Reimagining circularity: Actions for optimising the use of existing buildings

Lundgren, R.; Kyrö, R.; Toivonen, S. and Tähtinen, L. (2025) Reimagining circularity: Actions for optimising the use of existing buildings. Buildings & Cities, 6(1), pp. 674-694. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

Transitioning towards a circular economy, where the existing building stock is more efficiently used, would significantly reduce material and energy use, emissions, and waste from the built environment sector. This study focuses on exploring what conditions are needed for circularity by imagining preferable circular futures for a 2035 timeframe and understanding the required actions to achieve them. Futures studies methods are used to focus on preferable futures and backcasting. A series of seven backcasting workshops with experts identified actions which were subsequently analysed using thematic analysis. A rapid evidence assessment was then employed to evaluate whether these actions were currently practiced or novel approaches. Two main themes were elicited based on the expected agency: 'policymakers' (regulations, incentives, etc.), and 'organisations' (industry and firm levels). Findings suggest that many of the suggested actions within these themes already exist; however, they require reinforcement. Novel but incremental actions hold potential for implementation and align with existing initiatives. Novel radical actions present an opportunity for a paradigm shift, although both external disruption and internal renewal are likely to be required. Several identified actions present opportunities to overcome the barriers found in previous research. POLICY RELEVANCE The provided actions from this study can be used to guide circularity research, policy and corporate social responsibility in the built environment context. Many of the proposed actions are included in existing policies but require strengthening by raising target levels and penalties. The introduction of incentives would help to achieve the desired outcomes. Radical novel actions provide opportunities for a paradigm change but may not be welcomed by everyone in the sector. External disruption along with internal renewal through new knowledge and skills within organisations are likely to be required for change to occur.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: buildings; circular economy; construction industry; futures studies; public policy; real estate; reuse; sustainability
Index terms: thematic analysis, real estate, implementation, energy use, agency, workshop, construction industry, penalty, strengthening, building stock, renewal, built environment, circular economy, circularity, paradigm, reinforcement, corporate social responsibility, public policy, evidence, regulation
Subjects: renovation and retrofit, industry analysis, construction type, infrastructure and transport systems, sociology, health safety and environment, energy systems, evaluation and assessment methods, asset management, methods and analysis, building materials, contractual arrangements, structural engineering, sustainable design, regulatory law, public policy, political science, sustainable materials, real estate economics, education and knowledge transfer
Topics: Construction Materials, Legal Issues, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Procurement, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Governance, Urban Studies
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