TY - JOUR
T1 - Extended producer responsibility in the Australian construction industry
AU - Shooshtarian, Salman
AU - Maqsood, Tayyab
AU - Wong, Peter S.P.
AU - Khalfan, Malik
AU - Yang, Rebecca J.
N1 - Funding Information:
This review study forms part of a larger project (project 1.75. creation and stimulation of end markets for construction and demolition waste), which was supported by the Australia Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre. This project endeavours to foster a holistic national approach to address C&D waste issues through various waste management techniques that will result in market development for C&D waste resources.
Funding Information:
Funding: This research was funded by the Australia Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre, grant number P.1.75.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Li-censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2021/1/2
Y1 - 2021/1/2
N2 - With the COVID-19 outbreak across the world, policymakers and authorities have realised that they cannot solve the emerging issues using conventional policies and practices. COVID-19 has severely affected many industries, including construction and demolition (C&D) waste management and C&D waste resource recovery sector. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and schemes alike are policy instruments that prevent waste generation and promote a circular economy in the construction industry. These schemes are long adopted in various countries for different waste streams. EPR policy development and implementation, particularly for C&D waste, is still at an early stage in Australia. This study aims to review the Australian regulatory environment and practice to identify barriers and enablers towards successful policy development and implementation of C&D waste-related EPR. This study is based on secondary data that are publicly available. The document analysis was conducted to identify the level of regulatory and other stakeholders support in Australia. Following three rounds of examination of sources and applying multiple selection criteria, 59 different sources were reviewed in total. The results showed that there is widespread support among different stakeholders to develop EPR and expand the existing regulation to other materials. The barriers were cost and time implications for EPR policy establishment and enforcement, diversity of stakeholders involved, construction product lifecycle, responsibility of manufacturers, complexity in implantation of EPR regulations, modification inbuilt facilities and health and safety issues. Recommendations are made to alleviate these challenges. The outcome of this study could serve as a guideline for designing effective EPR policies.
AB - With the COVID-19 outbreak across the world, policymakers and authorities have realised that they cannot solve the emerging issues using conventional policies and practices. COVID-19 has severely affected many industries, including construction and demolition (C&D) waste management and C&D waste resource recovery sector. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and schemes alike are policy instruments that prevent waste generation and promote a circular economy in the construction industry. These schemes are long adopted in various countries for different waste streams. EPR policy development and implementation, particularly for C&D waste, is still at an early stage in Australia. This study aims to review the Australian regulatory environment and practice to identify barriers and enablers towards successful policy development and implementation of C&D waste-related EPR. This study is based on secondary data that are publicly available. The document analysis was conducted to identify the level of regulatory and other stakeholders support in Australia. Following three rounds of examination of sources and applying multiple selection criteria, 59 different sources were reviewed in total. The results showed that there is widespread support among different stakeholders to develop EPR and expand the existing regulation to other materials. The barriers were cost and time implications for EPR policy establishment and enforcement, diversity of stakeholders involved, construction product lifecycle, responsibility of manufacturers, complexity in implantation of EPR regulations, modification inbuilt facilities and health and safety issues. Recommendations are made to alleviate these challenges. The outcome of this study could serve as a guideline for designing effective EPR policies.
KW - Australia
KW - Circular economy in built environment
KW - Construction and demolition waste management
KW - Construction industry
KW - Environmental policy and management
KW - Extended producer responsibility
KW - Product stewardship
KW - Take-back scheme
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85099409396&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/su13020620
DO - 10.3390/su13020620
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85099409396
SN - 2071-1050
VL - 13
SP - 1
EP - 20
JO - Sustainability (Switzerland)
JF - Sustainability (Switzerland)
IS - 2
M1 - 620
ER -