waste materials to be put into a

17
 beneficial use, reusing and recycling do not completely avoid the waste generation

(Faniran and Caban 1998).

Reusing and recycling can only reduce the quantity of waste to be eventually disposed to

the landfill sites. Since reusing requires less energy and processes in dealing with the

waste than recycling, reusing should be put in higher hierarchy than recycling

(Crittenden and Kolaczkowski 1995).

According to the waste management principles of the EU the most effective environmental

solution may often be to reduce the generation of waste. Where further reduction is not

practicable, products and materials can sometimes be reused, either for the same or for a

different purpose. Failing that, value should be recovered from waste, through recycling,

composting or energy recovery from waste. Only if none of these solutions is appropriate

should waste be disposed of, using the best practicable environmental option.

The Waste Reduction Framework Plan (WRFP, 1998) recommends the following five waste

management actions in waste management and disposal:

• Waste avoidance: waste should not be produced in the first place;

• Waste minimization: if waste production is unavoidable, the quantities should be

minimized;

• Waste recovery, recycling and reuse: the recovery, recycling and reuse of suitable waste

materials should be maximized;

• Waste bulk reduction: if it is not possible to recover, recycle or reuse the waste materials,

the volume of residual waste should be reduced before final disposal, this might involves

incineration or composting; and

18
• Waste disposal: wherever possible the residue left after bulk reduction will be used for

construction purposes or reclamation in preference to being dumped in the landfills.

2.3. The Experiences of Other Countries

2.3.1. Netherlands

Definition of Construction and Demolition Waste

The first article of the Netherlands Environment Law (ENL) provides the official; definition

of waste as “All substances, preparations or objects, which the owner is disposing, planning to

dispose, or obliged to dispose”. CDW (Construction and Demolition Waste) in the

Netherlands is defined as “Waste which is generated in construction, renovation and

demolition of buildings and other edifices, including road and water constructions” CDW in

the Netherlands covers mixed construction and demolition waste offered by companies in the

construction sector, as well as mixed waste that remains after sorting and other processing of

construction.

The National Waste Plan(NWP), that provides the definition also lists out the major types of

waste included in the definition. Asbestos and waste which contains asbestos, dredging,

aerated concrete, roof waste, mixed C&DW and mixed fractions, separately collected glass,

gypsum, fiber optic cables, wood, paper or plastic insulated cables and remnants, materials

containing stone, grit, contaminated soil, packaging of paint, adhesive, sealant and resin sieve

sand are considered C&DW by the Plan.

Legislation on Construction and Demolition Waste: The legislative history of the

Netherlands on C&DW goes back to the 1972, the Urgency Notes on Environment (UNE),

given by its government. This document provided a reasonably outlined a complete picture of

19
the environmental of the country. The urgency note signaled an increase in waste volumes and

provided increasing the capacity of landfills and incinerators as a solution. More actions that

are ambitious aimed at prevention, reuse, reduction of adverse environmental impacts and

national planning, were taken from 1988-1991 and formed the basis for the current waste

policy. Major among these are the note prevention and recycling, the introduction of producer

responsibility, the Waste Institution and the Packaging Covenant. These measures led to a

considerable decrease in the percentage of wasteland filled to control the problem

significantly despite a sharp increase in the volume of waste.

The Dutch legislation on waste can be found primarily in the Environmental Management Act

(EMA) issued later in 1994. This Act consists mainly of a framework legislation deeming a

large number of issues to be regulated in orders in council, provincial environmental

regulations or municipal waste regulations. The decree on landfills and waste bans and the

waste collection decree are examples of orders in council based on the act.

The EMA provides the order of preference for waste management as prevention or restriction

of the generation of waste; no or minimal adverse effects to the environment in the production

(design for prevention and design for recovery); substances, preparations or other products

should be reused after use (recovery by product reuse); substances and materials of which a

product exists are recycled after use of the product (recovery by material reuse); using waste

as fuel or other means of energy generation (recovery as fuel);incineration as a disposal

method and land filling of waste.

The order of preference provided in this act is leading the Netherlands waste management in

practice. The Dutch Environmental Protection Act (DEPA) provides national legislation on

C&D, the Act under Chapter 10;

20
Imposes the duty of care for waste: everyone should ensure that there are no adverse effects

on the environment or come by actions involving waste;

Prohibits Land filling: it bans disposal (by land filling it outside establishments), bring into

the soil or burn of waste;

 Orders the issuance of National Waste Management Plan (NWMP);

 Provides rules for delivery, receipt, transportation and collection of industrial waste;

 Provides rules for the international shipments of waste and rules;

 Rules the issuance of municipal waste regulations;

The decree on landfills and waste bans, the decree on notification of industrial and hazardous

waste, and the decree on the arrangement collectors, transporters, dealers and brokers of waste

are some important decrees based on the Dutch Environmental Management Act.

The decree on landfills and waste bans obliges that waste should be recovered or incinerated

and may usually not be dumped and bans land filling a number of waste materials. The decree

on notification of industrial and hazardous wastes lays down the rules for disposal,

transporting and receiving waste. The decree on the arrangement collectors, transporters,

dealers and brokers is about who collects and transports waste and licensing authorized

persons.

Waste Management plans: The Netherlands Waste Management Plan is based on the

Environmental Management Act and deals with C&DW (Deloitee 2015). The plan contains

the sector plan for CDW management. The following are major decisions described in the

sector plan;

21
Delineation of CDW: as waste released during the construction, renovation and demolition of

buildings and other construction works including in civil engineering, covering mixed

construction and demolition in the construction sector and household waste, such as waste

that is unseparated released during construction, demolition or remodeling of private

households.

Minimum standard for processing: The minimum standard for the processing of CDW is

sorting or otherwise processing. The object of the treatment in this respect is to get as much

mono streams as possible to be separated which are suitable for recycling, with the restriction

that the resulting residue must at least be able to be burned. The minimum standard for sorting

residue for which recycling is not possible or where the recycling route is so expensive that

the cost of delivery by the producer/disposer is more than € 175 per ton, is incineration as a

disposal method.

Cross-border transport of waste: (Temporary) removal: shipments from the Netherlands to

landfill are not allowed on the grounds of national self-care, shipments from the Netherlands

in other types of (temporary) removal than landfill are in principle not allowed because

recycling is possible. However, this prohibition does not apply to sorting residue under the

condition that it appears from the notification that components such as wood, paper, metals,

glass and plastic are not suitable for recycling. In this case, transmission for incineration is

permitted. Shipments to the Netherlands for landfill are in principle prohibited under national

laws and/or based on national self-sufficiency. Shipments to the Netherlands for incineration

as a disposal method are in principle not allowed. Shipments to the Netherlands for other

types of (temporary) removal than incineration and land filling are in principle not allowed.

22
The municipalities of the country are mainly responsible for the enforcement of legislation. In

addition, the Environment and Transport Inspection has been commissioned to effectively

control over the management and processing of waste. It keeps track whether the recycling

targets are met and whether producers take responsibility. The inspection examines how the

waste collection goes and what ultimately happens to waste. There are also assessment

guidelines and what is known as the Netherlands Norms. This is a market regulation

(enforcement by the business itself), which uses certification of the quality of waste streams.

2.3.2. Sweden

Legislation: General rules for waste and handling of waste are laid down in the Swedish

Environmental Code and in ordinances made by the government, e.g. Ordinance on Waste

(SFS 2011:927). The management of CDW is mainly subject to the general waste legislation

or the general rules of consideration in the Environmental Code, Chapter 2. However, there

are some guidelines and regulations for certain waste fractions that influence CDW

management as well. Since 2002, it has been prohibited by the Ordinance on Land filling of

Waste (2001:512) to dispose of unsorted combustible waste at a landfill site. In 2005, the ban

was extended to cover all organic waste with certain exceptions. The exception for land filling

of organic and combustible waste is given in SEPA regulations and guidelines on the handling

of combustible and organic waste. Combustible CDW need not be sorted at source if

circumstances are such that sorting on-site is not possible.

Land filling of gypsum-based waste is restricted in the SEPA regulations on land filling.

Gypsum based waste generated in construction, renovation and demolition can only be placed

in nonhazardous waste landfills in cells where no biodegradable waste is accepted.

23
The guidelines of the Swedish Construction Federation recommend separate collection of

plasterboards in building production. Provisions on keeping hazardous waste separate and a

ban on the mixing of hazardous waste are laid down in the Swedish Waste Ordinance. The

management of PCB contaminated construction products is regulated in the Swedish

Ordinance, which requires identification of products in buildings and facilities.

Decontamination is required if the PCB content exceeds 500 mg/kg. In connection with

renovation or demolition, products with PCB content exceeding 50 mg/kg have to be

removed.

Waste-handling activities that include management, processing and recycling of CDW require

a permit from the competent authority either licensing by court or county authority or a less

extensive notification to local authorities.

In the case of recovery of waste in constructions, the notification process is used more

frequently compared to other recycling alternatives pursuant to ordinance on environmental

assessment. The recovery of waste in civil engineering requires notification in the case of a

minor risk of pollution of land or water area or groundwater, and licensing in the case of more

than a minor risk. The assessment of minor risk is based on the procedure presented in the

handbook on recovery of waste in civil engineering.

Waste Management Plans: According to the waste plan, the government's interim objective

for CDW is for reuse, recycling and other material utilization of non-hazardous construction

and demolition waste to increase to 70% by weight by 2020. One of the priority areas in the

second Swedish Waste Management Plan for 2012-2017 is CDW. SEPA lists the following

actions:

24
The Preparation of guidance concerning the way in which the general rules of consideration in

the Environmental Code and the waste hierarchy should be applied in connection with

inspections of the management of construction and demolition waste, and how the

cooperation between municipal construction boards and environmental boards can be

developed. Monitor developments and, when necessary, propose additional measures and

instruments to achieve the EU's recycling target. Continue the work to compile reliable

statistics for construction and demolition waste.

The Swedish First Waste Prevention Program (SWPP) for 2014-201721 was published in

2013. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency will monitor the program and draw up

a new program by 2018.

2.3.3. UK

Legislation: The Duty of Care Regulations, and Waste Management Licensing Regulations

Landfill Directive and the Clean Neighborhood Act are among the most important national

waste legislations in the UK. The regulations provide the basis for licensing controls and other

provisions aimed at ensuring that waste handling, disposal and recovery options do not harm

the environment. The Duty of Care Regulations state that responsibility for waste rests on all

parties involved in its management; from the original producer to everybody who handles it

up until its full recovery or disposal. The Landfill Directive and Council Decision

2003/33/EC18, which aim to prevent, or to reduce as far as possible, the negative

environmental effects of landfill. The waste hierarchy requirement imposes a duty on waste

producers (other than households) to take all reasonable measures to apply the waste

hierarchy to prevent material from becoming waste (e.g., by reusing or extending the life of

products).

25
The waste regulations of 2012applicable in England and Wales enforce separate collection of

waste where “necessary” to ensure that waste undergoes recovery operations in accordance

with the directive and to facilitate or improve recovery where it is “technically,

environmentally and economically practicable” (Defra, 2012a).

In 2008 the English Parliament in exercising powers in the Clean Neighborhood Act (CNA)

(2005)20, came up with the Site Waste Management Plans (SWMP) Regulations

200821.These C&DW specific regulations form the basis for the legal requirement for the

management of C&D waste. The SWMP require all clients with single construction or

demolition projects having a value (without VAT) of £300,000 or more to prepare a plan

showing the expected levels of waste and how the waste expected from the activity will be

managed. According to the Defra waste reports there is evidence to suggest that this

legislation together with assistance from WRAP and other bodies has resulted in a change in

the management of C&D W in the England (Defra, 2012b).

The principles of the UK(EU) C&D waste management policy and laws are prevention,

precautionary, polluter pays/polluter responsibility and the principle of proximity. The

prevention principle targets ensuring nature and resource conservation through minimized

waste generation. The Precautionary principle advocates for ensuring a reduction in the

impacts of waste on human health and the environment. The principle of the polluter pays and

polluter responsibility requires that those who generate waste be made to pay for the cost of

their actions. The principle of proximity and self-sufficiency seeks to ensure adequate

infrastructure is made available for the disposal of waste. The SWMP of the UK is based on

the waste hierarchy which is rooted on the 3Rs (reduce, reuse, recycle) principle of waste

management.

26
Another government policy that is recognized as having a great impact on C&DW

management in the UK is the Landfill Tax Regulations, which require waste producers to pay

for the disposal of waste. This is seen as an incentive for waste producers in the construction

industry to cut down the amount of waste they send to landfill. This encourages firms to

reduce the amount of waste they produce and recover more value from the materials in the

waste to save on the amount of money paid for the disposal at the landfill and for transporting

the waste. The regulations reportedly resulted in significant investment in recovery systems.

According to reports on the issue the amount of waste sent to landfill has fallen by a third

with an increase in recycling since the introduction of the landfill tax in the UK (Defra,

2012b).

The environment agency (which covers England and Wales), the Scottish Environmental

Protection Agency, the Department of the Environment in Northern Ireland and, local

authorities oversee the enforcement of waste management legislation in the UK.

2.4. Construction Waste Management in Ethiopia

2.4.1. Policy and Legislative Frame Work

There is no specific policy that pertains to construction waste management in Ethiopia but

constitutional policy provisions and national environmental policies indirectly deal it.

Articles 92.1 and 92.2 of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia

provide that “Government shall endeavor to ensure that all Ethiopians live in a clean and

healthy environment” and that “Government and citizens shall have the duty to protect the

environment” respectively. These provisions relate to and are applicable to construction waste

and its management from the perspective of environmental protection.

27
The Environmental Policy of Ethiopia issued by Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)

also contains provisions that directly and indirectly deal with construction waste management.

Article 3.7 that deals with matters related to human settlement, urban environment and

environmental health,

Article 3.8 that relate to the control of hazardous materials and pollution from waste and

Article 3.9 that deals with atmosphere pollution and climate change are worth mentioning.

Particularly Article 3.8 of the policy has detailed provisions dealing with many issues

including the review and development guidelines for waste disposal and issuance of

regulations, the establishment of safe limits for the location of sanitary landfill sites,

formulation and implementation of national strategy and guidelines on the management of

wastes, the promotion of waste minimization processes, efficient recycling of waste

materials.

Solid Waste Management Proclamation (SWMP) No. 513 of 2007 is a major proclamation

that accommodates solid management including construction waste management. The

objective of the proclamation is to enhance capacity to prevent the possible adverse impacts

and create economically and socially beneficial assets out of solid waste. The proclamation

has two articles that particularly deal with the management of solid construction waste.

Article 12 that deals with construction debris and demolition wastes empowers urban

administrations to undertake or enter into agreements with construction enterprises to refill

solid waste disposal sites, quarry pits with pebbles, or gravel from demolished buildings or

with excavated earth. It also stipulates that construction permits should be issued to building

contractors after they deposit a legally valid bond or other instruments to ensure

28
environmentally sound disposal of construction debris or excavated earth. In addition, it

deems that urban administrations should ensure the availability of adequate facility for an

environmentally sound solid waste management before the commencement of any

construction of residential houses.

Article 14, another article that deals with construction of solid waste disposal sites provides

that; urban administration should ensure that solid waste disposal sites are constructed and

properly used in conformity with the relevant federal environmental standard, solid waste

disposal are subjected to environmental auditing, environmental impact assessment should be

carried out for new solid waste disposal sites.

The proclamation also incorporates several provisions regarding obligations of administrative

organs and citizens, solid waste management planning, collection & storage, transportation,

treatment, disposal, incineration, recycling, and hazardous waste, civil and penal provisions.

Environmental Pollution Control Proclamation (EPCP) No.300/2002 is another related

proclamation. The proclamation mandates urban administrations to devise and implement safe

and effective mechanisms to handle, transport, and store municipal waste.

The proclamation under article 5 (Management of Municipal Waste) deems that urban

administrations should ensure the collection, transportation, and as appropriate, the recycling,

treatment or safe disposal of municipal waste through an integrated municipal waste

management system. It also mandates them to monitor and evaluate the adequacy of

municipal waste management systems and ensure their effectiveness.

29
2.5. The Practice of Waste management and Disposal in Ethiopia

Even giving a brief highlight of the situation of construction waste management in Ethiopia is

a trying task because it is largely unstudied and there is serious lack of data. One can

however infer about the practice and its challenges using government programs, studies

conducted on solid waste management in Ethiopia, its construction industry and relevant

studies on developing and African countries with similar stage of development.

The following characterize the practice of construction waste management;

• The most common construction waste management is land filling of waste – The most

common strategy is land filling of construction waste with insufficient landfill sites for

disposing solid waste. There is, for instance only one open dumpsite in Addis Ababa

for the disposal of all types of solid waste. The site is known as "Rappi" or "Koshe" It

is getting full, surrounded by housing areas, institutions, causing nuisance, and health

hazard for people living near the site.

• Construction waste including waste from the building of residential houses is mostly

disposed of based on contracts. The contractual obligation of contractors building

condominiums for the AAHCPO for instance, is mostly regarding the disposal of

excavated materials like soil and a general obligation to clear the site at completion.

The contractual obligation to dispose excavated materials like soil requires that waste

be disposed up to five kilometers away from project sites. There is no clause as to

where it should be dumped and how. There is also no obligation on contractors to

dispose waste material in an environmentally friendly and healthy manner. There is a

problem of enforcing contractual obligations and there are instances where contractors

do not dispose of construction waste pursuant to their obligations. The obligation to

30
 clear the site of waste is also general and there is no mechanism to make sure waste is

disposed properly at the completion of projects.

• Recycling and Reuse- Recyclable materials in construction waste include metal, wood,

and electrical products. Recycling however is not widely practiced due to

infrastructure and technological challenges. Existing infrastructure and facilities lack

capacity for sound reuse and recycling, of waste.

- There is lack of access to information on construction waste volumes and composition,

technical, institutional and organizational capacity, prevailing attitudes, and access to

technology and finance.

2.6. The Impact of Construction Waste Management

2.6.1. Impact on Human Health

There are several risks to public health that may result from poor management of construction

waste and disposal. The health impacts of construction waste depend on the type of waste

management strategies used. There is a large body of literature on the potential adverse health

effects of different construction waste management mechanisms particularly land filling and

incineration. According to most literature, the potential health problems resulting from

composting and recycling are very little.

There are many studies on the adverse health impacts of populations living near landfill sites,

like reproductive effects including low birth weight fetal and infant mortality, spontaneous

abortion, and the occurrence of birth defects. Vienna and Poland and Goldman et al1 both

found increased incidence of low birth weight in the populations around the Love Canal site

in the US. A similar increase in the proportion of low birth weight babies was found in

another landfill in the US namely the Lipari Landfill in the state of New Jersey. The study of

31
adverse birth outcomes associated with living within 2 km of a landfill site in Great Britain

found a significantly excess health risk as well.

Other health outcomes of landfills as reviewed by Vrijheid include respiratory symptoms,

irritation of the skin, nose and eyes, gastrointestinal problems, fatigue, headaches,

psychological problems and allergies. It has been suggested that evaluation of a relationship

between these symptoms is complicated by confounding by stress, public perception of risk,

odors and nuisance related to the site, and recall bias. For example, a survey found that

residents who indicated they were worried about pollution reported more symptoms than

those who were not worried, both in the exposed and control areas.

There are also several studies showing the impact of incineration from the health aspect. As

studies indicate, major pollutants associated with incineration include particles, acidic gases

and aerosols, metals and organic compounds. Several studies have consistently demonstrated

the association of particle exposure and acute health effects such as increased overall

mortality and emergency hospital admissions, particularly cardiovascular and respiratory

mortality and morbidity.

As studies show incineration construction and demolition materials spews pollutants into the

air that affect health and environment. Pollutants caused by incineration settle in different

water bodies, soil and feed crops where they enter food chain by lodging in animal fat and

dairy products affecting public health.

The result of incineration such as Smoke from burning of wood and trash contains very

small particles that, when inhaled, lodge deep inside the lungs causing severe health

32
problems including cancer, reproductive disorders, skin diseases, heart disease, liver damage,

respiratory and other problems. Children are particularly at risk.

Studies also suggest that long-term exposure to low concentrations is associated with chronic

health effects such as increased rates of bronchitis and reduced lung function2, shortened life

span, elevated rates of respiratory symptoms and lung cancer.

Another harmful effect of incineration is with respect to metals associated with incinerator

emissions include lead, cadmium, mercury, chromium, arsenic and beryllium. Different forms

of these at various levels and via various media and exposure, pathways have all been shown

to cause a range of carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health effects.

Studies also show that metals associated with incinerator emissions including lead, cadmium,

mercury, chromium, arsenic and beryllium have all been shown to cause a range of

carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health effects. The organic compounds that have received

the most attention relating to incineration are dioxins and PCBs, partly because of their ability

to accumulate in the body.

2.6.2. Economic Impact

Several studies evidenced the direct economic benefits of material waste minimization in

building construction (Noor et al 2013, Nagapan 2011). These include reduced purchase

quantity and price of raw materials, reduced transportation cost for waste materials to and

from sites, reduced disposal costs of waste materials, reduced purchase price of new

materials when considering reuse and recycling, long term benefits by optimizing building life

and avoiding expenses for demolition and construction of new buildings (Jain 2012). As

Bossink et al 1996 says the costs of construction waste consist of purchase losses, collection

33
costs, transportation costs, recycling costs and dumping costs. Substantial savings can be

obtained by reducing such costs of construction waste.

According to Guthrie (et al. 1999), waste minimization and recycling, have significant

economic benefits in terms of cost reduction. The economic benefits of waste minimization

and recycling include the possibilities of selling specific waste materials and the removal from

site of other waste at no charge or reduced cost, with a subsequent reduction in materials

going to landfill at a higher cost (Snook et al., 1995).

Reducing construction also have an indirect economic impact as it serves as an incentive for

stakeholders to put more efforts into minimizing construction waste.

2.6.3. Environmental Impact

The construction industry is perceived as a major contributor to environmental degradation.

The construction and operation of the built environment worldwide is estimated to account

for:12-16% of fresh water consumption, 25% of wood harvested, 30-40% of energy

consumption, 40% of virgin materials extracted (Macozoma, 2002), up to 57% solid waste

generation ending up in disposal sites, noise, dust and gas emissions (Lu and Yuan, 2011), 20-

30% of greenhouse emissions, up to 15% of purchased materials at jobsite ending up as waste,

change of land use, including clearing of existing flora, other indoor and outdoor emissions,

aesthetic degradation, opportunities for corruption, disruption of communities, including

through inappropriate design and materials and health risks on worksites and for building

occupants (UNEP, 2003).

The negative environmental impacts of construction waste are depicted in several studies (Nor

et al 2013). Construction waste due to improper waste management may result in unbalanced

34
ecology, change of living environment, potential sewage, and depletion of natural sources,

energy consumption and generating waste.

Waste prevention and minimization through effective management of waste is considered to

have significant long and short-term benefits to the environment. It helps reduce dependence

on natural resources such as trees and other raw materials thereby conserving valuable natural

assets. Effective waste management also lessons pollution as it reduces manufacturing and

transportation related emissions. Reduction of the energy and water required to produce

building supplies from raw materials contributes to reduced greenhouse gasses related to the

manufacturing and transportation of those materials.

2.7. The Role and Responsibilities of Gelan Project Office Local Administration

on CWM

The Addis Ababa city administration has launched the ongoing low cost condominium

housing projects through the Integrated Housing Development Program (IHDP) under the

auspices of the Ethiopian federal government in 2006. The IHDP is primarily meant to

address the acute housing problem in the city by providing low cost houses to low and middle

income class residents.

The AAHCPO established to manage and implement the program is mandated by law with

duties and responsibilities including the construction of standardized houses in the urban and

expansion areas with cost saving technologies, strengthening the construction industry,

preparing land and ensuring the supply of infrastructure facilities for the construction of

houses, directing and supervising the construction of government houses in sub cities,

implementing housing construction program from design to construction, enhancing the

35
capacity MSEs by participating them in projects, laying down training system for the

construction industry, executing design works, procurement and distribution of goods &

construction materials, managing human resource and finance and the co-ordination and

supervision of the activities of entities involved in the work of the project.

There are ten sub-city project offices under the structure of AAHCP office that coordinate the

task in each sub-city of Addis Ababa. Sub-city project offices are delegated with the tasks of

administering construction sites, collecting and delivering construction materials and

supervising their use, selecting and organizing MSEs, selecting and preparing land for

housing projects.

Procurement of construction materials is largely taken care of by these sub-city project offices

based on participating local firms and from MSEs with a fixed price system. They purchase

almost all construction materials such as cement, gravel reinforcement bars, iron, pre-cast

beam, hollow block, and gravel (aggregate) and distribute them to contractors. The materials

are supplied to contractors based on predetermined quantity depending on the level of

construction i.e. earth work, slab work, etc.

The construction work is carried out by contractors and MSEs selected by the AAHCP office.

Selection of contractors is based about registration with AAHCP office. The office hires large

contractors (Grade 6 and above) for foundation and structural works which are generally

beyond the capacity of MSEs. Contractors of lower grade (7-10) and MSEs are not hired for

foundation and structural work because they lack the required capacity and skills. The MSEs

involved in the IHDP or by non-program MSEs or small contractors where the former are not

available carry out superstructure work (walls, roofing, etc.) and finishing work including

36
sanitary and electrical installations, ceramics, tile lying, and painting. Program engineers of

the AAHCPO carry out supervision of construction activities and quality.

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction

This chapter deals with the research design and methodology of the study. The first section of

the chapter exposes the research design. It describes the research design, the population and

sample of the study; the instruments employed for data collection and narrate the procedures

used for the study. The second section dealing with data analysis defines the variables used.

The final section is on the reliability and validity of the instruments employed and of the

study itself.

3.2. The Research Design and Methodology

According to Mauch and Park (2003), research design is a total plan for carrying out an

investigation. Research methodology, research type, or general methods are considered

synonyms for research design. A completed research design shows the systematic sequence of

actions in carrying out an investigation essential to obtaining objective, reliable, and valid

information. The completed design also indicates how the resultant objective information is to

be used to determine conclusions about the accuracy of a hypothesis, a theory, or the correct

answer to a question (Dillman, 2000; Leedy and Ormrod, 2001; Miller and Salkind, 2002).

Kotzar et al (2005) defines research design as the plan and structure of investigation and the

way in which studies are put together. Cooper et al (2003) also define research design as the

process of focusing on the researcher’s perspective for the purpose of a particular study.

37
Mouton (1996:35) describes methodology as the means or methods of doing something.

According to Burns and Grove (2003:488), methodology includes the design, setting, sample,

methodological limitations, and the data collection and analysis techniques in a study.

Henning (2004:36) describes methodology as coherent group of methods that complement

one another and that have the ability to fit to deliver data and findings that will reflect the

research question and suit the researcher purpose. According to Holloway (2005:293),

methodology means a framework of theories and principles on which methods and procedures

are based. According to Polit and Hungler (2004:233), methodology refers to ways of

obtaining, organizing and analyzing data.

Methodology decisions depend on the nature of the research question. Methodology in

research can be considered the theory of correct scientific decisions (Karfman as cited in

Mouton & Marais 1996:16). In this study methodology and research design are considered

synonymous and refer to how the research was carried out and its logical sequence.

The focus of this study is the exploration and description of the situation of construction waste

management at the AAHCP Gelan condominium site. Accordingly, the descriptive approach

is used. Descriptive research refers to research studies that have as their main objective the

accurate portrayal of the characteristics of persons, situations or groups (Polit & Hungler

2004:716). This approach is used to describe variables rather than to test a predicted

relationship between variables.

The logic of Mouton & Marais (996:43-44) for employing a descriptive approach in data

collection in research justifies its employment in this study. According to them, the

descriptive approach gives the ability to collect accurate data on and provide a clear picture of

a phenomenon, which suits the purpose of this study. The descriptive approach is particularly

38
appropriate for this study because it is instrumental in obtaining an accurate and authentic

description of the situation of construction waste management at the study site.

3.3. Population and Sampling Methods

According to Diamantopoulos (2004), a population is a group of items that a sample will

draw. A sample, on the other hand, refers to a set of individuals selected from an identified

population with the intent of generalizing the findings to the entire population.

To set the population of the study, the researcher first identified major entities involved in the

building of the condominiums at the study site based on their respective tasks and

responsibilities. The AAHCP office at the City level, the Akaki Kaliti Sub City Housing

Construction Project office, contractor companies, and MSEs building the condominiums

were identified as primary stakeholders owning and directly involved in the construction

process and work. The city AAHCPO is legally and administratively responsible for and

carries out major tasks in the building of condominiums. The Akaki Kaliti sub city housing

construction project office is delegated to coordinate the construction work at the site. The

contractor companies carry out major construction work on sub and super structures. MSEs

perform finishing work like block work, interior and exterior plastering of all types, painting,

electrical sanitary and mechanical installations, door and window installation, flooring and

partitioning.

The sample for this study is drawn from staff and personnel of these entities using their roles

and involvement in the construction process at the target site as a sample criterion. It is

composed of individuals directly involved and responsible for the construction work, material

and construction waste management. Management and staff of city and sub city of AAHCP

offices, specifically the heads of departments, supervisors, store keepers, owners of

39
construction companies their foremen and engineering professionals, MSE representatives

involved in construction work constitute the sample. The total population also includes heads

of households or other members drawn from Gelan condominiums.

In the sample are the heads of departments of the city and sub city offices, all the storekeepers

and supervisors of the offices working at the site, all contractors and their foremen

constructing buildings, MSEs and condominium household representatives.

The method of sampling is a non-probability purposive sampling. Purposive sampling is also

known as deliberate or criterion sampling. It is a technique widely used in qualitative research

for the identification and selection of information-rich cases for the most effective use of

limited resources (Patton, 2002). The method involves identifying and selecting individuals or

groups of individuals that are especially knowledgeable about or experienced with a

phenomenon of interest (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011).

The study preferred to use purposive sampling to focus on units that are most likely to provide

the most information about waste management at the Gelan sites from professionals and staff

members with relevant knowledge and expertise.

3.4. Data Collection Tools

The researcher used both primary and secondary data collection methods to collect data for

the study. The primary data, both qualitative and quantitative were collected through

questionnaire, interviews and personal observation of the researcher.

Both open and close-ended format questions were designed to obtain information on the

situation of construction waste management and disposal strategies in the study area, the

AAHCPO Gelan condominium site. Secondary data were collected from published and

40
unpublished literature like books, journals, and research materials, statistical and legal

documents relevant to the objective of the study.

3.4.1. Questionnaire

A formal English questionnaire was designed to obtain primary data from the sample

population. The questionnaire was structured to assess the situation and effectiveness of the

waste management system and disposal strategies at the Gelan Condominium site. The

questionnaire was organized in five major sections to collect primary data about the types of

waste from the study site, waste monitoring system and the rate of waste generation, the time

and manner of deposing waste, the storage system and facilities, the major causes of waste,

the economic, human health and environmental impact of waste management, the awareness

of professionals and staff of the AAHCPO and contractors on waste management issues and

techniques.

3.4.2. Face to Face Interviews

The In-depth interview questionnaire was developed to obtain through information on the

issues the questionnaire targets. The interview was meant to supplement the questionnaire and

enhance reliability of data obtained by questionnaire. The researcher conducted 15 interviews

with staff members of AAHCPO, contractor and consulting companies, MSEs and members

of condominium residents.

3.4.3. Non-Participant Observations

According to Tedlock (1991) non-participant observation method involves the physical

viewing of what is present and occurring at the site or geographical location of interest by the

researcher. The observable phenomena may be physical features at the location of study or

behaviors of the respondents the researcher intends to study. The observations can be made

41
and visualized as photographs taken by cameras or be described if they are behavior and

invisible in physical terms. The researcher has made repeated on site visits and observations

of the study site to assess the situation of construction waste management at the study site,

recorded his observations and captured camera images.

3.5. Procedures of Data Collection

After deciding on the methods of data collection, the researcher decided on the content,

organization and format of the data collection tools to be used on this study. Accordingly, a

questionnaire was drafted in line with the research questions of the study. The content of the

questionnaire was organized as described in section 3.4.1 of this chapter.

The questionnaire designed for the study was subjected to a validation process for face and

content validity as defined by Mc Burney (1994:123). Face validity as defined by him is the

idea that a test should appear superficially to test what it is supposed to test and content

validity is the notion that a test should sample the range of behavior represented by the

theoretical concept being tested. Copies of the questionnaire and the research questions were

given to experienced civil and construction management engineers and language experts well

versed with the issue of construction and waste management and language to make sure it

addresses relevant issues and for ease of understanding. These experts went through the

research questions and the questionnaire to ascertain its appropriateness and adequacy. The

questionnaire was revised and validated based on the comments of these experts.

After validation of the questionnaire, the researcher carried out a pilot testing. The test was to

observe the reactions of the respondents to the questionnaire, to ensure whether the items it

contains are clear and easily understandable, to make sure whether there is a need for

42
inclusion of more items, to identify items to which respondents may not like to respond to and

generally ensure its effectiveness.

From the test, the researcher found out that some items were ambiguous and the questionnaire

needed additional items. He revised and modified questionnaire items for clarity and added

more items in line with the research questions. The researcher also examined and adopted the

formats and content of questionnaires commonly and widely used in relevant literature

particularly research, action plans and strategies dealing with site construction waste

management.

The questionnaires were administered to the heads of departments, supervisors and

storekeepers of city and sub city AAHCPOs, owners of construction companies, their foremen

and engineering professionals, MSE representatives involved in construction work. The

researcher also conducted formal and informal interviews to complement the questionnaires

and address the research questions. He conducted 11 interviews with key officials of

AAHCPO, consultants and contractors constructing condominiums at the study site. The

researcher also conducted informal interviews with contractors, engineers, supervisors,

storekeepers and other persons who worked and are still working with the client agency in the

past.

The researcher also carried out several site visits to observe and assess the situation of waste

management at the site. He carried out 6 on site visits to the study site and took digital images

evidencing his observations.

Data obtained from questionnaires, in-depth interviews and personal observation of the

researcher were analyzed using descriptive analysis. The quantitative data has been analyzed

43
using percentages, tables and figures. Questionnaire results were analyzed using the thematic

analysis method. The thematic content analysis method as described by Ezzy (2000) is a way

of analyzing data by organizing it into categories based on themes, concepts or similar

features. The analysis of the results of the questionnaire was based on the themes developed

when it was formulated. The researcher also analyzed the results of the face-to-face

interviews generating themes and patterns after careful and analytical reading of the

responses.

3.6. Ethical Considerations

According to Leedy et al (2005), there are a number of key ethical issues that relate to the

rights of research participants. These are protection from harm, informed consent, the right to

privacy and honesty.

The principle of informed consent requires that respondents should be given full information

about the research and their consent be sought to participate in it. The participants in this

study were well informed about the nature of the study in writing and orally. The

questionnaire described the nature of the study, why it was carried out and notified the

respondents that their participation was voluntary. The participants requested for interviews

were also orally informed about the nature of the study and that their participation was

voluntary and consensual.

The researcher also informed participants regarding their rights to confidentiality.

Confidentiality implies that the dignity and privacy of a subject should be respected.

Participants were informed that the information they submitted would be confidential and

only be accessed by the researcher. They were also not required to provide any identifying

and personal details and as such, the final study will not reflect the subject is identifying

44
information such as their names, although certain participants were comfortable with their

personal details being printed.

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1. Introduction

Chapter three comprises the analysis, presentation and interpretation of the findings of

this study. The analysis and interpretation of data is carried out in two phases. The first part

is based on the results of the questionnaire and deals with a quantitative analysis of data. The

second part is a qualitative interpretation of the results of interviews and focus group

discussions. Data gathered through the questionnaire was subjected to frequency percentages.

The responses for each individual question were added together to find the highest frequency

of occurrence (i.e. the number of times that a particular response occurs). These responses to

the questions, which are quantified, are then presented in percentage forms. This analysis is

presented in tabular form. The researcher uses tables containing a variable and in some

cases, combines two or more variables in a single table. The first section of the chapter deals

with respondent’s demography and the second is about their questionnaire responses. The

third section analyses the outcomes of face-to-face interviews.

4.2. Results and Findings of the Study

4.2.1. Respondents Demography Characteristics

The study employed a non-probability purposive sampling approach to best answer its

research questions. As indicated in the earlier chapter the approach was adopted to get reliable

data from professionals and workers with key positions directly responsible for management

45
and disposing construction waste as well as those carrying out construction and other

activities directly or closely related to construction waste management at the site.

Respondents constituting 36% are from the AAHCPO include the head, vice head, case team

coordinators, senior and junior officers of the office responsible for and work on construction

inspection, infrastructure, electricity and sanitary installations, auto-cad designing, structural

engineering, procurement and construction material supply, finance, store and logistics. 14%

of the participants are project coordinators, resident engineers, quantity surveyors, sanitary

and electrical work inspectors, and supervisors drawn from the two consultant companies

working for AAHCPO. 41% of the respondents are owners of contractor companies and

foremen working for the contractor companies and 9% of the respondents are drawn from

MSEs.

In terms of education out of the total population, 37% of the respondents have diplomas 31%

have first degrees, 2% have second degrees and 30% have high school certificates. 70% of the

total respondents are civil, electrical engineers, construction management professionals,

architects, management, business and marketing professionals. Regarding experience 29%

have spent between 10-15 years in the construction industry, 31% of them between 5-10 years

‘work experiences at the site, and40% spent 2-5years in the industry. 61% of the respondents

have been working at the site between 4-7 years and the rest 39% have been working at the

site between1-3 years.

As the analysis shows, the majority of the respondents are directly involved in activities

relating to construction waste management and are aware of the situation at the site. They are

key officials, professionals and staff identified from the AAHCPO, professionals from

46
contractor and consultant companies and MSEs. They are well qualified, occupy relevant key

positions at the office as well as the study site and are experienced enough to give reliable

responses.

The following tables show the demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Table 3: Age Characteristics of Respondents

Age Group № %
20-25 9 14.51
25-30 21 33.87
30-35 18 29.03
35-40 8 12.9
40-45 4 6.45
Above 45 2 3.22

Source; Survey Results and SPSS output (2017)

Table 4: Gender Characteristics of the Respondents

Gender № %

Male 42 67.74

Female 20 32.2
Total 62 100.0
Source; Survey Results and SPSS output (2017)

Table 5: Educational Level of Respondents

№ %
Level of Education
22.94 37
College diploma holders
13.2 31
Bachelor's degree holders
0.84 2
Master's degree holders
Certificate Holders 12.6 30

Source; Survey Results and SPSS output (2017)

47
Table 6: Current Work Institution of the Respondents

Work Institution № %
AAHCPO 22.32 36
Consultant Companies 8.68 14
Contractor Companies 25.42 41
MSE 5.58 9
Source; Survey Results and SPSS output (2017)

Table 7: Respondents Work Experience in the Construction Industry

Work Experience in the Construction № %

Industry in years
10- 15 12.18 29
5-10 13.02 31
2- 5 16.8 40
Source; Survey Results and SPSS output (2017)

Table 8: Respondents Work Experience at Gelan Housing Project Site

Work Experience at Gelan Site № %

4 -7 37.82 61
3-4 11.78 19
2-3 8.06 13
less than 2 years 4.34 7
Source; Survey Results and SPSS output (2017)

4.2.2. Respondents Responses

Out of 110 questionnaires, distributed 48 questionnaires returned with a lot of no-responses

and missing data were discarded from the analysis. The questionnaires were discarded

because the respondents failed to answer most of the questions in the questionnaire and

because the remaining questionnaires with a comprehensive data would suffice for analysis

and to answer the research questions. The rest, 62 completed questionnaires with valid

48
responses are used for computing and interpreting the results. Questionnaire data is presented

in Tables. Likert’s five-point scale ranging from 1 to 5 is used to analyze and rank the data on

type of material waste, causes of construction waste and measures to minimize construction

waste. The researcher used Mean Item scores (MIS) and Statistical Package for Social

Science (SPSS) to analyze data. A reliability coefficient of 0.70 and above is good,

acceptable, and reliable.

Gelan Site Waste Management Strategy

Table 9: Types of Waste and Generation Rate

№ Type of Waste Mean Item Standard Rank

Score Deviation

1 Wooden Materials 4.40 0.751 3

2 Cardboard 2.82 1.024 10

3 Cement 4.47 0.725 2

4 Paper Materials 4.37 0.735 4

5 Metal and Plastic Piping Materials 4.02 0.902 5

6 Concrete materials 3.94 1.002 6

7 Pieces of brick 3.59 1.122 8

8 Pieces of block 3.56 1.073 9

9 Pieces of Reinforcing steel 4.49 0.703 1

10 Electric wires 3.79 1.102 7

Source: Compiled from field survey

49
Table 9 shows that, the site generates several types of construction waste materials. The
respondents were given to choose from common types of building construction waste
materials identified in relevant literature.

Waste Monitoring

Table 10: Awareness and Implementation of Waste Monitoring System

Aware of Waste Monitoring

Response Waste Monitoring System at the site
System and Techniques to measure waste
generation rate

% %

Yes 42.2 0.0

No 31.4 88.2

Not Sure 36.4 11.8

Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 10 shows that, asked if they have knowledge about waste monitoring techniques 42.2%

of the participants responded in the affirmative 31.4% in the negative and 36.4% are not sure.

Concerning the existence of such a system at the site the majority of the participants 88.2%

responded that there is no waste monitoring system at the site, and the project does not

implement it. The rest of them 11.8% responded that they are not sure. None of them

responded in the affirmative. It should be noted here that the respondents are in the

management and staff of AAHCPO holding key positions at the site.

50
Causes of Construction Waste

Table 11: Causes of Construction Waste

Legend: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly

Agree

Causes of Waste № Min. Max. Mean Standard Rank

Deviation
Weak Waste Management 61 2 5 4.31 0.79 1
strategy
Poor Storage System and 60 1 5 4.15 0.95 2
Facilities
Lack of Skilled workers 61 1 5 4.08 0.80 3
Improper Handling and Material 60 1 5 4.07 0.82 4
Deterioration
Lack of workers' awareness and 59 1 5 4.05 0.99 5
knowledge of waste management
practices
Lack of Attention by 59 1 5 3.98 0.84 6
Management
Weak enforcement of laws and 60 1 5 3.97 0.97 7
Contract
Weak security /theft and 61 1 5 3.75 1.03 8
Vandalism
Poor supervision 60 1 5 3.43 1.18 9
Poor Technology and Equipment 59 1 5 3.37 1.24 10
Design Error 58 1 5 3.36 1.00 11
Design Changes 55 1 5 3.29 1.20 12
Ordering Errors 61 1 5 3.20 1.08 13
Force Majeure 60 1 5 2.83 1.25 14
Source: Compiled from field survey

51
The participants were asked to rank the causes of waste at the site as shown in Table 11. The

causes are common causes of building construction material waste selected and adopted from

relevant literature such as Lingard (et al 2000) and Shen and Tam et al, (2003). The ranking

was to be made from 1 - 5, from strongly disagree to strongly agree with multiple options

possible. The respondents identified the absence of waste management strategy, lack of

attention by management, and poor storage system and facilities as the top three major causes

respectively. Lack of workers' awareness and knowledge of waste management practices,

poor technology and equipment and inclement weather are identified as the least causes of

waste at the site.

It is important to notice here while all the factors identified by the respondents may account

for construction waste material at the site. The ranking is based on personal knowledge and

observation of the respondents not a scientific assessment. As participants from the client

office and owners and staff of construction companies revealed in interviews no systematic

assessment was carried out to identify the major causes of waste previously.

Effectiveness of Waste Management System

Table 12: Effectiveness of Site CWM & DS

Response Effective Site CWM & DS

№ %
Yes 0.0 0.0
No 42.03 67.8
Not Sure 19.96 32.2

Source: Compiled from field survey

52
Table 13: Timeliness of Waste Disposal from Site

Response Timeliness of Waste Disposal from Site

№ %
Yes 0.0 0.0
No 47.3 76.3
Not Sure 14.69 23.7
Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 14: AAHCPO Waste Disposal Supervision

Strong Supervision by Client

Response Office to Manage & Dispose Waste

№ %
Yes 0.0 0.0
No 45.0 72.7
Not Sure 16.92 27.3
Source: Compiled from field survey

The research assessed the perception of the respondents towards the waste management

system at the site. They were asked to forward their opinion about the effectiveness of the

system in general and respond to specific questions about the timeliness of waste disposal, the

strength of the storage system and to state their reasons for their opinions. Asked generally

about the effectiveness of the waste management system at site, the majority of them 67.8%

responded negatively and 32.2% of the respondents are not sure whether it is effective or not.

Regarding the time of waste disposal, the majority of the participants, 76.3% were of the

opinion that there is delay in disposal of waste material from the site and 23.7% said they are

53
not sure. Asked whether there is strong supervision on waste disposal from site, 72.7%

responded in the negative and the rest 36.3% said they are not sure.

Storage System and Facilities

Table 15: Efficiency of Storage System and Facilities

Response Efficient storage system and

facilities at the site
№ %
Yes 5.98 9.6
No 37.94 61.2
Not Sure 17.48 28.2
Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 16: Material Handling

Response Materials are Stored Properly

[[

№ %
Yes 43.27 69.8
No 6.82 11.0
Not Sure 11.0 19.2
Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 17: Security of Construction Materials

Response Materials are secured from theft and

Vandalism

№ %
Yes 10.7 17 .3
No 36.3 58.6
Not Sure 14.94 24.1
Source: Compiled from field survey

54
As depicted in the tables concerning the storage facilities and system, 61.2% of the

respondents were of the opinion that the storage facilities are poor and they are not effective,

28.4% are not sure about its effectiveness and 9.6% said it is effective.69.8% and 64.2% of

the respondents respectively said that the site does not have an effective storage, control and

monitoring system and stored materials are exposed to theft and vandalism. 29.2% and 34.8%

of the respondents are not sure whether the storage control system is effective or not.

Concerning theft and vandalism 58.6% of the respondents are of the opinion that materials are

not secured. 17.3% of the respondents said stored materials are secured from theft and

vandalism and 24.1% of the respondents are not sure if materials are secured from theft and

vandalism.

Measures to Improve CWM & DS

Table 18: Measures to Improve CWM & DS

No Measures Mean Item Standard Rank

Score Deviation
1 Proper storage facilities and improved store control and 4.74 0.6494 2
monitoring system

2 Implementation of systematic Waste Management 4.81 0.4869 1

Strategy

3 Staff training and awareness on 4.62 0.6178 3

waste management and Its Impacts

4 Proper site supervision 4.62 0.5203 4

5 Careful handling of construction materials 4.54 0.9206 8

and equipment
6 Improved procurement management 3.82 0.5965 11
7 Due attention from management 4.52 0.5764 9

8 Stronger security measures 3.68 0.7362 13

9 Improved enforcement of contracts 4.58 0.6383 6
10 Improved legal measures 4.39 0.9060 10

55
 11 Use of more efficient construction equipment 3.68 0.7362 12
12 Improved procurement management 4.60 0.5680 5

13 Employment of skilled workmen for 4.56 0.6401 7

site operations

Source: Compiled from field survey

The research attempted to identify factors that may have bearing on the effectiveness of

construction waste management at the site. The questionnaire included several factors which

are widely accepted as having positive impact on the effectiveness of construction material

waste management system.

The respondents were asked if they believe the factors listed in the questionnaire contribute to

improve the waste management system of the site and to rank each of them according to their

significance in improving the waste management system of the site. As shown in Table 18

which depicts the distribution of responses the respondents ranked the measures for waste

minimization from top to bottom as due attention from management, implementation of

systematic waste management strategy, proper site supervision, proper storage facilities and

improved store control and monitoring system, careful handling of construction materials and

equipment, stronger security measures, staff training and awareness on waste management

and its impacts, improved enforcement of contracts, improved legal measures, use of more

efficient construction equipment, employment of skilled workmen for site operations,

improved procurement management improved procurement management, more attention from

management, implementation of systematic waste management strategy and proper site

supervision are considered to have the highest impacts, while staff training and awareness on

waste management and its impacts, employment of skilled workmen for site operations and

56
improved procurement management are perceived as having the lowest impacts of all the

measures.

Awareness and Implementation of Policy and Legislation on Construction Waste

Table 19: Policy, Legislation and Contracts on CWM & DS

Awareness of Awareness of Effective Effective Enforcement of

Response National Legislation on Implementation Contractual Obligations
Policies on CWM&DS of CWM&DS on CWM&DS
CWM&DS Policy and Laws

% % % %
Yes 30 .0 48.4 0.0 0.0
No 41.4 51.6 47.3 45.0
Not Sure 27.6 0.0 52.7 55.0
Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 19 shows responses about Ethiopian policies and laws on construction waste

management and disposal. Participants were asked if they have knowledge of Ethiopian

policies and laws pertinent to CWM &DS. They were also asked if they believe CWM &DS

policy and laws are implemented effectively and regarding their belief regarding the

enforcement of contractual obligations concerning waste management from the site. 42% and

28% of the respondents claimed they were not aware of and not sure if a policy exists and

30% of the respondents said they are aware there is a policy. Regarding legislation 39% are

not aware of the existence of laws on construction wastes whereas 25% are not sure about the

existence of laws on construction waste. Only 36% said they are aware that there are laws and

policies relating to waste management. Concerning policy and law enforcement 47% of the

respondents said there is no effective implementation of policy and laws and 53% are not sure

about the situation. Regarding the enforcement of contractual clauses on waste disposal 45%

57
of the respondents agreed that the enforcement of contractual requirements is weak and the

rest, 55% are not sure.

Awareness of Construction Waste Management Core Issues

Table 20: Awareness of CWM & DS Core Issues

Awareness of CWM & DS Core Issues

Option %

1. Efficient material handling, reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal of waste 0.0

2. Reduction and disposal of construction waste 14.8

3. Proper material scheduling and handling to reduce waste 26.2

4. Strict supervision to minimize waste 52.4

5. Appropriate disposal of waste to landfills and other areas allocated for waste disposal 6.6

Total 100%

Source: Compiled from field survey

The research attempted to assess knowledge and awareness of the concept of waste

management and contemporary core issues. The respondents were given a list of five choices

four of which dealing with some features and one with a comprehensive definition including

all major aspects of the concept. The choices were, efficient material handling, reduction,

reuse, recycling and disposal of wastes, minimization and disposal of construction wastes,

proper scheduling and handling of materials for waste reduction, strict supervision to

minimize waste, appropriate disposal of waste to landfills or other areas allocated for waste

disposal. The response showed that a fair percentage of the respondents were able to identify

the most appropriate description of construction waste management from a list of options.

From column 2 of Table 20, it can be seen that 52.5% chose option 1, which encompassed

about all aspects of construction waste management.

58
Waste Disposal Negative Impact on Human Health

Aware of Health CWM&DS at the Site Health Impact Assessment

Response Impact of Potentially Harmful to of CWM&DS Carried out
CWM&DS Health

% % %

Yes 53.7 60.1 0.0

No 11.2 10.0 41.7

Not Sure 32.1 28.9 58.2

Table 21: Awareness of CWM & DS Health Impact

Source: Compiled from field survey

The study assessed the knowledge of the participants regarding the health impacts of waste

management system and their perception of its impact on health. Concerning awareness of

health impacts of waste management system 53.7% of the respondents said they are aware,

11.2% said they are not aware and 32.1% are not sure if there is a linkage between waste

management and disposal system and health. With respect to the potential of the waste

management and disposal system of the site 61% of the participants said it is potentially

harmful,10% said it’s not harmful and 33% are not sure if it is friendly to health or not.

Regarding health impact assessment to ensure waste is managed in accordance with health

concerns 58.2% of the participants are not sure if assessment was carried out. 41.7% of the

respondents said there was no assessment and none said it was carried out.

Waste Disposal Negative Impact on Local Economy

59
 Table 22: Awareness of Site CWM& DS Economic Impact

Response Site storage facilities and system economically effective?

% % % % %
Yes 72.1 4.7 73.2 42.2 73.4
No 0.0 67.2 3.7 7.2 7.2
Not Sure 37.9 28.1 23.1 52.6 19.4
Source: Compiled from field survey

The research assessed the awareness of participants and the economic impacts of construction

waste management at the project site. As shown in Table 22 below the majority 72.1% of the

respondents agreed that the waste management system has negative economic impacts. As

table 22 shows the majority, 67.2% also agree that storage facilities and system are not

economically effective, there is delay in waste disposal at the site, the enforcement of

contractual clauses on CWM&DS is weak the office incurs additional cost due to the poor

storage system and delay in waste disposal from the site.

Waste Disposal Negative Impact on Local Environmental Health

Table 23: Awareness of Relationship between CWM& DS and Environment

Response Aware of Relationship between CWM&DS and

Environment

№ %
Yes 38.31 61.8
No 3.72 6.0
Not Sure 19.96 32.2

Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 24: Environment Impact of CWM&DS at the Site

60
 Response CWM&DS at the Site Environment ally friendly

№ %
Yes 0.0 0.0
No 41.6 66.4
Not Sure 20.83 33.6
Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 25: Supervision to Ensure Environmental friendliness of Construction Waste

Disposal

AAHCPO Supervises to Ensure Waste Disposal is

Response Environmentally Friendly
№ %
Yes 0.0 0.0
No 40.54 65.4
Not Sure 21.45 34.6
Source: Compiled from field survey

Table 26: Adverse Potential of CWM&DS on Environment

CWM&DS Potentially Hazardous to Environment

Response
№ %

Yes 41.66 67.2

No 0.0 0.0

Not Sure 20.33 32.8

Source: Compiled from field survey

61
 Table 27: Environmental Impact Assessment of CWM&DS

Environmental Impact Assessment of CWM&DS Carried

Response out by AAHCPO
№ %
Yes 0.0 0.0
No 32.73 52 .8
Not Sure 29.26 47.2
Source: Compiled from field survey
To assess their awareness of environmental impacts of CWM & DS the respondents were

asked if they have knowledge about the linkage between construction waste management and

the environment, if CWM&DS at the site is environment ally friendly, if there is supervision

to ensure an environmentally friendly waste management and disposal at the site, if

CWM&DS of the site is potentially hazardous to the environment and an environmental

impact assessment of CWM&DS was carried out.

As summarized on table 23 61.8% of them are aware of and 37.2% of the respondents are not

sure about the linkage between waste management and disposal system and the environment.

With respect to the possible environment impact of the waste management and disposal

system of the project 61% of the participants said it is possibly hazardous and the rest are not

sure if it is environmentally friendly or not. Regarding control and monitoring to ensure waste

is managed in lieu with environmental concerns 66.4% of the participants responded that

there is no supervision by the AAHCPO to ensure waste disposal is environmentally friendly

whereas 32.6% of the respondents are not sure if the office carries out supervision to make

sure waste is disposed in an environmentally friendly manner.

As the response in table 27 indicates, the office did not carry out an assessment on the

economic, environmental and health impacts of the waste disposal system. 52.8% of the

62
respondents constituting the majority of respondents from the client office said an

environmental assessment was not carried out and the remaining 47.2% are not sure if there

was an assessment by the office.

4.2. Face to Face Interview Results Concerning Construction Waste

Management and Disposal Strategy at Gelan Site

Types, Level, Waste Monitoring and Disposal

As interviews with the head, deputy head and senior officers from the construction unit of the

AAHCPO reveals the project office purchases and supplies major construction materials like

reinforcement bars, precast, blocks for slab and block work to the contractors to efficiently

use and prevent waste of construction materials. The contractors purchase and use materials

such as gravel, timber, wooden materials for form and other works, nail and wire rod.

According to the interviewees, the sub-city branch office stores the materials at its stores and

supplies them to the contractors. Supply and distribution of the materials to the contractors is

based on a predetermined amount the office fixed for each of the materials it supplies.

Contractors are financially liable for waste that results from excessive use of materials beyond

the amount fixed. According to the interviewees, there would have been waste without the

strategy but they unanimously agree that it has weaknesses. Some of them mentioned poor

workmanship, lack of knowledge and lack of storage facilities are challenges. Regarding

waste disposal respondents from the AAHCPO said contractors are contractually responsible

to dispose excavated earth materials away from the site and to landfills. Some of them are not

sure where and how far away contractors are contractually obliged to dump waste materials.

Others said there is no obligation on contractors regarding where and how far away waste

should be dumped as long as they discarded away from the site. According to respondents

63
from the AAHCPO, contractors are also under obligation to clear up to one-meter radius of

the area surrounding buildings they construct. Here again some of the respondents say there is

no specific obligation as to where they should dump waste while others are not sure if

contractors have such obligation.

The results of the interviews with key staff from the construction unit of the AAHCPO as well

as the head tend to agree with the findings of the questionnaire regarding the types of waste

and level as well as waste monitoring system. All of them confirmed the site generates the

types of waste listed under Table 1 and they do not know the amount of waste generated. All

the respondents said pieces of reinforcement bars take up the largest of the waste volume the

site generates. As all of them confirmed, their assertion is not based on any systematic

measurement but on mere experience and empirical observation. Similar to questionnaire

respondents all interviewees from the office said there is no waste monitoring system at the

study or other condominium sites of the AAHCPO. Asked to give a quantified estimate of the

volume of waste from reinforcement bars or any of the other materials the site generates all of

said they do not know and further responded no assessment has been carried out.

Asked if they have knowledge about site waste monitoring systems and techniques all of them

responded in the negative. Interviews with some of them however revealed they have a

slightly fair idea that it is used to measure waste. After they were given a definition of waste

monitoring mechanisms and a short explanation of its uses all of them agreed that it might be

useful to implement it at the site.

Regarding waste disposal, AAHCPO Interviewees revealed that is done by dumping to

landfills except pieces of metal and reinforcement bars sold mostly for reuse by MSEs. They

also said their office is responsible for managing and disposing waste from materials such as

64
cement and reinforcement bars it supplies to contractors. According to their responses, the

later are responsible for disposing waste from materials like timber and other wood materials

they purchase for construction.

Interview responses from AAHCPO consultants and contractors agrees with questioner

responses on the main type of site waste identified that all said the site generates the items in

the list. Like AAHCPO interviewees, they also asserted that waste from reinforcement bars

constitutes the largest volume. They further confirmed that their estimate is based on

observation; there is no system to monitor the level of waste at the site. Consultant, and

contractor interviewees have a relatively better awareness of the concept of waste monitoring

and the benefits than AAHCPO respondents do.

Respondents Opinion on the Causes of Waste

The majorities of AAHCPO, consultant and contractor interviewees agree that the items listed

under Table 15 actually or potentially cause construction waste at the site. Asked on whether

he considers lack of attention by management as a main cause one AAHCPO interviewee said

it may be a potential cause but he views the challenge more relate to lack of capacity than lack

of attention. He said there is a recognized and accepted management lack of capacity in terms

of human resources, knowledge, skill, finance and material resources, which is more of a

challenge than attention. He says the management pays sufficient attention to manage and

dispose waste properly but it does not have adequate capacity to overcome the challenges. He

also opined that increased attention by AAHCPO management would not help much in

overcoming the major challenges. He cited lack of knowledge and skill of waste management

techniques, lack of human resources and mandates as examples of what he considers lack of

capacity. Asked about supervision regarding proper enforcement of contracts on waste and

65
disposal he said the problem lies in the contractual clauses than lack of managerial

supervision. According to him, the office supervises to make sure waste is disposed properly

and does not effect payment unless contractors dispose waste according to the contract. If the

manner contractors dispose waste is problematic, the solution may be to revise the standard

contract to make disposal healthier and effective.

Some AAHCPO Sub city branch management interviewees attribute the cause of the largest

volume of waste (from Reinforcement bars) to contractors. They say it occurs because some

contractors take reinforcement bars in excess of what is needed and they do not have skilled

workers. Most of them agree that the storage facilities and system causes waste. Some of them

say improving storage facilities and system requires a stronger financial capacity, which they

lack. Contractor and consultant interviewees also agree with the factors listed as causes of

waste in Table 15. One contractor added corruption should be considered as one major factor

causing waste at the site. He says there is a widely recognized and reported corruption in

AAHCPO in procurement of construction materials for condominium sites. He says

substandard quality materials are supplied and used for construction having long-term

negative economic impact. He mentioned the frequent media reports as evidence of corruption

in the office. He says contractors have no say regarding the quality of materials supplied by

AAHCPO and simply use them even knowing they are not up to the quality required. Another

contractor supporting this view said there is a problem of quality in construction materials the

AAHCPO supplies but its immediate effect is on the quality of the condominiums.

Contractors as he says, use the materials supplied despite their quality and there is no

immediate visible waste of materials. Another contractor also complained about the quality of

materials produced by MSEs that result in waste.

66
Regarding corruption one AAHCPO interviewee said the material transit from store to

construction site may cause the loss of materials. As he says corrupt parties involved in the

transit like contractors and guards may collaborate to steal construction materials to other

destinations before they reach stores. He said there was a precedence of such corruption at

another site.

Construction Waste Disposal and its Impact on Human Health

The response of the interviewees agrees with the responses of questionnaire respondents

concerning the potentially harmful effects of waste disposal to human health. While most of

them agree on the potential most of them also indicated the specific and direct effects of the

waste disposal system need to be assessed and studied. The responses of AAHCPO

interviewees with respect to waste disposal by contractors imply the negative potential of the

waste disposal system to human health. As they said contractors are not contractually obliged

to dump waste in a healthy manner. Their only obligation is to dispose construction waste

away from site. Whatever the hazardous nature of the materials and the effect of the manner

dumping to health they would not be responsible.

Interview responses concerning policy and legislation awareness and enforcement

corroborates questionnaire responses about the negative potential of the CWM &DS. As the

results show the respondents themselves lack awareness of relevant, policies, laws, and they

also asserted there is lack of awareness and implementation on the part of other stakeholders.

This implies that the AAHCPO itself or contractors may fail to dispose waste in a health

friendly manner because they are not aware of their obligations or relevant laws are not

enforced properly to refrain them from doing so.

67
Interviewees from the AAHCPO also comply with questionnaire responses on health impact

assessment. They confirmed that no assessment was carried out to identify the health impacts

of the waste management and disposal at the site.

Responses of Waste Disposal negative impact on Economy, Environmental and Human

Health

Interviewees including key respondents from the major stakeholder AAHCPO confirmed that

no environmental impact assessment was carried out on environmental impacts of the waste

disposal system. Given low national economic and social development, a weak construction

industry and literature evidence lack of environmental assessment can be interpreted as an

indication of the harmful potential of the waste disposal system. Despite their lack of

awareness about how and the specific harmful effects, the interviewees are aware of the link

between environment and waste management and disposal. Interview responses regarding the

health impacts of the waste disposal system comply with the results of the questionnaire. The

majority of the interviewees agree that the waste disposal system may cause harm to human

health and no assessment was carried out by the office.

68
 CHAPTER FIVE - CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Conclusions of the Study

The study site generates several types of waste materials such as wooden materials,

cardboard, cement, paper materials, metal and plastic piping materials, concrete materials,

pieces of brick, pieces of block, and pieces of reinforcing steel and electric wires. The

accurate rate of generation of the materials is not known because there is no waste monitoring

system at the site. Awareness of waste monitoring system among the staff of AAHCPO,

contractors and other stakeholders is generally low. Factors such as weak waste management

strategy, lack of attention by management, poor storage system and facilities are major of

waste at the site. There is no timely waste disposal and strong supervision by client office to

manage & dispose waste. The storage system and facilities are poor; materials are not stored

properly and not secured from theft.

Awareness of CWM & DS Core Issues is low among the major stakeholders. The waste

management system of the site is potentially harmful to economic, environmental and human

health. No assessment is carried out to assess the impact of the waste management strategy.

As the study indicates, both the AAHCPO and contractors have a responsibility in disposing

construction waste from the site. However, waste is not managed and disposed timely and in a

proper manner. Waste materials are stored at the poor storage facilities of the AAHCPO and

sometimes within the compound exposed to theft and deterioration. Contractors enter into

agreement to dispose of waste materials with the AAHCPO but they often fail to discharge

their obligation. The AAHCPO does not strictly supervise if they fulfill their contractual

obligation and take legal measures when they fail to dispose of waste within the time and in a

manner stipulated in the contract or as is demanded in pertinent laws. The economic

69
disadvantages of delay and poor storage system are obvious. Materials are not reused, they

deteriorate, they are stolen and the AAHCPO incurs additional costs for storage.

The AAHCPO does not have a waste monitoring system to identify the types and amounts of

waste materials and but according to the results of this research the study site generates

several types of construction waste materials such as wooden materials, cardboard, cement,

paper materials, metal and plastic piping materials, concrete materials, pieces of brick, pieces

of block, pieces of reinforcing steel and electric wires.

Awareness of waste monitoring system among the staff of AAHCPO, contractors and other

stake holders is generally low. Factors such as weak waste management strategy, lack of

attention by management, poor storage system and facilities are major of waste at the site.

There is no timely waste disposal and strong supervision by client office to manage & dispose

waste. The storage system and facilities are poor, materials are not stored properly and not

secured from theft and vandalism. Awareness of CWM & DS Core Issues is low among the

major stake holders.

The waste management system of the site is potentially harmful to economic, environmental

and human health. No assessment is carried out to assess the impact of the waste management

strategy.

Lack of supervision by the AAHCPO, inefficiency in procurement, inefficient storage

facilities and system, mishandling of materials, design and ordering errors and, lack of skill,

material deterioration, absence of modern waste management strategy, lack of proper

attention by management, weak enforcement of contractual obligation, weak security /theft

70
and vandalism, lack of awareness and knowledge of waste management practices underlie the

causes of waste.

Awareness of environmental impacts of waste management and disposal system among the

management and staff of the AAHCPO and the contractors is very low. Hence they do not

give due attention to environmental concerns in carrying out their activities. There is no

assessment of environmental impacts and no strategy is employed to prevent environmental

hazard that may occur due to waste management. There is no mechanism to follow up and

ensure waste is disposed legally and properly in a manner that does not affect the

environment. The long term negative effect of poor material management in degrading the

environment is not taken into consideration both on the part of the AAHCPO and contractors.

There is also lack of awareness of the relationship between waste management and health.

However, there is no effort to carry out health impact assessment to prevent adverse effects

construction waste may cause to human health. There is lack of awareness and knowledge of

the concept of waste management. The knowledge of both contractors and staff of the client

AAHCPO is not holistic. They are not aware of the core elements of modern and effective

waste management system.

There is lack of awareness of policies and laws relevant to waste management. This has

caused lack of compliance with existing laws. Staff of the AAHCPO as well as contractors are

not well aware of the laws to manage and dispose of waste in line with their obligations. Lack

of legal awareness also weakened the enforcement of in case of violation of obligations.

5.2. Recommendations

Overcoming the challenges of construction waste management at the study site requires a

thorough understanding of the problems on the waste management system. Thus, the

71
AAHCPO as well as other stakeholders should understand the negative impacts of the waste

management system, give appropriate attention and act to find solution. The first action

should be carrying out an in depth preliminary scientific assessment to understand the

problems clearly and in depth. Pending a thorough study of the problems on the waste

management system the major stakeholder, AAHCPO should act to strengthen its current

strategy. One useful measure may be strengthening the implementation of laws and

contractual clauses including provisions imposing obligations on contractors to dispose waste.

Contractual clauses clearly stipulating where contractors should dispose of waste and how

they should dispose them should be incorporated. The inclusion of punitive provisions may

also come in handy.

Another useful measure is strengthening the enforcement of existing relevant laws.

Strengthening the enforcement of laws such as the solid waste proclamation which imposes

penalty in cases of violation should be considered. The AAHCPO should strengthen

supervision to make sure contractors live up to their contractual obligation. As an

implementing governmental body, it has the obligation to enforce constitutional provisions

pertaining to environmental protection as well as other relevant laws. Its responsibility entails

to make sure that entities responsible for waste disposal discharge their obligations in relation

to environmental protection. It should carry out supervision to make sure dumping of waste

from site is done in a manner not harmful to health and environment.

The AAHCPO should take measures to improve its storage facilities, control and monitoring

system to make sure that construction materials are stored properly and are secured from theft

and vandalism. The AAHCPO should conduct staff and professional training on waste

management and its impacts such a training among other things would help increase

72
understanding of the problem, focus and attention and motivates concerned bodies to take

appropriate initiatives.

Other concerned governmental bodies having the responsibility should make sure there is a

comprehensive legislative framework to address the problem of construction wastes.

Governmental bodies with the jurisdiction should issue laws and regulations at a national

level and introduce effective monitoring and control system. They should introduce laws to

reduce the negative environmental and health effects of obtaining and using raw materials,

their transportation and processing. Legislative efforts should reach grass root levels.

Concerned bodies should develop and set up education, research and training programs to

raise awareness of construction waste management at a national level for all of the

construction sector bodies. They should carry out research and development studies to

introduce and strengthen effective construction waste management strategies.

73
 REFERENCES

Berry M, Bove F. Birthweight reduction association with residence near a hazardous waste

landfill. Environmental Health perspective1997; 105: 856–61

Coventry, S. and Guthrie, P. (1998) Waste Minimization and recycling in construction –

Design Manual CIRIA London

Crittenden, B., and Kolaczkowski, S (1995). Waste management – a practical guide,London:

Institution of Civil Engineers

Deloitee , Bio by Deliotee , Screening template for Construction and Demolition Waste

management inThe Netherlands V2 – September 2015

Dockery DW, Pope III CA. Acute respiratory effects of particulate air pollution.Annu Rev

Public Health 1994; 15: 107–32

Faniran, O. O., and Caban, G. 1998.“Minimizing waste on construction project sites”, in,

Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, 5:2, pp182- 188.

Ferguson J, Kermode N, Nash C.L, Sketch W.A.J, Huxford R.P (1995) Managing and

Minimizing Construction Waste: A Practical Guide.Institution of Civil Engineers,

London.

Formoso, C. T., Soibelman, L ., De Cesare, C. and Isatto, E. L., 2002. “Material Waste in

Building Industry: Main Causes and Prevention”, in, Journal of Construction

Engineering and Management, July/August 2002, pp316-325.

Gertsakis, J. and Lewis, H. 2003. Sustainability and the Waste Management Hierarchy. A

discussion paper prepared for Eco Recycle Victoria, March 2003.

Goldman LR, Paigen B, Magnant MM, Highland JH. Low birth weight, prematurity and birth

defects in children living near the hazardous waste site, Love Canal. Hazard Waste

74
 Hazard Mater 1985; 2: 209 –23

Guerrero, L. Abarca (2014). A construction waste generation model for developing countries

Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

Guthrie, P., Woolveridge, A.C. and Patel, V.S. (1999) Waste minimization in construction: site

guide. London: Construction Industry Research and Information Association

Jaillon, L., Poon, C. S., & Chiang, Y. H. (2009). Quantifying the Waste Reduction Potential of

Using Prefabrication in Building Construction in Hong Kong. International Journal

of Integrated Waste Management, Science and Technology, 29(1): 309-20.

Jain, M. (2012). Economic Aspects of Construction Waste Materials in Terms of Cost

Savings – A case of Indian construction. International Journal of Scientific and

Research Publications, 2(10): 1-7.

Koskela, L. (1992). Application of the New Production Philosophy to Construction.Stanford:

Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Stanford University.

Lingard, H, Graham, P. and Smithers, G. (2000) ‘Employee Perceptions of the Solid Waste

Management System Operating in a large Australian Contracting Organisation:

Implications for Company Policy Implementation’, Construction Management and

Economics, Vol. 18, pp 383.

Lu, W., Yuan, H., Li, J., Hao, J. J. L., Mi, X., & Ding, Z. (2011).An Empirical Investigation of

Construction and Demolition Waste Generation Rates in Shenzhen city, South China.

Waste Management, 31(4), pp. 680–687.

Lu, W., & Yuan, H. (2011).A Framework for Understanding Waste Management Studies in

Construction.International Journal ofIntegrated Waste Management, Science

andTechnology,.1252-1260.

75
Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment (2014), National Waste Plan appendix 1-5

Muhwezi, L., Chamuriho, L. M., &Lema, N. M. (2012).An Investigation into Materials

Wastes on Building Construction Projects in Kampala-Uganda. Scholarly Journal

ofEngineering Research, 1(1): 11-18.

Nagapan, S., Rahman, I. A., &Asmi, A. (2012).Factors Contributing to Physical and

Nonphysical Waste Generation in Construction Industry.International Journal of

Advancesin Applied Sciences (IJAAS), 1(1): 1-10.

Nagapan, S., Rahman, I. A., &Asmi, A. (2011).A Review of Construction Waste Cause

Factors. Asian Conference on Real Estate: Sustainable Growth Managing Challenges

(ACRE), 967-987.

Nor, R., Raja, H., Noor, M., Ruslan, A., Ridzuan,M., Endut, I. R., Noordin, B., et al. (2013).

The Quantification of Local Construction Waste for the Current Construction

WasteManagement Practices: A Case Study in Klang Valley. Business Engineering and

Industrial Applications Colloquium (BEIAC), 2013 IEEE, 183-188

Ozonoff D, Colten ME, Cupples A, Heeren T, Schatzin A, Mangione T et al. Health problems

reported by residents of a neighborhood contaminated by a hazardous waste facility.

Am J IndMed 1987; 11: 581–97

RijkswaterstaatLeefomgeving (2015), Environmental Management Act Waste

Rajendran, P., &Pathrose, C. (2012).Implementing BIM for Waste Minimization in the

Construction Industry: A Literature Review.2nd international conference

onmanagement, 557-570.

Serpell, A., & Alarcon, L. (1998).Construction Process Improvement Methodology for

Construction Projects. International Journal of Project Management, 16(4), pp. 215–

76
 221.

Shen, L. Y, Tam, V. W, Tam, C. M, and Drew, D, (2004), ‘Mapping Approach for Examining

Waste Management on Construction Sites’, Journal of Construction Engineering and

Management, Vol. 130, No. 4, July/August 2004, pp. 472-481

Shen, L. Y. and Tam, V. W. Y. (2002).Implementation of environmental management in the

Hong Kong construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, vol.

20, no. 7, pp. 535–543

Skoyles, E. R., 1976. “Materials wastage – a misuse of resources”, in, Building Research and

Practice, 4:4, p232.

Snook, K., Turner, A. and Ridout, R. (1995) Recycling waste from the construction site.

England: Chartered Institute of Building.

Tam, V. W. Y., Tam, C. M., Zeng, S. X., & Ng, W. C. Y. (2007).Towards Adoption of

Prefabrication in Construction. International Journal of Building Science and its

Applications, 3642-3654.

Vianna NJ, Polan AK.Incidence of low birth weight among Love Canal residents. Science

1984; 226: 1217–9

Vrijheid M. Health effects of residence near hazardous waste landfill sites: a review of

epidemiologic literature. Environ Health Perspect 2000; 108: 101–12

Wrap. (2006). Best Practice Guidelines on the Preparation of Waste Management Plans for

Construction Contents.

WHO. Air Quality Guidelines for Europe (European Series No 91). Copenhagen: World

Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, 2000.

77
 ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF NATURAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

Appendix

Survey question for Contractors, Consultants, Local Administrations

Dear respondents,

The purpose of this research is to collect information on construction waste management and

disposal system at Gelan condominium construction project site in order to identify problems

and provide alternative solutions of waste disposal to local management as a requirement for

the completion of MBA degree in construction management from Addis Ababa Science and

Technology University.

Your volunteer participation in providing accurate information is vital for the successful

completion of this research. The information provided will be used for academic purpose only

and will be kept confidential.

Thank You for your participation

Endale Teferi

Tel. 0969 934822

Email: [email protected]

78
Part I. Demographic Characteristics

1. Gender : Male Female

2. Age 20-30 30-40 40-50 above 50 yrs

3. Name of institution /agency /company__________________________

4. Position_________________________

5. Period of Service in years

1- 3 4-7 more than 7 years

6. Academic qualification -

Certificate Diploma First Degree Post Graduate Doctoral

other

7. Field of Study

Accounting Engineering Management Construction management

Economics Accounting and Finance other

Part II. Technical Questions

8. What type of waste materials are dispose at the site?

_______________________________________________________________________

9. Do you have any knowledge about how construction waste materials are disposed at the

site?

Yes No

10. Do you believe the current construction materials waste disposal system is good for

human health, economic and environment?

Yes No

79
 11. Is there a scheduled time and disposal place for construction waste disposal in the site?

Yes No I don’t know

12. What length of time do you consider reasonable for construction waste disposal ? Please

explain why?

________________________________________________________________________

13. What do you think the advantages of timely disposing waste materials? What is the

current waste disposal practice at the

site?____________________________________________________________________

14. In your opinion what are the negative impacts of the waste material disposal system

practiced at the site?

_______________________________________________________________________

15. Are you aware of any health related problems caused due to waste materials at the site?

Yes No

16. Do you believe the waste disposal system practiced may have negative impacts to the

environment? Yes No I don’t know

17. Please state some of the human and environmental impacts of the waste disposal system

You believe are harmful

_______________________________________________________________________

18. Do you believe Addis Ababa Savings and Housing Development agency incurs extra

cost due to the storage and delay in the disposal of waste materials

Yes No

19. What reason/s in your opinion account for the delay in disposal of waste materials at the

Gelan condominium site ?

80
 Absence and inadequacy of waste disposal policy, laws and strategies

Weakness of administration and management in implementing disposal system in place

Lack of awareness of waste disposal strategies and their impact

Lack of trained manpower

Lack of knowledge and skill of relevant personnel

20. Please explain if you are aware of other reasons that underlie the ineffectiveness of

waste disposal system at the site

_______________________________________________________________________

21. Which party is responsible for waste disposal and who covers the waste related costs ?

Addis Ababa Savings and Housing Development agency

Contractors

22. What are the basis for calculating the costs?

_______________________________________________________________________

23. Are there any directives regarding the costs and time of disposal?

Yes No

24. Is there a storage system for construction waste at Gelan Site?

Yes No

25. Do you believe the storage system is economically and environmentally effective ?

Yes No

26. Please state the problems you might be aware of in the storage system;

_______________________________________________________________________

27. Is there a system to control and monitor stored waste materials?

Yes No

81
28. Do you believe the system applied to control and monitor stored waste materials is

effective?

Yes No

29. Are the costs for stores , offices and towers related to the storage and administration of

waste materials included in the project?

Yes No

30. Is there an effective system to ensure that contractors dispose waste materials timely

and in line with human and environmental concerns ?

Yes No

31. Do contractors receive payment from client without disposing waste?

Yes No

32. Do you believe the removal system and time of waste material disposal is economically

sound?

Yes No

33. Please state some if you are aware of the causes for delay and ineffectiveness of stored

disposing waste materials.

_______________________________________________________________________

Finally Please forward any opinion, suggestion or recommendation regarding the waste

material disposal system at the site

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

82
Appendix II:

Face-to-face interview questions for AAHCPO management members and staff , heads and

staff of contractor and consultant companies and MSEs

Dear respondents,

The purpose of this research is conducted to collect information on construction waste

management and disposal strategy system at Gelan condominium construction site in order to

identify problems and provide alternative solution of waste disposal to local management as a

requirement of completion of MBA degree in construction management from Addis Ababa

Science and Technology University.

Your volunteer participation in providing accurate information is vital for the successful

completion of this research. The information provided will be used for academic purpose only

and will be kept confidential.

Thank You for your participation

Endale Teferi

Tel. 0969 934822

Email: [email protected]

1. Do you have a knowledge about construction waste management and disposal

strategies?

2. Do you know what kinds of construction wastes are on the site?

3. Are the construction waste materials stored properly?

4. Do you think construction waste materials have economic values?

83
5. Is there any effect on the community health?

6. What is the reason of delay of disposal of construction wastes at the site?

7. Please forward any opinion, suggestion and recommendations regarding to

construction waste management and disposal strategy?

84
Appendix III:

A survey question for focus group of discussion questions for specific group of respondents

Dear respondents,

The purpose of this research is conducted to collect information on construction waste

management and disposal strategy system at Gelan condominium construction site in order to

identify problems and provide alternative solution of waste disposal to local management as a

requirement of completion of MBA degree in construction management from Addis Ababa

Science and Technology University.

Your volunteer participation in providing accurate information is vital for the successful

completion of this research. The information provided will be used for academic purpose only

and will be kept confidential.

Thank You for your participation

Endale Teferi

Tel. 0969 934822

Email: [email protected]

1. Do you have any knowledge about construction waste management and disposal

strategy?

2. Is there any negative impact on community health and environment due to undisposed

construction waste materials?

3. What is the reason of delay of construction waste management and disposal of wastes

at the site?

85
4. Do you believe construction waste materials are stored and prevent properly from

damage, theft and vandalism?

5. Is there a mechanism of supervision of construction waste materials at the site level?

86
87
88