Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
STRUCTURAL MODELLING OF CAUSE AND EFFECT FACTORS OF
CONSTRUCTION WASTE GENERATION IN MALAYSIAN
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
SASITHARAN NAGAPAN
A thesis submitted in
fulfilment of the requirements for award of the
Doctor of Philosophy
Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
DECEMBER 2014
v
ABSTRACT
Construction industry contributes significantly in improving socio-economic
development of a country. However, this industry faces serious problems of
construction waste generated worldwide including Malaysia. Construction waste is
results from various factors which are necessary to identify for reducing the waste
generated in construction project. Hence, this study focused on developing a
structural model of construction waste generation and determining the most
important group that contributes to construction waste generation. The questionnaire
consisted of 77 causative factors which then clustered into 7 groups and 13 effects
factors of construction waste which are clustered into 3 groups. These factors and
assigned groups were validated by 30 construction personnel (contractors,
consultants and clients) during the pilot study. The actual survey was conducted with
a total of 302 questionnaires were received by respond rate of 60%. The data analysis
is carried out using SmartPLS software. A structural model of construction waste
generation was developed based on 7 groups of causative factors and 3 groups of
effect factors using Partial Least Squared-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM)
technique. It was found that the model is fit due to the R² value of 0.451 (R2
≥ 0.26 =
substantial). The model identifies that all 10 groups are significant with t-value ≥
2.58 from bootstrapping process of 5000 random samples. The model indicates that
Handling of Materials and Equipment group has the highest impact on construction
waste generation. Finally, this finding was validated by 22 construction practitioners
who agreed that Handling of Material and Equipment group of factors contributes the
highest amount of construction waste generation at site. This group of factors should
be avoided during construction works to reduce the waste generation. The findings of
this study are contributed to understand clearly the cause and effect factors of
construction waste generation in Malaysia.
vi
ABSTRAK
Industri pembinaan adalah penyumbang yang ketara di dalam peningkatan
pembangunan sosio-ekonomi sebuah negara. Walau bagaimanapun, industri ini
menghadapi masalah yang serius bagi isu penjanaan sisa pembinaan di seluruh dunia
termasuk Malaysia. Sisa pembinaan dihasilkan daripada pelbagai faktor yang perlu
dikenalpasti untuk mengurangkan penjanaan sisa di projek pembinaan. Oleh itu,
kajian ini telah fokus kepada membangunkan satu model struktur penjanaan sisa
pembinaan dan menentukan kumpulan yang paling signifikan kepada penjanaan sisa
pembinaan. Soal selidik terdiri daripada 77 faktor penyebab yang diklasterkan
kepada 7 kumpulan dan 13 faktor kesan sisa pembinaan yang diklusterkan kepada 3
kumpulan. Semua faktor dan kumpulan yang ditentukan ini telah disahkan oleh 30
pekerja pembinaan (kontraktor, perunding dan pelanggan) semasa kajian rintis.
Kajian sebenar telah dijalankan dengan 302 borang soal selidik yang telah diterima
dengan kadar respon sebanyak 60%. Analisis data dilakukan dengan menggunakan
perisian SmartPLS. Satu model struktur penjanaan sisa pembinaan telah dibangunkan
berdasarkan 7 kumpulan faktor penyebab dan 3 kumpulan kesan dengan
mengunakan teknik Partial Least Squared-Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-
SEM). Ia mendapati bahawa model tersebut adalah baik kerana nilai R² adalah 0.451
(R² ≥ 0.26 = substantial). Model tersebut telah kenalpasti bahawa semua 10
kumpulan adalah signifikan dengan nilai-t ≥ 2.58 daripada proses bootstrapping
bagi 5000 sampel rawak. Model tersebut telah menunjukkan bahawa kumpulan
Pengendalian Bahan dan Peralatan mempunyai impak tinggi kepada penjanaan sisa
pembinaan. Akhirnya, penemuan ini telah disahkan oleh 22 pengamal pembinaan
yang bersetuju bahawa kumpulan Pengendalian Bahan dan Peralatan merupakan
faktor penyumbang tertinggi bagi penjanaan sisa pembinaan di tapak. Faktor-faktor
bagi kumpulan ini harus dielakkan semasa kerja pembinaan supaya penjanaan sisa
pembinaan dapat dikurangkan. Penemuan kajian ini menyumbang kepada memahami
dengan jelas faktor penyebab dan kesan penjanaan sisa pembinaan di Malaysia.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION
DEDICATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
ABSTRAK
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
LIST OF APPENDICES
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.2 Problem Statement
1.3 Research Questions
1.4 Aim and Objectives
1.5 Scope of the Research
1.6 Thesis Structure
CHAPTER 2 CAUSE AND EFFECT FACTORS OF
CONSTRUCTION WASTE
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Construction Industry
2.3 Type of Construction Waste
2.3.1 Physical Waste
2.3.2 Non-Physical Waste
2.4 Issues on Construction Waste
2.5 Causative Factors of Construction Waste
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
xi
xiii
xv
xvi
1
1
2
3
3
3
4
6
6
6
7
8
10
12
13
viii
2.5.1 Design Group of Factors (DESG)
2.5.2 Handling Materials and Equipment Group
of Factors (HAND)
2.5.3 Workers Group of Factors (WORK)
2.5.4 Management Group of Factors (MANA)
2.5.5 Site Condition Group of Factors (SITE)
2.5.6 Procurement Design Group of Factors
(PROC)
2.5.7 External Group of Factors (EXTE)
2.6 Effect factors of Construction Waste
2.6.1 Environment
2.6.2 Economy
2.6.3 Social
2.7 Theoretical Model
2.8 Summary
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Research Plan
3.3 Literature Review
3.4 Quantitative Approach
3.4.1 Questionnaire Design
3.4.2 Pilot Study
3.4.2.1 Reliability Test of Pilot Study
3.4.2.2 Analysis of Pilot Study
3.4.2.3 Summary of Pilot Study
3.4.3 Questionnaire Survey
3.5 Analysis Methods
3.6 Model Development
3.6.1 PLS-SEM
3.7 Validation
3.8 Summary
CHAPTER 4 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
22
22
23
24
26
26
26
28
28
28
30
32
33
37
38
38
39
39
43
44
45
45
ix
4.2 Actual Survey
4.2.1 Sampling Statistics
4.2.2 Organization
4.2.3 Knowledge and Experience
4.3 Univariate Analysis on Collected Data
4.3.1 Waste Generated
4.3.2 Data Reliability Test
4.3.3 Ranking of Causative Factors
4.3.3.1 Comparison with Other Countries
4.3.4 Ranking of Effect Factors
4.4 Summary
CHAPTER 5 STRUCTURAL MODELLING OF CAUSE AND
EFFECT FACTORS
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Development of Hypothetical Model
5.3 Sample Size
5.4 Model's Assessment Procedure
5.4.1 Input Data
5.4.2 Draw Hypothetical Model
5.4.3 Assign Manifest to Latent Variable
5.4.4 Execute Modelling Process
5.5 Assessment of Measurement Model
5.5.1 Individual Item Reliability
5.5.2 Convergent Validity
5.5.3 Discriminant Validity
5.6 Assessment of Structural Model
5.6.1 Hypothesis Testing
5.7 Validation
5.7.1 Statistical Validation
5.7.2 Expert's Opinion Validation
5.8 Summary
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
6.1 Introduction
45
46
47
48
51
52
53
54
58
59
60
61
61
61
63
63
65
65
66
70
70
70
71
72
75
77
79
79
81
84
85
85
x
6.2 Conclusion of the Findings
6.2.1 Objective 1: Identifying cause and effect
factors of construction waste
6.2.2 Objective 2: Determining hierarchically the
cause and effect factors of construction
waste
6.2.3 Objective 3: Developing structural model of
cause and effect factors of construction
waste
6.3 Limitation of the Study
6.4 Contribution to Academic Knowledge
6.5 Contribution to the Industry
6.6 Recommendations for Future Research
REFERENCES
APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PILOT STUDY
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE FORM FOR DATA
COLLECTION
APPENDIX C: EXAMPLE OF CSV. FILE FORMAT USED IN
PLS-SEM ANALYSIS
APPENDIX D: PLS ASSESSMENT RESULTS
APPENDIX E: QUESTIONNAIRE FORM FOR VALIDATION
APPENDIX F: SIGNIFICANCE LETTER FROM INDUSTRY
PUBLICATIONS AND ACHIEVEMENTS
VITA
85
85
87
89
90
91
91
91
93
109
114
119
120
143
147
148
154
xi
LIST OF TABLES
2.1 Construction Projects Registered under CIDB
2.2 Physical Waste Generation
2.3 Time and Cost Overrun Problems in Several
Countries
2.4 Various Groups of Factors
2.5 Design Group of Factors
2.6 Handling of Materials and Equipment group of
Factors
2.7 Worker Group of Factors
2.8 Management Group of Factors
2.9 Site Condition Group of Factors
2.10 Procurement Group of Factors
2.11 External Group of Factors
2.12 Environment Group
2.13 Economy Group
2.14 Social Group
3.1 Respondent’s Demographics in Pilot Study
3.2 Cronbach's alpha for Pilot Study
3.3 Cut-off Scale
3.4 Analysis of Causative Factor from Pilot Study
3.5 Analysis of Effect Factor from Pilot Study
3.6 The Use of SEM Approach in Construction Research
4.1 Survey Statistics
4.2 Respondent’s Organization
4.3 Type of Organization
4.4 Types of Construction Waste Generated
7
10
11
13
15
16
16
17
19
19
20
21
22
23
31
33
33
34
37
43
46
47
47
52
xii
4.5 Reliability Test Results
4.6 Frequency and Ranking of Causative Factors
4.7 Comparison with Factors of Construction Waste with
other Countries
4.8 Ranking of Overall Data for Effect Factors
5.1 Sample Size Used by Researchers
5.2 Convergent Validity
5.3 Analysis of Cross-loading of Factors
5.4 Latent Variable Correlations
5.5 Results of Hypothesis Tests
5.6 Q2 value for Predictive Relevancy
5.7 Demographic of Respondents Who Involved in
Validation Process
5.8 Frequency Results for Expert's Opinion Validation
6.1 Path Results of the Model
54
55
58
59
63
71
72
75
79
81
82
83
89
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 Construction Sector Growth Trend from 2004 to
2012
2.1 Wastage of Cement at Construction Site
2.2 Packaging Waste at Construction Site
2.3 Metal Waste at Construction Site
2.4 Bricks Waste at Construction Site
2.5 The Need for Rework
2.6 Equipment Failure Leads to Stoppage of Work
2.7 Construction Waste Illegally Dumped at Mangrove
Swamp, Malacca in 2011
2.8 Construction Waste at 17/1A Road, Petaling Jaya in
2012
2.9 Construction Waste Illegally Dumped at Taman
Ruwiyah, Selayang in 2013
2.10 Construction Waste Illegally Dumped at Kampung
Melayu Subang in 2014
2.11 Theoretical Model of Construction Waste
3.1 The Flow Chart of this Research
3.2 Experience of Respondents Involved in Pilot Study
3.3 Example of E-tendering Model
3.4 Example of Intentions to Share Knowledge Model
3.5 Example of Cost Performance Model
3.6 Example of Model Struktur Petunjuk Prestasi Utama
4.1 Type of Projects Respondents handled
4.2 Contract Amount of Projects Handled by
1
8
9
9
9
11
11
12
12
13
13
23
27
32
41
41
42
42
48
xiv
Respondents
4.3 Academic Qualification of Respondents
4.4 Respondent’s Experience
4.5 Stages of Construction Waste Generation
5.1 Hypothetical Model of Construction Waste
5.2 Process Diagram of PLS-SEM Analysis
5.3 Draw Hypothetical Model in SmartPLS
5.4 Assign Manifest Screenshot of SmartPLS
5.5 Complete Model of PLS-SEM
5.6 Developed Structural Model
5.7 t-value from Bootstrapping
5.8 Generated Q2 Values of the Model
6.1 Causative Factors of Construction Waste
6.2 Effects factors of Construction Waste
6.3 Top Five Significant Causative Factors
6.4 Top Five Severity Effect Factors
6.5 PLS-SEM of Cause and Effect Factors of
Construction Waste
49
50
51
53
62
64
66
67
67
76
78
80
86
87
88
88
89
xv
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CW - Construction Waste
CIDB - Construction Industry Development Board
PLS-SEM - Partial Least Square-Structural Equation Modelling
SEM - Structural Equation Modelling
KPKT - Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government
EPU - Economic Planning Unit
PPSPPA - Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management
Corporation (Perbadanan Pengurusan Sisa Pepejal
dan Pembersihan Awam)
CIOB - The Chartered Institute of Building
JKR - Public Works Department (Jabatan Kerja Raya)
Ir. - Professional Engineer
UTHM - Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
PSA - Politeknik Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah
PMU - Politeknik Mukah Sarawak
csv. - Comma Separated Value
AVE - Average Variance Extracted
CR - Composite Reliability
GDP - Gross Domestic Product
RM - Ringgit Malaysia
BE - Bachelor of Engineering
Q² - Predictive Relevancy
CV Red - Cross Validated Redundancy
CV Com - Cross Validated Communality
xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX TITLE PAGE
A Questionnaire for Pilot Study 109
B Questionnaire Form for Data Collection 114
C Example of csv. File Format Used in
PLS-SEM Analysis 119
D PLS Assessment Results (Iteration 1 until 8) 120
E Questionnaire Form for Validation 143
F Significance Letter from Industry 147
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
In Malaysia, construction development is growing rapidly since last few decades.
Together with social development, construction sector has contributed significantly
to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the country. The construction growth trend in
GDP since 2004 is illustrated in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Construction Sector Growth Trend from 2004 to 2012
(Khan et al., 2014 & CIDB, 2013a)
Figure 1.1 shows that, in year 2012, Malaysian construction sector registered
an impressive GDP growth of 18.5% that is far surpassing the 4.6% in 2011. This
growth is due to the huge amount invested for construction development projects
1.8
8.5
4.4
6.2 6.0
4.6
18.5
-5
0
5
10
15
20
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Sec
tor
GD
P (
%)
2
under 10th Malaysia Plan (2011-2015) with the allocation of RM230 billion (EPU,
2011).
Even though the rapid development of construction provides facilities which
are needed by people but it also contributes to negative impact to economy, social
and environment (Noor et al., 2013; Azis et al., 2012; Llatas, 2011). The waste
generated from construction activities has been increasing over the years and giving
negative effect to environment. The waste generation has resulted in the increasing of
illegal dumping activity (Katz & Baum, 2011) and shortage of landfill space (Ann et
al., 2013). Thus, it is important to take actions for avoiding construction waste
generation.
1.2 Problem Statement
Like other countries, Malaysia is also facing a serious problem of waste generation in
the construction industry (Noor et al., 2013; Hassan et al., 2012; Aadal et al., 2013).
This waste generation is due to the increasing demand for major infrastructure
projects, commercial buildings and housing development (Begum et al., 2010;
Mokhtar & Mahmood, 2008). It has resulted in creating a number of illegal dumping
site nationwide (Wei, 2012; Sharifah & Zainal, 2014). The waste generation is
caused by various factors which need to be identified for avoiding the waste.
Unfortunately, Malaysia does not have accurate data of construction waste
flows and factors causing the waste generation on-site or off-site (Begum et al.,
2007). The same problem was also highlighted by foreign researchers (Yuan & Shen,
2011; Lu & Yuan, 2011b; Azis et al., 2012). In order to overcome this issue,
Construction Industry Development Board of Malaysia (CIDB) and National Solid
Waste and Public Cleansing Corporation (PPSPPA) have encouraged researchers to
conduct research works in construction wastes area (Hamid, 2011; Taha, 2012).
Unfortunately only a few researchers have studied the issue of construction waste in
Malaysia. However, most of these studies focused on quantifying the amount of
construction waste generation and less attention is given on developing relationships
model for cause and effect factors of construction waste generation.
3
Hence, this study focuses on identifying factors of construction waste
generation and developing a structural model of cause and effect factors of
construction waste generation for Malaysian construction industry.
1.3 Research Questions
Based on the problem statement of the study, the research questions are formulated
to help researcher into achievable objectives. This research focuses on the following
research questions:
i. What are the cause and effect factors of construction waste?
ii. What is the main factor of the cause and effect factors of construction waste?
iii. How to develop a relationships model between the factors and construction
waste generation?
1.4 Aim and Objectives
The aim of this study is to develop a relationship model of cause and effect factors of
construction waste generation for Malaysian construction industry. In order to
achieve this aim, the objectives of this study are:
i. Identifying cause and effect factors of construction waste.
ii. Determining hierarchically the cause and effect factors of construction waste.
iii. Developing structural model of cause and effect factors of construction waste.
1.5 Scope of the Research
This study focuses on identifying the cause and effect factors of construction waste
generation through factual perception of the construction practitioners. The target
respondents are focuses to contractors, consultants and clients. These three categories
of respondent are the major players in Malaysia construction industry (Yong &
4
Mustaffa, 2011). Contractors who involved in the study are registered with
Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) of Malaysia. There are seven
categories of contractors from smallest contractor G1 (less than RM 200,000) until
the largest contractor G7 (above than RM 10 million). Consultant who is working in
Malaysia construction project is identified during direct visitation to their office/site.
Client who has participated in the survey is from government body such as Public
Work Department (JKR) and Solid Waste Management and Public Cleansing
Corporation (PPSPPA). The gathering of data involves only quantitative method
using structured questionnaire distributed throughout Malaysia. Since the research
focuses for Malaysia construction industry, all the respondents involved are only
from Malaysia.
1.6 Thesis Structure
This study focuses on developing a structural model of cause and effect factors of
construction waste generation for Malaysian construction industry. The thesis of this
study is divided into 6 chapters as stated below:
Chapter 1: This chapter discusses the need of this study. It contains
background, problem statement to summarize the main research questions and
objectives of the study.
Chapter 2: This chapter contains the review of published research works for
the related study on construction waste factors and effects.
Chapter 3: This chapter explains research plan and the methodology adopted
for this research work. It presents details of analyzing approaches used for data
analysis together with the data collection technique.
Chapter 4: This chapter discusses the univariate analysis results including
identifying and determining hierarchically the cause and effect factors of
construction waste generation. It also highlights the most top factor of cause and
effect of construction waste generation in Malaysia construction industry.
Chapter 5: This chapter explains the multivariate approaches of structural
equation modelling (SEM) analysis. It also includes the development of structural
5
model of cause and effect factors of construction waste generation using PLS-SEM
approaches and as well as explains the course of validating the model’s output.
Chapter 6: The final chapter discusses the conclusion of the results achieved
from this study with direction for future works to benefit the construction industry
for controlling the construction waste factors of a project.
CHAPTER 2
CAUSE AND EFFECT FACTORS OF CONSTRUCTION WASTE
2.1 Introduction
This chapter provides an overview of the types, issues and factors of construction
waste generation. Based on literature review the cause and effect factors are linked
into a theoretical model. This model is addressing a gap in construction waste
domain for Malaysia construction industry. This study explores the relationships of
cause and effect of factors of construction waste generation.
2.2 Construction Industry
Construction industry plays a significant role in helping the development of a
country to achieve developed nation status by the year 2020 (Islam & Ismail, 2010;
Khan et al., 2014). Therefore to fulfil the development process, high number of
construction projects are being planned and constructed in the 10th
Malaysia Plan
(2011-2015) (CIDB, 2013b). Table 2.1 shows the total number and amount of
construction projects are being registered in Construction Industry Development
Board, Ministry of Works, Malaysia.
7
Table: 2.1: Construction Projects Registered under CIDB
Year
Total
Numbers of
Projects
Total Project Value
(RM million) Source
2009 7,039 74,913.65 CIDB, 2011
2010 7,124 87,286.46 CIDB, 2011
2011 7,359 97,034.17 CIDB, 2012
2012 7,542 122,720.59 CIDB, 2013b
From Table 2.1, it can be perceived that the trend of construction project
numbers and its value are increasing from 2009 to 2012. Currently, numerous mega
construction projects are ongoing in Malaysia such as Kuala Lumpur International
Airport 2 (KLIA 2) project with RM 997,227,000.00 (Habibullah et al., 2012), and
Electrified Double Track Project (EDTP), Ipoh - Padang Besar project with RM
12.485 billion (Gamuda, 2014). Due to this rapid development in the construction
sector, the construction industry faces the problem with construction waste
generation. According to Nasaruddin & Ravana (2008) and Begum et al. (2010), the
construction waste generation is increasing every year in Malaysia. This problem is a
crucial challenge for the construction industry.
According to Ofori (2000), construction industry in developing country needs
to take challenges in reducing waste generation which was to land disposal and also
need to find an environmental-friendly way of minimizing the waste. This is because
the generated waste leads to negative impact on the environment (Papargyropoulou
et al., 2011; Winkler, 2010). Hence, the construction waste such as time and cost
overrun also reduces the overall projects performance in the construction industry
(Alwi et al., 2002b).
2.3 Type of Construction Waste
Waste is considered as unwanted material (Ferguson et al., 1995) which is a by-
product of human and industrial activity that has no residual value (Serpell &
Alarcon, 1998). It is also considered as losses which are resulted from activities that
consume direct or indirect costs but do not add value to the end product (Koskela,
1992). For construction waste, it is generated due to construction activities which
8
include design works, planning, procurement, execution, renovation and also
demolition. Currently, construction industry is facing severe problem due to
construction waste generation that increase rapidly (Foo et al., 2013) worldwide such
as in United States and Europe (Serpell et al., 1995), Singapore (Hwang & Yeo,
2011), Sri Lanka (Senaratne & Wijesiri, 2008) and Malaysia (Azis et al., 2012).
Construction waste has resulted in consumption of resources in excess than
the necessary need to execute a service (Freitas, 1995 cited in Branco, 2007). It has a
significant impact on environment and social aspects of life and also causing
economic loss. Construction waste can be clustered into two types namely the
physical and non-physical waste.
2.3.1 Physical Waste
Physical construction waste is defined as waste which arises from construction,
renovation and demolition activities including land excavation or formation, civil and
building construction, site clearance, demolition activities, roadwork, building
renovation and repair of damaged buildings. Some researchers define physical waste
as solid waste which comprises sand, bricks, blocks, steel, concrete debris, tiles
bamboo, plastics, glass, wood, paper, vegetation and other organic materials (Katz &
Baum, 2011; Hao et al., 2008; Bossink & Brouwers, 1996). These wasted materials
are usually deposited at landfills. Figures 2.1-2.4 show the examples of physical
waste at construction site.
Figure 2.1: Wastage of Cement at Construction Site
9
Figure 2.2: Packaging Waste at Construction Site
Figure 2.3: Metal Waste at Construction Site
Figure 2.4: Bricks Waste at Construction Site
10
The generation of physical waste has been highlighted from various countries by
researcher in term of percentage/weight/volume of waste generated as shown in
Table 2.2.
Table: 2.2: Physical Waste Generation
References Material Waste Generation
Jaillon et al. (2009) Hong Kong generates 21.5 million tonnes of
construction waste in 2005.
Kofoworola &
Gheewala (2009)
It is estimated that between 2002 and 2005, an average
of 1.1 million tonnes of construction waste was
generated per year in Thailand.
Fatta et al. (2003) Construction and demolition waste in Greece is
estimated to exceed 3.9 million tonnes from years 1999
to 2000.
Nagapan et al. (2013) 422.9m
3 construction waste generated within 2 months
in three construction projects in Malaysia.
McGrath & Anderson
(2000) Construction waste is estimated around 70 million
tonnes every year in United Kingdom.
John et al. (2004) Generation of Construction and demolition waste in
Brazil is estimated 68.5 million tonnes annually.
2.3.2 Non-Physical Waste
Non-physical waste is normally occurred during the construction process such as
rework, waiting time, unnecessary transportation, delay in moving material and
others. Non-physical waste can also be termed as non-value adding activities that are
usually resulted to time and cost overrun for a construction project (Alwi et al.,
2002a; Nazech et al., 2008). Figures 2.5 and 2.6 show the examples of activities that
could result to non-physical waste at construction site.
11
Figure 2.5: The Need for Rework Figure 2.6: Equipment Failure Leads to
Stoppage of Work
Table 2.3 shows the time and cost overrun scenario in different countries.
Table 2.3: Time and Cost Overrun Problems in Several Countries
References Country
Experiencing of the non
physical waste problem
Time Cost
Senaratne & Wijesiri (2008) Sri Lanka √ √
Hwang & Yeo (2011); Ekanayake & Ofori
(2000); Zhao & Chua (2003) Singapore √
Polat & Ballard (2004) Turkey √
Alwi, Hampson, & Mohamed (2002a);
Nazech et al., (2008) Indonesia √ √
Formoso et al., (2002) Brazil √ √
Serpell et al., (1995) Chile √
Faniran & Caban (1998); Alwi et al., (2002) Australia √
Koskela (1992) Finland √ √
Table 2.3 indicates that are many countries experiencing the time and cost
overrun. All these problems can be considered as non physical waste (Alwi et al.,
2002b).
12
2.4 Issues on Construction Waste
Construction wastes have become a pressing issue in many developing countries and
have adverse effects on environment, economy and social aspects. The related issue
of construction waste problem is illegal dumping of the waste. This problem become
a frequent issue created from construction waste in many countries (Rahmat &
Ibrahim, 2007, Yuan, 2012, Yu et al., 2013). Malaysia is facing serious illegal
dumping problem throughout the country (Yahaya & Larsen, 2008). A study
conducted by Mahayuddin, (2011), have identified 13 illegal dumpsites in Ipoh,
Perak while Rahmat & Ibrahim, (2007) found 19 illegal dumping sites are located
near to the road side corridor in Johor Bahru, Johor. Since 2011 until 2014, local
newspapers highlighted illegal dumping issues in a few places in the country as
shown in Figure 2.7-2.10 below.
Figure 2.7: Construction Waste Illegally
Dumped at Mangrove Swamp, Malacca
in 2011 (Murali, 2011)
Figure 2.8: Construction Waste at 17/1A
Road, Petaling Jaya in 2012 (Wei, 2012)
13
Figure 2.9: Construction Waste Illegally
Dumped at Taman Ruwiyah, Selayang
in 2013 (Ghani, 2013)
Figure 2.10: Construction Waste Illegally
Dumped at Kampung Melayu Subang in
2014 (Sharifah & Zainal, 2014)
This construction waste problem is caused by many contributory factors of
construction waste generation. Hence, to avoid/prevent the generation of construction
waste, the practitioners need to identify the main factors of construction waste
generation before engaging in construction works.
2.5 Causative Factor of Construction Waste
Construction waste is generated throughout the project from the inception stage until
the completion stage. There are many factors contribute to construction waste
generation. A total of 81 factors are identified from research articles worldwide
(Nagapan et al., 2012). Most of the articles grouped their factors differently.
However, majority of the articles introduced the groups of some similarities. Table
2.4 shows various groups introduced by the previous researchers. It ranges between 4
to 10 groups.
Table 2.4: Various Groups of Factors
Researchers Groups No of
groups
Senaratne & Wijesiri (2008) Management, Resources, Information, External 4
Guerrero et al. (2012) Design, Construction process, Material management,
Operation, Residues, Other 6
Ekanayake & Ofori (2000) Design, Operational, Material Handling, Procurement 4
Bossink and Brouwers
(1996)
Design, Procurement, Materials Handling, Operation,
Residual, Other 6
14
Table 2.4 (continued)
Table 2.4 shows the categorization of the group of factors by previous
researchers varies between four to ten groups. In this study the factors are
categorized into 7 groups. The groups are Design, Handling of Materials and
Equipment, Workers, Management, Site Condition, Procurement and External group
(Nagapan et al., 2013). Each group of factors is presented in the following sub-
sections.
2.5.1 Design Group of Factors (DESG)
Design is an important stage before the construction activity is going to be started on
site. Previous researchers identified many wasteful activities during the design stage.
The majority of these wasteful activities consume time and effort without adding
value for the construction project (Love, 1996). Besides that, in design group there
are 12 factors contributing to waste generation. All the design factors are shown in
Table 2.5.
Researchers Groups No of
groups
Polat & Ballard (2004)
Design, Procurement, Operation, Other
4
Graham & Smithers (1996) Design, Procurement, Materials Handling, Operation,
Residual, Other 6
Akhir et al. (2013)
Information and communication, Equipments, Project and
Contract Management, Material, Procurement, External,
Manpower
7
Ilhaq (2010)
Contractual, Design, Procurement, Transportation, Onsite
management and Planning, Material storage, Material
Handling, Site Operation, Others
8
Alwi et al. (2002a) People, Professional Management, Design and
Documentation; Materials, Execution and External. 6
Nazech et al. (2008)
Manpower, Professional management, Design and
Documentation, Materials, Work execution, External
factors
6
Urio & Brent (2006) Design, Procurement, Materials Handling, Operation,
Residual, Other 6
Osmani et al. (2008)
Contractual, Design, Procurement, Transportation, On-site
Management and Planning, Material storage, Material
handling, Site operation, Residual, Other.
10
Adnan (2012) Design, Procurement, Material, Operational, Others 5
15
Table 2.5: Design Group of Factors
No Factors References
1 Frequent design changes Adewuyi & Otali, (2013); Faniran & Caban (1998); Yunpeng
(2011); Alwi et al. (2002b); Zhao & Chua (2003)
2 Design errors Tam et al. (2007); Wan et al. (2009); Senaratne & Wijesiri
(2008); Noor, (2013)
3 Lack of design information Osmani et al. (2008); Urio & Brent (2006); Polat & Ballard
(2004)
4 Poor design quality Nazech et al. (2008); Formoso et al. (2002); Alwi et al.
(2002a)
5 Slow drawing distribution Nazech et al. (2008);
Alwi et al. (2002a); Alwi et al. (2002b)
6 Incomplete contract document Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Poon et al. (2004)
7 Complicated design Poon et al. (2004); Guerrero et al. (2012)
8 Inexperience designer Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Bossink & Browers (1996);
Osmani et al. (2008)
9 Error in contract
documentation Urio & Brent (2006); Osmani et al. (2008)
10 Interaction between various
specialists Garas et al. (2001); Polat & Ballard (2004)
11 Poor coordination of parties
during design stage Poon et al. (2004); Urio & Brent (2006)
12 Last minute client requirements Poon et al. (2004); Osmani et al. (2008)
These 12 factors as indicates in Table 2.5 is identified from the past research
works. The formation of ‘design group’ is in line with the research works carried out
by Guerrero et al. (2012) where the group is one of the contributors to construction
waste generation.
2.5.2 Handling Materials and Equipment Group of Factors (HAND)
Handling methods play a vital role to prevent damages in construction projects.
Commonly, handling methods related to material handling and equipment handling
by workers in any construction projects. Researchers from Malaysia concur with the
problem and found most of the material was damaged due to handling works Ilhaq
(2010). This waste generation group consisted of 9 factors are as shown in Table 2.6.
16
Table 2.6: Handling of Materials and Equipment Group of Factors
No Factors References
1 Wrong material storage Wahab & Lawal (2011); Lau et al. (2008); Mokhtar & Mahmood,
(2008); Guerrero et al. (2012)
2 Poor material handling Kofoworola & Gheewala (2009); Gavilan & Bernold (1994)
3 Damage during
transportation
Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Garas et al. (2001); Wahab & Lawal
(2011); Guerrero et al. (2012)
4 Poor quality of materials Lu et al. (2011); Nazech et al. (2008); Bossink & Browers (1996);
Alwi et al. (2002a); Serpell et al. (1995)
5 Equipment failure Tam et al. (2007); Gavilan & Bernold (1994); Zhao & Chua (2003)
6 Delay during delivery Polat & Ballard (2004); Alwi et al. (2002a); Zhao & Chua (2003)
7 Tools not suitable used Wang et al. (2008);Tam et al. (2007); Zhao & Chua (2003)
8 Inefficient methods of
unloading Osmani et al. (2008); Poon et al. (2004b); Lau et al. (2008)
9 Materials supplied in
loose form Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Osmani et al. (2008)
The group is supported from previous research work conducted by
Ekanayake and Ofori (2000) from the National University of Singapore.
2.5.3 Workers Group of Factors (WORK)
Construction projects cannot be carried out without workers or labours. They are the
major players during the construction activity. The workers will work together with
other parties as a team to construct the project until its completion. In this study,
'worker’s group' comprises of 14 factors of waste generation is as shown in Table 2.7.
Table 2.7: Worker Group of Factors
No Factors References
1 Workers' mistakes during
construction
Gavilan & Bernold (1994); Llatas (2011);
Polat & Ballard (2004)
2 Incompetent worker Nazech et al. (2008); Lu et al. (2011); Formoso et al. (2002);
Alwi et al. (2002a)
3 Poor attitudes of workers Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Serpell et al. (1995)
4 Damage caused by workers Poon et al. (2004a); Urio & Brent (2006);
Polat & Ballard (2004)
5 Insufficient training for
workers Garas et al. (2001); Wang et al. (2008); Formoso et al. (2002)
6 Lack of experience Lu et al. (2011); Nazech et al. (2008);
Alwi et al. (2002a)
7 Shortage of skilled workers Alwi et al. (2002a); Polat & Ballard (2004); Noor (2013)
17
Table 2.7 (continued)
No Factors References
8 Inappropriate use of materials Urio & Brent (2006); Alwi et al. (2002a)
9 Poor workmanship Faniran & Caban (1998); Tam et al. (2007)
10 Worker’s no enthusiasm Yunpeng (2011); Zhao & Chua (2003)
11 Inventory of materials not well
documented
Urio & Brent (2006); Mokhtar & Mahmood
(2008)
12 Abnormal wear of equipment Garas et al. (2001)
13 Lack of awareness among the workers Mokhtar & Mahmood (2008)
14 Too much overtime for workers Alwi et al. (2002a)
Without workers factors as indicates in Table 2.7, construction could not take
place and can cause project stoppage. This grouping of waste generation factors
adapted from ‘people group’ (Alwi et al., 2002) which is later changed to more
specific grouping as ‘workers group’.
2.5.4 Management Group of Factors (MANA)
From the beginning of construction projects, the management team is considered as a
driver for the projects. They will plan, supervise and control the construction
activities. In addition, Serpell (1995) point out that manager has to deal with many
factors that may negatively affect the construction process. Hence, literature of past
researchers leads to form a group namely 'management group' as illustrated in Table
2.8. The similar group name has been applied by Garas et al. (2001) for a study
conducted on Egyptian Construction Industry.
Table 2.8: Management Group of Factors
No Factors References
1 Poor planning Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Formoso et al. (2002); Senaratne &
Wijesiri (2008); Zhao & Chua (2003)
2 Poor controlling Garas et al. (2001); Kofoworola & Gheewala (2009);Senaratne &
Wijesiri (2008)
3 Poor site management Urio & Brent (2006); Lu et al. (2011); Formoso et al. (2002);
Zhao & Chua (2003)
4 Poor supervision Wang et al. (2008); Nazech et al. (2008); Alwi et al. (2002a);
Zhao & Chua (2003)
5 Inappropriate construction
methods Wahab & Lawal (2011); Tam et al. (2007); Polat & Ballard (2004)
18
Table 2.8 (continued)
No Factors References
6 Lack of coordination among
parties Yunpeng (2011); Garas et al. (2001); Alwi et al. (2002a)
7 Poor information quality Wang et al. (2008); Senaratne & Wijesiri (2008); Serpell et al.
(1995)
8 Late information flow among
parties
Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Osmani et al. (2008); Senaratne &
Wijesiri (2008); Alwi et al. (2002b)
9 Scarcity of equipment Formoso et al. (2002); Serpell et al. (1995); Polat & Ballard
(2004)
10 Lack of waste management
plans
Bossink & Browers (1996); Urio & Brent (2006); Polat &
Ballard (2004); Akhir (2013)
11 Resources problem Wahab & Lawal (2011); Senaratne & Wijesiri (2008)
12 Rework Wan et al. (2009); Garas et al. (2001); Polat & Ballard (2004);
Akhir (2013)
13 Waiting periods Zhao & Chua (2003); Alwi et al. (2002b)
14 Communication problems Gavilan & Bernold (1994); Yunpeng (2011)
15 Outdated equipment Nazech et al. (2008); Alwi et al. (2002a)
16 Non availability of
equipment Zhao & Chua (2003); Serpell et al. (1995)
17 Lack of knowledge about
construction Kofoworola & Gheewala (2009); Urio & Brent (2006)
18 Long project duration Poon et al. (2004b) ; Osmani et al. (2008)
19 Lack of influence of
contractors Urio & Brent (2006)
20 Lack of environmental
awareness Wang et al. (2008)
Table 2.8 demonstrates that the management group is the biggest number of
waste contributory factors involved with 20 factors contributing to the construction
waste generation.
2.5.5 Site Condition Group of Factors (SITE)
Unfavourable site conditions such as soft soil/peat soil or hilly area for construction
activities need more attention as compared to ordinary site. This is because the earth
is geographically hilly and swampy. So, these conditions lead to construction waste
generation. For this research, 'site condition group' contains 8 contributory factors as
shown in Table 2.9.
19
Table 2.9: Site Condition Group of Factors
No Factors References
1 Leftover materials on site Lau et al. (2008); Faniran & Caban (1998); Poon et al.
(2004a)
2 Waste resulting from packaging Llatas (2011); Bossink & Browers (1996); Wang et al.
(2008)
3 Poor site condition Formoso (2002); Zhao & Chua (2003); Alwi et al. (2002)
4 Waiting due to congestion at site Serpell et al. (1995); Zhao & Chua (2003)
5 Waiting due to lighting problem Zhao & Chua (2003)
6 Difficulties accessing construction
sites Osmani et al. (2008)
7 Unforeseen ground conditions Poon et al. (2004b)
8 Interference of others crews at site Zhao & Chua (2003)
In line with the group, there are few articles supported the grouping factors (Zhao &
Chua, 2003; Alwi et al., 2002a).
2.5.6 Procurement Group of Factors (PROC)
Procurement is essential to deliver a project on time, on budget and to a high quality
(CIOB, 2010). It is very close in dealing with supplier, contractor or client for
purchasing and ordering the construction materials. During the construction process,
many projects faced procurement problem (Lu & Yuan, 2011b; Tam et al., 2007). In
this study 'procurement group' consists of 10 factors for construction waste
generation as highlighted in Table 2.10.
Table 2.10: Procurement Group of Factors
No Factors References
1 Ordering errors Mokhtar & Mahmood, (2008); Poon et al. (2004) ; Lu et al.
(2011); Polat & Ballard (2004)
2 Items not in compliance with
specification
Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Formoso et al. (2002); Garas et
al. (2001)
3 Error in shipping Gavilan & Bernold (1994); Wang et al. (2008); Tam et al.
(2007)
4 Mistakes in quantity surveys Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Tam et al. (2007); Polat &
Ballard (2004)
5 Supplier errors Urio & Brent (2006)
6 Wrong material delivery
procedures Urio & Brent (2006)
7 Over allowances Osmani et al. (2008)
20
Table 2.10 (continued)
No Factors References
8 Frequent variation orders Ndihokubwayo & Haupt (2009)
9 Different methods used for
estimation Lau et al., (2008)
10 Waiting for replacement Polat & Ballard (2004)
2.5.7 External Group of factors (EXTE)
External factors are uncontrollable factor which can generate construction waste
(Alwi et al., 2002a). External factor group's is named in different way according to
previous researchers. Some of the researchers name it as 'unpredicted situations'
(Garas et al., 2001), 'others' (Urio & Brent, 2006) and 'external' (Alwi et al., 2002a) .
For this study, the group consists of 8 uncontrollable factors contributing to waste
generation as stated in Table 2.11.
Table 2.11: External Group
No Factors References
1 Effect of weather Wahab & Lawal (2011); Senaratne & Wijesiri (2008); Akhir et
al. (2013)
2 Accidents Ekanayake & Ofori (2000); Bossink & Browers (1996); Polat &
Ballard (2004)
3 Pilferage Garas et al. (2001); Faniran & Caban (1998); Muhwezi et al.,
(2012)
4 Lack of legislative
enforcement Esin & Cosgun (2007); Wang et al. (2008); Faridah et al. (2004)
5 Vandalism Wahab & Lawal (2011); Garas et al. (2001)
6 Damages caused by third
parties Nazech et al. (2008); Alwi et al. (2002a)
7 Festival celebration Serpell et al. (1995)
8 Unpredictable local
conditions Polat & Ballard (2004)
This type of group as in Table 2.11 is supported by Nazech et al. (2008) who
conducting study on construction waste generation for Indonesia construction
industry.
21
2.6 Effect factors of Construction Waste
Construction wastes give many negative effects to a country. In Malaysia,
construction waste is getting worse with the illegal dumping issues as described in
Chapter 2 Section 2.4. From the review of literature it has been identified that there
are three main groups of effect factors for construction waste generation that are
environment, economic and social (Begum et al., 2010; Begum et al., 2006; Mokhtar
& Mahmood, 2008; Seow and Mohamad, 2007). The effect factor of construction
waste is looking into these three elements.
2.6.1 Environment
Environment encompasses of all living and non living things on earth which interact
with all of living species (Johnson et al., 2007). Therefore, these construction wastes
(non living things) from the construction industry have high impact on the
environment (Yunpeng, 2011). Table 2.12 is consisted of 4 effect factors.
Table 2.12: Environment Group
No Factors References
1 Environmental
pollutions
Lu et al. (2011); Llatas (2011); Wang & Li (2011); Begum et al.
(2010);Che Hasan et al. (2013); Liu & Huang ( 2013)
2 Shortage of land Kofoworola & Gheewala (2009); Mokhtar & Mahmood (2008);
Ortiz et al. (2010)
3 Increasing of Illegal
dumping
Gavilan & Bernold (1994); Kofoworola & Gheewala (2009); Seow
and Mohamad (2007); Seror et al. (2014)
4 Ecological damage Yunpeng (2011); Lu & Yuan, 2010
The group as presented in Table 2.12 is formed to reflect the effect of
construction waste generation on the environment.
22
2.6.2 Economy
A country growth is based on economic development in the country. The economy
development system works when all professions, occupations, economic activities
contribute to the economy development of the country (Esin & Cosgun, 2007). For
this study, the effect factors related to cost overrun and time loss of a construction
project (Formoso et al., 2002; Alwi et al., 2002). The economy group comprises of 5
factors which give effect from construction waste is shown in Table 2.13.
Table 2.13: Economy Group
No Factors References
1 Increase in transportation charge of
construction waste have been raised
Faridah et al., (2004); Faniran & Caban (1998);
Ekanayake & Ofori (2000)
2 Increase cost of projects Khairulzan & Halim (2006); Urio & Brent
(2006); Ndihokubwayo & Haupt (2009)
3 Increase landfill fee Gavilan & Bernold (1994); Wang et al. (2008)
4 Increase in price of raw materials Faniran & Caban (1998); Khairulzan & Halim
(2006)
5 Delay of projects Khairulzan & Halim (2006); Ndihokubwayo &
Haupt (2009);
These 5 factors as shown in Table 2.13 are identified from literature review to
reveal the construction waste effect from economic perspective.
2.6.3 Social
Social attributes occur whenever people interact under specific conditions,
circumstances and actions (Merton, 1968). The social attribute is also related to
human or population growth in a country (Katz & Baum, 2011). With more
population in a country, more problems can arise from the construction waste
generation. Furthermore, the impact of construction waste will lead people to create
problems in term of health and negative relationships among them. The social factors
are presented in Table 2.14.
23
Table 2.14: Social Group
No Factors References
1 Mental health effects Llatas (2011); Wang & Li (2011); Seow and Mohamad (2007); Tam et
al. (2007)
2 Physical health effects Wang et al. (2008); Yunpeng (2011); Noor (2013); Wu et al. (2014)
3 Injury to public Khairulzan & Halim (2006); Mokhtar & Mahmood (2008); Ortiz et al.
(2010)
4 No aesthetic Khairulzan & Halim (2006); Seow & Mohamad (2007); Seror et al.
(2014)
Table 2.14 is reflected the effect of social group from construction waste generation.
2.7 Theoretical Model
Theoretical model or hypothetical model is developed from a review of past research
works (Aibinu & Lawati, 2010). The theoretical model is basis for testing the
relationships of independent and dependent variables (Fellows & Liu, 2008). Hence,
based on a review of the literature, a structural model of cause and effect factors is
developed as presented in Figure 2.11.
Figure 2.11: Theoretical Model of Construction Waste
24
The theoretical model as in Figure 2.11 is concerned with relationships of cause and
effect factors of construction waste. Furthermore, the linkages between causes
(design, handling, workers, management, site condition, procurement and external
factor) and effects (environment, economy and social) have been integrated into one
relationship model. This addresses a gap in the literature by providing a complete
model within the context of relationship in construction waste domain. In order to
provide more complete understanding of the cause and effect factors of this model,
several hypotheses is constructed from the model.
The relationships between the cause and effect factors (independent variables)
and construction waste generation (dependent variable) form the basis to formulate
hypotheses as describe below:
H1: DESG (design) has significant effect on construction waste
H2: HAND (handling) has significant effect on construction waste
H3: WORK (workers) has significant effect on construction waste
H4: MANA (management) has significant effect on construction waste
H5: SITE (site condition) has significant effect on construction waste
H6: PROC (procurement) has significant effect on construction waste
H7: EXTE (external factors) has significant effect on construction waste
H8: Construction waste has significant effect on EN (environment)
H9: Construction waste has significant effect on SO (social)
H10: Construction waste has significant effect on EC (economy)
2.8 Summary
Construction industry is contributing significantly in economic and social
development of the country. However, it is facing chronic problem of construction
waste generation globally which needs serious attention and in depth study to resolve
it. For this, the first and foremost important step is to understand the problem of
construction waste, causes contributing to waste generation and the effects of waste.
This chapter presents a comprehensive literature review carried out to understand the
issue of construction waste and the cause and effect factors. This has resulted in
93
REFERENCES
Aadal, H., Rad, K. G., Fard, A. B., Ghasemi, P., & Sabet, P. (2013). Implementing
3R Concept in Construction Waste Management at Construction Site. Journal
of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences, 3(10), pp. 160–166.
Adewuyi, T. O., & Otali, M. (2013). Evaluation of Causes of Construction Material
Waste - Case of Rivers State, Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal of Environmental
Studies and Management, 6, pp. 746–753.
Adnan, N. F. (2012). A Study of Construction Waste Generation at Site Project in
Batu Pahat, Johor. Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia: Thesis Master.
Aibinu, A., & Al-lawati, A. (2010). Using PLS-SEM Technique to Model
Construction Organizations Willingness to Participate in E-bidding.
Automation in Construction, 19(6), pp. 714–724.
doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2010.02.016.
Akhir, N., Rahman, I. A., Memon, A. H., Nagapan, S. (2013). Factors of Waste
Generation throughout Construction Life Cycle. Proceedings of the
Malaysian Technical Universities Conference on Engineering and
Technology (MUCET). Pahang, Malaysia.
Akter, Ambra, & Ray. (2011a). Trustworthiness in mHealth Information Services :
An Assessment of a Hierarchical Model with Mediating and Moderating
Effects Using Partial Least Squares (PLS). Journal of the American Society
for Information Science and Technology, 62(1), pp. 100–116. doi:10.1002/asi.
Akter, S., Ambra, J. D., & Ray, P. (2011b). An evaluation of PLS based complex
models: the roles of power analysis, predictive relevance and GoF index.
Proceedings of the 17th Americas Conference on Information Systems.
Detroit, Michigan. pp 1-7.
Akintoye, A. (2000). Analysis of Factors Influencing Project Cost Estimating
Practice. Construction Management and Economics,18(1), pp. 77-89.
94
Alwi, S., Hampson, K., & Mohamed, S. (2002a). Non Value-Adding Activities in
Australian Construction Projects. Proceedings of the International
Conference on Advancement in Design, Construction, Construction
Management and Maintenance of Building Structure. Bali. pp. 270–278.
Alwi, S., Hampson, K., & Mohamed, S. (2002b). Waste in the Indonesian
Construction Projects. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference of
CIB W107 - Creating a sustainable Construction Industry in Developing
Countries. South Africa: Griffith University. pp. 305–315.
Al-Najjar, J. M. (2008). Factors Influencing Time and Cost Overruns on
Construction Projects in the Gaza Strip. Faculty of Engineering, The Islamic
University Gaza: Master’s Thesis.
Awang, M. (2014). Struktur Kompetensi Pengurusan Fasiliti dan Petunjuk Prestasi
Utama Politeknik. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Ph.D. Thesis.
Ann, Y., Poon, C. S., Wong, A., Yip, R., & Jaillon, L. (2013). Impact of
Construction Waste Disposal Charging Scheme on Work Practices at
Construction Sites in Hong Kong. Waste Management, 33(1), pp. 138–46.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2012.09.023.
Azis, A. A. A., Memon, A. H., Rahman, I. A., Nagapan, S., & Latif, Q. B. A. I.
(2012). Challenges Faced by Construction Industry in Accomplishing
Sustainability Goals. Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Business,
Engineering and Industrial Applications. Bandung, Indonesia. pp. 630–634.
Bagozzi, & Yi. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), pp.74–94.
Banerjee, A., Chitnis, U. B., Jadhav, S. L., Bhawalkar, J. S., & Chaudhury, S. (2009).
Hypothesis Testing, Type I and Type II Errors. Industrial Psychiatry Journal,
18(2), pp. 127–131. doi:10.4103/0972-6748.62274.
Bell, J. (1993). Doing your Research Project. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Begum, R. A., Satari, S. K., & Pereira, J. J. (2010). Waste Generation and Recycling:
Comparison of Conventional and Industrialized Building Systems. American
Journal of Environmental Sciences, 6(4), pp. 383–388.
doi:10.3844/ajessp.2010.383.388.
Begum, R. A., Siwar, C., Pereira, J. J., & Jaafar, A. H. (2006). Factors and Values of
Willingness to Pay for Improved Construction Waste Management: A
95
Perspective of Malaysian Contractors. Waste Management, 27(12), pp. 1902–
1909. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2006.08.013.
Begum, R. A., & Pereira, J. J. (2008). Awareness , Attitude and Behavioural Status
of Waste Management : A Profile of Malaysian Contractors. Asian Journal of
Water, Environment and Pollution, 5(3), pp. 15–22.
Bossink, B. A. G., & Brouwers, H. J. H. (1996). Construction Waste: Quantification
and Source Evaluation. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 122(1), pp. 55–60. doi://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
9364(1996)122:1(55).
Branco, C. R. C. (2007). An Effective Way to Reduce Residential Construction Waste:
A Case Study in Texas. Texas A&M University: Master’s Thesis.
Brown, J.D. (2001).Using Surveys in Language Programs. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Byrne, B.M (2010). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts,
Applications, and Programming. 2nd
ed. New York: Taylor and Francis
Group.
Che Hasan, A. B., Yusof, Z. B., Mohd Ridzuan, A. R. B., Atan, I. B., Noordin, B. B.,
& Abdul Ghani, A. H. B. (2013). Estimation Model of Construction Waste
Materials in Malaysia: Steel. Proceedings of the IEEE Business Engineering
and Industrial Applications Colloquium. Langkawi. pp. 709–713.
Chin. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling.
Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), pp. 295–336.
Chin, W. W. (2010). How to Write Up and Report PLS Analyses. In V. Esposito
Vinzi et al. (eds.) (Ed.), Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Berlin: Springer.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8 29.
CIDB. (2011). Construction Statistics Quarterly Bulletin (Dec 2011). Construction
Industry Development Board Malaysia. Retrieved from
https://www.cidb.gov.my/cidbv2/images/pdf/buletin/2011/BahagianKeduaQ4
2011.pdf.
CIDB. (2012). Construction Statistics Quarterly Bulletin (Dec 2012). Construction
Industry Development Board Malaysia. Retrieved from
https://www.cidb.gov.my/cidbv2/images/pdf/buletin/2012/bahagian
keduas42012.pdf.
96
CIDB. (2013a). Construction Sector Growth Trend from 1980 to 2012. International
Construction Week 2013, Construction Industry Development Board
Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.
CIDB. (2013b). Construction Statistics Quarterly Bulletin (Sept 2013). Construction
Industry Development Board Malaysia. Retrieved from
https://www.cidb.gov.my/cidbv2/images/pdf/buletin/2013/bahagian 2 q3-
2013.pdf.
CIOB. (2010). A Report Exploring Procurement in the Construction Industry, The
Chartered Institute of Building. Berkshire, United Kingdom. pp 1-28.
Chin, W. W. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation
Modeling. Modern Methods for Business Research, 295(2), pp. 295-336.
Chin, W. W. (2010). How to Write up and Report PLS Analyses, in Handbook of
Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Application. Esposito Vinzi,
V.; Chin, W.W.; Henseler, J.; Wang, H. (Eds.), Springer, Germany. pp. 645-
689.
Cohen. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd
ed. New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Dainty, A. R. J., & Brooke, R. J. (2004). Towards Improved Construction Waste
Minimisation : A Need for Improved Supply Chain Integration. Structural
Survey Journal, 22(1), pp. 20–29. doi:10.1108/02630800410533285.
Dulami, M.F., Ling, F.Y.Y., and Bajracharya, A. (2003). Organisational Motivation
and Inter-organisational Interaction in Construction Innovation in Singapore.
Construction Management and Economics, 21(3), pp. 307-318.
Economic Planning Unit. (2011). 10th Malaysia Plan: Building on the Nation’s
Strengths Prime Ministry Department. Retrieved from
http://www.epu.gov.my/epu-theme/RMKE10/rmke10_english.html.
Ekanayake, L. L., & Ofori, G. (2000). Construction Material Waste Source
Evaluation. Proceedings of the Strategies for a Sustainable Built Environment,
Pretoria. pp. 23-25.
Enshassi, A., Al-Najjar, J., & Kumaraswamy, M. (2009). Delays and Cost Overruns
in the Construction Projects in the Gaza Strip. Journal of Financial
Management of Property and Construction, 14(2), pp. 126–151.
doi:10.1108/13664380910977592.
97
Esin, T., & Cosgun, N. (2007). A Study Conducted to Reduce Construction Waste
Generation in Turkey. Building and Environment, 42(4), pp. 1667–1674.
doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.02.008.
Faridah, A., Halim, H. A., & Hasnain, M. (2004). A Study on Construction and
Demolition Wastes from Buildings in Seberang Perai. Proceedings of the 3rd
National Conference in Civil Engineering. Penang, Tanjung Bungah. pp. 1–5.
Faniran, O. O., & Caban, G. (1998). Minimizing Waste on Construction Project Sites.
Engineering Construction and Architectural Management Journal, 5(2), pp.
182–188. doi:10.1108/eb021073.
Fatta, D., Papadopoulos, A., Avramikos, E., Sgourou, E., Moustakas, K.,
Kourmoussis, F., Loizidou, M. (2003). Generation and Management of
Construction and Demolition Waste in Greece: An Existing Challenge.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 40(1), pp. 81–91.
doi:10.1016/S0921-3449(03)00035–1.
Ferguson, J., Kermode, N., Nash, C. L., Sketch, W, A, J., & Huxford, R, P. (1995).
Managing and Minimizing Construction Waste : A Practical Guide. London:
Institute of Civil Engineers. pp. 3–14.
Fellows, R and Liu, A.(2008). Research Methods for Construction. 3rd
ed. Wiley-
Blackwell: Utopia Press.
Foo, L. C., Rahman, I. A., Asmi, A., Nagapan, S., & Khalid, K. I. (2013).
Classification and Quantification of Construction Waste at Housing Project
Site. International Journal of Zero Waste Generation, 1(1), pp. 1–4.
Formoso, C. T., Soibelman, L., Cesare, C. De, & Isatto, E. L. (2002). Material Waste
in Building Industry : Main Causes and Prevention. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 128(4), pp. 316–325.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2002)128:4(316).
Fornell, & Larcker. (1981). Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables
and Measurement Error: Algebra and Statistics. Journal of Marketing
Research, 18(3), pp. 328–388.
Freitas, (1995). O Desperdício na Construção civil: Caminhos Para Sua Redução. In
Branco, C. R. C. (2007). An Effective Way to Reduce Residential
Construction Waste: A Case Study in Texas. Texas A&M University: Master
Thesis.
98
Gamuda. (2014). Electrified Double Track Project (EDTP), Ipoh - Padang Besar.
Gamuda Berhad. Retrieved from
http://www.gamuda.com.my/mrt_railway_edtp.html.
Garas, G. L., Anis, A. R., & Gammal, A. El. (2001). Material Waste in the Egyptian
Construction Industry. Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction, National University of Singapore,
pp. 1–8.
Gavilan, R. M., and Bernold, L. E. (1994). Source Evaluation of Solid Waste in
Building Construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 120(3), pp. 536-552.
Ghani. (2013). Sisa Binaan Dibuang Secara Haram bimbangkan Penduduk. Metro
Newspaper. p. 5.
Graham, P. and Smithers, G. (1996) Construction Waste Minimization for Australian
Residential Development. Asia Pacific Building and Construction
Management Journal, 2(1), pp. 14–19.
Guerrero, L. A., Maas, G. J., Lambert, A. J. D., and Troyo, F. (2012). Construction
Waste in Costa Rica. Proceedings of the ISWA World Solid Waste Congress,
Florence. Italy.
Habibullah, N., Zafirol, A., Halim, A., & Halim, A. A. (2012). Green Building
Concept: Case Study: New LCC Terminal & KLIA 2 Sepang, Selangor,
Malaysia. Journal of Design + Built, 5(1). Retrieved from
http://www.ukm.my/jsb/jdb/.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011a). PLS-SEM: Indeed a Silver Bullet.
The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), pp.139–152.
Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. (2011b). An Assessment of the
Use of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling in Marketing
Research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), pp. 414–433.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A Primer on Partial
Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM).United State of
America: SAGE Publications.
Hamid, Z. A. (2011). Policy and Sustainable Development : Malaysian Construction
Industry perspective. Proceedings of the One Day Seminar – Knowledge
Sharing on Construction Management. Johor, Malaysia, pp. 1–82.
99
Hao, J. L., Hill, M. J., & Shen, L. Y. (2008). Managing Construction Waste on-site
through System Dynamics Modelling : The Case of Hong Kong. Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, 15(2), pp. 103–113.
Hassan, S. H., Ahzahar, N., Fauzi, M. A., & Eman, J. (2012). Waste Management
Issues in the Northern Region of Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 42, pp. 175–181.
Harland, C. M., Lamming, R. C., Walker, H., Philips, W. E., Caldwell, N. D.,
Johnson, T. E., (2006). Supply Management: Is it a Discipline? International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, 26(7), pp. 730–753.
Henseler, J. (2009). On the Convergence of the Partial Least Squares Path Modeling
Algorithm. Computational Statistics, 25(1), pp. 107–120.
Hulland. (1999). Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management
Research: A Review of Four Recent Studies. Strategic Management Journal,
20(2), pp. 195-204.
Hwang, B., & Yeo, Z. B. (2011). Perception on Benefits of Construction Waste
Management in the Singapore Construction Industry. Engineering
Construction and Architectural Management Journal, 18(4), pp. 394–406.
Idris, N. I. (2012). Construction Waste Management in Malaysia Landfills: A Case
Study at Dengkil and Kuang Inert Waste Landfill. Universiti Tun Hussein
Onn Malaysia: Master Thesis.
Ilhaq, M. (2010). An Investigation with the Concepts of Construction Site Waste
Minimisation. University of East London: Master Thesis.
Islam, R., & Ismail, Y. (2010). Malaysia on Course to Become A Developed Country:
Prioritizing Issues With The Analytic Hierarchy Process. International
Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 2(2), pp.1–4.
Islam, M.D.M. and Faniran, O.O. (2005), Structural Equation Model of Project
Planning Effectiveness. Journal of Construction Management and Economics,
23 (2), pp. 215–223.
Ismail, I. B. (2014). Assessing The Risk of Factors on Time and Cost Overrun
Throughout Lifecycle of Construction Project. Universiti Tun Hussein Onn
Malaysia: Master’s Thesis.
100
Jaillon, L., Poon, C. S., & Chiang, Y. H. (2009). Quantifying the Waste Reduction
Potential of using Prefabrication in Building Construction in Hong Kong.
Waste Management, 29(1), pp. 309–320.
Jayawardane, A.K.W. and Gunawardena, N.D. (1998). Construction Workers in
Developing Countries: A Case Study of Sri Lanka. Journal of Construction
Management and Economics, 16, pp. 521-530.
Jin, X.H., Doloi, H., Gao, S.Y. (2007), Relationship-Based Determinants of Building
Project Performance in China. Journal of Construction Management and
Economics, 25, pp. 297–304.
Jingkuang, L., & Yousong, W. (2011). Establishment and Application of
Performance Assessment Model of Waste Management in Architectural
Engineering Projects in China. Systems Engineering Procedia, 1, pp. 147–155.
John, V. M., Angulo, S. C., Miranda, L. F., Agopyan, V., & Vasconcellos, F. (2004).
Strategies for Innovation in Construction and Demolition Waste Management
in Brazil. Proceedings of the CIB World Building Congress, National
Research Council of Canada, Toronto.
Johnson, D.L., Ambrose S.H., Bassett T.J., Bowen M.L., Crummey D.E., Isaacson
J.S., Johnson D.N., Lamb P., Saul M., and Winter, N. A.E. (1997). Meanings
of Environmental Terms. Journal of Environmental Quality, 26, pp. 581-589.
Kasim, R., Alexander, K, & Hudson, J. (2006). A Choice of Research Strategy for
Community-based Action Skills Requirements in the Process of Delivering
Housing Market Renewal. Proceedings of the 6th
International Postgraduates
Research Conference in Built and Human Environment, Delft University,
Netherland.
Katz, A., & Baum, H. (2011). A Novel Methodology to Estimate the Evolution of
Construction Waste in Construction Sites. Waste Management, 31(2), pp.
353–358. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.01.008.
Khairulzan, Y. and Halim A. B. (2006). Eco-costing of Construction Waste. Journal
of Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 17(1),
pp. 6-19.
Khan, R. A., Liew, M. S., & Ghazali, Z. Bin. (2014). Malaysian Construction Sector
and Malaysia Vision 2020: Developed Nation Status. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 109, pp. 507–513.
101
Kitchenham, B., and Pfleeger, S. L. (2002). Principles of Survey Research: Part 5
Populations and Samples. Software Engineering Notes, 27(5), pp. 17-20.
Kofoworola, O. F., & Gheewala, S. H. (2009). Estimation of Construction Waste
Generation and Management in Thailand. Waste Management, 29(2), pp.
731–738. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2008.07.004.
Koskela, L. (1992). Application of the New Production Philosophy to Construction.
Stanford: Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, Stanford University.
Lam, P. T. I., Chan, E. H. W., Poon, C. S., Chau, C. K., & Chun, K. P. (2010).
Factors Affecting the Implementation of Green Specifications in Construction.
Journal of Environmental Management, 91(3), pp. 654–61.
Lau, H. H., Whyte, A., & Law, P. (2008). Composition and Characteristics of
Construction Waste Generated by Residential Housing Project. International
Journal of Environmental Research, 2(3), pp. 261–268.
Leung M.Y., Ng S.T., Skitmore M., Cheung S.O. (2005), Critical Stressors
Influencing Construction Estimators in Hong Kong, Construction
Management and Economics, 23 (1), pp. 33–43.
Li, X. and Wang, R. (2007). Survey Research on Relationship among Service Failure:
Service Recovery and Customer Satisfaction. Proceedings of the
International conference on Management Science and Engineering, Harbin,
China. pp. 1121-1123.
Liu, W., & Huang, W. (2013). Research on Construction Waste Resourcelization
Legislation. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Measuring
Technology and Mechatronics Automation. Hong Kong. pp. 893–897.
Llatas, C. (2011). A Model for Quantifying Construction Waste in Projects
According to the European Waste List. Waste Management, 31(6), pp. 1261–
1276. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.01.023.
Lu, W., & Yuan, H. (2011). A Framework for Understanding Waste Management
Studies in Construction. Waste Management 31(6), pp. 1252–1260.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.01.018.
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.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2010.12.004.
102
Lohmoller, J.B., (1989), Latent Variable Path Modeling with Partial Least Squares,
Heidelberg: Physica. In Aibinu, A., & Al-lawati, A. (2010). Using PLS-SEM
Technique to Model Construction Organizations Willingness to Participate in
E-bidding. Automation in Construction, 19(6), pp. 714–724.
Love, P.E.D. (1996). Toward Concurrency and Integration in the Construction
Industry. Proceeding of the 3rd ISPE International Conference on Current
Engineering. Canada.
Mahayuddin, S. A. (2011). Penjanaan, Komposisi dan Pengurusan Sisa Binaan:
Kajian Kes Ipoh, Perak. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia: Ph.D. Thesis.
McGrath, C. & Anderson, M. (2000). Waste Minimisation on a construction site:
Digest 447, Building research Establishment, London.
Memon, A. H. (2013). Structural Modelling of Factors Causing Cost Overrun in
Construction Industry. Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia: Ph.D Thesis.
Memon, A. H., & Rahman, I. A. (2014). SEM-PLS Analysis of Inhibiting Factors of
Cost Performance for Large Construction Projects in Malaysia: Perspective of
Clients and Consultants. The Scientific World Journal, 2014, pp. 1–9.
Memon, A. H., Rahman, I., Razaki, M., Asmi, A., & Aziz, A. (2011). Time Overrun
in Construction Projects from the Perspective of Project Management
Consultant. Journal of Surveying, Construction & Property, 2(1), pp. 54–66.
Merton, R.K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. New York, Free Press.
Mokhtar, S. N., & Mahmood, N. Z. (2008). Approach in Construction Industry : A
study on Prefabrication Method as a Tool for Waste Minimization.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Environmental Research and
Technology. Penang. pp. 184–187.
Molenaar, Washington, & Diekmann. (2000). Structural Equation Model of
Construction Contract Dispute Potential. Journal of Construction
Engineering and Management, 126(4), pp. 268–277.
Muhwezi, L., Chamuriho, L. M., & Lema, N. M. (2012). An investigation into
Materials Wastes on Building Construction Projects in Kampala-Uganda.
Scholarly Journal of Engineering Research, 1(1), pp. 11–18.
Murali, R. S. (2011). An Irresponsible Act: Tropical Mangrove Swamp has Become
a Construction Dumpsite. The Star. p. 3.
103
Nasaruddin, F. H., & Ravana, S. D. (2008). E-Construction Waste Exchange in
Malaysia: A Preliminary Study. Proceedings of the International Symposium
on Information Technology. pp. 1–7.
Nagapan, S., Rahman, I. A., Asmi, A., & Adnan, N. F. (2013). Study of Site's
Construction Waste in Batu Pahat, Johor. Procedia Engineering, 53, pp. 99-
103.
Nagapan, S., Rahman, I. A., Asmi, A. (2012). Factors Contributing to Physical and
Non-Physical Waste Generation in Construction Industry. International
Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences, 1(1), pp. 1-10.
Nazech, E. ., Zaldi, D., & Trigunarsyah, B. (2008). Identification of Construction
Waste in Road and Highway Construction Projects. Proceedings of the
Eleventh East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering &
Construction. Taipei. pp. 19–21. Retrieved from
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/17765/.
Ndihokubwayo, R., and Haupt, T. (2009). Variation Orders on Construction Projects:
Value Adding or Waste. International Journal of Construction Project
Management, 1(2), pp. 1- 17.
Noor, R. N. H. R. M., Ridzuan, A. R. M., Endut, I. R., Noordin, B., Shehu, Z., &
Ghani, A. H. A. (2013). The Quantification of Local Construction Waste for
the Current Construction Waste Management Practices: A Case Study in
Klang Valley. Proceedings of the Business Engineering and Industrial
Applications Colloquium. pp. 183–188.
Noor, M. M. (2013). Kajian Pengukuran Sisa Binaan di Tapak Bina Sekitar Batu
Pahat, Johor. Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia: Master’s Thesis.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. 2nd
ed. In Aibinu, A., & Al-lawati, A.
(2010). Using PLS-SEM Technique to Model Construction Organizations
Willingness to Participate in E-bidding. Automation in Construction, 19(6),
pp. 714–724.
Ofori, G. (2000). Challenges of Construction Industries in Developing Countries :
Lessons from Various Countries. Proceedings of the 2nd International
Conference on Construction in Developing Countries: Challenges Facing the
Construction Industry in Developing Countries. pp. 15–17.
104
Osmani, M., Glass J., and Price, A.D.F. (2008). Architects’ Perspectives on
Construction Waste Reduction by Design. Waste Management, (28), pp.
1147–1158.
Ortiz, O., Pasqualino, J.C. and Castells, F. (2010). Environmental Performance of
Construction Waste: Comparing Three Scenarios from a Case Study in
Catalonia, Spain. Waste Management, 30, pp. 646–654.
Papargyropoulou, E., Preece, C., Padfield, R., & Abdullah, A. A. (2011). Sustainable
Construction Waste Management in Malaysia: A Contractor’s Perspective.
Proceedings of the Management and Innovation for a Sustainable Built
Environment. Netherlands.
Polat, G., & Ballard, G. (2004). Waste in Turkish Construction: Need for Lean
Construction Techniques. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction. pp. 1–14.
Poon, C. S., Yu, A. T. W., & Jaillon, L. (2004a). Reducing Building Waste at
Construction Sites in Hong Kong. Construction Management and Economics,
22(5), pp. 461–470.
Poon C. S., Yu A. T. W., Wong S. W., and Cheung E. (2004b). Management of
Construction Waste in Public Housing Projects in Hong Kong. Journal of
Construction Management and Economics, 22(7), pp. 675-689.
Rahman, I. A., Memon, A. H., Abdullah, N. H., & Azis, A. A. A. (2013).
Application of PLS-SEM to Assess the Influence of Construction Resources
on Cost Overrun. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 284, pp. 3649–3656.
Rahmat, N. R., & Ibrahim, A. H. (2007). Illegal Dumping Site: Case Study in The
District Of Johor Bahru Tengah, Johor. Proceedings of the 1st International
Conference on Sustainable Materials. Park Royal Hotel, Penang. pp. 89–91.
Ramayah, T., Lee, J. W. C., & In, J. B. C. (2011). Network Collaboration and
Performance in the Tourism Sector. Service Business, 5(4), pp. 411–428.
Reinartz, W.J., Haenlein, M. and Henseler, J. (2009). An Empirical Comparison of
the Efficacy of Covariance-Based and Variance-Based SEM. International
Journal of Market Research, 26 (4), pp. 332–344.
Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D. W. (2012). A Critical Look at the Use of
PLS-SEM in MIS Quarterly. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), pp. 1–8.
105
Ringle, Wende, & Will. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta. Hamburg. Retrieved from
http://www.smartpls.de/.
Sambasivan, M., & Soon, Y. W. (2007). Causes and Effects of Delays in Malaysian
Construction Industry. International Journal of project management, 25(5),
pp. 517-526.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2010). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building
Approach. London: Wiley.
Senaratne, S., & Wijesiri, D. (2008). Lean Construction as a Strategic Option :
Testing its Suitability and Acceptability in Sri Lanka. Lean Construction
Journal, 4(1), pp. 34–48.
Seror, N., Hareli, S., & Portnov, B. (2014). Evaluating the Effect of Vehicle
Impoundment Policy on Illegal Construction and Demolition Waste Dumping:
Israel as a Case Study. Waste Management, 34(8), pp. 1436–45.
Serpell, A., & Alarcon, L. (1998). Construction Process Improvement Methodology
for Construction Projects. International Journal of Project Management,
16(4), pp. 215–221.
Serpell, A., Venturi, A., & Contreras, J. (1995). Characterization of Waste in
Building Construction Projects. Third workshop on lean construction.
Albuquerque. pp. 67–78.
Seow, T. W and Mohamad, A. H (2007). Pengurusan Sisa Pembinaan di Tapak Bina.
Proceedings of the Universiti Perguruan Sultan Idris, Tanjong Malim, Perak.
Seuring, S., & Muller, M. (2008). From a Literature Review to a Conceptual
Framework for Sustainable Supply Chain Management. Journal of Cleaner
Production journal,16, pp. 1699–1710.
Sharifah, & Zainal. (2014). Longgokan Sisa Bahan Binaan Makin Membukit. Sinar
Harian. p. 20.
Silva, N. De, & Vithana, S. B. K. H. (2008). Use of PC Elements for Waste
Minimization in the Sri Lankan Construction Industry. Structural Survey,
26(3), pp. 188–198.
Sim, L.G. (2005). Mapping Approach for Examining Waste Management within
Construction Sites. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Master’s Thesis.
106
Srivastava, S.K. (2007). Green Supply-Chain Management: A State-of the-Art
Literature Review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), pp.
53-80.
Suangsuwan, J., Wiratchai, N., & Wongwanich, S. A. (2005). Development of
Indicators, and the Cause and Effect Model of Collaboration of Primary
School Teacher in Ayutthaya province, Thailand. Proceeding of the
Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference,
Thailand.
Taha, M. P. M. (2012). Waste Minimization : Be Part of The Solution. Proceeding of
the National Conference on Hydrology and Environment. Johor.
Tam, V. W. Y., Shen, L. Y., Fung, I. W. H., & Wang, J. Y. (2007). Controlling
Construction Waste by Implementing Governmental Ordinances in Hong
Kong. Construction Innovation, 7(2), pp. 149–166.
Tan, C. N. L., & Ramayah, T. (2014). The Role of Motivators in Improving
Knowledge-Sharing Among Academics. Information Research, 19(1), pp. 1-
19.
Ullman, J. B. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling. In B. G. Tabachnick & L. S.
Fidell (Eds.), Using Multivariate Statistics. 4th
ed. Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural Equation Modeling in Information
Systems Research Using Partial Least Squares. Journal of Information
Technology Theory and Application, 11(2), pp. 5–40.
Urio A, & Brent A. (2006). Solid Waste Management Strategy in Botswana: The
Reduction of Construction Waste. Journal of the South African Institution of
Civil Engineering, 48(2), pp. 18–22.
Viljoen, C. (2010). Quality Factors Contributing to the Generation of Construction
Waste. Cape Peninsula University of Technology: Ph.D Thesis.
Wahab, A. B., & Lawal, A. F. (2011). An Evaluation of Waste Control Measures in
Construction Industry in Nigeria. African Journal of Environmental Science
and Technology, 5(3), pp. 246–254.
Wan, S. K. M., Kumaraswamy, M. M., & Liu, D. T. C. (2009). Contributors to
Construction Debris from Electrical and Mechanical Work in Hong Kong
107
Infrastructure Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management, 135(7), pp. 637-646.
Wang, J. Y., Kang, X. P., and Tam, V.W.Y. (2008). An Investigation of Construction
Wastes: An Empirical Study in Shenzhen. Journal of Engineering, Design
and Technology, 6(3), pp. 227-236.
Wang, R., and Li, S. (2011), Talking about the Production and Disposing of
Construction Waste from the View of Sustainable Development. Proceeding
of the Power and Energy Engineering Conference Asia-Pacific, pp. 1-4.
Wei, T. K. (2012). MBPL to Clear Debris before Chinese New Year. The Star. p. 4.
Winkler, G. (2010). Recycling Construction & Demolition Waste. United States:
McGraw-Hill.
Wold, H., (1982), Soft Modeling: The Basic Design and Some Extensions, in
Systems under Indirect Observations. In Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub,
D. W. (2012). A Critical Look at the Use of PLS-SEM in MIS Quarterly. MIS
Quarterly, 36(1), pp 1–8.
Wong, P.S.P., Cheung, S.O. (2005), Structural Equation Model of Trust and
Partnering Success. Journal of Management in Engineering, 21 (2), pp. 70–
80.
Wu, Z., Yu, A. T. W., Shen, L., & Liu, G. (2014). Quantifying Construction and
Demolition Waste: An Analytical Review. Waste Management.
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.05.01.
Yahaya, N. Bin, & Larsen, I. (2008). Federalising Solid Waste Management in
Peninsular Malaysia. Proceedings of the International Solid Waste
Association (ISWA) World Congress. Singapore. pp. 1–13.
Yong, Y. C., & Mustaffa, N. E. (2011). Clients, Consultants and Contractors’
Perception of Critical Success Factors for Construction Projects in Malaysia.
Proceedings of the 27th Annual Association of Researchers in Construction
Management Conference, England.
Yang, J. B., & Peng, S. C. (2008). Development of a Customer Satisfaction
Evaluation Model for Construction Project Management. Building and
Environment, 43(4), pp. 458-468.
Yuan, H. (2012). A Model for Evaluating the Social Performance of Construction
Waste Management. Waste Management, 32(6), pp. 1218–1228.
108
Yuan, H., & Shen, L. (2011). Trend of the Research on Construction and Demolition
Waste Management. Waste Management, 31(4), pp. 670–679.
Yupeng, H., (2011), Minimization Management of Construction Waste. Proceedings
of the International Symposium of Water Resource and Environmental
Protection China. pp. 2769-2772.
Zainun, N. Y., Roslan, N., & Memon, A. H. (2014). Assessing Low-Cost Housing
Demand in Melaka: PLS-SEM Approach. Advanced Materials Research, 838,
pp. 3156–3162.
Zhao, Y., & Chua, D. K. H. (2003). Relationship between Productivity and Non
Value-Adding Activities. Proceeding of the 11th Annual Conference of the
International Group for Lean Construction. Blacksburg.
