Data Collection

The complexity of both the construction and demolition process is dependent upon the particular project. Factors, including site characteristics, geographical location and building type will determine the mechanics of the process and the composition of the likely C&D waste streams.

Despite the variety and complexity of individual projects, this report has considered generic construction and demolition cycles. Although it is acknowledged that both the construction and demolition processes are often integrated, with demolition taking place before construction, for the purpose of clarity, we have considered both the construction and demolition process as distinct processes.

The figures below illustrate a generic demolition cycle, consisting of internal strip out, roof, walls, foundations and then site finish, and a generic construction cycle consisting of site investigation/ground work and site preparation, foundations, frame, envelopes (walls and roof), and internal fit out.

Research into Cultural/Behavioural and Mechanical Barriers to Data Collection

The South East Centre for the Built Environment (SECBE), in partnership with the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA), as part of the BREW Programme (2006/07) commissioned Temple Group Ltd (Temple) to research the cultural/behavioural and mechanical barriers to waste data collection.

The objective of this report was to progress an understanding of those significant cultural/behavioural and mechanical barriers to waste data collection, critical to the development and the adoption of more sustainable waste management practices in the construction sector.

Our research methodology included data reviews, telephone interviews, site visits and desktop research into waste management practices in the UK and internationally. Key findings of our research included:

The inherent value of the materials is not recognised and therefore is being lost;
Regulatory drivers, such as the requirement for waste management plans, is critical to the adoption of sustainable waste management practices;
Awareness raising and educational/training initiatives are critical, as is the role of a "site champion";
Certain site audit tools can be difficult given time, resource and on-site space constraint;
Commercial market places for recycled materials are still under developed which limits the commercial value of the recyclable materials, thus influencing (adversely) industry buy-in;

This report also provides a set of recommendations to ensure those identified cultural/behavioural and mechanical barriers are successfully overcome. These included:

Education and training for all personnel in the construction process including those in the design team, the supply team and procurement, and on-site workers
Appropriate rewards and incentives are needed to achieve behavioural change
Improved waste management practices should be instituted such as standardised reporting metrics, appropriate (more prescriptive) waste categories, managing waste by variance and the use of segregated skips
More regulatory initiatives are required, similar to the requirements for Site Waste Management Plans, to effect change and ultimately stimulate the market for recovered/recycled materials.

Barriers to waste data collection

Construction and Demolition Process Waste Overview
The complexity of both the construction and demolition process is dependent upon the particular project. Factors, including site characteristics, geographical location and building type will determine the mechanics of the process and the composition of the likely C&D waste streams.

Construction Cycle

Construction and Demolition waste management requires a great deal of coordination and expertise amongst key stakeholders. Whilst the above processes (cycles) may appear simple, it is important to remember that in order to effect waste minimisation within this context, a large number of stakeholders need to be involved and to "own" or at least contribute to the effectiveness of the system.

The contractor needs to have the experience and expertise to be able to act as the "hub of the wheel" to achieve waste reduction through the supply chain and in ensuring effective construction site waste management systems are in place. The collection of accurate data, the monitoring of system performance and the communication of such results is of critical importance in managing a complex and interdependent system.

To effect change and savings, it is important to understand where the savings can be most efficiently achieved. It has been shown that approximately 70%[1] of the opportunity for waste minimisation is within the design phase. The remaining 30% is found within the operational phase - the construction site. Of this 30% there are two key phases of the construction process that offer the greatest opportunity for waste minimisation and reduction which are the construction of the roof and the internal "fit out".

Therefore in attempting to develop an effective real time data system it is important to understand in holistic terms all the elements from the design phase through to construction and fit-out and the critical support systems such as supply chain management, on-site operational and technical constraints and site waste management.

This report will consider such factors in reviewing the SECBE RTDS pilot and in our recommendations for RTDS process improvements.

Research Methodology

Research Methods - Telephone Interviews, Site Visits and Data Review
A number of telephone interviews were conducted with those individuals with responsibility for either the promotion of improved site waste management or site waste management.

Other interviews were conducted with Kier Partnership Homes. Site visits to several Wolseley sites (a leading supplier of building materials and services) and Wolsely client sites to understand at first hand, at a site level potential barriers to effective management construction and demolition waste.

The key comments are provided below and have been grouped under respective headings of cultural/behavioural and mechanical barriers. It is important to note that although some of the issues raised during our research were quiet specific to the adoption of the BRE SMARTStart tool, many are general comments that would apply to other similar waste auditing tools.

A desktop study was also carried out to identify general industry cultural/behavioural and mechanical barriers to efficient waste data collection. This involved desktop research into best practice in Canada, the USA, New Zealand, Australia and Europe and followed up with telephone interviews with key waste management professional known to members of the project team.

Findings - Telephone Interviews and Site Visits

Cultural/Behavioural Factors
A key issue is that the contractors do not see the waste as their issue or problem, they are hired to say install 40m of skirting and are given the materials to work with and have therefore no ownership of the issue. Therefore key is how materials are paid for and could a change to this help create ownership and therefore better management.

The underlying business model needs to be changed to allow the value inherent in the materials and waste to be recognised and therefore recovered (as mentioned above from our observations)
The inherent value of the materials is not recognised and therefore is being lost
Neither the buyers nor the specifiers in the company offices are engaged in this concept and are only focused on lowest price, unit or total and not the value of the materials if specified to produce less waste
At the moment there is a perception that there is no real incentive to get involved;
A key benefit of the SmartStart system increases the awareness of waste issues on-site, facilitates a more analytical approach to waste management and is a useful tool in motivating subcontractors to be more waste conscious
The role of contractual methods to manage waste and using the example of plasterboard off-cuts is important. Make it the responsibility of the contractor to dispose of this wastage - reduce volume of waste generated, reduce costs and provide a cleaner safer construction site
There is an important role for the site champion - responsibility to collect data, facilitate communication between all parties and increase awareness of waste management issues
It was important to understand waste contractors underlying business model. They do not charge the builder by weight, but by skip collection. Waste brought back to their yards and sorted. Weight of waste to be disposed of to landfill reduced considerably, this is where the contractor makes profit; thus there is a fundamental problem with the underlying business model
The waste handler manager's role was seen in many respects to be as important as the site manager. He needs to feed back information on the types of waste that are generated on-site back to the site manager so he is aware of what the problems are and the waste types such as "doors" and issues such as cross contamination
The requirement for a site manager "keeping an eye on things" at the site was mentioned on numerous occasions. This would ensure waste management practices were properly adhered to. Moreover, the site waste manager needs to be on site walking around, inspecting skips and work practices ensuring that there is no wastage of raw materials or cross contamination of waste in skips
In addition, understanding of how smaller companies work and manage their businesses is fundamental to how we then address change within the industry. It almost appears to be the case that we are running before we can walk, in that we have focussed directly on the waste produced without understanding why it happens and what process is involved
Important to identify, perhaps contractually, who owns the raw materials such as pipes, fittings, doors, etc. and therefore the property of contractors to dispose of to a skip. This would link to and help define "when a raw material becomes waste". Many contractors can be wasteful of raw materials because they have not paid for them. This is particularly true for plumbers and carpenters and others who have been provided with materials by a construction company of homes. If the contractors had paid for the materials themselves they would be much more conscious since such costs would be coming from their profit margin

Mechanical Factors

The only way to get SMARTStart (or any other waste audit tool) to actually work is to employ a site waste manager to promote more sustainable waste management practices. This might only work, and be cost effective, on larger sites
The system should be managed by variance which would be a better approach i.e. only assess the skips that appeared to an experienced practitioner to be not normal for the phase of the work. A study on this would be beneficial
Some respondents did not think that the waste audit tool as used during the pilot study provided useful feedback. There were too many categories and there was too much variability in estimating data - "rubbish in rubbish out" is a likely problem
Many respondents felt that the categories used for the pilot study were not prescriptive enough - blocks and bricks should be broken down into new blocks / old blocks etc. which would highlight wastage. It is important to be able to distinguish between wastage and general construction and demolition waste and this can not be done at the moment as there are no separate categories for new block/old blocks etc
Paradoxically others felt that in some ways the system is too prescriptive and system categories should be reworked to better reflect the stages of a house building / renovation project. One issue with the pilot study audit tool categories, in particular Ceramics is that bricks / blocks and ceramics should not be under the same category heading of Ceramics. Bricks and blocks are an important waste stream and should have their own category
No formal training was available for operating staff on how best to characterise waste streams (which could also be a cultural barrier); tool box talks need additional training re. characterisation
A waste audit tool should reflect the stages of the project - site clearance / preparation, demolition, construction, fixtures and fitting etc. because waste streams vary with the stage of the project
The process of categorising the waste streams was starting to get repetitive - the same types of material appearing in collected skips, supporting an argument regarding focusing on variances only as presented in this review. A waste handling company agreed that it might be a good idea to propose a standard skip and the waste materials that you would be likely to find in such a skip i.e. 20% timber, 35% plastics, etc., against which variances can be measured. They fully supported the idea presented in this review that the variance concept would be a good idea
Visual inspection of the skips involved the skips being emptied out and segregated into appropriate waste streams and the Supervisor estimates the percentages of each waste stream. This process is again difficult and time consuming and produces less value than weights in practice
The concept of having segregated skips for each different waste stream was generally acceptable but most were sceptical of how well such a system would work, as contractors will dump material in the first skip they see. Skips would then have to be sorted, thus defeating the purpose of segregated skips. Also space is an issue here
One Company found the process to be very time consuming. Characterisation was generally done that day, or first thing the following morning. All skips were assessed within a 24-48 hour timeframe
The SMARTStart system / waste audit process is very much a subjective process - visual inspection of the skips at the site. More objective data collection, particularly weight, would be much better. It is important to understand the relationship between weight and volume. Waste contractors charge per skip collection. Although a hassle and an upfront cost, the use of on-site waste compactors can reduce waste disposal costs by increasing the weight of skips and thus reduce the frequency of skip collection
It was felt that having segregated waste skips could be beneficial. Some waste streams can "puff up" a skip i.e. timbers and dry wall - if disposed of with other materials such as drums and plastics can result in a skip having a poor volume to weight ratio because of poor skip packing practices
In terms of wastage there were examples where perfect doors were dumped in skips and cross contamination had arisen when people dumped paint into a skip. Paint is considered as being hazardous waste and thus contaminates other non-hazardous materials in the skip, such as timbers, which then in turn must be disposed of a hazardous waste
The key mechanical barrier is the lack of reliability between volume estimates and mass values, and of a financial value indicator, which can act a significant factor in encouraging the use of such a system. There should be uniform reporting metrics and there must be an improved system of relating volume to mass and either of these metrics to a financial indicator.

General Comments

The SMARTStart system (as designed) can only be used for certain project types such as house building, refurbishment and renovations. It can not be used for other projects such as road building etc. A more comprehensive tool is available in the form of SmartAudit which provides greater flexibility in terms of the projects that can be audited
Key would be for CoRE to take 10 sites and provide intensive help to get to the bottom of the data issues [as mentioned in this and the RTDS reports on volume - mass - value relationships] and get detailed feedback and clarity
In hindsight, the project would have benefited from targeting a small number of companies and providing a more intense assist to these to determine the problem waste streams and then look to deal with them e.g. only recording the unusual skip contents, rather than everything arising from a site. In truth, a skip containing 100% inert material is not going to cause any problems whereas one with mixed waste needs addressing not only for the variety of material that needs recycling but also to determine why they occur as waste in the first instance
As mentioned, SMARTStart is a good tool but one that is only as good as the data fed into it. The analysis of that data needs to be shared with all so that we can understand and then adapt our investigations
The need for good quality information. This leads back to the waste categories used not being prescriptive enough, as discussed with a construction company. When a person reports "timbers", all timbers have been lumped together as is the case with plastics. More detailed categorisation of wastes such as the number of 4x4's or 2x2s and lengths of 2" diameter plastic pipes cannot be provided because of time and resource constraints. Information provided is therefore not descriptive enough and therefore is not of any real value. If more detailed information on particular waste streams could be provided such as the number of 4x4s, waste could be traced back to particular stages of work, which could then be studied in more detail to design out waste, the key objective
The SMARTStart system, as developed by BRE was to help initially a large volume house builder and it did help a lot, particularly for example for plasterboard, however when rolled out to smaller companies it showed a very different response
SMARTStart is a low tech method of collecting data on waste streams, useful tool, can be used on clipboard, or PDA. SmartStart has a useful/simple user interface
It is an effective tool, particularly in projects where high volume waste streams are generated. Information provided by the waste audit tool can be used to identify the big issues - where there is a lot of wastage in terms of building materials. The developer can then institute improved management practices to reduce wastage in future projects of a similar nature
The industry (cultural) norm, when specifying materials, is to add 10% to account for wastage
The trial did achieve an important objective: raising awareness of waste management issues within the construction industry in general
Training and education is critical to ensuring long term success of such initiatives. Tool box talks and online tools were effective in helping to inform and educate site personnel on how to use such tools and the benefits which are likely accrue
Important that there is leadership in pushing through this change agenda. The construction industry can be slow to respond and therefore it is important that momentum is maintained;
There needs to be a screening or refocusing on the better types of wins in the whole area of waste management
The SMARTStart system itself does not appear to be easy to use reliably, in an objective manner, with apparent significant variances in terms of information recorded, and the recording process is susceptible to subjective bias. This is an area that training may help improve
The approach needs to be an expert user / systems approach, relying on the knowledge and sense of their business the operatives have from many years of experience. Any waste audit tool should be simple so that anyone can do it, and to keep the costs down it is usually the lowest paid worker that fills in the skip data sheet. The more expertise the employee has, the higher the cost will be, which will turn many smaller companies off from undertaking any sort of data collection at all
The double handing of the data should be avoided and in this respect the SMARTStart is not efficient. A waste auditing tool should be a one-touch approach so that when entered in a handheld or on the sheet a threshold system clearly highlights the key actions, not a system where data is captured and then later entered on-line or to another company database. Such duplicity invites mistakes for erroneous entries and missed opportunities
The fact that the tool is a voluntary tool should not be overlooked and therefore any waste auditing tool should be linked to the specific regulatory and industry led initiatives.

General Industry Research
As of April 2007, there does not appear to be a directly comparable waste data collection system in operation anywhere else in the developed world. Targeted research was undertaken in Canada, the USA, New Zealand, Australia and Europe, to identify similar systems. Two reasons why such a waste data collection system may have not as yet been developed are that there is the possibility, although unlikely, that such an initiative/system has not been thought of and that such initiatives may have been considered less important than other waste management matters. Other findings include:

There are varying degrees of awareness and commitment across the industry, and society in general, in dealing with all types of waste
Given that there are varying degrees of social, cultural and industry willingness to adopt improved waste management practices means that the transition will be the subject of intense debate
Current resource commitments and existing waste infrastructure are directed towards landfill disposal options as opposed to waste minimisation / recycling, limiting the potential for immediate change
Commercial market places for recycled materials are still under developed which limits the commercial value of the recyclable materials, thus influencing (adversely) industry buy-in;
Where there are established markets for recycled materials they are still subject to variations and fluctuations in value, and more needs to be done in terms of supporting market based tools to facilitate change
Leadership buy in is critical to the overall success of sustainable waste management initiatives
There is sometimes a perception that recycled materials are of a lower quality than virgin material needs to be addressed
Material handling cost, additional resource costs, and risks to programme can still be a driver to landfill
Value systems and preconceived notions can be a powerful influence on behaviour;
In terms of changing attitudes and ultimately behaviour, it is important to be aware that new information is often understood in terms of old concepts
Anecdotes, in terms of story lines of costs savings achieved, can be important in helping to change behaviour when companies can see the direct benefits to them (i.e. cost savings)
Rewards and incentives may not be as effective as an individual or companies value system
People are more likely to act, to be more conscientious when they are directly responsible for the desired outcome and can clearly see the benefits which will accrue
Change agents are critical to the process in terms of disseminating information on best practice and coordinating available resources
A lack of awareness of the importance and value of waste auditing in the overall sustainability agenda
There is a lack of understanding of the value of the kinds of waste that are generated throughout the construction process. Although different stages of a project, lessons can be learned from demolition contractors, where they routinely achieve 95% recovery of materials from the demolition phase of a project
Some within the industry consider recycling to be a cost in terms of time and other resources, rather than a saving
Is sustainable waste management a client interest? Market demand for such initiatives is an important driver for change
Current resource commitments and existing waste infrastructure are directed towards landfill disposal options as opposed to waste minimisation / recycling, limiting the potential for immediate change
At an organisational level some of the key cultural barriers include: insufficient information about the nature of the change; staff do not perceive the need for change; changes to social structures and working conditions; and loss of individual control over work due to changes in job specification
At an individual level resistance to change can be as a result of selective perception i.e. a biased view of a particular situation, what was done before is fine, why change it;, habit; inconvenience or loss of freedom and in some respects; and fear of the unknown

Discussion and key recommendations

Cultural/Behavioural Barriers
Cultural/behavioural barriers have been considered as one in this report, as both these factors are not mutually exclusive. The general culture will influence people's values, and ultimately behaviour. Influence can also operate in reverse, where individual behaviour, especially that of recognised leaders, can ultimately influence the cultural context.

In cultural terms, despite a general increase in awareness of environmental issues and a number of voluntary waste initiatives, the issue of waste still remains an under represented one within the construction industry and to a much lesser degree to the demolition industry.

Whilst there are very hopeful signs of change illustrated by an increase specific regulation directed at the industry (see Section 4) it is almost certain that other factors will need to be considered, particularly cultural/behavioural barriers. Such barriers include:

A fundamental shift in focus is required from a view that waste is waste to one that views waste as a resource that has not yet been recovered;
Key to overcoming all of the barriers described is leadership, both in the hierarchical sense within an organisation, but also by having people close to the delivery end of the organisation such as ‘ site champions';
Of course preventative measures, such as designing out waste, is much more effective in terms of time and costs;
It is important to change the industry's frame of reference from the short -term (the next house, the next site) to a long term more sustainable future where initiatives are now put in place to ensure waste generation is prevented through improved design and procurement and that necessary market based initiatives are in place so that recycling is cost effective;
Such a change of attitude is unlikely to happen overnight and therefore provision should be made for a phased, gradual approach rather than a step change. Managing expectations, so the industry, and public understand that this is a long term solution will be critical to long term success;
The industry needs to value efficiency, even sufficiency over excess resource consumption;

Modelling Behaviour and Other Cultural/behavioural Factors
A number of different conceptual behavioural models have been used to help understand behaviour within a range of circumstances and environments. Such conceptual models have also been used in understanding a community's attitude to environmental pollution and can be used in understanding attitudes to waste management. Such models are useful in a general sense and provide useful rules of thumb or frames of reference to which individuals relate helping to identify appropriate ways forward.

Rational Choice Model
Rational choice model predict that people will act in their own best interests, or the best interest of the environment and industry in general when clear benefits can be identified. Therefore it is critical that the necessary incentives are put in place (market based initiatives, regulations (See Section 4)) to ensure that the decision framework is adjusted that it will be in the best interest of a construction company to collect accurate and detailed waste data, which is critical to managing waste in a more sustainable manner. In adopting a rational model approach it is clear that a top down approach would be most effective. A regulatory framework with fair and balanced incentive and enforcement frameworks, which would include market based initiatives, would be most effective in effecting change.

Attitude Model
Attitude models rest on the assumption that attitudes of individuals and companies influence behaviour. What the individual's perception of waste management initiatives, including the value of waste data collection is critical in understanding how attitudes and ultimately behaviours will influence attempts to manage waste sustainably.

We all see things in different ways and have different perceptions or views of how we see the ‘real' world. People do not generally receive information in a passive manner, automatically accepting it, but analyse and judge what it is being said, who is saying it, in order to decide what is significant and what can be disregarded as worthless.

Personal expectations will play a key role in influencing that they "hear", and what they want to ‘hear'. Personal values and perceptions shape the way we react to information in terms of delivery or changes in approach.

Although a top down approach as suggested in the Rational Choice model can be a powerful way to change attitudes, a bottom up approach is likely to be very useful in effecting change in terms of sustainable waste management practices. Such initiatives would include information sessions, education - tool box talk - case studies illustrating the true savings (and costs) of such initiatives and would also have consideration for the cultural (ethno-lingual) variability's across the construction industry to ensure particular groups are not left out of such initiatives (i.e. because of language barriers). Moral leadership, at a company level and sectoral level through organisation such as the South East Centre for the Built Environment (SECBE), ReMade and Building Research Establishment (BRE), the National Industrial Symbiosis Programme (NISP), Waste and Resources Awareness Programme (WRAP) and Envirowise , Scottish Waste Awareness Group (SWAG in Scotland) will be critical to instituting change.

Aspects of both the top-down approach (Rational Choice Model) and the bottom-up approach (Attitude Model) will be important in developing an overall approach to a sustainable waste management, including data collection.

Other Key Recommendations include:

Education and training is critical to changing values and ultimately behaviour in terms on sustainable waste management practices. Therefore a coordinated information and education programme should be developed with all key stakeholders with an interest in sustainable waste management
Commercial market places for recycled materials are still under developed which limits the commercial value of the recycled materials, thus influencing the perception of waste as waste, rather than as a resource. Therefore the government should work closely with the private sector in further stimulating a market for recovered/recycled materials
As a general point where there are established markets for recycled materials they are still subject to variations and fluctuations in value, and more needs to be done in terms of supporting market based tools to facilitate change in perception
Leadership buy in is critical to the overall success of sustainable waste management initiatives. Managers need to be fully engaged in an ongoing and coordinated approach to promote responsible waste management
It is critical that adequate resources are made available for the collection and processing of data both at the site level and the at the sectoral level so that it is clear where and how this information (waste data) is being used, maintaining interest and buy-in of all stakeholders
Effective enforcement, balanced with adequate support industry wide support to enable companies to learn from their mistakes and institute change through learning. A visible and high profile enforcement policy which sets out clearly and consistently where, how and why enforcement action will be taken. This will help to assist in creating a culture which makes it socially unacceptable not to deal with waste in a responsible manner, and which demonstrates that anything less will not be tolerated
Information campaigns will be required to educate/inform the design team, procurement and the entire supply chain that recycled materials are not of a lower quality than virgin material. Such initiatives will also encourage market demand
In terms of changing attitudes and ultimately behaviour, it is important to be aware that new information is often understood in terms of old concepts, which may inhibit the industries ability to "think outside the box" to identify new and innovative ideas to manage waste sustainability. An example may be an over-reliance on recycling as a "tired and trusted" techniques instead of attempting to change the system to consider designing waste out of the construction process altogether
Adequate support and resources need to be made available to those responsible for waste management on-site through training budgets and staff who can institute change
People must be given responsibility for waste management and the data that is generated during waste audits. Appropriate carrots and sticks must be in place to ensure the information that is being fed back into the system is both accurate and relevant. Such responsibilities will ensure a sense of ownership for such data, leading to improved performance
Benefits of improved data collection in terms of volumes of waste diverted from landfill and associated cost savings, benefits to the over environment must be communicated to all staff helping to foster a "feel good factor" amongst staff
Regulatory, industry led initiatives such as waste performance indicators or other types of environmental performance indicators will be critical to overall success
It is important that rewards and incentives are sufficient to achieve behavioural change

Actions to effect change include:

Create a sense of urgency amongst relevant people, whatever the nature or size of the organisation. This will be an important role for senior management;
Build a guiding team with the credibility, skills, connections, reputations and formal authority to provide change leadership
Create visions which are sensible, clear and uplifting, with pragmatic delivery strategies and schedules;
Communicate the vision and strategies in order to induce understanding and commitment. The language used is important and must not only communicate the overall benefits to society and the environment in general, but also the benefits in a business sense;
Empower action and remove obstacles that stop people acting on the vision
Produce short term wins that help to provide credibility, resources and momentum to the overall effort
Don't let up but maintain the momentum, consolidate early changes and create wave after wave of change
Make change stick by nurturing a new culture, and developing group norms of behaviour and shared values

Mechanical Barriers

The mechanical barriers in the collection of waste data a can be significant. Such challenges must be overcome if the goal of sustainable construction is to be achieved. Data is central to the overall process and therefore data must be of a sufficient quality that is also accurate. Methods and units of measurement must be uniform across sites and it must be clear the end use of such data and how such data will help to contribute to the construction industry becoming more sustainable and self-sufficient.

A mechanical barrier, which is also, indirectly, a cultural/behavioural barrier, is the how waste data is recorded and measured. As discussed it is important that there is a standardised method for recording waste data. It is important that the waste categories used in waste check sheets are standardised and sufficiently prescriptive to ensure all waste types are recorded (mechanical barrier). Although a more detailed categorisation approach will be more time consuming, the information collected is likely to be more accurate, therefore it is much easier for the data collector to see the inherent value in the data and how such data can contribute to a more sustainable waste management practices. It is critical that data collectors see a purpose in the data collection process, thus ensuring higher levels of participation and motivation (cultural/behavioural barriers).

The information on which the tool relies is of a very low resolution, that is not to say that it is inaccurate, however it can only ever be considered to provide the most basic of guides to the types of waste generated on-site. There does not appear to be any consistent, approach to training the individuals who undertake the assessment and therefore it is difficult to assess how objective the data is. It is possible with the current system that an inaccurate assessment of the wastes management performance of the organisation could be presented, due to simple issues such as this.

Inspecting skips can place a significant operational burden on staff and it is important that such burdens are minimised where possible. Therefore managing by variance a cost effective and time efficient method of collecting data on waste streams generated on-site.

Another time efficient approach, which would also improve the quality of waste data collected is the segregation of waste on-site into inert, hazardous and timber waste streams. Such an approach is discussed. Other operation constraints include issues around the double handing of the waste data which is not efficient.

Real Time Data System
The primary objective of the Real Time Data System (RTDS) would be to minimise waste in the construction process through the accurate collection of waste data. This data would enable immediate action to be taken on-site, through appropriate on-site feedback mechanisms. Such data would also be used in designing out waste from the construction process through feedback mechanisms to the design team, procurement and the supply chain.

A RTDS should be a one-touch approach so that when segregated, weighed or estimated by volume, data is entered in a handheld computer which then can be directly transferred to a central database. Avoiding double handling of information will avoid mistakes associated with data transfer, incorrect data interpretation and would lessen burdens on staff in terms often time consuming process of data collection, thus reducing potential mechanical and behavioural barriers to waste data collection.

Managing by Variance
Manage by variance - an effective way to accomplish this, is to work with the site operative's expertise and knowledge (Expert Systems) so that they feel what they are doing makes sense and ultimately works. The approach to this overall system should be to work by variances and allow, over time, for what is considered normal and what is considered a variance to change through time having regard to the particular stage of work improvements achieved, in terms of reduced waste generation.

The logic for such an approach is that only waste that is at variance from the waste that is found in a "normal" skip will be analysed in greater detail. Normal skips will go straight to sorting and recovery, thus overcoming mechanical barriers and cultural/behavioural barriers by avoiding boring, repetitious work which can lead to impaired performance.

Segregation on Site Options
Segregated skips can be provided to reflect particular waste streams or the phase of the project, which will have characteristic waste streams. Segregation at source minimise the resources required, in terms of time required to sort skips and to categories the range of waste type in such general waster skips.Mechanical barriers to be overcome include space constraints on an active site. Cultural/behavioural barriers, which could result in cross contamination (i.e. worker disposing of paint to a waste timber skip - all this waste is them considered to be hazardous, with disposal and cost implications). Such cost impacts must be avoided where possible to ensure site managers do not loose interest and revert back to the contemporary system where general skips are used on-site to manage waste.

Please refer to the SECBE report entitled Waste Management Programme Development of a Real-time Data System for more detail on the concept of real time data systems, managing by variance and segregation on-site.

Waste Management Hierarchy
In managing waste, each company must have due regard to the waste management hierarchy: Reduce, Re-use, Recover and Recycle. It is also important that attainable targets are set for each site and that the necessary resources (i.e. segregated skips, nominated on-site waste management representative) are made available and that appropriate training and education programmes developed and implemented. This is critical in terms of overcoming both mechanical and cultural/behavioural barriers to waste data collection.

Key Recommendations include:

The training of the person to collect the data should be both comprehensive and consistent. The development of an industry standard qualification should be considered. This could have a number of benefits, both on the personal level, at corporate level and across the industry. One of the main benefits would be the consistency of the reliability of the data collected
Site waste management plans will be a critical driver in ensuring a more sustainable approach to waste management
Where there are on-site space constraints a practical solution could be the use of smaller bags to manage smaller volumes of waste. Sorting such "smaller volumes" of waste would be more practical on a site with space constraints
The waste management infrastructure must be changed, with more of a focus on waste minimisation / recycling facilities and a move a way from the current over-reliance on landfilling of waste
Logistics management is likely to become a more important tool in the management of waste on-site. Materials can be delivered "Just-in-time" (JIT), thereby freeing up on-site storage areas which can be used to house segregated skips. JIT delivery will also reduce wastage where materials are damaged whilst stored on-site (i.e. water damage and accidents)
It is important to understand the industries cost matrix - material handling costs and risks to programme can still be a driver to traditional waste management techniques rather than the adoption of a more sustainable approach
As a general point where there are established markets for recycled materials, they are still subject to variations and fluctuations in value, and more needs to be done in terms of supporting market based tools to facilitate change

Conclusions and recommendations for further work

Conclusions
Research carried out in developing this report, which addresses the cultural/behavioural and mechanical barriers to data collection, included a review of the success/failures of a waste audit tool (BRE SMARTStart), used as part of a wider waste management pilot study run by SECBE. Those involved in the project including builders, waste contractors and consultants were interviewed to get site level feedback on the practicalities on the SMARTStart tool specifically, and waste audit tools generally. The review also included research into the broader, more general mechanical and cultural/behavioural barriers to data collection. Behaviour models have also been suggested, to help conceptualise peoples decision making process, important when considering appropriate initiatives - whether top-down or bottom-up, which help to push forward the sustainable construction waste agenda.

Key Conclusions included:
It is important, to manage the expectations of all parties concerned including regulators and the construction sector that "sustainable construction" can not be achieved through a "step change" process. Gradual improvements through the adoption of initiatives such as the SMARTStart and other waste audit tools represent a first step and will increase awareness of waste management issues and foster innovation
Meaningful and committed partnerships with suppliers, regulators and waste management companies is critical in trying to find a sustainable solution to waste management
The adoption of the Pilot Study waste audit tool encountered a number of mechanical barriers to successful adoption. These included:
Waste categories were not prescriptive enough
Lack of agreed reporting metrics and assessment methodology which can lead result in inaccuracies;
Skip assessments are laborious and time consuming
A key benefit of the SmartStart system was that it increased awareness of waste issues on-site, facilitates a more analytical approach to waste management and is a useful tool in motivating subcontractors to be more waste conscious;
There is general, sector wide interest in the development and adoption of a more sustainable way to manage waste - and a waste audit tool is critical to this end. Therefore it is important that organisations such as SEEDA, SECBE or BRE develop improved and better focused approach to waste management, alone or in consultation.
The inclusion of the use of managing by variance and working with the expertise of the users, and the use of segregated skips will likely will help to ensure that certain mechanical barriers can be overcome
Training, education, management buy-in will all help to overcome the quite significant cultural/behavioural barriers sustainable waste management

Recommendations for Further Work
The recommendations from this review are for SECBE and SEEDA to progress to a site based study to test the conclusions from this review. The key tasks would be:

Further development of the Rational Choice Model and the Attitude Model so that rather than being generic, high level rule of thumb models, they will more closely reflect the South East region. This is particularly important given the increased demand for workers from across Europe and Asia, thereby changing the cultural (ethno-lingual) profile of the construction industry which one hopes to change, adopting a more sustainable approach to waste management.
Additional study to investigate further the mechanical barriers to data collection, appropriate reporting metrics and waste categories.