Survey of Three Stakeholder Groups on Site Waste Management Plans Report to Defra, Business Resource Efficiency and Waste (BREW) Programme March 2007
The Construction Resources & Waste Platform (CRWP) is funded by DEFRA's Business Resource Efficiency and Waste (BREW) Programme and managed by AEA Energy & Environment and BRE
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Title
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Customer
BREW
Confidentiality, copyright and reproduction
AEAT in Confidence This document has been prepared by AEA Technology plc in connection with a contract to supply goods and/or services and is submitted only on the basis of strict confidentiality. The contents must not be disclosed to third parties other than in accordance with the terms of the contract.
File reference Reference number
ED02414005- Issue 1
AEA Energy & Environment The Gemini Building Fermi Avenue Harwell International Business Centre Didcot OX11 0QR t: 0870 190 8524 f: 0870 190 6318 AEA Energy & Environment is a business name of AEA Technology plc AEA Energy & Environment is certificated to ISO9001 and ISO14001 Author
Name
Toby Gritten
Approved by
Name
Kate McCartney
Signature Date
AEA Energy & Environment
iii
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
iv
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
AEA Energy & Environment
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Executive summary AEA Energy & Environment and the Building Research Establishment (BRE) have undertaken a survey on Site Waste Management Plans (SWMP) contacting three stakeholder groups: the Construction and Demolition (C&D) industry, local authorities and trade federations/associations. The aim of the survey was to identify the experience and understanding of SWMPs of each of these three groups, with specific regard to: • • • •
Cost vs Benefit; Most and Least effective interventions; Willingness to set waste reduction targets (and to what level); and Waste audit trail.
The responses received from trade federations/associations were not suitable for proper analysis and as such the report focuses on the other two stakeholder groups. Specific stakeholders that utilised SWMPs were identified where possible, and contacted for the survey. Only the C&D companies sample group all had experience of SWMPs. As a result the stakeholder group that most understood SWMPs was the C&D companies. It was found that C&D companies find the main benefit of SWMP to be financial reward, however there was no consensus as to whether this was in direct correlation to the volume of waste reduced on site. The savings made were unique to projects, due to variations in project type (i.e. house building, bridge building or demolition). This variability of savings on different projects caused the majority of C&D companies to state that whilst they are willing to have targets set, the actual targets themselves should not be a flat percentage reduction. Local authorities had replied that targets should be included, although no consensus was found. It was noted that the average figure local authorities provided for an achievable target was considerably higher than that proposed by companies, however answers to previous questions indicated this was based on a desire to reduce waste rather than understanding of SWMPs. Local authorities identified sustainability and corporate social responsibility as their main benefit of SWMPs followed closely by waste reduction. Local authorities recognised that financial reward was the main benefit to C&D companies, however other benefits specifically related to these companies were not identified. All of the stakeholders were in favour of auditing SWMPs. Furthermore there was a consistent response that this should be carried out either by the C&D company or an outside consultancy. It is noted that should SWMPs be introduced the use of auditing would be a benefit as it could also aid monitoring of the use and impact of SWMPs in the UK. The study found that a lack of data collection by C&D companies caused the understanding of the exact impacts and costs of SWMPs to be difficult to evaluate. The introduction of an audit process could provide the impetus for companies to collect data allowing for more in depth analysis of the impact and cost of SWMP to be achieved.
AEA Energy & Environment
v
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
Table of contents 1
2
3
4
Introduction
1
1.1
Background
1
1.2
Methodology
2
1.2.1
Development of questionnaires
2
1.2.2
Stakeholders contacted
2
Analysis of surveys
4
2.1
Construction and Demolition Companies
4
2.2
Local Authorities Response to Questionnaires
13
2.3
Trade Federations and Associations
18
Discussion
21
3.1
Cost vs. Benefits of SWMPs
21
3.2
Effective interventions
24
3.3
Targets
25
3.4
Audit process
26
Conclusions
28
Appendices
vi
Appendix 1
Questionnaires
Appendix 2
Summary of completed questionnaires
AEA Energy & Environment
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Introduction
AEA Energy & Environment
vii
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
1
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Introduction
The Business Resource Efficiency and Waste programme (BREW), contracted AEA Energy & Environment and the Building Research Establishment (BRE) to undertake a series of evidence gap projects on Site Waste Management Plans (SWMPs) and waste prevention targets. The aim of these projects is to identify best practice and examples of SWMPs in use. In conjunction, willingness of the construction and demolition (C&D) sector and local government to implement and regulate SWMPs in the UK has been gauged. The remit of this project is to develop and conduct a survey relating to current SWMP users. The survey targeted three stakeholder groups that use or are involved with SWMPs: • • •
Construction and Demolition (C&D) companies; Local authorities; and Trade Associations and Federations.
The aim of the survey was to evaluate the three groups understanding and experience of SWMPs, in the context of: • • • •
Cost vs Benefit; Most and Least effective interventions; Willingness to set waste reduction targets (and to what level); and Waste audit trail.
It is anticipated that this work will be part of a portfolio that can assist government in developing legislation, procedures and guidance for the introduction of SWMPs.
1.1
Background
Sustainability, waste, climate change and resource efficiency increasingly arise in public debates and the media. This rise in public awareness has led to increasing efforts to identify methods to achieve ‘green’ goals. The C&D industry is one of the areas where it is believed such savings can be achieved. BREW’s construction programme aims to improve resource efficiency through waste minimisation and management. 1
The C&D industry in the UK consumes more than 400 million tonnes of materials annually, and 2 generates over 100 million tonnes of waste . There is increasing pressure on the industry to reduce the amount of materials used and recycle more. This poses a number of questions: what are the best ways to do this; how should the industry go about it; and what support is available? In the Netherlands up to 90% of construction and demolition waste is re-used or recycled whereas the 3 UK achieves a rate of 45% . There is significant potential for the C&D industry to make a difference through waste prevention, reduction and improved site waste management. There are many opportunities for C&D contractors to make cost savings and to reduce waste. Establishing good waste minimisation and management practices would make a significant difference. Implementation of SWMPs is one way the construction industry can achieve these savings. The use of SWMPs are currently voluntary, although there is consideration of making them mandatory. The 4 government is currently contemplating how SWMPs could be brought into the UK planning system .
1
The construction industry mass balance:resource use, wastes and emissions RA Smith et al www.trl.co.uk/viridis/800/mainpage.asp?page=82 DEFRA/ Ofiice of National Statistics Publication ofr the environment in your pocket 2006. p.g.52 or www.defra.gov.uk/environmental/statistics/waste/index.htm 3 Report to DGXI, European Commission Construction and Demolition Waste Manageement Practices, and their economic impacts Report by Symonds, February 1999 4 Please see the Environment Agency’s Future legislation – Site Waste Management Plans page at: http://www.netregs.gov.uk/netregs/legislation/380525/1555007/?lang=_e 2
AEA Energy & Environment
1
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1 Research, commissioned by WRAP 2006, showed that only 11% of 800 construction companies contacted used SWMPs, and only 3% were following the DTI's 2004 guidelines for implementing SWMPs. SWMPs are a vehicle to manage, audit, and validate waste reduction on C&D sites. SWMPs incorporate a variety of measures to help reduce or recycle site arisings as well as integrate with other legislative procedures. SWMP use a number of methods including: • • • • • • •
Predicting materials use and waste generation; Identifying reuse and recycling routes; Recording actual waste generation subsequent reuse/recycling; Updating of SWMP through the construction programme; Compliance with the Duty of Care/ Hazardous Waste regulations; Identification of waste reduction through procurement; and Review of the SWMP and continuous improvement.
The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) has provided guidance on how to produce a SWMP. The document contains details of procedures and quality assurance systems, providing a template for stakeholders to utilise.
1.2
Methodology
1.2.1
Development of questionnaires
Three different questionnaires were developed for the three different stakeholders. These questionnaires are reproduced in Appendix 1. The questions set to each of the stakeholder groups were tailored to answer each of the following objectives: • • • •
Costs versus benefits of having a SWMP; Effective interventions for waste management; Willingness to set targets; and Auditing preferences.
1.2.2
Stakeholders contacted
Forty-three C&D companies were identified that utilised a SWMP. The sample group chosen represented small, medium and large companies in both construction and demolition to make the results more representative of the whole industry. Thirty-one local authority (LA) planning departments were identified to achieve a good geographical mix for the UK and Northern Ireland as well as a rural and urban mix. Three LA’s were specifically targeted as they already have a requirement for SWMPs in their planning process. Within the LA the principle planning manager was contacted. Eight trade associations were contacted although only one of the trade associations was willing to respond in any way to this survey. All the other trade organisations felt unable to comment until they had consulted their members, unfortunately the timescale of the project did not allow for this. The one organisation that did respond did not respond directly to the questionnaire instead providing general answers on subjects within the survey.
2
AEA Energy & Environment
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Analysis of Surveys
AEA Energy & Environment
3
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
2
Analysis of surveys
2.1
Construction and Demolition Companies
The survey targeted 43 C&D companies located in the UK and Northern Ireland who utilise SWMP. These companies ranged in size from large multinationals to smaller regional firms. The following information presents each survey question with the responses from each of the companies interviewed. Question 1 How does an SWMP provide financial savings? Are these financial savings in direct correlation to the volume of waste reduced on site?
re sp on se N o
D on 't kn ow
B et te rP la nn in g W as te aw ar en es s
20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lo w er di sp os al co R st ed s uc in g ov er or de rin g
Frequency of response
Figure 1:C&D company responses to how a SWMP provided them with financial savings
The results indicate that lower waste disposal costs are the most important method of financial savings for the C&D companies contacted (Figure 1), with 44% respondents identifying it as such. There was no clear second most important method with better planning, reducing over ordering and waste awareness being acknowledged by 16% of respondents. 7% did not know how an SWMP provided financial savings. Of the 43 companies that answered this question 40% did not know if the financial savings were in direct correlation to the volume of waste reduced on site, with the remainder split evenly between yes and no representing 30% of respondents each.
4
AEA Energy & Environment
Restricted – Commercial AEA/ED02414005/Issue 1
Survey of three stakeholder groups on Site Waste Management Plans
Question 2 Can you please estimate the percent reduction of the waste arisings occurring per project? Table 1. Respondents estimate of percentage reduction of waste arisings occurring per project Response Frequency of response No percentage reduction in waste
