Analysis of the Coordination Degree of the Construction Waste Recycling Policy Among Different Stakeholders

Zhiyu Huang, Hong Lang () and Mingxue Ma
Additional contact information
Zhiyu Huang: Chongqing University of Science and Technology
Hong Lang: Chongqing University of Science and Technology
Mingxue Ma: Western Sydney University

A chapter in Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management and Real Estate, 2021, pp 409-425 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract With the acceleration of the urbanization process, the continuous demolition of old buildings and the start of new projects in China, more and more attention have been paid to the negative impact on the environment exerted by a large number of construction waste. In recent years, the state and some local governments have successively issued policies on waste from construction and demolition. Although the main components of waste have recycling potential, the recycling rate in 2017 was only 5%. These measures can only be made full use if they are highly recognized by society. However, the effectiveness of the relevant policies is currently unknown. This article evaluates the current construction waste recycling policies from three different stakeholders: the government, enterprises, and universities. The coordination degree between three different stakeholders reflects the effectiveness of the policy. 158 online questionnaires were distributed, of which including 19 measures, and 132 valid responses were received. After sorting out the collected questionnaire data and importing it into the SPSS software, using the Kruskal–Wallis H test method, analyzed the coordination degree of the government, enterprises and universities on the same measure and their differences (expressed by P). The study results show that there are differences in the degree of recognition of the same measure between different stakeholders, which may be caused by the different nature of work. There are two “good coordinated measures”, which are “50% reduction in value-added tax” and “establishment Recycling quality standards”; 8 items are “moderate coordination”, including “achieve source emission reduction”, “land preferential use”, “information platform construction”, etc. There are 9 items that are “poor coordination”, including “establish classification standards”, “Who generates who pays”, “Regular release of resource utilization product price information”, etc. This study can provide a reference for improving the efficiency of construction waste resource management.

Keywords: Construction waste; Recycling policy; Coordination degree; Analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-981-16-3587-8_27

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9789811635878

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-16-3587-8_27

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Springer Books from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().