IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/kitiip/39.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Secondary raw material markets in the C&D sector: Study on user acceptance in southwest Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Volk, Rebekka
  • Kern, Christian Frederik
  • Schultmann, Frank

Abstract

In industrialized countries, regulations demand increasingly higher recycling (RC) rates and many efforts are undertaken to recycle construction and demolition (C&D) waste fractions. The C&D sector has indisputable relevance due to the highest mineral waste fraction, high numbers of employees and turnovers. High-quality RC construction products can be produced to sub-stitute primary resources and reduce land use. This empirical study analyses the acceptance of RC materials in Germany particularly of private awarding authorities in their private construction project(s). In 41 structured interviews, data is collected and evaluated based on hypotheses. Qualitative and quantitative analyses show that acceptance problems cannot be stated. However, medium knowledge and low experience with RC construction materials as well as communication problems are identified. The respondents have no concerns and tend to trust in RC construction materials, but this is decreasing with the increased structural importance of the materials. Surprisingly, quality is the most frequently mentioned decision criteria in private construction projects, followed by cost. Private awarding authorities see no increase of their property value by using RC construction materials. And, the majority is unwilling to pay a premium for RC construction materials. Higher material quality standards, regular government reviews and financial support are seen conducive.

Suggested Citation

  • Volk, Rebekka & Kern, Christian Frederik & Schultmann, Frank, 2020. "Secondary raw material markets in the C&D sector: Study on user acceptance in southwest Germany," Working Paper Series in Production and Energy 39, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Industrial Production (IIP).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:kitiip:39
    DOI: 10.5445/IR/1000105958
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/214690/1/1690865717.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5445/IR/1000105958?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    2. Schweizer-Ries, Petra, 2008. "Energy sustainable communities: Environmental psychological investigations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4126-4135, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bonaiuto, M. & Mosca, O. & Milani, A. & Ariccio, S. & Dessi, F. & Fornara, F., 2024. "Beliefs about technological and contextual features drive biofuels’ social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    2. Čábelková, Inna & Strielkowski, Wadim & Streimikiene, Dalia & Cavallaro, Fausto & Streimikis, Justas, 2021. "The social acceptance of nuclear fusion for decision making towards carbon free circular economy: Evidence from Czech Republic," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    3. Dessi, F. & Ariccio, S. & Albers, T. & Alves, S. & Ludovico, N. & Bonaiuto, M., 2022. "Sustainable technology acceptability: Mapping technological, contextual, and social-psychological determinants of EU stakeholders’ biofuel acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    4. Adil, Ali M. & Ko, Yekang, 2016. "Socio-technical evolution of Decentralized Energy Systems: A critical review and implications for urban planning and policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1025-1037.
    5. Sherry-Brennan, Fionnguala & Devine-Wright, Hannah & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2010. "Public understanding of hydrogen energy: A theoretical approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5311-5319, October.
    6. Yuan, Xueliang & Zuo, Jian & Ma, Chunyuan, 2011. "Social acceptance of solar energy technologies in China--End users' perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1031-1036, March.
    7. Timo Kaphengst & Eike Karola Velten, 2014. "Energy Transition and Behavioural Change in Rural Areas – The Role of Energy Cooperatives. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 60," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47214, March.
    8. Schriever, Marlene & Halstrup, Dominik, 2018. "Exploring the adoption in transitioning markets: Empirical findings and implications on energy storage solutions-acceptance in the German manufacturing industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 460-468.
    9. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    10. Bauwens, Thomas & Devine-Wright, Patrick, 2018. "Positive energies? An empirical study of community energy participation and attitudes to renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 612-625.
    11. Salak, B. & Lindberg, K. & Kienast, F. & Hunziker, M., 2021. "How landscape-technology fit affects public evaluations of renewable energy infrastructure scenarios. A hybrid choice model," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    12. Schumacher, K. & Krones, F. & McKenna, R. & Schultmann, F., 2019. "Public acceptance of renewable energies and energy autonomy: A comparative study in the French, German and Swiss Upper Rhine region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 315-332.
    13. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    14. Li, Na & Hakvoort, Rudi A. & Lukszo, Zofia, 2021. "Cost allocation in integrated community energy systems - A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    15. von Wirth, Timo & Gislason, Linda & Seidl, Roman, 2018. "Distributed energy systems on a neighborhood scale: Reviewing drivers of and barriers to social acceptance," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2618-2628.
    16. Ali Arababadi & Stephan Leyer & Joachim Hansen & Reza Arababadi & Gloria Pignatta, 2021. "Characterizing the Theory of Energy Transition in Luxembourg, Part Two—On Energy Enthusiasts’ Viewpoints," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-18, November.
    17. Dobers, Geesche M., 2019. "Acceptance of biogas plants taking into account space and place," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    18. van der Schoor, Tineke & Scholtens, Bert, 2015. "Power to the people: Local community initiatives and the transition to sustainable energy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 666-675.
    19. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Ziefle, M., 2021. "What drives public acceptance of sustainable CO2-derived building materials? A conjoint-analysis of eco-benefits vs. health concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    20. Friedl, Christina & Reichl, Johannes, 2016. "Realizing energy infrastructure projects – A qualitative empirical analysis of local practices to address social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 184-193.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    recycling construction materials; C&D sector; secondary raw materials; acceptance; private awarding authorities;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:kitiip:39. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.iip.kit.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.