An Environmental Assessment Model of Construction and Demolition Waste Based On System Dynamics: A Case Study in Guangzhou

Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2020) 27:37237–37259
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07107-5
ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND BIOGEOCHEMISTRY OF ECOSYSTEMS
An environmental assessment model of construction and demolition

waste based on system dynamics: a case study in Guangzhou
Jingkuang Liu 1 & Yedan Liu 1 & Xuetong Wang 1
Received: 16 July 2019 / Accepted: 18 November 2019 / Published online: 31 December 2019
# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract
At present, China is in the rapid development stage of urbanization, and construction activities are becoming more frequent. This
is accompanied by a large amount of construction and demolition waste (C&DW), which raises many problems with its
governance, such as occupying valuable land resources, causing air pollution, and consuming raw materials. In this study, taking
Guangzhou as an example, the system dynamics principle was used to establish an environmental assessment model of C&DW,
and Vensim software was used to simulate and analyze the environmental, economic, and social impacts of various disposal
methods of C&DW. The results showed that (1) among all waste disposal methods, landfill disposal had the highest greenhouse
gas emissions. It was estimated that the greenhouse gas emissions from landfill disposal will account for 75% of the total
emissions in 2030, while the greenhouse gas emissions from recycling disposal will only account for 0.5%. (2) The simulation
results showed that, according to the current data, the land area occupied by waste landfills and illegal dumping in 2030 will be
about 4.88 million m2, and the economic loss caused by land loss and global warming will account for 9.1% of Guangzhou’s
GDP in 2030, which is equivalent to the national economy of a regional city with a less developed economy. (3) Enhanced
supervision could significantly reduce the amount of illegal dumping, but its effect on landfill disposal and recycling would be
very limited. According to the results of the simulation analysis, some suggestions were put forward to improve the environ-
mental, economic, and social impact of C&DW disposal in Guangzhou.
Keywords Construction and demolition waste . Environmental assessment . System dynamics . Greenhouse gas emissions
Introduction demolition, and construction projects and infrastructure pro-

jects. According to statistics, the newly completed areas in
With the continuous advancement of China’s urbanization pro- China cover 2 billion m2/year, which is close to half of the
cess and the rapid growth in the national economy, China’s global construction area, and will continue to grow. It is esti-
comprehensive national strength has significantly increased, mated that the newly added construction area will cover about
and people’s standard of living has generally reached a com- 30 billion m2 by 2020 (Yang and Ma 2009; Liu et al. 2019).
fortable level. However, environmental problems generally ac- Guangzhou, which is an economically developed city, has an
company economic growth. As the main pillar of the national annual construction area, newly completed area, and waste out-
economy, the construction industry has been developing rapid- put as shown in Fig. 1. In recent years, the recycling rate of
ly. A large amount of construction and demolition waste C&DW in Guangzhou has only been 65%, while that in devel-
(C&DW) has been produced owing to the continuous increase oped countries was 90%(Hu et al. 2016). In the Netherlands,
in new buildings, building renovations, reconstruction, repairs, the recycling rate of C&DW was as high as 95% in 2001
(NEAA 2010). The high recovery rate can not only produce
clear environmental benefits but also obtain considerable eco-
Responsible editor: Philippe Garrigues
nomic benefits through resource reuse. In contrast, the utiliza-
tion rate of C&DW in China is relatively low, which also re-
* Xuetong Wang
[email protected]
veals that the level of waste management in China needs to be
improved urgently. If the contractor fails to properly dispose of
1
School of Management, Guangzhou University, C&DW, then a large amount of waste not only occupies valu-
510006 Guangzhou, People’s Republic of China able land resources and destroys the soil structure, but also
37238 Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:37237–37259
Fig. 1 Annual construction area

and annual construction and
demolition waste production
(GBS 2017)
emits a large amount of greenhouse gases, which cause air provide feasible suggestions to relevant government depart-
pollution lead to global warming, and eventually destroy the ments for the recycling of C&DW.
environment in which people live and endanger their health
(Liao et al. 2017a; Liao et al. 2017b; Liao et al. 2018).
Therefore, how to implement effective C&DW management, Literature review
improve the recycling rate of C&DW, and reduce the environ-
mental impact of C&DW disposal have become urgent prob- In recent years, environmental problems caused by C&DW
lems that need to be solved. have become increasingly prominent. The government has
The disposal methods of C&DW can be roughly classified begun to pay attention to the environmental impact of
into four types, namely reuse, recycling, incineration, and C&DW. In addition, the economic benefits of recycling and
landfilling. Landfilling is the main disposal method of utilizing C&DW have attracted the attention of contractors
C&DW in China, and incineration is seldom used. C&DW and developers. Many scholars have begun to focus on the
can cause air pollution and aggravate global warming. reduction management of C&DW. In China, the reduction
Studies have shown that landfills produce about 91 kg of management of C&DW and its environmental impact have
greenhouse gases per ton of waste (Marzouk and Azab also attracted the attention of many scholars. Through
2014). Therefore, it is difficult to meet the policy of urban Vensim software modeling and simulation of actual data in
sustainable development by means of landfill and so on after Shenzhen, Wang et al. (2016) concluded that the environmen-
the generation of C&DW. From the perspective of govern- tal impact cost of landfilling C&DW would increase yearly
ment departments, China’s management of C&DW mainly from 2015 to 2024, and that the environmental impact of fuel
focuses on economic evaluation, and there is relatively little energy consumption and land occupation would account for
emphasis on environmental assessment, especially analysis of 88.67% of the environmental impact of C&DW landfill dis-
the combination of the environment, economy, and society. In posal according to the data at the end of the simulation period
this study, from an environmental point of view combined in 2024. Ding et al. (2016) used system dynamics (SD) and
with an economic and social, by studying the process of the theory of planned behavior to establish a dynamic model
C&DW disposal, this paper analyzes the environmental pol- of C&DW reduction management. The results showed that
lution, economic impact, and social benefits of C&DW re- reduction management could effectively reduce 27.05% of
source disposal, and takes Guangzhou as an example to sim- the waste production, alleviate the pollution damage of waste
ulate the impact of greenhouse gas emissions from C&DW to the environment, and reduce the total cost of waste
disposal on the environment and the economic losses caused management. Liu et al. (2018) used SD to model and
by the method of system dynamics, and to make a strategic simulate the environmental benefits of C&DW recycling
choice according to the comprehensive benefits of the way of through literature analysis, field research, and questionnaires.
resource disposal. The most effective environmental benefits Through scenario analysis of an environmental benefit model, it
of C&DW disposal methods were determined, which could was concluded that reasonable penalties for illegal discharge
Environ Sci Pollut Res (2020) 27:37237–37259 37239
units, unit landfill fees, the distance from C&DW to resource to conduct technical, economic, and environmental assess-
disposal centers, and unit subsidies for resource utilization ments of buildings facing demolition or renovation. The fea-
could improve the environmental benefits. Wang et al. sibility of building renovation was analyzed as a whole. By
(2018a, b) combined life cycle assessment (LCA) with building evaluating the proposed interventions, strategies to reduce the
information modeling to study a high-rise residential building. economic and environmental impacts of various activities
The results showed that the environmental benefits of recycling could be identified. In order to assess the net carbon, energy,
C&DW varied with the materials. In addition, on-site recycling and water footprints of recycling and other waste management
of waste could reduce carbon emissions more effectively than alternatives, and to track the impact of three waste manage-
factory recycling and waste landfilling. Hossain et al. (2017) ment modes (recycling, landfilling, and incineration) on the
used the LCA method to comprehensively evaluate the envi- entire economic supply chain, Kucukvar et al. (2014) devel-
ronmental performance of the C&DW management system in oped a mixed LCA model based on economic input and
Hong Kong based on the actual data and documentary data of output. The results showed that only the recycling of
two construction sites there, and found that the C&DW man- building materials could have a positive impact on the
agement system based on off-site sorting and direct landfilling environmental footprint in terms of carbon, energy, and
had a significant impact on the environment, but through the water footprint, and incineration was a better alternative after
on-site sorting system, considerable net environmental benefits the water and energy footprint categories were recovered.
could be achieved. Wang et al. (2018a, b) used the LCA and Landfilling was considered a slightly better strategy when
willingness to pay methods to investigate the environmental the carbon footprint was the main focus. Colangelo et al.
impact of recycling 1 t of demolition waste in Shenzhen. The (2018) used the LCA method to compare and analyze four
environmental impacts included global warming, ozone deple- different concrete mixtures, namely, C&DW, incinerator ash,
tion, acidification, eutrophication, suspended particulate matter, marble sludge and blast furnace slag. In this study, the use of
solid waste creation, and land consumption. The results showed “green” recycled aggregates in concrete production was pro-
that recycling could provide an environmental benefit of posed to facilitate the assessment of potential adverse effects
1.21 CNY/t environmental benefit, while the environmental from an environmental and energy perspective and to analyze
cost of direct landfilling was 12.04 CNY/t. The impact of en- them using SimaPro(C) software. It was concluded that the
vironmental assessment on C&DW disposal in China is shown recycled aggregate was better than traditional concrete.
in Table 1. Among the recycled aggregates, the blast furnace slag had
The environment for recycling C&DW has also attracted the least impact on the environment. Rodríguez et al. (2007)
the attention of many scholars abroad. Marzouk and Azab introduced the evaluation results of waste management in the
(2014) used STELLA software to create a dynamic model of Madrid Autonomous Region based on collection, statistical
C&DW management. The research showed that recycling and disposal, and analysis; compared the site management with
utilizing C&DW could not only significantly reduce and without the environmental management system; and ana-
greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, and waste landfill lyzed the effectiveness of waste management and the current
space, but also reduce the global warming potential. Marrero environmental management system, in order to understand the
et al. (2017) established a complete waste quantification mod- deficiencies in environmental management systems and
el based on the work breakdown system of the project budget existing waste management systems and identify environmen-
on the basis of previous research. By evaluating five urbani- tal management measures in all primary areas to promote the
zation projects, two industrial projects, and three residential recycling and recycling management of C&DW by construc-
projects, the waste quantity, budget, and ecological footprint tion companies. The impact of environmental assessment on
were determined. The study showed that 98% of waste is C&DW disposal abroad is shown in Table 2.
produced by earthworks and tree felling and that 97% of the From the above analysis, scholars have different perspec-
ecological footprint is caused by fuel consumed by on-site tives on environmental impact analysis of recycling manage-
machinery and building materials. A new scheme for 100% ment of C&DW. In China, some scholars used SD to analyze
soil reuse and crushing of inert waste as concrete aggregate the environmental benefits of landfilling, source reduction,
was proposed. In all the cases analyzed, the ecological foot- and resource-based disposal of C&DW; others used the life
print value was reduced by more than 20%. They also showed cycle method to assess the environmental impact and econom-
that it was feasible to quantify the overall impact of building ic benefits of carbon emissions from C&DW. For the environ-
engineering application recovery and reuse strategies using a mental benefits of recycling management of demolition and
work breakdown system. Finally, from the perspective of con- C&DW, foreign scholars have different research perspectives.
struction projects, the traditional waste management and eco- Some foreign scholars analyzed the environmental benefit and
nomic control model could be completed by using ecological economic impact of C&DW from the perspective of the car-
footprint indicators for environmental analysis. Alba- bon and ecological footprints by establishing an environmen-
Rodríguez et al. (2017) established a comprehensive model tal assessment model of C&DW. Others concluded that the
Table 1 Environmental study on construction and demolition waste (C&DW) disposal in China
Scholars Theory/research method Research direction Conclusions
Wang et al. 2016 Vensim software modeling Environmental impact of The environmental impact cost of C&DW landfilling is
C&DW landfill increasing each year. The environmental impact of
fuel energy consumption and land occupation
accounts for 88.67% of the environmental impact of
C&DW landfill disposal.
Ding et al. 2016 SD and theory of Environmental benefits of Reduction management of waste sources can
planned behavior C&DW reduction management effectively reduce 27.05% of waste production,
alleviate landfill pressure, save land resources,
reduce waste disposal costs of construction
enterprises, produce environmental benefits, and
effectively reduce environmental pollution problems
caused by C&DW.
Liu et al. 2018 SD, literature analysis, Environmental benefits of Establishing reasonable penalties for illegal
field research, and C&DW resources discharging units, unit landfill fees, the distance from
questionnaires C&DW to resource disposal centers, and unit
subsidies for resource utilization have a greater,
positive impact on environmental benefits.
Wang et al. 2018a, b LCA and building Demolition waste carbon The environmental benefits of recycling and utilization
information modeling emissions of C&DW vary depending on the material.
Compared with brick and stone wastes, recycling
and utilization of metal wastes have greater
environmental benefits. Carbon emission reduction
of aluminum is as high as 45%, but only 0.66% of
the total weight. In different life cycle stages, on-site
collection and classification are the largest contrib-
utors to total carbon emissions. Compared with fac-
tory recycling and landfilling, on-site recycling is
more conducive to reducing carbon emissions.
Hossain et al. 2017 LCA Impact of different waste sorting Off-site sorting and direct landfill C&DW management
systems on the C&DW systems have a significant impact on the
management environment environment. The net environmental benefits of
on-site sorting systems are considerable; the envi-
ronmental benefits are mainly determined by the
composition and classification management of
wastes. Metal recycling can reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and replace iron ore to produce new steel.
Wang et al. 2018a, b LCA and willingness Environmental costs and Recycling 1 ton of demolition waste can provide
to pay benefits of C&DW 1.21 CNY of environmental benefits; the current
fees for landfills are not high enough to offset the
environmental costs, the construction and operation
costs and potential fines for landfills.
recycling of building materials and effective environmental an example, the SD method was used to simulate the impact of
management systems have positive effects on improving en- greenhouse gas emissions on the environment and the eco-
vironmental management while avoiding unnecessary economic losses caused by different disposal methods of
nomic losses caused by the waste of resources through LCA, C&DW, and some suggestions for low-carbon C&DW dis-
collection, and statistics. It can be seen from the analysis that posal were introduced.
scholars within China and abroad mainly study the resource
management of C&DW from the perspective of the environ-
ment or economy, but seldom combine the three aspects of Research methods
environment, economy, and society. In this study, from the
point of view of the environment combined with the economy SD is a science that was founded by Professor Jay Forrester of
and society, the environmental pollution and economic impact the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1956 to study the
of C&DW disposal methods were analyzed by studying the dynamic complexity of systems. It is based on feedback con-
process of C&DW disposal. Moreover, taking Guangzhou as trol theory and computer simulation technology and is mainly
Table 2 Environmental study on construction and demolition waste (C&DW) disposal abroad
Scholars Theory/research method Research direction Conclusions
Marzouk and Azab 2014 STELLA software modeling Environmental impact of C&DW Recycling and utilizing demolition waste can not only
significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions, energy
use, and waste landfill space, but also reduce the global
warming potential.
Madelyn et al. 2017 Establishing a quantitative Ecological footprint of waste Fuel consumption of on-site machinery and building ma-
waste model based on an terials cause 97% of the ecological footprint. A new
engineering budget work scheme using 100% soil and crushing inert waste as
decomposition system concrete aggregate was proposed. In all cases, the eco-
logical footprint value was reduced by more than 20%.
From the perspective of construction projects, the tradi-
tional waste management and economic control model
can be completed by using ecological footprint indica-
tors for environmental analysis.
Alba-Rodríguez et al. 2017 Establishing a comprehensive Technological, economic, The technical, economic, and environmental assessment of
assessment model for C&DW and environmental assessment the restoration of buildings facing demolition or new
of C&DW construction was conducted. The feasibility of the
restoration of buildings was analyzed as a whole.
Through the evaluation of the proposed interventions,
strategies for reducing the economic and environmental
impacts of various activities were determined.
Kucukvar et al. 2014 Creating a mixed LCA model Assessment of the environmental Only the recycling of building materials could have a
based on economic input-output impact of alternative C&DW positive impact on the environmental footprint in terms
management methods using of carbon, energy, and water. Incineration is a better
supply chain life cycle analysis alternative after water and energy footprint categories
are recovered, and landfilling is considered a slightly
better strategy when carbon footprint is the main focus.
Colangelo et al. 2018 LCA and SimaPro(C) Environmental assessment Compared with traditional concrete, recycled aggregate has
software of different concrete mixtures better performance, and blast furnace slag has the least
impact on the environment. Production of ordinary
Portland concrete in Campania, Italy, is related to high
carbon dioxide emissions. The use of recycled
aggregates can ensure the reduction in global warming.
The use of recycled aggregates can improve
environmental management issues.
Rodríguez et al. 2007 Collection, statistical Environmental management Comparing the situation of the construction site with or
processing, and analysis system for C&DW without an environmental management system, it is
concluded that the application of the environmental
management system in the construction site will help to
gradually improve the environmental awareness of all
staff members. At the same time, defects in the
environmental management system and improvement
measures are found.
used to study the relationship between the structure, function, management is understood, the commonalities and differences
and dynamic behavior of complex systems (Yuan and Zhang in the development of resource management are comprehen-
2010). C&DW management is a complex system, involving sively analyzed, and the current situation of C&DW reduction
many stakeholders and links. It requires the joint efforts of the management in Guangzhou is understood based on the
government, environmental protection departments, building existing literature and field research. A research system model
materials departments and construction units, as well as other was determined according to the actual situation in
relevant departments. It is reasonable to use SD to solve the Guangzhou. As shown in Fig. 2, the model was constructed
related problems of C&DW management. and simulated according to the program in the figure.
The environmental assessment model of C&DW
An environmental assessment system for C&DW established in this study had three main purposes. (1)
According to Vensim causal cycle diagram, a comprehensive
At present, there are four typical methods of C&DW manage- and systematic description of the logical relationship and in-
ment, namely illegal landfilling, simple landfilling, resource- teraction between factors will help the relevant personnel to
based disposal, and on-site resource utilization, from which better understand the changes in the whole system caused by
the status of domestic and foreign C&DW resource changes within the system. (2) By simulating and analyzing
Fig. 2 Research system

framework
the output of C&DW in Guangzhou through the SD model, assessment system were obtained, and a causality diagram of
the environmental impact of greenhouse gas emissions from the waste environmental assessment system was created, as
various disposal methods of C&DW was analyzed, and low- shown in Fig. 4.
carbon emission reduction measures were taken to improve it.
(3) Based on the model simulation results, the environmental,
economic, and social impacts of C&DW management pro-
cesses were analyzed, and suggestions were introduced to Society
improve the existing problems in the disposal process.
Causal feedback diagram for the environmental

benefit assessment of C&DW
Environment Economy
There are many factors affecting the recycling of C&DW,
including environmental, economic and social aspects, which
are interrelated and mutually influential, as shown in Fig. 3.
The disposal methods of C&DW include illegal dumping, Greenhouse gas Land loss
Government
landfilling, and recycling, which involves the generation of emissions from supervision
C&DW, illegal landfilling, landfill disposal, recycling, and waste recycling
Global warming
recycling costs, among others. Based on this framework, ac- Greenhouse gas
emissions from Illegal dumping
cording to the environmental benefit evaluation indicators (en- of waste Socio-economic
landfilling of waste losses
ergy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and land, so-
cial, and economic losses), the intermediate variables of each
indicator and the factors affecting the intermediate variables Illegal dumping
of waste
were derived. The environmental benefit evaluation model
Greenhouse gas
was established by the environmental benefit evaluation indi- emissions from illegal Landfill disposal
cators, intermediate variables, and the factors affecting the landfilling of waste volume of waste
intermediate variables. Through the analysis of the environ-
mental impact of the disposal methods of C&DW, the inter-
action among the factors in the waste environmental Fig. 3 Environmental, economic, and social factors
Total amount of + The amount of waste

Construction waste sorting recovered in the Unit disposal
area + C&DW + and recycling recycling station cost of recycling
+ production - + station
+
-
GDP of Admission fee
Guangzhou Unit transport Ratio of waste of unit waste
+ Recycling ratio of
Government cost sorting and recycling
- recycling station
supervision
-
+ +
+ + +
Illegal dumping fine Landfilling disposal + Traffic volume of recycled
- volume of waste Proportion of waste in the recycling station Recycling and disposal
+
landfilling of waste + cost of contractor
Illegal dumping
The recycling recycling station
of waste -
amount of waste
+ + sorted from the site
+
+ Landfill and +
+ transport volume Energy consumption +
Cost of illegal + of recycling and
of waste + Total cost of
dumping Illegal dumping and transport
Cost of landfilling sorting and
transport volume recovery
+ of waste
++ Ratio of waste
Energy consumption of + +
+ Land loss sorting and
landfilling and transport recycling on site
- Energy consumption + Net cost of
Proportion of illegal of illegal dumping + on-site sorting
Unit landfill cost
dumping of waste and transport +
Greenhouse gas - +
Greenhouse gas emissions from
emissions from + Socio-economic waste recycling
+ landfilling of waste
losses
Greenhouse gas +
+ +
emissions from illegal Benefits of on-site Unit cost of
+
landfilling of waste Total greenhouse waste sorting on-site sorting
+
gas emissions + Global warming
Fig. 4 Causality diagram for the environmental assessment system of construction and demolition waste
Environmental benefit analysis large amount of C&DW is produced during construction.

The main methods to deal with this waste are illegal
The main routes affecting environmental benefits are as landfilling, landfilling, and recycling. In addition, the trans-
follows: port and disposal of these wastes will consume energy, gener-
ate greenhouse gases, pollute the air, and increase the potential
R1: C&DW production→Illegal dumping of waste→ of global warming. A large amount of greenhouse gas emis-
Illegal dumping and transport volume→Energy con- sions will seriously pollute the environment and lead to global
sumption of illegal dumping and transport→ warming, thereby affecting human survival and economic de-
Greenhouse gas emissions from illegal landfilling of velopment and causing social and economic losses. In order to
waste→Total greenhouse gas emissions→Global reduce environmental pollution and economic losses, relevant
warming→Socio-economic losses→C&DW production. government departments must take measures to minimize the
R2: C&DW production→Landfill disposal volume of production of C&DW.
waste→Landfill and transport volume of waste→
Energy consumption of landfilling and transport→
Greenhouse gas emissions from landfilling of waste→ Economic benefit analysis
Total greenhouse gas emissions→Global warming→
Socio-economic losses→C&DW production. The process of urbanization will inevitably be accompanied by
R3: C&DW production→Total amount of waste sorting the emergence of new buildings, the demolition or renovation
and recycling→The amount of waste recovered in the of old buildings, and a large amount of waste, thereby resulting
recycling station→Traffic volume of recycled waste in in the waste of resources, environmental pollution, and other
the recycling station→Energy consumption of recycling issues that will seriously hinder the sustainable development of
and transport→Greenhouse gas emissions from waste cities and result in economic losses (Xiao et al. 2019). The
recycling→Total greenhouse gas emissions→Global causality route diagrams of economic benefits are as follows:
warming→Socio-economic losses→C&DW production.
(1) R4: C&DW production→Landfill disposal volume of
The three causal feedback routes of R1, R2, and R3 express waste→Land loss→Socio-economic losses→C&DW
the process of greenhouse gas production from C&DW. A production
R5: C&DW production→Illegal dumping of waste→Land the proportion of landfilling decreases, and the greenhouse gas
loss→Socio-economic losses→C&DW production. emissions from landfilling can be reduced, thereby reducing
Increasing the amount of landfill disposal (or illegal dump- the social and economic losses and the production of C&DW.
ing of waste) will occupy a large amount of land resources, At the same time, increasing the unit landfill fee will also
destroy the soil structure, pollute groundwater resources, and promote contractors to adopt methods of sorting and recycling
cause economic losses. In order to avoid occupying more land C&DW. With the increase in sorting and recycling, green-
resources and to reduce economic losses, relevant government house gas emissions from waste will be reduced accordingly,
departments must take measures, such as increasing unit land- thereby reducing the potential of global warming and socio-
fill fees and increasing the supervision of illegal dumping and economic losses and reducing the production of waste.
resource-based disposal to reduce the amount of landfill dis-
posal (or illegal dumping) and reduce the output of C&DW. Social benefit analysis
(2) R6: Total amount of waste sorting and recycling→Fines The environmental impact and economic losses caused by the
for illegal dumping→Cost of illegal dumping→ disposal of C&DW have made the relevant government depart-
Proportion of illegal dumping of waste→Illegal dumping ments aware of the importance of waste recycling, increased the
of waste→Illegal dumping and transport volume→ supervision of the illegal dumping of contractors, publicized the
Energy consumption of illegal dumping and trans- economic benefits of waste recycling, and urged the contractors
port→Greenhouse gas emissions from illegal landfilling to dispose of the waste as required. The causal feedback from
of waste→Total greenhouse gas emissions→Global government regulation is shown in R9:
warming→Socio-economic losses→C&DW produc- R9: C&DW production→Government supervision→
tion→Total amount of waste sorting and recycling. Illegal dumping of waste→Land loss→Socio-economic
losses→C&DW production.
R6 describes the impact of illegal dumping fines on the Feedback route R9 expresses the impact of government
total amount of waste sorting and recycling. The continuous supervision on C&DW production. With the continuous ad-
growth in C&DW has also prompted some construction units vancement of urbanization, C&DW generated by construction
to not treat wastes in accordance with regulations, thereby activities is increasing. If supervision is not strengthened, then
increasing the amount of illegal dumping of waste. random stacking and occupation of construction sites will also
Increasing illegal dumping fines can effectively reduce the affect the surrounding environment. In order to prevent the
amount of illegal dumping of waste and indirectly force con- illegal dumping of C&DW, reduce the occupation of limited
tractors to adopt sorting and recycling, thereby increasing the land resources, and reduce the economic losses caused by
amount of waste sorting and recycling, reducing environmen- illegal landfills, the government has increased the supervision
tal pollution, and reducing social and economic losses. of illegal dumping of C&DW to reduce the amount of illegal
dumping, thereby reducing the production of C&DW.
(3) R7: C&DW production→Unit landfill cost→ Cost of
landfilling of waste→Proportion of landfilling of
waste→Landfill disposal volume of waste→Energy Simulation analysis of the environmental
consumption of landfilling and transport→Greenhouse assessment system model of C&DW: a case
gas emissions from landfilling of waste→Total green- study of Guangzhou
house gas emissions→Global warming→Socio-eco-
nomic losses→C&DW production. On the basis of the relationships among the variables in the cau-
sality diagram of the environmental assessment system, by defin-
R8: C&DW production→Unit landfill cost→ Cost of ing all the main variables affecting the process of C&DW dis-
landfilling of waste→Proportion of landfilling of waste→Ratio posal, a stock flow diagram of the dynamic model of the C&DW
of waste sorting and recycling→Total amount of waste sorting environmental assessment was established, as shown in Fig. 5.
and recycling→The amount of waste recovered in the recycling
station→Traffic volume of recycled waste in the recycling sta- Data sources
tion→Energy consumption of recycling and transport→
Greenhouse gas emissions from waste recycling→Total green- The stock flow diagram of the environmental assessment
house gas emissions→Global warming→Socio-economic model of C&DW was mainly constructed on the basis of the
losses→C&DW production. causality diagram of the environmental assessment system
The feedback routes of R7 and R8 describe the reduction in and the interactions between the internal elements of the sys-
C&DW production by increasing the unit landfill cost. When tem. In order to facilitate the visual quantification of the envi-
the unit landfill fee increases, the cost of landfilling increases, ronmental assessment, in this study, based on the data of the
Construction The amount of waste Unit disposal

GDP of area Waste production
Illegal dumping recovered in the cost of recycling
Guangzhou index Government
Increment of illegal of waste Increment of waste recycling recycling station station
Illegal dumping subsidies
dumping of waste in recycling station
cost
C&DW production Admission fee
<Time> of unit waste
Government Illegal dumping Annual output of Recycling and disposal
fine C&DW Recycling ratio of
supervision Cost of illegal cost of the contractor's
recycling station
dumping and Ratio of waste recycling station
transport of waste sorting and Total waste sorting Cost of waste
Volume of illegal Recycle bin
Proportion of recycling and recovery recycling and
dumping and Increment of waste profit
illegal dumping transport Profit of waste disposal
Increment of illegal transport of waste sorting and recycling
of waste in the recycling station
dumping and
transport of waste Greenhouse gas Proportion of The recycling Energy consumption
emissions from landfilling of waste amount of waste of recycling and Revenue per unit product
Increment of greenhouse gas landfilling of waste Increments of the
recycling amount of waste sorted from the site transport of the recycling station
emissions from waste landfills
sorted from the site
greenhouse gas Unit transport cost Landfill disposal Traffic volume of
Energy consumption waste recycling
emissions per unit volume of waste Benefits of on-site
of illegal dumping Increment of Increment of recycling and transport
metal waste landfill Ratio of waste waste sorting
and transport waste landfilling in the waste recycling station Greenhouse gas
sorting and
Greenhouse gas recycling on site emissions per unit
emissions per unit Environmental impact Greenhouse gas of concrete waste
Cost of landfilling and Total cost of
concrete waste landfill factor of construction emissions from
transport of waste sorting and
material transport Annual sorting and waste recycling Increment of greenhouse gas
Greenhouse gas recovery
emissions from recovery cost emissions from waste recycling Net cost of
illegal landfilling Increment of greenhouse Greenhouse gas Energy consumption of on-site sorting
of waste gas emissions from illegal emissions per unit gravel landfilling and transport Land loss Socio-economic Sales unit price in
landfilling of waste brick waste landfill Increment of losses recycling market
Landfill and land loss Greenhouse gas
Greenhouse gas
Cost of waste transport emissions per unit of
volume Increment of landfill Global emissions per unit
landfilling brick and block waste
Greenhouse gas transport warming of metal waste
Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of Average baseline
Total greenhouse Greenhouse gas Unit cost of
emissions per unit plastic waste landfil Landfill volume land price in Carbon dioxide
gas emissions required to fill emissions per unit on-site sorting
wood waste landfil Increment of total Guangzhou impact weight of mortar waste
Unit landfill cost unit waste
greenhouse gas emissions
Fig. 5 Stock flow diagram of the construction and demolition waste environmental assessment model
Guangzhou Statistical Yearbook 2007–2017 and related refer- inconsistent dimensions in the model. The two consistencies
ences, the environmental impact of C&DW disposal in refer to the consistency of the units on the left and right sides
Guangzhou was analyzed through interviews with the of all the equations in the model. For example, in the equation
Guangzhou Urban Management Committee, Guangzhou “cost of waste landfill = unit landfill cost* landfill disposal
Housing and Urban-Rural Construction Committee, and volume of waste + cost of landfill and transport of waste” the
C&DW comprehensive utilization enterprises. unit at the left side of the equation is 10,000 CNY, while at the
right side of the equation, the unit of the landfill fee is CNY/t,
Equation and parameter setting the disposal of waste is 10,000 t, and the cost of landfilling and
transport of waste is 10,000 CNY. Following the dimensional
The constructed environmental assessment model contained consistency, the equation “10,000 CNY = CNY/t × 10,000 t +
16 state variables, 6 rate variables, 27 constants, 1 shadow 10,000 CNY” meets the principle of dimensional consistency.
variable, and 21 auxiliary variables. Based on the system stock In the environmental assessment model of C&DW disposal
flow diagram and collected data, the rate, state, and calculation constructed in this study, all variables and equations passed
formulas of auxiliary variables involved in the model are the dimensional consistency checking function of Vensim
shown in Appendix Table 4. The parameters involved were software.
set separately, as shown in Appendix Table 5.
2. Validity check
Model checking The validity test of the model was used to check whether
the results of the simulation were consistent with the actual
Model testing is a key link to test the reliability and applica- situation by comparing simulation data with historical data
bility of the constructed model, reasonably reflect objective and calculating relative errors. In this study, the validity of
facts, and ensure that the model can be applied to the devel- the model was verified by comparing the simulation data with
opment of an environmental assessment of C&DW disposal in the actual values of previous statistical yearbooks. Compared
Guangzhou. In combination with existing literature studies, with the construction area from 2013 to 2016, the fitting de-
the model was checked using the following tests: gree between the actual numerical values and the values of the
simulation model is shown in Table 3.
1. Dimensional consistency test Table 3 shows that the differences between the actual con-
struction area and simulation value in 2015 and 2016 were less
Based on the data of the Guangzhou Statistical Yearbook than 5%, while in 2013 and 2014, they were less than 14%.
and related literature, a simulation model was established to fit The main reason for this was that the large-scale renovation of
the current situation of environmental assessments of C&DW villages in the city and old towns of Guangzhou in 2013 and
disposal in Guangzhou. There were no equations with
Table 3 Comparison of actual

construction area and simulation Year 2013 2014 2015 2016
values for 2013–2016
Actual value (10,000 m2) 15,056 16,399 15,160 16,290
Simulation value (10,000 m2) 12,987 14,202 15,601 17,054
Error (%) 13.7% 13.4% 2.9% 4.7%
2014 increased the construction area compared with that in the situation. Current 0 indicates that when the government’s su-
previous 2 years, thereby resulting in a slightly larger error; pervision is equal to 0, the amount of illegal dumping of waste
however, the average error was 8.7%. Therefore, it can be reaches the highest level and is expected to reach 25,437,700 t
regarded as an effective model. The system can effectively by 2030. Current 1 refers to the intensity of government su-
reflect the situation of C&DW disposal in Guangzhou, and pervision of 1, thereby indicating that the regulation of illegal
other variables can also be simulated by this model. dumping of waste is very strict, so the amount of illegal dump-
ing of waste is 0. Current indicates the value of government
3. Extreme conditions test supervision under normal circumstances. The value of illegal
dumping of waste was between Current 0 and Current 1,
The extreme conditions test was used to determine whether which was consistent with the actual situation. According to
the equation in the model was still meaningful under extreme the same method, the extreme condition test for other vari-
conditions in the variable definition domain. Selecting the ables in the model met the test requirements.
amount of illegal dumping of waste as the dependent variable In summary, through the above three tests, the environmen-
and government supervision as the independent variable, the tal assessment model of C&DW constructed in this study can
extreme conditions of the model were tested. Taking the ex- be used to simulate the environmental impact analysis of
treme values of independent variables in the definition domain C&DW disposal process.
[0,1], three simulations were conducted according to the
values of 0.3 and 0.1 respectively, and the change in the illegal
dumping amount of waste was obtained as shown in Fig. 6.
Model simulation results and discussion
Figure 6 clearly shows that, under two extreme conditions,
the reduction in illegal dumping of waste was still meaningful,
After all variables were input into the model, the values of the
and the simulation results were consistent with the actual
main parameters were changed within a reasonable range. The
Fig. 6 Test of extreme conditions Illegal dumping of waste

for illegal dumping of waste
30 M
22.5 M
tons
15 M
7.5 M
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Illegal dumping of waste : Current1
Illegal dumping of waste : Current0
Illegal dumping of waste : Current
model was simulated, and different simulation results were slowly and continuously, while the landfill disposal vol-
recorded and compared. The time of the model was set from ume will increase significantly, which is caused by the
2007 to 2030 with a time step of 1 and units of time of a year. lack of awareness of C&DW reduction and the immatu-
rity of the waste recycling market. As a result, the out-
put of waste is expected to continue to increase signif-
Analysis of waste production in various disposal
icantly, while recycling growth is expected to be slow.
modes
According to the simulation of the model, the amount of ille- Simulation analysis of the environmental assessment
gal dumping, landfill disposal, amount of waste recovered in
the recycling station, and the recycling amount of waste sorted The generation and disposal of waste must be accompanied by
from the site in Guangzhou from 2007 to 2030 were obtained, the impact on the ecological environment. Reasonable dispos-
as shown in Fig. 7. al methods can reduce environmental pollution, while illegal
The simulation results in Fig. 7 show that in 2030, disposal methods aggravate environmental pollution. The im-
the amount of landfill disposal in Guangzhou will reach pact of various disposal methods of C&DW on the ecological
80 million tons, and the illegal dumping of waste, the environment is shown in Fig. 8. Figure 9 shows the green-
amount of waste recovered in the recycling station, and house gas emissions from waste recycling resources, and
the amount of waste sorted for recycling from the site Fig. 10 shows the total greenhouse gas emissions.
will reach nearly 20 million tons. At the same time, Figure 8 depicts the greenhouse gas emissions from
they also show that the main method of disposal of three waste disposal processes, namely, recycling,
C&DW in Guangzhou is landfilling, and the supervision landfilling, and illegal landfilling. As shown in Fig. 8,
of illegal dumping of waste is not strict. The amount of because landfilling is the main waste disposal method in
illegal dumping of waste, the amount of waste recov- Guangzhou, the greenhouse gas emissions from
ered in the recycling station, and the amount of waste landfilling are the highest. Without effective measures,
sorted for recycling from the site are basically the same, it is estimated that the greenhouse gas emissions from
and accounting for only 25% of the landfill disposal. In landfilling will reach 78,541.6 million kg by 2030,
terms of the trend, the growth rate of C&DW produc- followed by illegal landfilling and recycling. Figure 8
tion shows no clear signs of declining. With the in- shows that the greenhouse gas emissions curve of
crease in waste production, the illegal dumping of recycling close to the abscissa and tend to be less than
waste, the amount of waste recovered from the 0. The specific trend is shown in Fig. 9. The green-
recycling station, and the amount of waste sorted for house gas emissions curve of waste recycling in Fig. 9
recycling from the site are also expected to increase shows a downward trend with negative values, which
Fig. 7 Simulation of various Selected Variables

disposal methods
80 M
60 M
tons
40 M
20 M
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Landfill disposal volume of waste : Current
The amount of waste recovered in the recycling station : Current
The recycling amount of waste sorted from the site : Current
Fig. 8 Simulation model of Selected Variables

greenhouse gas emissions from
various disposal methods 80 B
59.85 B
39.7 B
kg
19.55 B
-600 M
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Greenhouse gas emissions from illegal landfilling of waste : Current
Greenhouse gas emissions from landfilling of waste : Current
Greenhouse gas emissions from waste recycling : Current
indicate that with the continuous growth in waste pro- urge contractors to adopt resource-based treatment
duction and the increasingly severe impact on the envi- methods in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
ronment and economy, relevant government departments The downward trend of the curve below 0 indicates that
should be aware of the seriousness of the problem, greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced due to
strengthen waste reduction management, start supporting recycling. The downward trend represents the annual
and promoting green recycled products, encourage reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. It was estimated
recycling, promote low-carbon building materials, con- that greenhouse gas emissions with recycling will reach
duct technological innovation of recycled products, and 568.782 million kg by 2030. Compared with the total
Fig. 9 Simulation of greenhouse Greenhouse gas emissions from waste recycling

gas emissions from waste
recycling 0
-150 M
kg
-300 M
-450 M
-600 M
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Greenhouse gas emissions from waste recycling : Current
Fig. 10 Total greenhouse gas Total greenhouse gas emissions

emissions
200 B
150 B
kg
100 B
50 B
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Total greenhouse gas emissions : Current
greenhouse gas emissions in Fig. 10, which are as high and comprehensively implement a sustainable develop-
as 104,163 million kg in 2030, it only accounts for ment strategy.
0.5% of the total emissions. If no reasonable measures
are taken to prevent these emissions, they will lead to Simulation analysis of economic benefit
global warming. Therefore, the government should vig-
orously support and publicize the recycling of products The cost of waste disposal determines how the contractor
and improve the resource recycling market so that soci- disposes of the waste. For the contractor, the method with
ety can realize the harm of improper disposal of wastes the lowest cost is the best way to dispose of waste. As shown
Fig. 11 Costs of various disposal Selected Variables

methods
2000 T
1500 T
CNY
1000 T
500 T
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Cost of waste landfilling : Current
Illegal dumping cost : Current
Recycling and disposal cost of the contractor's recycling station : Current
Fig. 12 Landfilling and illegal Selected Variables

dumping costs
40 B
30 B
CNY
20 B
10 B
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Cost of waste landfilling : Current
Illegal dumping cost : Current
in Fig. 11 and Fig. 12, the cost of waste recycling is the disposed of in landfills is expected to increase every
highest, followed by the cost of illegal dumping, and finally year, and the amount recycled is expected to be very
the cost of landfilling. Because the cost of landfilling is small. As shown in Fig. 7, the actual situation was
the lowest, many contractors use landfills to dispose of consistent with the simulation results.
C&DW and reduce costs. In addition, solid waste such Therefore, in order to encourage contractors to recy-
as waste earth, waste concrete, bricks, and aggregates cle waste, relevant government departments should sub-
can be used for filling foundation pits and for pavement sidize, relieve, or reduce the relevant taxes and fees for
and land reclamation. Since the cost is basically only enterprises that adopt recycling treatment, reduce their
the transportation cost, it is convenient to handle, and recycling cost, and encourage more enterprises to use
is beneficial to the contractors, the amount of waste recycling treatment to dispose of C&DW.
Fig. 13 The relationships Selected Variables

between landfilling, illegal
dumping, and land loss 80 M tons
5M ΃
60 M tons
3.75 M ΃
40 M tons
2.5 M ΃
20 M tons
1.25 M ΃
0 tons
0 ΃
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Illegal dumping of waste : Current tons
Landfill disposal volume of waste : Current tons
Land loss : Current ΃
Fig. 14 The relationships Selected Variables

between global warming, land
loss, and economic loss 200 B kg
5M ΃
40 B CNY
100 B kg
2.5 M ΃
20 B CNY
0 kg
0 ΃
0 CNY
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Global warming : Current kg
Land loss : Current ΃
"Socio-economic losses" : Current CNY
The problem of land pressure caused by C&DW has large economic loss for Guangzhou, which is an inter-
been the main focus of scholars. As shown in Fig. 13, national metropolis with extremely limited land re-
with the increasing amount of landfill disposal and ille- sources available for development. If large areas of land
gal dumping, especially landfill disposal, the amount of are used to landfill waste, then the situation will likely
land loss is also increasing each year. The simulation worsen and seriously hinder the sustainable development
results showed that in 2030, the amount of waste land- of the economy in Guangzhou.
fill disposal is expected to reach 7631.32 tons and the The simulation results in Fig.14 show that the socio-
amount of illegal dumping is expected to reach 1788.3 economic losses will increase with the increase in land
tons, thereby accounting for about 4.88 million m2 of loss and global warming potential. According to the
land. The occupation of such a large area is clearly a first allocation and work plan of the carbon emission
Fig. 15 The impact of changes in Illegal dumping of waste

government supervision on illegal
dumping 30 M
22.5 M
tons
15 M
7.5 M
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Illegal dumping of waste : Government supervision -20%
Illegal dumping of waste : Government supervision -10%
Illegal dumping of waste : Government supervision+20%
Illegal dumping of waste : Government supervision+10%
Fig. 16 Effect of supervision on Landfill disposal volume of waste

landfill throughput
80 M
60 M
tons
40 M
20 M
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
Landfill disposal volume of waste : Current
Landfill disposal volume of waste : Government supervision -20%
Landfill disposal volume of waste : Government supervision -10%
Landfill disposal volume of waste : Government supervision+20%
Landfill disposal volume of waste : Government supervision+10%
quota in Guangdong Province (for trial implementation) data, the loss caused by land loss and global warming
and the Guangzhou Municipal Bureau of Land Planning, in 2030 will be about 353.8 billion CNY, which is a
the weight of the carbon dioxide impact is 0.06 CNY/ large loss that is equivalent to the gross national prod-
kg. The benchmark land price levels of commercial ser- uct of a regional city with less developed economy.
vice land (first floor land price), office, residential, and Guangzhou is developing and renewing rapidly. Many
industrial land in 11 districts under municipal jurisdic- old urban areas are being renovated. If effective mea-
tion are 10,602 CNY/m2, 4356 CNY/m2, 7938 CNY/m2, sures are not taken to prevent and control land loss and
and 988 CNY/m2, respectively. The average benchmark global warming, then the losses after 10 years will be
land price is 5971 CNY/m2. According to the current much higher than 353.8 billion CNY. Therefore, the
Fig. 17 Effect of supervision The amount of waste recovered in the recycling station
intensity on recycling
30 M
22.5 M
tons
15 M
7.5 M
0
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029
Time (Year)
The amount of waste recovered in the recycling station : Current
The amount of waste recovered in the recycling station : Government supervision -20%
The amount of waste recovered in the recycling station : Government supervision -10%
The amount of waste recovered in the recycling station : Government supervision+20%
The amount of waste recovered in the recycling station : Government supervision+10%
relevant government departments should strengthen their then the implementation of a single strategy can be op-
supervision and punishment for illegal waste disposal and timized, and the function should be maximized.
provide incentives and support to enterprises that recycle
waste so as to encourage more construction units to adopt
source reduction management and recycling. Conclusions
Simulation analysis of social evaluation The output of C&DW will not only cause environmental
pollution but also affect the sustainable development of
Government supervision has an important impact on the amount the environment, economy, and society. Taking
of illegal dumping of waste. If the supervision is strengthened, Guangzhou as an example, the impact of the method of
then the amount of illegal dumping will decrease, and vice versa. C&DW disposal on the environment, economy, and soci-
If the intensity of government supervision is changed, it will ety was evaluated using SD software. Based on the sim-
increase by 10% and 20% and decrease by 10% and 20%, ulation results of the model, several conclusions were
respectively. Observe the influence of the change of government drawn. (1) Compared with other disposal methods, the
supervision on the amount of illegal dumping of waste. The cost of landfilling is relatively low, and solid waste can
simulation results of the model are shown in Fig. 15. be used for filling foundation pits, land reclamation, and
The simulation results in Fig. 15 show that if the land leveling. Therefore, at present, landfilling is the
government strengthens the supervision of illegal dump- main waste disposal method in Guangzhou. (2) Among
ing, then illegal dumping will show a decreasing trend; all waste disposal methods, landfilling has the highest
if the supervision is weakened, then illegal dumping greenhouse gas emissions. It is estimated that the green-
will increase. If the intensity of government supervision house gas emissions from landfilling will account for
increases by 20%, then illegal dumping will be 12.8464 75% of the total emissions in 2030, while the reduction
million tons in 2030, and the severity of the increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to recycling will only
will be the lowest; if the intensity of supervision de- account for 0.5% of the total emissions, which is very
creases by 20%, then the severity of the increase will low. (3) Enhanced supervision can significantly reduce
be the highest with the dumping amount of 22.915 mil- the amount of illegal dumping of waste, but the effect
lion tons. Meanwhile, if the intensity of supervision on landfill disposal and recycling is not clear, and was
remains unchanged, then the illegal dumping amount basically unchanged. (4) The simulation results showed
will be equal to 17.883 million tons, which would be that according to current data, the land area occupied by
between the amount from the other two scenarios. waste landfills and illegal dumping in 2030 will be
Clearly, the intensity of government supervision has a about 4.88 million m2, and the economic losses caused
significant impact on the amount of illegal dumping of by land loss and global warming will account for 9.1%
waste, and the simulation results were consistent with of Guangzhou’s GDP in 2030, which is equivalent to
the actual situation. Although the intensity of supervi- the GDP of a regional city with a less developed econ-
sion can significantly reduce the amount of illegal omy. This will not only aggravate the pressure of land
dumping of waste, it has little impact on the output of shortage and environmental pollution, but also cause
C&DW. Other measures should be taken to control the large economic losses and seriously hinder the sustain-
output of waste, such as reducing the source, increasing able development strategy. In view of the existing waste
the landfill cost, improving the resource recovery mar- management problems in Guangzhou, the following sug-
ket, encouraging the use of recycled products, and in- gestions were introduced.
creasing the promotion of assembly buildings.
Government supervision can effectively reduce the 1. Developing green building materials and building a
illegal dumping of C&DW, but the improvement in green-oriented urban design. The average energy
waste landfilling and recycling is limited, as shown in consumption of building products in China is much
Figs. 16 and 17. The figures show that the change in higher than that in developed countries. There is a
supervision intensity has no significant impact on the large area for improvement in the energy efficiency
amount of landfill disposal and the amount of waste of building materials. When purchasing building ma-
recovered in the recycling station. The trend of graphic terials, priority should be given to recyclable or re-
changes is basically the same. Thus, there are some newable materials to improve the recycling efficien-
limitations in a single policy, which can only affect cy of building materials and reduce energy con-
one aspect and cannot achieve multiple effects. If mul- sumption. Green building materials can not only re-
tiple single policies, such as supervision, fines, subsi- duce the use of natural resources and energy but
dies, and fees, are combined to form a mixed policy, also promote the recycling industry to actively
recycle waste and produce recyclable, radiation-free 4. Publicizing the recycling of waste materials and
building materials with low (or no) pollution. raising citizens’ awareness of environmental protec-
Advocating the development of new green building tion and knowledge of green building. China should
materials not only saves energy and reduces carbon vigorously publicize the recycling of waste re-
dioxide emissions from building materials in pro- sources, promote recycled building materials, and
duction and waste disposal but also improves the enhance the public’s awareness of environmental
structure’s thermal insulation and other functions protection and knowledge of recycled building ma-
and reduces carbon dioxide emissions from build- terials so that citizens can understand the green ben-
ings in the operation process. The low-carbon build- efits of recycled building materials and green build-
ing policy system and the relatively lagging policy ings. Through advertising, the misunderstanding of
support should be improved. The research and de- the waste recycling industry can be eliminated and
velopment of new energy-saving building materials the sense of identity can be improved, which is
should be vigorously supported, and the research conducive to the development of recycled building
and development of green building materials should materials and the recycling industry and to the im-
be financially supported. plementation of a sustainable development strategy.
2. Promoting assembly building, green building, and 5. Adopting a mixed policy to manage construction and de-
recycled products. The government should vigorous- molition waste. Increasing government supervision can
ly promote assembly building, advocate green build- effectively reduce the amount of illegal dumping of waste,
ing, conduct research on low-carbon materials tech- but it has little impact on landfill disposal and recycling.
nology, encourage construction units to use recycled There are some limitations to a single policy, which can
products, and reduce waste production from the only affect one aspect, but cannot achieve multiple effects.
source. In accordance with the requirements of pro- If the integration of multiple single policies, such as su-
moting supply-side structural reform and new urban- pervision, fines, subsidies, and fees, can optimize the im-
ization development in China, vigorously developing plementation of a single strategy, then it should be able to
assembly buildings such as steel structures and con- maximize its functions. That is to say, while increasing
crete has the advantages of developing new energy- supervision, waste landfill fees and illegal dumping fines
saving and environmental protection industries, im- should also be increased, and subsidies for construction
proving the level of building safety, promoting the units and resource recovery companies that use recycled
resolution of excess capacity, and promoting the ad- products should be increased. Combining a single policy
justment and upgrading of industrial structures, into a mixed policy can achieve greater benefits than those
which also meets the requirements of green of a single policy.
buildings.
3. Promoting the development of construction and demoli- In this study, Vensim software was used to simulate
tion waste industries and optimizing market interest- and analyze the environmental assessment system of
driven mechanisms by policies. China has not paid C&DW disposal in Guangzhou and was combined with
enough attention to the recycling of C&DW, mainly be- economic and social evaluation. This provided a refer-
cause there is no mature market and the relevant enter- ence for reasonable disposal of C&DW in Guangzhou
prises do not see the considerable benefits of recycling and can also help other cities to solve the problem of
waste. The sustainable development strategy should be waste impact. However, there were some limitations in
implemented in the C&DW recycling industry, and the this study as only the waste generated in the construc-
government should provide encouragement and support tion process of new projects, was considered, and not
for its development. Green passage should be set up for that of demolition and decoration. At the same time, the
enterprises or construction units that adopt resource simulation of government participation in the system
recycling, economic stimulus policies should be imple- was insufficient. In waste disposal, many aspects require
mented, taxes should be reduced and preferential mea- compulsory government participation, such as increasing
sures for water, and electricity should be provided to stim- charges for construction waste discharge, increasing the
ulate the enthusiasm of producers. LCA and management waste utilization rate, and other policies. However, in
of C&DW should be strengthened. Macro-control of the the model, only monitoring efforts were considered,
recycling market should be conducted to support green and simulation analysis of mixed policies was lacking,
industries and provide power for the development of the which needs to be improved in future research.
recycling industry.
Acknowledgments This work was funded by the Humanities and Social

Sciences Projects of Ministry of Education (No. 18YJA630113), the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71501052), the
“13th Five-Year” Plan of Philosophy and Social Sciences of
Guangdong Province (No. GD19CGL23), the Humanities and Social
Sciences Projects of Guangdong General Universities (No.
2017WTSCX097), and “University Innovation and Strong” Projects of
Education Bureau of Guangdong Province (No. 2016WQNCX120). The
author would like to acknowledge the valuable suggestions of the editor
and three anonymous reviewers.
Appendix 1
Table 4 Variables and equations of the construction and demolition waste (C&DW) environmental assessment model
S/N Variables Equation
1 GDP of Guangzhou WITH LOOKUP(time)Lookup = ([(2007, 0) − (2030, 40,000)]

(2007, 7140),…,(2030, 39,053))
2 Construction area (1.004 × GDP of Guangzhou-2571.99) × 10,000 (Note)
3 Increment of illegal dumping of waste Annual output of C&DW × proportion of illegal dumping of waste
4 Illegal dumping of waste Increment of illegal dumping of waste × (1 − government
supervision)
5 Increment of illegal dumping and transport of Increment of illegal dumping of waste
waste
6 Energy consumption of illegal dumping and Environmental impact factor of construction material
transport transport × increment of illegal dumping and transport of waste
7 Increment of greenhouse gas emissions from (Greenhouse gas emissions per unit plastic waste
illegal landfilling of waste landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit wood waste
landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit concrete waste
landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit gravel brick waste
landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit metal waste
landfill) × increment of illegal dumping of waste + energy
consumption of illegal dumping and transport
8 Annual output of C&DW Construction area × waste production index
9 Cost of illegal dumping and transport of waste Unit transport cost × volume of illegal dumping and transport of
waste
10 Illegal dumping cost Illegal dumping of waste × illegal dumping fine + cost of illegal
dumping and transport of waste
11 Cost of waste landfilling Unit landfill cost × landfill disposal volume of waste + cost of
landfilling and transport of waste
12 Cost of landfilling and transport of waste Unit transport cost × landfill and transport volume
13 Increment of total greenhouse gas emissions Increment of greenhouse gas emissions from illegal landfilling of
waste + increment of greenhouse gas emissions from waste
landfills + increment of greenhouse gas emissions from waste
recycling
14 Increment of waste sorting and recycling Annual output of C&DW × ratio of waste sorting and recycling
15 Ratio of waste sorting and recycling 1 − (proportion of landfill of waste + proportion of illegal dumping
of waste)
16 Increment of greenhouse gas emissions from (Greenhouse gas emissions per unit plastic waste
waste landfills landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit wood waste
landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit concrete waste
landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit gravel brick waste
landfill + greenhouse gas emissions per unit metal waste
landfill) × increment of waste landfill + energy consumption of
landfill and transport
17 Increment of waste landfilling Proportion of landfill of waste × proportion of landfill of waste
Table 4 (continued)
S/N Variables Equation
18 Annual sorting and recovery cost Recycling and disposal cost of contractor recycling station + net
cost of site sorting
19 Increment of landfill transport Increment of waste landfilling
20 Energy consumption of landfilling and Environmental impact factor of construction material
transport transport × increment of landfill transport
21 Increment of waste recycled in recycling Increment of waste sorting and recycling × recycling ratio of
station recycling station
22 Increment of the recycling amount of waste Increment of waste sorting and recycling × ratio of waste sorting
sorted from the site and recycling on site
23 Increment of recycling and transport in waste Increment of waste recycled in recycling station
recycling station
24 Increment of greenhouse gas emissions from (Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of concrete waste + greenhouse
waste recycling gas emissions per unit of mortar waste + greenhouse gas
emissions per unit of brick and block waste + greenhouse gas
emissions per unit of metal waste) × increment of recycled waste
in recycling station + energy consumption of recycling and
transport
25 Land loss Increment of land loss × landfill volume required to fill unit waste
26 Global warming Total greenhouse gas emissions
27 Socio-economic losses Global warming × carbon dioxide impact weight + average baseline
land price in Guangzhou × land loss
28 Recycling and disposal costs of the (Cost of waste recycling and transport + unit disposal cost of
contractor’s recycling station recycling station + admission fee of unit waste) × the amount of
waste recovered in the recycling station
29 Cost of waste recycling and transport Unit transport cost × traffic volume of waste recycling
30 Profit of waste disposal in the recycling (Revenue per unit product of recycling station − unit disposal cost
station of recycling station) × increment of waste recycling in recycling
station
31 Energy consumption of recycling and Environmental impact factor of construction material
transportation transport × increment of recycling and transport of waste
recycling station
32 Revenue per unit product of the recycling Sales unit price in recycling market + government subsidies
station
33 Benefits of on-site waste sorting Sales unit price in recycling market × the recycling amount of waste
sorted from the site
34 Net cost of on-site sorting Benefits of on-site waste sorting- unit cost of on-site sorting × the
recycling amount of waste sorted from the site
Reference Liu et al. (2014); using IBM SPSS Statistics software, the linear regression equation between the construction area (unit: m2 ) and GDP was
obtained
Appendix 2
Table 5 Setting of relevant parameters of the construction and demolition waste environmental assessment model
S/ Name of parameters Assignment Data source

N
1 Fines for illegal dumping 2000 CNY/t time Liu et al. (2014); Liu et al. (2019a)
2 Government supervision 0.3 dmnl (0–1) Interview survey
3 Proportion of illegal dumping of waste 0.15 dmnl Wang et al. (2014); Bao et al. (2019)
4 Ratio of waste sorting and recycling in site 424.49 kg/t Zhang et al. (2010)
5 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of plastic waste landfill 514.54 kg/t Zhang et al. (2010)
6 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of gravel and brick waste landfill 4.2 kg/t Zhang et al. (2010)
7 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of concrete waste landfill 43.99 kg/t Zhang et al. (2010)
8 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of metal waste landfill 37.82 kg/t Zhang et al. (2010)
9 Unit transport cost 4 CNY/t Interview survey
10 Unit landfill fee 30 CNY/t Wang et al. (2016)
11 Recycling ratio of recycling station 0.3 dmnl Wang et al. (2016)
12 Proportion of landfilling of waste 0.45 dmnl Rodríguez et al. (2007)
13 Ratio of waste sorting and recycling on site 0.28 dmnl Yuan and Wang (2014)
14 Unit area of land occupied by landfill 0.6 t/m2 Poon et al. (2001)
15 Unit disposal cost of recycling station 40 CNY/t Interview survey
16 Admission fee of unit waste 3 CNY/t Hu and Zhou (2018)
17 Government subsidies 25 CNY/t Liu et al. (2014)
18 Sales unit price in recycling market 40 CNY/t Chen and Yuan (2017)
19 Unit cost of on-site sorting 20 CNY/t Yuan (2017)
20 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of concrete waste 1.1365 kg/t Wang et al. (2018a, b); Liu et al. (2019b)
21 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of metal waste − 37.3142 kg/t Wang et al. (2018a, b)
22 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of mortar waste 0.297 kg/t Wang et al. (2018a, b); Mak et al. (2019)
23 Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of brick and block waste 27.902 kg/t Wang et al. (2018a, b)
24 Average baseline land price in Guangzhou 5971 CNY/m2 GZLRPC (2017)
25 Carbon dioxide impact weight 0.06 CNY/kg GZCEE (2013)
26 Index of waste production 0.037 t/m2 Wang et al. (2012)
27 Environmental impact factor for transportation of building materials 4.169 kg/t Wang et al. (2014)
References Liu TT, Zhang J, Hu MM (2018) Analysis on environmental benefits of

construction and demolition waste recycling: a case study in
Chongqing. China Environ Sci 38(10):3853–3867
Alba-Rodríguez MD, Martinez-Rocamora A, Gonzulez-Vallejo P,
Liu JK, Xiao YQ, Wang D, Pang Y (2019) Optimization of site selection
Ferreira-Sanchez A, Marrero M (2017) Building rehabilitation ver-
for construction and demolition waste recycling plant using genetic
sus demolition and new construction: economic and environmental
algorithm. Neural Comput & Applic 31(Suppl 1):233–245. https://
assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev 66:115–126. https://doi.
doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3730-8
org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.06.002
Bao ZK, Lu WS, Chi B, Yuan HP, Hao JL (2019) Procurement innovation Liu JK, Teng Y, Jiang YH, Gong EQ (2019a) A cost compensation model
for a circular economy of construction and demolition waste: lessons for construction and demolition waste disposal in South China.
learnt from Suzhou, China. Waste Manag 99:12–21. https://doi.org/ Environmental Science and Pollution Research 26:13773–13784.
10.1016/j.wasman.2019.08.031 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2887-0
Chen JG, Yuan SC (2017) Simulation evaluation of the policy effect of Liu JK, Gong EQ, Wang D, Lai XH, Zhu J (2019b) Attitudes and behav-
sorting and recycling construction waste: an analysis based on dif- iour towards construction waste minimisation:a comparative analy-
ferent subsidy amount. Urban Problems 07:27–34 sis between China and the USA. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:13681–
Colangelo F, Forcina A, Farina I, Petrillo A (2018) Life cycle assessment 13690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2247-0
(LCA) of different kinds of concrete containing waste for sustain- Mak TMW, Chen PC, Wang L, Tsang DCW, Hsu SC, Poon CS (2019) A
able construction. Buildings 70(8):2–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ system dynamics approach to determine construction waste disposal
buildings8050070 charge in Hong Kong. J Clean Prod 241(20):118309. https://doi.org/
Ding ZK, Yi GZ, Huang TY (2016) An environmental impact assessment 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118309
model of construction waste reduction management. J Disaster Prev Madelyn M ,Manuel P, Cristina RC, Antonio FG, Jaime SG(2017)
Mitig Eng 36(1):100–106. https://doi.org/10.13409/j.cnki.jdpme. Assessing the economic impact and ecological footprint of construc-
2016.01.013 tion and demolition waste during the urbanization of rural
Guangzhou Bureau of Statistics (GBS) Statistical Yearbook of land.Resources, Conservation & Recycling117:160-174. https://
Guangzhou City (2017) Beijing: China Statistical Publishing House doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.10.020
Guangzhou Carbon Emission Exchange (GZCEE) (2013) The first allo- Marrero M, Puerto M, Rivero-Camacho C, Freire-Guerrero A, Solís-
cation and work plan of carbon emission quota in Guangdong Guzmán J (2017) Assessing the economic impact and ecological
Province. http://www.cnemission.com/article/zcfg/gdszcwj/ footprint of construction and demolition waste during the urbaniza-
201401/20140100000640.shtml tion of rural land. Resour Conserv Recycl 117:160–174. https://doi.
Guangzhou Land Resources and Planning Commission (GZLRPC) org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.10.020
(2017) Announcement on the achievements of benchmark Land Marzouk M, Azab S (2014) Environmental and economic impact assess-
Price of State-owned Construction Land use right in 2017 in ment of construction and demolition waste disposal using dynamics.
Guangzhou. http://www.gz.gov.cn/gzgov/s5828/201801/ Resour Conserv Recycl 82:41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
b391aea80b79461cb5ead1c936afe147.shtml resconrec.2013.10.015
Hossain MU, Wu ZZ, Poon CS (2017) Comparative environmental eval- Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (NEAA) Construction
uation of construction waste management through different waste and demolition waste: generation and disposal in the Netherlands,
sorting systems in Hong Kong. Waste Manag 69:325–335. https:// 1985–2001. Netherlands Environmental Date Compendium
doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.07.043 [G/OL]. [2010-12-17]. http://www.mnp.nl/mnc/index-en.html
Hu MM, Zhou MC (2018) Research on the economic benefits and coun- Poon CS, Ann TW, Ng LH (2001) On-site sorting of construction and
termeasures of construction waste on-site sorting during the con- demolition waste in Hong Kong. Resour Conserv Recycl 32(2):
struction process: a case of Chongqing. Constr Econ 39(06):108– 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-3449(01)00052-0
113 Rodríguez G, Francisco JAl, Germán M (2007) The contribution of en-
Hu G, Jiang H, Xu ZB (2016) Development and utilization of construc- vironmental management systems to the management of construc-
tion wastes from the perspective of “urban minerals”–a case study of tion and demolition waste: the case of the Autonomous Community
Guangzhou. Urban Problems 1:51–57 of Madrid (Spain). Resour Conserv Recycl 50:334–349. https://doi.
Kucukvar M, Egilmez G, Tatari O (2014) Evaluating environmental im- org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.06.008
pacts of alternative construction waste management approaches Wang JY, Li ZD, Wang FX (2012) Economic cost assessment of con-
using supply chain-linked life-cycle analysis. Waste Manag Res struction waste based on system dynamics. Constr Econ 08:95–98
32(6):500–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X14536457 Wang JY, Li ZD, Tam VWY (2014) Identifying best design strategies for
Liao PC, Shih Y, Wu CL, Zhang XL, Wang Y (2017a) Does corporate construction waste minimization. J Clean Prod 92:237–247. https://
social performance pay back quickly? A longitudinal content anal- doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.076
ysis on international contractors. J Clean Prod 170:1328–1337. Wang T, Wang JY, Wu D (2016) Dynamic assessment on environmental
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.230 impacts of construction waste disposal by landfill in Shenzhen.
Liao PC, Xia NN, Wu CL, Zhang XL, Yeh JL (2017b) Communicating Constr Econ 37(02):100–103
the corporate social responsibility (CSR) of international contrac- Wang JY, Wu HY, Duan HB, Zillante G, Zuo J, Yuan HP (2018a)
tors: content analysis of CSR reporting. J Clean Prod 156:327– Combining life cycle assessment and building information model-
336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.027 ling to account for carbon emission of building demolition waste: a
Liao PC, Liao JQ, Wu GD, Wu CL, Zhang XL, Ma MC (2018) case study. J Clean Prod 172:3154–3166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Comparing international contractors' CSR communication patterns: jclepro.2017.11.087
a semantic analysis. J Clean Prod 203:353–366. https://doi.org/10. Wang T, Wang JY, Wu P, Wang J, He QH, Wang XY (2018b) Estimating
1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.218 the environmental costs and benefits of demolition waste using life
Liu JK, Wang YS, Zhang WJ, Zheng ZT (2014) Cost-benefit analysis of cycle assessment and willingness-to-pay: a case study in Shenzhen.
construction and demolition waste management based on system J Clean Prod 172:14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.
dynamics: a case study of Guangzhou. Syst Eng Theory Pract 168
34(06):1480–1490. https://doi.org/10.12011/1000-6788(2014)6- Xiao YQ, Liu JK, Pang YS (2019) Development of a competency model
1480 for real-estate project managers: case study of China. Int J Constr
Manag 9(04):317–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2018. Yuan YG, Zhang B (2010) Theory and practice of system thinking and
1435237 system dynamics: ideas, methods and tools for scientific decision-
Yang JS, Ma XX (2009) Study on recycling and utilization of construc- making. Environmental Science Press, Beijing, p 303
tion waste. Mod Trade Ind 13:304–305 Zhang ZH, Shang CJ, Qian K (2010) Evaluation of carbon emission in
Yuan HP (2017) Barriers and countermeasures for effective management building life cycle. Constr Econ 02:44–46
of construction and demolition waste: a case of Shenzhen in China. J
Clean Prod 157(7):84–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.04.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
137
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Yuan HP, Wang JY (2014) A system dynamics model for determining the
waste disposal charging fee in construction. Eur J Oper Res 237(3):
988–996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.02.034

An Environmental Assessment Model of Construction and Demolition Waste Based On System Dynamics: A Case Study in Guangzhou

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Environmental Assessment Model of Construction and Demolition Waste Based On System Dynamics: A Case Study in Guangzhou

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Environmental Assessment Model of Construction and Demolition Waste Based On System Dynamics: A Case Study in Guangzhou

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2020) 27:37237–37259

ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND BIOGEOCHEMISTRY OF ECOSYSTEMS

An environmental assessment model of construction and demolition

Introduction demolition, and construction projects and infrastructure pro-

Fig. 1 Annual construction area

Scholars Theory/research method Research direction Conclusions

Scholars Theory/research method Research direction Conclusions

Fig. 2 Research system

Causal feedback diagram for the environmental

Total amount of + The amount of waste

Environmental benefit analysis large amount of C&DW is produced during construction.

Construction The amount of waste Unit disposal

Table 3 Comparison of actual

Fig. 6 Test of extreme conditions Illegal dumping of waste

Fig. 7 Simulation of various Selected Variables

Fig. 8 Simulation model of Selected Variables

Fig. 9 Simulation of greenhouse Greenhouse gas emissions from waste recycling

Fig. 10 Total greenhouse gas Total greenhouse gas emissions

Fig. 11 Costs of various disposal Selected Variables

Fig. 12 Landfilling and illegal Selected Variables

Fig. 13 The relationships Selected Variables

Fig. 14 The relationships Selected Variables

Fig. 15 The impact of changes in Illegal dumping of waste

Fig. 16 Effect of supervision on Landfill disposal volume of waste

Acknowledgments This work was funded by the Humanities and Social

S/N Variables Equation

1 GDP of Guangzhou WITH LOOKUP(time)Lookup = ([(2007, 0) − (2030, 40,000)]

S/N Variables Equation

S/ Name of parameters Assignment Data source

References Liu TT, Zhang J, Hu MM (2018) Analysis on environmental benefits of

You might also like