Recirculation of construction and demolition Waste: A case study of Danish producers and demolishers

Julia Köhler, Fie Fredshavn Nielsen, Jakob Verstermark, Christian Thuesen
{"title":"Recirculation of construction and demolition Waste: A case study of Danish producers and demolishers","authors":"Julia Köhler,&nbsp;Fie Fredshavn Nielsen,&nbsp;Jakob Verstermark,&nbsp;Christian Thuesen","doi":"10.1016/j.clema.2024.100276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As resource scarcity increases, the construction industry recognizes the potential of Reverse Logistic Supply Chains (RLSC) for demolition waste. Implementing RLSC, however, lacks maturity and poses challenges due to the complexity of the construction industry. This paper is the first to investigate the critical interface between demolishers and producers. In particular, demolishers are crucial for the potential to valorize reclaimed construction wood as they are the gatekeepers of the materials. We apply an existing framework, conceptualized through a systematic literature review, to the case of a Danish shed producer and their collaboration with demolishers. Our data foundation includes qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with industry stakeholders and quantitative financial data on conventional as well as selective demolition. Through the analysis of material, information, and financial flows of reclaimed wood, this paper identifies inhibitors to these flows and reveals that producers can address the majority. Since responsibilities for reprocessing, transportation, and storage require clarification, making agreements for (1) reprocessing and (2) transportation, potentially facilitated by (3) a digital platform can support the producer in overcoming these inhibitors. Even though we show that selective demolition can be financially attractive for demolishers, our findings call for additional supportive regulation of tender practices. Further, we coin the concept of reversed value proposition as RLSC necessitate a reversed understanding of value creation. Overall, this paper contributes empirical evidence to the existing framework, extends it by adding inhibitors and flows, and suggests an extension with platform thinking to support the implementation of RLSC.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100254,"journal":{"name":"Cleaner Materials","volume":"14 ","pages":"Article 100276"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleaner Materials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772397624000601","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As resource scarcity increases, the construction industry recognizes the potential of Reverse Logistic Supply Chains (RLSC) for demolition waste. Implementing RLSC, however, lacks maturity and poses challenges due to the complexity of the construction industry. This paper is the first to investigate the critical interface between demolishers and producers. In particular, demolishers are crucial for the potential to valorize reclaimed construction wood as they are the gatekeepers of the materials. We apply an existing framework, conceptualized through a systematic literature review, to the case of a Danish shed producer and their collaboration with demolishers. Our data foundation includes qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with industry stakeholders and quantitative financial data on conventional as well as selective demolition. Through the analysis of material, information, and financial flows of reclaimed wood, this paper identifies inhibitors to these flows and reveals that producers can address the majority. Since responsibilities for reprocessing, transportation, and storage require clarification, making agreements for (1) reprocessing and (2) transportation, potentially facilitated by (3) a digital platform can support the producer in overcoming these inhibitors. Even though we show that selective demolition can be financially attractive for demolishers, our findings call for additional supportive regulation of tender practices. Further, we coin the concept of reversed value proposition as RLSC necessitate a reversed understanding of value creation. Overall, this paper contributes empirical evidence to the existing framework, extends it by adding inhibitors and flows, and suggests an extension with platform thinking to support the implementation of RLSC.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
建筑和拆除废物的再循环:丹麦生产商和拆除商案例研究
随着资源稀缺性的加剧,建筑行业认识到逆向物流供应链(RLSC)在处理拆除废物方面的潜力。然而,由于建筑行业的复杂性,反向物流供应链的实施还不够成熟,并面临着挑战。本文首次研究了拆除商和生产商之间的关键接口。特别是,拆除者对于再生建筑木材的价值潜力至关重要,因为他们是材料的守门人。我们将通过系统性文献综述概念化的现有框架应用于丹麦棚屋生产商及其与拆除商合作的案例中。我们的数据基础包括与行业利益相关者进行的半结构化访谈所获得的定性数据,以及有关传统拆除和选择性拆除的定量财务数据。通过对再生木材的材料流、信息流和资金流的分析,本文确定了这些流动的阻碍因素,并揭示了生产商可以解决的大多数问题。由于需要明确再加工、运输和储存的责任,因此在(1)再加工和(2)运输方面签订协议,并通过(3)数字平台的潜在促进作用,可以帮助生产商克服这些阻碍因素。尽管我们的研究表明,选择性拆除在经济上对拆除者很有吸引力,但我们的研究结果要求对招标行为进行额外的支持性监管。此外,我们还提出了 "反向价值主张 "的概念,因为有轨电车公司需要反向理解价值创造。总之,本文为现有框架提供了实证证据,通过增加抑制因素和流量对其进行了扩展,并提出了平台思维的扩展建议,以支持有偿租赁合同的实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Recirculation of construction and demolition Waste: A case study of Danish producers and demolishers Effects of the surface properties and particle size of hydrated lime on desulfurization Investigation of the influence of crushed sand on carbonation of Mortar: Physical and microstructural analysis Biodegradable natural polymers and fibers for 3D printing: A holistic perspective on processing, characterization, and advanced applications Experimental study of phase change material (PCM) biochar composite for net-zero built environment applications
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1