Implementation of Industrial Symbiosis: How can a collaborative network improve waste management?

DEGREE PROJECT

REAL ESTATE AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT

MASTER OF SCIENCE, 30 CREDITS, SECOND LEVEL STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2020

Implementation of Industrial Symbiosis

- How can a collaborative network improve waste management?

Zaid Al-karkhi & Josef Fadhel

Master of Science thesis

Title: Implementation of Industrial Symbiosis – How can a collaborative network improve waste management?

Author(s): Zaid Al-karkhi & Josef Fadhel

Department: Real Estate and Construction Management Master Thesis number

Supervisor: Tina Karrbom Gustavsson

Keywords: sustainability, circular economy, construction waste management, industrial symbiosis, collaborative network

Abstract

Global use of natural resources has accelerated during the past decade and emissions and waste have increased as a consequence. The construction sector is a major contributor to global carbon emissions and is responsible for as much as one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions. The negative impact that industries across the world are having on the environment is getting recognized as a serious problem and the environmental awareness is growing. A

significant amount of this impact could be reduced with increased resource efficiency. Our economic system needs to undergo an unprecedented transformation, to stop environmental degradation but also to assure sustainable access to natural resources in the future. To tackle this issue, institutions are pressuring to move away from our current linear economy with its “take-make-dispose” characteristics and move towards a circular economy that is waste-free by design. The concept of Industrial Symbiosis is seen as a means to do that. In these

industrial networks that resemble biological symbioses, waste or by-products of one company become a resource for another. By engaging traditionally separate industries in a collective approach involving physical exchange of materials, energy and by-products, it is possible to divert waste from landfill and reduce the negative impact on the environment. From a company perspective, Industrial Symbiosis can reduce the need for raw materials as well as waste disposal costs while allowing companies to create new revenue from residue and by products.

The aim of this report was to investigate the perspectives that stakeholders have on a potential participation in an Industrial Symbiosis network and the complex interplay of drivers,

facilitators and barriers to the implementation, as well as how the responsibilities among the stakeholders could be divided in order to implement this concept in the most effective way.

This was done by interviewing key stakeholders within the construction industry to get an overall perspective on their views.

The results indicated a generally positive outlook on the concept of Industrial Symbiosis among the stakeholders. Key drivers and barriers were identified as economic – companies are only willing to invest if it is profitable, regulatory – regulations are an important enabling factor as they create the right incentives for companies to participate, organizational – A transformation of the business model is necessary in order to implement circular economy and technological – Technological developments and innovations will aid the implementation as it can increase efficiency and transparency among the network participants. A tentative model has been generated where the responsibility distribution among the stakeholders have been mapped in order to give a greater understanding of the dynamics of a potential network.

Acknowledgement

This study is a master thesis that was carried out in the spring of 2020 at the Royal Institute of Technology within the department of Real Estate and Construction Management. The thesis comprises 30 higher education credits and is the final stage of master’s degree in the Master of Science program.

The client for this degree project is Skanska and we would like to take the opportunity to extend a big thank to Skanska through our supervisor Ina Djurestål for the support and guidance that made the study possible. We would also like to show gratitude towards our supervisors from KTH Andreas Ekeskär and Tina Karrbom Gustavsson who answered our questions, always took the time to talk us through any of the troubles that would arise during the thesis. All of their contributions have challenged and helped us to define and formulate a clearer question and purpose, which in turn has generated more relevant and reality-based results.

Additionally, we would like to show appreciation to everyone who took their time to meet us, whether it be face-to-face or through Skype during the time of the ongoing pandemic.

Without this contribution and results that were obtained there would not have been any empiricism to present. It is with the information that you contributed with that we were able to put the theoretical framework into practice

Sincerely,

Zaid Al-karkhi & Josef Fadhel Stockholm, 2020-05-20

Examensarbete

Titel: Implementering av Industriell Symbios – Hur kan ett kollaborativt nätverk förbättra avfallshanteringen?

Författare: Zaid Al-karkhi & Josef Fadhel Institution:

Examensarbete Master nivå:

Handledare: Tina Karrbom Gustavsson

Nyckelord: hållbarhet, cirkulär ekonomi, avfallshantering, industriell symbios, kollaborativt nätverk

Sammanfattning

Den globala användningen av naturresurser har ökat under det senaste decenniet och utsläpp och avfall har vuxit som en följd. Byggsektorn är en stor bidragande faktor till globala koldioxidutsläpp och ansvarar för så mycket som en tredjedel av de globala utsläppen av växthusgaser. Den negativa påverkan som industrier över hela världen har på miljön erkänns som ett allvarligt problem samtidigt som miljömedvetenheten växer. En betydande mängd av denna påverkan kan minskas med ökad resurseffektivitet. Vårt ekonomiska system måste genomgå en enastående omvandling, för att stoppa miljöförstöring men också för att

säkerställa hållbar tillgång till naturresurser i framtiden. För att ta itu med denna fråga pressar institutionerna att flytta sig bort från vår nuvarande linjära ekonomi och gå mot en cirkulär ekonomi som är avfallsfri genom design. Begreppet Industriell Symbios ses som ett sätt att göra det. I dessa industriella nätverk som liknar biologiska symboler blir avfall eller

biprodukter från ett företag en resurs för ett annat. Genom att engagera traditionellt separata industrier i en kollektiv strategi som involverar fysiskt utbyte av material, energi och

biprodukter, är det möjligt att avleda avfall från deponering och minska den negativa miljöpåverkan. Ur ett företagsperspektiv kan Industriell Symbios minska behovet av

råmaterial samt avfallskostnader samtidigt som företag kan skapa nya intäkter från rester och av produkter.

Syftet var att undersöka de synpunkter som intressenter har på ett potentiellt deltagande i ett Industriellt Symbios-nätverk och det komplexa samspelet mellan aktörer för genomförandet, samt hur ansvaret mellan aktörerna ska delas upp för att implementera detta koncept på det mest effektiva sättet. Detta gjordes genom att intervjua viktiga aktörer inom byggbranschen för att få ett övergripande perspektiv på deras åsikter.

TRITA-ABE-MBT-20528 Fastigheter och byggande

Resultaten indikerade en generellt positiv syn på konceptet industriell symbios bland

intressenterna. Viktiga drivkrafter och hinder identifierades som ekonomiska - företag är bara villiga att investera om det är lönsamt, regelverk - förordningar är en viktig möjliggörande faktor eftersom de skapar rätt incitament för företag att delta, organisatoriska - En omvandling av affärsmodellen är nödvändig i för att genomföra cirkulär ekonomi och teknik -

Teknologisk utveckling och innovationer hjälper implementeringen eftersom det kan öka effektiviteten och öppenheten bland nätverksdeltagarna. En modell har genererats där ansvarsfördelningen bland intressenterna har kartlagts för att ge en större förståelse för dynamiken i ett potentiellt nätverk.

Förord

Denna studie är ett examensarbete som genomfördes våren 2020 vid Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan inom institutionen för Fastigheter och Byggande. Examensarbetet omfattar 30 högskolepoäng och är den sista etappen av masterexamen i Civilingenjörsprogrammet inom Samhällsbyggnad.

Detta examensarbete utgjordes i samarbete med Skanska och vi vill ta chansen att tacka Skanska ett stort tack genom vår handledare Ina Djurestål för det stöd och vägledning som gjorde studien möjlig. Vi vill också tacka våra handledare från KTH Andreas Ekeskär och Tina Karrbom Gustavsson som svarade på våra frågor, alltid tog sig tid att läsa igenom och gav feedback om de tankar vi hade under studiens gång. Alla deras bidrag har utmanat och hjälpt oss att definiera och formulera en tydligare fråga och syfte, som i sin tur har gett mer relevanta och verklighetsbaserade resultat.

Dessutom vill vi tacka alla som tog sig tid att träffa oss, vare sig det var på kontor eller genom Skype under tiden för den pågående pandemin. Utan detta bidrag och resultat som erhölls hade det funnits något resultat att presentera. Det är med den information som ni bidrog med som vi kunde implementera den teoretiska ramverken i praktiken.

Vänliga hälsningar,

Zaid Al-karkhi & Josef Fadhel Stockholm, 2020-05-20

Innehållsförteckning

1 INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1BACKGROUND ... 1

1.2PROBLEM STATEMENT ... 2

1.3PURPOSE AND QUESTIONS ... 3

1.4LIMITATIONS ... 4

2 LITERATURE REVIEW ... 5

2.1CIRCULAR ECONOMY ... 5

2.2WASTE MANAGEMENT ... 6

2.2.1 Mineral Wool Waste ... 8

2.3INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS ... 8

2.4INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS IN SWEDEN ... 10

3 THEORY ... 12

3.1CIRCULAR ECONOMY ... 12

3.2SUPPLY CHAIN ... 13

3.2.1 Supply Chain Management ... 14

3.3INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS ... 15

3.3.1 Definition ... 15

3.3.2 Theoretical Background ... 16

3.3.3 Mechanisms ... 17

3.3.4 Industrial Symbiosis within Supply Chain ... 19

3.3.5 Types of Industrial Symbiosis ... 21

4 METHOD ... 24

4.1RESEARCH DESIGN ... 24

4.2SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS ... 25

4.2.1 Collection of Data ... 25

4.2.2 Ethics ... 27

4.3RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY ... 27

5 EMPIRICS ... 29

5.1WASTE MANAGEMENT ... 29

5.2INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS ... 31

5.2.1 Driving Forces ... 31

5.2.2 Challenges ... 33

5.2.3 Requirements and Regulations ... 35

5.2.4 Planning in early phase ... 37

5.2.5 Logistics and transport ... 39

6 ANALYSIS ... 41

6.1MAIN MOTIVATIONS FOR ENGAGING IN INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS NETWORKING ... 41

6.1.1 Institutional Pressure ... 41

6.1.2 Networking and increasing knowledge between companies ... 43

6.1.3 Logistics and transport ... 44

6.2BARRIERS TO INDUSTRIAL SYMBIOSIS NETWORKING ... 46

6.2.1 Profit/Short-term vs. long-term ... 46

6.2.2 The role of the coordinator ... 47

6.2.3 Uncertainty/Digital facilitation ... 48

6.3TENTATIVE MODEL ... 49

7 CONCLUSION ... 55

7.1RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY ... 57

REFERENCES ... 59

APPENDIX ... 66

APPENDIX A–INTERVIEWEE RECYCLING COMPANY ... 66

APPENDIX B–INTERVIEWEE MUNICIPALITY ... 67

APPENDIX C-INTERVIEWEE WASTE MANAGEMENT CONTRACTOR ... 68

APPENDIX D–INTERVIEWEE CONTRACTOR ... 69

1 Introduction

This chapter will give you a background and a problem formulation which will sum up in an explanation of the gap that this thesis is trying to fill as well as the limitations of the study

1.1 Background

As a result of the increasing global population and gross domestic production, material and energy consumption are increasing, and this trend is expected to continue (Virtanen et al., 2019). The environmental challenges we face today are more palpable than ever before and the consequential impact is not sustainable. It has been established that economic and

production systems cannot be separated from the environment, with contemporary ecological economic theory emphasizing the increasing impact of human activities on nature (Nasir et al., 2016). The construction sector is a major contributor to global carbon emissions and is responsible for as much as one-third of global greenhouse gas emissions (Nubholz et al.,2019). One of the reasons for this development is due to lack of resource efficiency and can be linked to the production and consumption processes; “produce, use, throw” or “take, make, dispose”. Preston (2012, p.3) describes this model quite vividly:

"In today’s economy, natural resources are mined and extracted, turned into products and finally discarded"

By moving towards a circular economy, it is possible to reduce carbon dioxide emissions without compromising economic development (Neves et al., 2019). The concept of circular economy aims at keeping products, materials and component at their highest utility

throughout the value chain, but at the same time being restorative and regenerative by design (Jones, 2018). It refers to a system that creates as little economic loss as possible, and where the majority of the products and resources used in production processes can be reused and recycled (Johnsen et al.,2015). The concept of circular economy gives the means to develop strategies and ideas that lead to sustainable industrial progress and improve harmony between environment, economy and society (Kirchherr, Reike, & Hekkert, 2017).

As a way of reducing negative environmental impact, regulations regarding construction waste are becoming stricter (Jones, 2018). The concept of circular economy is increasingly seen as a major policy agenda and a testing challenge for the construction industry. The

European Commission (2018) argued that the built environment is an important focus in working towards circular economy and the European Environment Agency (2016a) identified construction and demolition as one of five priority areas in the transition to a circular

economy (Jones, 2018). Furthermore, recently as of December 2019, Stockholm city’s real estate companies have collectively developed common requirements for waste that arise from construction and demolition projects (Stockholms Stad, 2019). The requirements are based on the Swedish Public Procurement Authority’s basic level of waste quantities and real estate sector’s guidelines, as a tool for meeting the requirements of the Environmental Code's general consideration rules, the EU's waste hierarchy and helping to achieve Sweden's environmental goals (ibid).

In terms of improving business performance, companies generally are good at identifying potentials located at the interorganizational interfaces, for instance by building strategic partnerships and creating alliances around core competencies. The concept of industrial ecology aims to explore potentials of further improvements of company’s environmental performance by developing industrial ecosystems that exhibit cyclical resource-use pattern analogues to those observed in mature biological systems (Starlander, 2003).

Industrial Symbiosis, which is a subfield of industrial ecology is increasingly being seen as a means for implementing circular economy and as a strategic tool for economic development, green growth, innovation and resource efficiency (Johnsen et al., 2016). Industrial Symbiosis is often defined as a collective approach in which one company’s waste is used as raw material by another company. By adopting the concept of Industrial Symbiosis and creating collaboration networks between companies’ it is possible to create closed loops of material flows - leading to less waste and more economical gains (Yeo et al. 2019).

1.2 Problem Statement

The challenges of sustainable construction, industrial growth and importance of resource efficiency are clearly recognized by the European commission and are now at the forefront of strategy and sustainability policy (Jones, 2018). The construction industry generates about 35% of waste to landfill (Burman et al., 2018). Moreover, most of the waste that does not go to landfill goes to recovery instead of being recycled, whereas material recycling is deemed to be a more sustainable approach (European Commission, 2018). There is an increased urgency

to move more towards circular business models that aim to utilize embedded economic and environmental value in products and materials for as long as possible and increase the level of material recycling.

One main causes of hesitations for companies to invest in green solutions is the uncertainty regarding the economic returns (Volz et al., 2015). In a paper written by Mckinsey &

Company it has been shown that short-termism has increased among companies in the search for faster economic returns (Mckinsey & Company, 2017). Public companies specifically, often face pressures to generate high return of investment and dividends for their

shareholders. This short-term thinking may hinder companies from investing in long term sustainability projects that would bring environmental benefits as the return of investment is perceived to be too far away in time. Hence, it becomes more imperative for companies to adapt and evolve by creating a paradigm shift in this regard and start working more long term, as this would bring economic development while also protecting the environment. Much research has been conducted regarding circular business models generally but also Industrial Symbiosis particularly. However, after an extensive literature review, there is no existing research examining the potential for Industrial Symbiosis specifically within the construction industry in Sweden, and that is what this paper aim to provide.

1.3 Purpose and questions

The main objective of this thesis is to make a contribution to the fields of Industrial Ecology and construction waste management in terms of facilitating the development of Industrial Symbiosis networks within the construction industry in Sweden. This is achieved by

exploring the different barriers and challenges that each stakeholder in the industry perceive and examine what different responsibilities respective stakeholders has for the facilitation. This would provide insight about the perceptions of the potential participants and may contribute to providing a better understanding of the specific requirements of Industrial Symbiosis development within the context of the Swedish Construction Industry. By using the supply chain of the material mineral wool, it is possible to investigate the implications an Industrial Symbiosis network would have on the different stakeholders involved.

The main research questions for this thesis are the following:

- What are the main success factors for the implementation of Industrial Symbiosis networks within the Swedish construction industry?

- What are the main barriers?

- What responsibilities do each stakeholder have for an implementation?

1.4 Limitations

The research has been limited to include the perspective of the construction industry in the development of an Industrial Symbiosis network. Since the Industrial Symbiosis is a cross-sectoral network facilitation system, the opinion of other sectors would be valuable; however, the authors are interested in exploring the main barriers and challenges that the actors within the construction sector consider and what their views are on an Industrial Symbiosis network is. Since Industrial Symbiosis can include a diverse amount of materials, it is important that the study focuses on the supply chain of one material which is the mineral wool. Every material supply chain varies and the incentives towards collaboration is different depending on what material is being investigated.

This thesis is conducted in collaboration with a construction contractor, which is the source of the interviewees that have been chosen from the contractor’s perspective. This is a limitation that would otherwise generate more information from other contractors that could add value to the thesis. However, since it is one material supply chain that is being investigated, it is also important that one contractor is being chosen to interview. The geographical area that has been chosen is Stockholm, Sweden where all the interviewees are positioned. The output that is generated is from the construction projects that are located in Stockholm.

2 Literature Review

The literature review will show the most relevant previous research and studies that have dealt with the same topics that this study is keen on exploring

In order to define the research questions, an empirical literature review has been chosen where previous research papers that deal with Industrial Symbiosis are analyzed and studied in order to gain a broader understanding. The underlying problem being explored is linked to construction waste management and how an implementation of Industrial Symbiosis, a collective approach compatible with circular economy, can improve the way contractors deal with waste. There have been extensive research papers that discuss the success factors and barriers that Industrial Symbiosis provides for a wide range of industries. However, there is a gap in the research conducted in a Swedish context with the perspective of the construction industry – something that this thesis aspires to contribute with. What this section aims to shed a light on is the various research that has been made and discuss them.

2.1 Circular Economy

Circular economy, according to Korhonen, Honkasalo & Seppälä (2016), is a compilation of ambiguous and separate concepts from different fields. The paper distinguishes the definition of circular economy from The European Commission which is based on the 4R framework; reduce, reuse, recycle and recover of materials and energy. Through a qualitative text analysis, Korhonen et al. (2016) continues to analyze the limitations of circular economy in which the management of the circular economy-type interorganizational and inter-sectorial material and energy flows is one of the main concerns. This finding is further supported by the work of Witjes & Lozano (2016) who investigate a potential framework for sustainable business models. The research paper initially addresses the relationship between the client and contractor in the public procurement process. Managerial implications mentioned in the research is the lack of collaboration between producers and suppliers which can be illustrated in the current lack of sustainable development business models. The development of circular economic business models that add value through sustainability in terms of both

environmental and economic benefits, can according to the findings of Lozano et al. (2016) be achieved through a collaboration between producers and suppliers since it leads to reduction in raw material utilization and waste creation. There is a heavy emphasize on cooperation

since the circular economy establishes a flow between processes where the waste from one process can be used as a surplus for another process.

Additionally, Virtanen et al. (2019) conducted a research that tackles the tools to actually promote circular economy by analyzing the regional material flow in the manufacturing industry. The case study was performed in Finland, with a project that has a strategic plan to work towards circular economy. The main aim was to develop an input-output study of material flows of various products; however, the data was insufficient which meant that the focus was instead concentrated to waste flows. Different indicators were extracted to effectively capture the circulation of waste materials. The results indicate that waste woods and plastics need to be heavily promoted in terms of recycling to reach the EU recycling requirements (Virtanen et al., 2019).

Furthermore, Nubholz, Rasmussen & Milios (2019) bring up the matter of how the use of secondary material in building can be of importance to increase the decarbonization of the sector as well as how the implementation of business model innovation and political tools can aid in the transition towards circular building. By using a comparative case study, the research could estimate the potential carbon saving that the usage of secondary material cause.

Nubholz et al. (2019) state that their results indicate that secondary material usage causes a potential for carbon saving. What’s interesting is that companies aiming to use secondary materials need an enhancement of the business environment, where they need additional policy interventions to remove the remaining barriers that are existing as of today. Incentives need to be available for companies to offer recovered material at higher value, which can be deployed by public procurement requirements as well as public policies.

2.2 Waste Management

Waste management from a circular economic perspective can reflect itself in the waste hierarchy (see Figure 1 - EU’s waste hierarchy inspired by The EU Commission's waste hierarchy (2008)) which was laid down in a directive from EU (Van Ceneghem et al., 2019). Waste management is defined by Van Ceneghem et al. (2019) as the measures that need to be implemented once waste has been produced; hence, making re-use, recycle, recovery and landfill the possible options. Re-use is the mere preparation of products or components of products that have become waste to ensure that they can be re-used without any processing,

recycling is when waste is re-processed into other products, recovery being an umbrella term which encompasses energy recovering and ultimately landfill in which one gains no benefit from the material (Turunen & Van Calster, 2016).

Figure 1 - EU’s waste hierarchy inspired by The EU Commission's waste hierarchy (2008)

Hadzic, Voca & Golubic (2017) state the importance of the flexibility that the European Commission has granted in terms of the waste hierarchy, where economic, technical or environmental factors can weigh in on using energy recovery rather than recycling. Van Ceneghem et al. (2019) further elaborates that certain materials who have a high energy recovery rate is better fit for energy recovery rather than recycling, which according to Merrild, Larsen & Christensen (2012) can be decided through a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). The LCA can be used in waste management in order to make optimal strategic choices by valuating recycling of material in retrospect to energy recovery. In most cases, LCA studies that are conducted favor recycling to waste-to-energy as a solution, calculating the environmental benefits that both options generate (Van Ceneghem et al., 2019).

Opposingly, Duong (2017) studies the material of cardboard and the benefits that incineration with energy recovery could produce instead of recycling. The findings of the study suggest that higher credits are due by using incineration with energy recovery, thus inciting recovery as an option. The results of Rigamonti et al. (2018) in their study shows that in some choices of materials, the recycled material does not always uphold the same quality as virgin raw material and is something that actors within the field should consider when deciding whether to use recycled material. Rigamonti et al. (2018) therefore proposes the choice of energy recovery as a solution when the quality of the recycled material cannot be assured.

Reduce

Reuse

Recycle

Recovery

2.2.1 Mineral Wool Waste

Mineral wool as waste can be caused both as process waste from the mineral wool production process or as a result from construction and demolition (Väntsi & Kärki, 2012). The authors continue to state that the use of mineral wool waste can differ depending on the quality that it is acquired in. Some technologies allow mineral wool waste to be utilized completely and recycled; however, this requires that the mineral wool is of a certain quality when being collected. Dunster (2011) mentions that mineral wool waste can also be taken advantage of in other areas of construction, such as indoor ceiling tiles. By using the mineral wool from the construction and demolition industry, one can use apply it in another sector and therefore add value. It is the mineral fiber minerals that mineral wool waste can substitute in the process of producing indoor ceiling tiles.

Duran, Leninhan & O´Regan (2006) discuss that in order for waste to be considered

recyclable and used in another process, it needs to be evaluated and more profitable than to buying the virgin material. This is something that Dunster (2011) calculates on and discusses the pricing point of using mineral wool waste instead of mineral fibers and finds that each case is different and depends on the transportation costs as well as logistics.

2.3 Industrial Symbiosis

Industrial Symbiosis is characterized as a flow of material that occurs through cooperative organization, which has previously been defined as an industrial ecosystem. Therefore, Industrial Symbiosis can be recognized as a subfield of industrial economy (Yeo et al. 2019). Hinders of the development of industrial ecosystems has been defined by the complexity that it brings; difficulties to apply it with not enough attention focusing on the internal and

external facts. Chertow & Ehrenfeld (2012) research on how companies between themselves can establish a self-organizing industrial ecosystem, referred to as Industrial Symbiosis. The findings present a three-stage model beginning with a numerous number of stakeholders engaging with each other. Continuously, the success factors that results in a network benefit need to be identified as well as defining the benefits and ultimately institutionalizing norms to enable successful collaboration (Chertow & Ehrenfeld, 2012). Most importantly is the

recognition of benefits for the network, and how each stakeholder can gain profit of this system.

The self-organizing Industrial Symbiosis as Chertow & Ehrenfeld (2012) examines is merely one of the activities that Industrial Symbiosis can be classified as (Paquin &

Howard-Grenville, 2012). Paquin et al. (2012) seeks to understand the evaluation of facilitated networks and further states that Industrial Symbiosis can, aside from self-organization, also evolve from a facilitation by firms, organizations and individuals or from a planned network that stems from a central national plan or vision that needs to be realized. The emergence of Industrial Symbiosis has a heavy emphasize on the process of firms capturing their own interests and creating a self-organized system where they create interaction spaces in which ideas are shared, even within a facilitated network. This analysis is in affiliation of the work of Boons & Howard-Grenville (2009), where an inter-connectivity of companies through norms and trust is considered to be an important factor in the development of Industrial Symbiosis systems. However, Paquin et al. (2012) still highlights the importance of a planned network that stems from a national plan in order to gain goal-directed processes rather than participants sharing norms.

Yeo et. al (2019) conducts a systematic literature review to assess the tools that can be used to promote Industrial Symbiosis and the research culminates in 6 steps to create Industrial Symbiosis; firstly, by preliminary assessment consisting of determining whether there is a potential for creating Industrial Symbiosis in the respective sector. Secondly, the network needs to be built of businesses that have an interest in engaging in the Industrial Symbiosis where awareness and trust is established. Amongst the businesses, synergy opportunities need to be determined in order to analyze the gains and profits. To fully implement the idea of Industrial Symbiosis, a business feasibility needs to be conducted that aids as support in the decision of planning for the Industrial Symbiosis. Finally, a thorough documentation and reinforcement of actual Industrial Symbiosis cases needs to be made with the driving mechanisms and how the Industrial Symbiosis was realized throughout the process.

The rise of authorities that encourage an approach in line with circular economy and circular building has resulted in a stream of Industrial Symbiosis development across the world. The main reason behind this is that Industrial Symbiosis is an approach that progresses towards circular- and bio-based economy through a pragmatic and effective mean (Harris, Mirata, Broberg, Carlsson & Martin, 2019). According to Neves et al. (2019), Industrial Symbiosis is described as the process in which one company benefits from the waste of another’s, by using waste as raw material. Neves et. al (2019) describes Industrial Symbiosis as a “mutually

beneficial relationship” since the collaboration between entities and companies allow them to exchange resources and by-products with a competitive advantage for the partakers. The contributed research continues to discuss how Denmark has been a success with the

implementation of Industrial Symbiosis which has been a self-organizing initiative between companies. However, the highest number of identified cases of Industrial Symbiosis has been in the United Kingdom. This may be due to the fact the government launched a program, National Industrial Symbiosis Programme with the intention of promoting this collaboration model to decrease the use of raw material. Neves et al. (2019) also states that this program can be seen as a legal framework that is slowly developing across nations, insisting that more companies should be on the front in terms of developing Industrial Symbiosis.

Domenech et al. (2019) determine the barriers and drivers of Industrial Symbiosis by using the interviews conducted as a foundation for the framework. The main key drivers are identified such as the decrease of company costs with resources, the creation of new areas of revenues which in turn results in a higher turnover as well as the accomplishment of

environmental policy and targets within the company and national goals. However, key barriers include risk and uncertainty of defining the costs-benefits of Industrial Symbiosis, logistics in term of transport costs and ultimately lack of time. This research aligns with the work of Ji et al. (2020) who investigate the factors that promote and inhibit firm’s

participation in Industrial Symbiosis by using a quantitative approach. After an extensive literature review, they list the findings, promoting and inhibiting factors which are eventually tested using a questionnaire. The interesting additional finding of this survey is that Ji et al. (2020) conclude that the need to meet requirements of environmental laws and regulations is the most driving factor to participate in Industrial Symbiosis.

2.4 Industrial Symbiosis in Sweden

The research on Industrial Symbiosis in Sweden is limited, with a few cases actually implemented in industries that surpass the real estate and construction industry. Swedish Environmental Institute and RISE, in collaboration with various institutions presented a roadmap on how the Industrial Symbiosis can be encouraged in the climate of Sweden (Harris et al., 2019). They present a SWOT analysis of the current environment on Industrial

Symbiosis, with strengths characterized by the circular economy trend and how it can increase the acceptance of Industrial Symbiosis as well as the competitive advantaged that a

collaborative business culture promotes. However, one weakness is a lack of drivers and incentives. One of the five critical element to support Industrial Symbiosis development and growth is to develop policy drivers and remove barriers for contractors (Harris et al., 2019). By comparing the needed resources to what has been implemented in the UK, i.e. the National Industrial Symbiosis Program, the research that Harris et al. (2019) lays down suggests a national facilitation program which supports a series of networks have the ability of acting as a driver of Industrial Symbiosis. This will be the foundation of fostering collaboration

between the stakeholders in order to unite them. In order for the network to be accomplished and established, Harris et al. (2019) mentions the importance of funding from regional bodies, municipalities and research grants. This sort of funding would enable to run the initial years of the program which is important to incite the stakeholders within to take part. In Sweden, the public procurement can be used as a tool to encourage contractors to foster circular economy. Therefore, the responsibility lies on the municipalities and national government to demand recycling policies as a part of Industrial Symbiosis in the procurement process. When mapping the Industrial Symbiosis development in Europe, Domenech et al. (2019) conducted an extensive literature review to review the typologies of networks and how these contribute to circular economy. The Local Investment Plans and Climate Investment Program have funded 30% of physical infrastructure to provide for Industrial Symbiosis projects, where local authorities in collaboration with local stakeholders develop strategies to work towards. From the analysis, Domenech et al. (2019) conclude that self-organized networks with operating private stakeholders seem to be more common in Sweden with the support and participation of the local government. The need for the local government to meddle is

furtherly highlighted in literature (Notarnicola, Tassielli & Renzulli, 2016) who analyze the constraints and potential new synergies in Italy. Notarnicola et al, (2016) emphasize on incentives that entrepreneurs require to develop their core business economically as well as contributing to positive externalities from an environmental perspective. The firms expressed a willingness to establish a collaboration in an Industrial Symbiosis project if there was a coordinator to conduct the necessary activities for the firms, alternatively a public financial contribution.

3 Theory

This section will present the relevant theoretical framework from which this research paper is built upon which will be used in analyzing the empirics of the study

3.1 Circular Economy

The term circular economy (CE) has been linked with a wide variety of meanings and associations by different authors. Kircherr et al. (2017) identified 114 definitions and argued that this variety of understandings can be very problematic. However, the concept of CE can typically be contrasted with the traditional “linear economy” (see Figure 2 - Concept of Linear Economy) with the take-make-dispose resource model which turns raw materials into waste in the production process and which is seen to lead to environmental pollution and the removal of natural capital from the environment (Jones & Comfort, 2017).

Figure 2 - Concept of Linear Economy

It is an economic paradigm where resources are kept in use as long as possible, with maximum value extraction. The concept of CE originates from industrial ecology and emphasizes the benefits of recycling waste materials and by-products. The principles of CE embrace all stages of the product life cycle from the product design to the production process through marketing and consumption to waste management, recycling and re-use, which is illustrated in Figure 3 - Concept of Circular Economy.

Figure 3 - Concept of Circular Economy

The aim is to use methodologies in supply chain management that continuously sustain the circulation of resources within a closed loop system. As a result, this will reduce the need for virgin materials for economic activities and enable products at the end of their life cycle to re-enter the supply chain as a production input through recycling, reusage or remanufacturing (Nasir et al., 2016). The are several different factors that are pressuring for a transitioning into a more circular economy. These include the continuing depletion of scarce natural resources, the supply problems associated with the increasingly volatile international political situation and the unpredictable event associated with climate change and the potential price volatility connected to both these factors. Moreover, the increasing introduction of national and international legislative regulation designed to reduce environmental impact are also driving the implementation of circular economy.

3.2 Supply Chain

There are various definitions of supply chain. One proposition is that a supply chain is a set of firms that pass materials forward. When manufacturing a product and delivering it to the end user, several independent firms are involved such as raw material and component producers, product assemblers, wholesalers, retailer merchants and transportation companies, and this network together forms the supply chain. Another way of defining supply chain is that it is a network of organizations that are involved, through upstream (supply) and downstream (distribution) linkages, in the different processes and activities and activities that produce value in the form of products and services delivered to the ultimate consumer. Mentzer et al. (2001, p.4) combines these definitions and defines supply chain as a set of three or more

Make

Use

Reuse

Remake

entities (organizations or individuals) directly involved in the upstream and downstream flows of products, services, finances, and/or information from a source to a customer. This is furtherly illustrated in the figure below.

Figure 4 - Illustration of the different steps in the Circular Supply Chain inspired by the figure of Mentzer et al. (2001)

3.2.1 Supply Chain Management

It is important to distinguish between supply chain and supply chain management. Supply chain is a phenomenon that exists in business, often referred to as distribution channels. Supply chain management, however, is defined by Mentzer et al. (2001) as the management of those supply chains and requires transparent and overt management efforts by the

organizations within the supply chain. Rather than viewing the supply chain as a set of fragmented parts, the philosophy of SCM takes a systems approach to viewing the supply chain as a single entity and extends the concept of partnerships into a multi-firm effort to manage the total flow of goods from the supplier to the ultimate customer. Moreover, the concept of SCM underline the affect that each firm in the supply chain have directly or indirectly on the performance of all other supply chain members, as well as the overall performance of the supply chain. For this reason, the philosophy of SCM seeks

synchronization and convergence of intrafirm and interfirm operational and strategic capabilities into a unified marketplace. The integrative nature of SCM directs supply chain members to focus on developing innovative solutions to create unique, individualized sources of customer value. Manufacturer Distribution Center Use Disposal Circular Supply Chain

For SCM to be implemented companies must first have supply chain orientation. This is defined as recognizing the activities that are required in managing the flows in a supply chain by an organization (Mentzer et al., 2001). This means recognizing the strategic implication not just in one direction of the supply chain but through the whole chain. SCM is concerned with improving both efficiency (i.e., cost reduction) and effectiveness (i.e., customer service) in a strategic context through integrated supply chain management to obtain competitive advantage and increase profitability. Effective supply chain management is made up of a series of strategic partnerships with long term orientations among firms working together and mutually sharing information, risks, and rewards and that yield a competitive advantage. For this to happen, inter-functional coordination is required including functional shifting within the supply chain, the role of various types of third-party providers, how relationships between companies should be managed as well as the viability of different supply chain structures (Mintzer et al., 2001).

3.3 Industrial Symbiosis

3.3.1 Definition

The approach of Industrial Symbiosis was based on ecological science to describe the organic relationships between industries. In 1947, George Renner investigated production waste and byproducts and their flows among industries and described the possibility that waste from one enterprise could be used as raw material by another industry. It was described as the industrial equivalent of the symbioses that occur in natural ecosystems (Zhang, Zheng, Chen, Su, & Liu, 2015). This concept was further developed when Ayres (1988) proposed the term “industrial metabolism” to describe the whole integrated collection of physical processes that convert raw materials, energy, and labor into finished products and wastes under steady-state conditions.

Frosh and Gallopoulus (1989) proposed the concept of “industrial ecosystems” and advocated for a transformation of the traditional model of industrial activity into a more integrated model that would be the industrial equivalent of natural ecosystems. Within such a system, the consumption of energy and materials would be optimized, waste generation would be minimized, and the wastes and byproducts from one process would serve as raw materials for other processes. This would closely resemble the efficient cycling that occurs in a natural

ecosystem. Lowe & Evans (1995) further described the industrial ecosystem as analogous to a closed-loop natural system.

For the past 30 years, the field of Industrial Symbiosis has developed quickly, and studies now use systematic methods that originates in the study of complex ecological and biological systems to build on industrial metabolism research and study details of the exchanges of materials and energy through a network of industries. This has proven to provide important insights of ways to improve resource efficiency (Lowe & Evans, 1995). In its Action Plan for Circular Economy, the European Commission targets a more sustainable and

resource-efficient economy in Europe and identifies the need to promote Industrial Symbiosis and announces revised European regulation of waste in order “to clarify rules on by-products to facilitate Industrial Symbiosis and help create a level playing field across the EU” (EC, 2015). 3.3.2 Theoretical Background

The term symbiosis originates from biology and refers to “a close, sustained coexistence of two species or kinds of organisms” (Lowe and Evans, 1995). As the field of industrial ecology developed in the 20th _{century, the symbiosis in natural systems was adopted as an} analogy for how industries interact, and soon developed into its own field of research (Lowe and Evans, 1995; Harper and Graedel, 2004; Korhonen, 2004). Industrial Symbiosis as a concept is based on the idea of industrial ecosystems, where symbiotic relationships are established between economically independent industries/companies, typically in a relatively close geographical proximity (Herczeg, Akkerman, & Hauschild, 2018). Cooperation among companies is the precondition for an Industrial Symbiosis complex and through it a network can be formed. The aim of this network is to create systems that make it possible to reuse waste from one industrial process in another industrial process. This way, the consumption of materials and energy can be optimized, and by-products from one industry can serve as raw materials for other industries/companies, decreasing the disposal of waste and the loss of resources (Zhang, Zheng, Chen, Su, & Liu, 2015). This process is presented in figure 7, which explains the outcome of a functioning Industrial Symbiosis. Although the exchanges occur more efficiently over shorter distances, proximity is not a precondition for symbiosis to develop. In fact, Mirata and Emtairah (2005) emphasize that the relationship is not restricted to physical exchanges but could also include exchanges of knowledge and utilization of shared infrastructure.

Figure 5 - The process and outcome of an Industrial Symbiosis network

There are three dimensions in which Industrial Symbiosis aims to achieve benefits.

Economically, companies benefit by reduced cost for sourcing, avoiding disposal cost, and/or gaining extra profit from selling the by-products. Generally, resource efficiency will increase by producing more outputs from the same amount of input (raw materials). From the

environmental perspective, the benefits are reduced natural resource consumption and waste disposal as well as reduction of emissions to air, water and soil from the production of the saved raw materials. Finally, the third dimension is the social perspective. The

implementation of Industrial Symbiosis leads to a bigger emphasize on the local community and working cooperatively across industries and governmental bodies to contribute to regional economic development ((Zhang, Zheng, Chen, Su, & Liu, 2015).).

3.3.3 Mechanisms

For an Industrial Symbiosis to develop it is important to understand the driving forces of this model. Studies of the mechanisms that lay the baseline for an Industrial Symbiosis have primarily analyzed the factors, including internal industrial metabolic processes that influence the system’s formation and future development. The exchanges and flows of resources are the key aspects that define the symbiosis (Zhang, Zheng, Chen, Su, & Liu, 2015). The driving forces are described in the illustrative figure 8 below.

Figure 6 - An illustration showing the main drivers and barriers in the development of Industrial Symbiosis

The first driving force to consider is related to the economic benefits. As previously

mentioned, symbiotic relationships among different industries or companies can decrease the cost of raw materials and the disposal cost for waste because the raw materials of one industry or company can be replaced to a degree by the byproducts and wastes of another – improving the economic efficiency of each participant’s operations. However, the development of an Industrial Symbiosis is an evolutionary process that goes through structural and cultural embeddedness and institutionalization, which takes time and social capabilities. Due to the substantial initial costs of Industrial Symbiosis networks, companies often rely on financial support from private investors and governmental bodies and may otherwise be reluctant to participate in case of long payback periods (Herczeg, Akkerman, & Hauschild, 2018). Herczeg, Akkerman & Hauschild (2018) continue to define the second driving force which relates to the legislations and regulations that form the development of a symbiosis. Many industrial symbioses have developed as eco-industrial parks because of regulatory pressures and as a way of conforming with environmental/waste management regulations and were built to meet the need for improved environmental protection and sustainable development. Taxes related to landfill and energy uses can have a significant impact on companies. This is seen to be a factor that influence the engagement of Industrial Symbiosis networking due to

institutional pressure where the institutional environments indirectly force companies to join to appear valid (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). This aligns with the regulations that Zhang et al. (2015) claim is an essential aspect for companies to establish links with other companies or organizations to meet the legal requirements. Governmental frameworks can facilitate information exchange among different industrial symbioses and provide feedback loops for

Drivers and barriers for Industrial Symbiosis Economic

Regulations _DevelopmentTechnical

policy makers. Furthermore, regional governments can promote Industrial Symbiosis initiatives and attract regional investments, as well as provide financial support for their development. However, restrictive waste management laws can sometimes act as barriers to Industrial Symbiosis initiative and it is important that they are set on a practical level

(Herczeg, Akkerman & Hauschild, 2018).

The third driving force that influence the formation and development of Industrial Symbiosis network relates to technological improvements and innovations. Improvements in material utilization and reuse technologies, and the adjustment of industrial production structures help stimulate the development. As these three factors influence the formation and development of Industrial Symbiosis complexes in different ways it is important to analyze the interactions among these factors to better understand how they are related and what principles that govern these interactions (ibid).

Finally, the fourth driving force is the organizational aspects of an Industrial Symbiosis network. Barringer & Harrison (2000) mention the interorganizational learning that can arise due to a collaboration among companies. The level of the learning that is spread between organizations will heavily influence the company’s decision to engage in Industrial Symbiosis networking. Knowledge that is transferred allows companies to improve their competitive position where one can learn from each other and build their own organization. There is not only a need for tangible exchanges, which profit, and economic gain is mentioned in the previous section, but also intangible exchanges in the form of knowledge. Furthermore Barringer & Harrison mention the risk of companies not being willing to share knowledge since there is a risk of disclosing information that is exclusive to their business.

3.3.4 Industrial Symbiosis within Supply Chain

From an operations and supply chain management perspective, Industrial Symbiosis

introduces new supplier-buyer relationships and forms a collaborative supply chain network between previously unrelated companies. The relationships formed in an Industrial Symbiosis is different from traditional supply chain relations since the traded by-products are typically not within the core business of the supplier. This requires a certain degree of shared visions and collective decision-making, necessitating mutual recognition, trust, and information sharing and often some sort of central organization (Herczeg, Akkerman, & Hauschild, 2018).

Furthermore, newly formed interdependencies often imply technical challenges relating to the quantity and quality of waste flows. To address common challenges, and create an effective collaborative network, knowledge and experience sharing is a key contribution to the development of mutual understanding of circumstances that affect companies and help develop core capabilities.

The coordination of this “collective learning” requires analysis of circumstances and possible improvements, as well as key stakeholders engaged in collaboration. Trust, open

communication and joint problem solving are essential for the functioning of Industrial Symbiosis complexes and are leveraged through social networking. Transparency and dissemination of information among business partners needs to be emphasized, as it engages key stakeholders to secure their commitment and improve supply chain processes.

Transparency should also reduce unethical (or illegal) behavior, thus further improve social sustainability while simultaneously reducing transaction costs for external stakeholders interested in assessing company’s social responsibility. Moreover, to make collaboration sustainable, it is important to coordinate the distribution of risks and benefits among the companies as it affects their long-termcommitments.

To align incentives, companies share objectives, make joint decisions, and often rely on each other’s trustworthiness. Typically, logistical integration requires an information system that collects, stores, and works with operational data (Herczeg, Akkerman, & Hauschild, 2018). Furthermore, to coordinate the terms of production and delivery and minimize risks, suppliers and customers typically have written contracts and agreements (Herzeg, 2016). Although the idea of collaboration is joint efforts and collective benefits, companies do not always share these equally, which may be a factor for conflict. Further, companies don’t necessarily depend on each other to the same extent causing asymmetrical relationships. Consequently, some companies may experience the benefits and/or high risks not worthwhile the efforts of participation. However, the importance of sustainable supply chains is continuously growing making it increasingly challenging to ignore collaboration across industries (Herczeg,

Akkerman, & Hauschild, 2018). The organizational and operational aspects of the challenges that arise in an Industrial Symbiosis network is illustrated in figure 9. This figure is out of importance since it depicts the outcome of an integration and coordination with Industrial Symbiosis on both an organizational and operational aspect that later will be used as a

Figure 7 - The challenges in an Industrial Symbiosis Network System in terms of organization and operation inspired by the illustration of Herczeg (2016)

3.3.5 Types of Industrial Symbiosis

The study of Industrial Symbiosis has over the years progressed from studying the exchanges that occur within companies to include the exchanges among companies, and finally to include regional exchanges of resources and information sharing (Chertow, 1999, 2000). There are three main perspectives from which researchers have examined the different types of symbioses. First, by investigating external factors, such as the location of the eco-industrial park, the factors that are influencing its formation, its development history, and its current status (Zhang, Zheng, Chen, Su, & Liu, 2015).

Improvement of the systems’ environmental performance, and the economic and social benefits, combined with the regulations imposed by local or national governments is a major influence of the evolution and growth of an Industrial Symbiosis complex. Including this factor, Chertow (2007) proposed two additional categories: planned eco-industrial parks and self-organizing parks. The self-organizing parks are developed by existing private actors who are motivated to exchange their resources as a result of the abovementioned influences. The

Create synergies between the processes that different

companies have Offer a communication platform by integrating local

industries into an organizational unit

Establish the long-term collaboration where the involved companies share

profit, risks and benefits Social networking in order to

find solutions to problems

Have a local system where waste is collected Install waste treatment

storage centers Share information on waste flows between stakeholders

Include original and recycled materials in the procurement process as well as production

planning

Manage quality uncertainties in waste flows Integration Coordination Organizational aspects Operational aspects

aim of these parks is to gain economic benefits in terms of cost reductions, increased

revenues, and business expansion. In contrast, planned eco-industrial parks emerge as a result of conscious effort often promoted by governmental bodies to identify companies from different industries that could potentially collaborate, and to promote resource sharing among these companies (ibid).

Another way of categorizing the different types of symbiosis complexes is to use internal characteristics of the system, such as the relationships between members and the structural distribution of a system. Based on the different industrial compositions of a system, eco-industrial parks can be categorized into sector-integrated, sector-specific, and reuse and recycling parks. Sector-integrated parks consists of companies from different industrial sectors mainly developed from economic and high-tech industrial development zones. Sector-specific parks contain one or more core enterprises from the same industrial sector, as well as some other enterprises from related industries. These types of parks are mainly developed through increasing the integration of the flows of materials and energy. Reuse and recycling parks consist of companies who are specifically engaged in reuse, recycling and resource recovery. The idea of these parks is to reduce the negative impact on the environment by preventing potentially useful resources from becoming wastes, and by using these resources to replace the consumption of raw materials. With the help of advanced technology and company coordination, wastes generated by industrial production and consumption processes can be transformed into recycled or reused resources and products (Zhang, Zheng, Chen, Su, & Liu, 2015).

Eco-industrial parks can further be divided into dependency-oriented, equality-oriented, and nested categories, depending on the nature of the relationship among participants in a network products (Zhang, Zheng, Chen, Su, & Liu, 2015). Dependency-oriented parks develop around one or more companies. Equality-oriented parks gives equal status to all participants and the companies do not rely exclusively on each other. Nested eco-industrial parks combine aspects of both categories. Companies in these parks can be divided into three categories depending on whether they are dominated by parasitism, commensalism, or mutualism. If they are dominated by parasitism the dynamics are such that one or more of the companies benefit at the expense of one or more of the other companies. If companies are dominated by

harming other companies. A mutualistic dynamic within the complex is one in which most relationships among companies are beneficial to each company (ibid).

4 Method

This section will introduce the reader into the methodology that the authors have chosen to conduct this study with as well as a presentation of the interviewees and the reliability and validity that the study entails

4.1 Research Design

In order to conduct the research, it is out of importance to address the procedure of obtaining the empirical results required to answer the research questions. The research question is of abductive nature, meaning that an inductive and deductive research approach is combined (Saunders et al., 2016). Inductivism describes an approach where theory is derived from empirical findings, whilst deductivism is when the researcher derives empiricism from a theoretical framework. Hence, the abductive research approach is characterized by using both theory and empirical findings that is thoroughly used and compared throughout the research to gain an understanding of the phenomenon that is being studied. The use of abductive research will make it possible to alter the strategy of the research depending on the outcome of the different steps throughout the research (Saunders et al., 2016). This was useful in this study when deriving what material supply chain that would be further investigated. The choice of mineral wool as a potential candidate for symbiosis was derived after an extensive literature review as well as the interviews conducted in the early stages. Due to the nature of the study, the analysis will be based on different actor’s thoughts, attitudes and perceptions of a potential collaboration towards circular building and a higher degree of recycle. The

interviewed respondents consisted of actors within the supply chain which will be presented (see section 4.2.1). The results generated is expected to be both richly descriptive and driven by empiricism, meaning a qualitative research approach is most fitting in this research. A qualitative approach can be conducted with different methods, the one that the authors deem most appropriate to use in this study is semi-structured interviews (Saunders et al., 2016). The use of semi-structured interviews is preferred over structured interviews due to the flexibility that a semi-structured interview generates (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The flexibility allows the conversation during the interview to get more in depth and provides the researcher more basis for the analysis. Thus, the open environment that arises due to the type of chosen methodology simplifies it for the respondent to expand on their reasoning (Kallio et al., 2016). This was apparent during the interviews as there was space fot the respondnets to

further elaborate on the matters that they deemed most important. However, to maintain the interview within the planned frameworks, the authors will create a list of questions that are expected to be reached during the interview (Alshenqeeti, 2014) (see appendix A-E).

4.2 Semi-structured interviews

To conduct the semi-structured interviews in a productive matter, Barriball & While (1994) mentions the qualifications that the interviews needs to acquire before the conduction of interviews. The literature study performed gave an insight as to how the semi-structured interviews should be conducted, both in terms of what questions to ask as well as who to interview. Saunders et al., (2016) states that the risk of the results being partial might occur when performing semi-structured interviews: however, this was solved by ensuring a choice of respondents to compile enough spread in the answers.

4.2.1 Collection of Data

Since the aim of the study is to present a framework of the responsibilities and obligations that each actor has in a potential collaboration to improve the waste management according to the theoretical framework of Industrial Symbiosis, interviews with different actors across the supply chain were conducted (i.e. from raw material, through material handling, material supply, transportation, storage and recycling). Primarily, an identification of the actors in such collaboration was needed, which was possible after an extensive literature review as well as an analysis on the supply chain of the chosen material, mineral wool. The literature review included scientific journals and research that have been peer-reviewed, to ensure that the studies that are analyzed have relevancy to modern research. The data collected can be seen as a form of secondary data, which can be defined as information that is already existent and is collected by someone other than the author (Hedin, 2014). This data is also later in the study used to cross-refer with the primary data that is gathered through the semi-structured

interviews.

In total, 10 interviews were conducted where questions were used as a foundation for all interviews. However, there were room for follow up questions and deeper elaborations from the respondents. The questions differed according to each actor to guarantee that their perspective could be highlighted throughout the study. The interview questions for each stakeholder are presented in the appendix. What unites the actors is that they have a direct

relation with the construction industry, as well as a direct or indirect connection to the waste management of respective company or organization. This is significant to the study since the results should reflect the opinions of what active stakeholders potentially expect from a collaboration in the context of Industrial Symbiosis. Since this thesis is conducted in

cooperation with a construction company, the opinions from the contractor’s perspective were compiled from this specific company. This could ultimately lead to bias in the results, which is discussed in the section of validity and reliability (see chapter 4.3 Reliability and validity). Each respondent was categorized due to their specific role within the company to collect perspective along the supply chain. Besides the contractor’s perspective, interviews were conducted with sustainability managers from a municipal company, two waste management contractors as well as a supplier of mineral wool. Two different waste management

contractors were chosen to receive a broader perspective to further compare the results. Below is a table which summarizes the length of the interview as well as the different professions each stakeholder has.

Table 1 - Table of all the respondents, their position as well as the length of the interview

Actor Respondent Role Length

Recycling Company Respondent A Sustainability communication manager & CEO

1h

Municipal Resident Company

Respondent B Head of Environmental Management

1h Respondent C Climate Project Manager 30 min

Waste Management Contractor

Respondent D Environmental and Quality Manager

1h

Respondent E Contract Manager 1h

Contracting Company

Respondent F Environmental Development Manager

1h

Respondent G Project Manager 1h

Respondent I Contract and Supply Manager 1h

Material Supplier Respondent J Head of Sustainability 1h

4.2.2 Ethics

Prior to the research, the researcher is required to confirm that the study is being conducted according to the frameworks and characteristics of ethical standards (Bryman & Nilsson, 2011). According to Bryman & Nilsson (2011), a research should follow four principles that can help guide the researcher throughout the process, which is what this research has followed when conducting the semi-structured interviews. Primarily, the researcher should inform the respondent of the purpose of the research and how the information that the respondent is giving will be used in the study. Once the respondent has been given the information, they need to give consent whether they would like to participate in the interview. Ultimately, the researcher should inform the respondent that the data that is being collected will be treated with confidentiality. At this state, the respondents can choose whether to be anonymous or not in the study. In the interviews that the authors have conducted in this research, the

respondents have chosen to be anonymized.

4.3 Reliability and validity

The concepts of reliability and validity have received much criticism from qualitative

researchers as the concepts originate from the quantitative method. There is no constant object in qualitative research and the results of measurements at different times can give different answers depending on the interviewees' mood and stress level. Thus, this study will see the reliability that subordinates the validity, that is, if the validity is good, the reliability is also good (Svensson & Starrin, 1996). The focus of this section will therefore be on presenting the study's validity.

Svensson and Starrin (1996) present validity as the relationship between an account and something outside this account. The theoretical concepts used in the study come primarily from research in the same field. In cases where a fair translation from English is difficult to do, concepts of origin have been used in the report. The concepts from the literature study matched the responses of the respondents in a good way and it very rarely happened that the author needed to interpret the concepts used by the interviewees. It is also difficult to make a

systematic generalization based on qualitative research (which is not the aim of this study). The selection is not based on randomness and does not strive to have external generalizability or external validity (Bryman, 2011). The study wants to strive for analytical generalizability. In order to increase validity, two practical approaches have been used, data triangulation and feedback from the informants. According to Svensson and Starrin (1996), data triangulation is a strategy to show how credible a result is. This study has applied triangulation using several different data sources, documents, observations and interviews.