Munaro, M R and Tavares, S F (2025) Design for adaptability and disassembly: Guidelines for building deconstruction. Construction Innovation, 25(2), pp. 665-687. ISSN 1471-4175
Abstract
Purpose: Design for adaptability and disassembly (DfAD) is an effective method to reduce construction and demolition waste generation, landfill loads and greenhouse gas generation; preserve natural resources; and increase environmental awareness in the construction industry. However, it is an underexplored strategy due to a lack of information about projects and a set of agreed guidelines to guide buildings deconstruction. This study aims to understand how DfAD can support the sector's transition toward circularity. Design/methodology/approach: Through an integrative literature review, this study analyzed the current publications and terminologies used, identified the main themes discussed and described the key criteria for integrating deconstruction in the building design stage. Findings: The results showed that the term DfAD encompasses different ecodesign strategies and is concentrated in six major thematic categories (design and construction principles, tools for DfAD, components and connections for DfAD, barriers, drivers and guidelines for DfAD, existing building stock potential and selective deconstruction process). In total, 60 criteria were presented to guide the deconstruction of buildings, emphasizing standardization, modularization and prefabrication of materials and components as fundamental requirements. Originality/value: The study highlighted the need to expand the knowledge and training of the design team, establish public policies and tax incentives and develop tools, methods, and circular indicators to enable the implementation of deconstruction strategies for buildings.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building end-of-life; circular economy; construction sector; deconstruction; dfad |
| Index terms: | disassembly, design team, strategy, construction and demolition, literature review, building stock, methodology, landfill, greenhouse gas, publication, construction sector, public policy, building design, design for adaptability, natural resource, circular economy, waste generation, circularity, design and construction, modularization, environmental awareness, standardization, implementation, construction industry, prefabrication |
| Subjects: | research methods, sustainable design, design process, building construction, asset management, research dissemination and communication, environmental impact, waste management, sustainable materials, climate science, operations management, public policy, environmental resource management, professional practice, contractual arrangements, architectural design, management, performance measurement, industry analysis, environmental behaviour, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Governance, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy, Site Management, Design Practice, Procurement, Sustainability, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here