Design for disassembly: A review of public policy proposals

Vorobjev, O.; Uotila, U.; Joensuu, T. and Saari, A. (2026) Design for disassembly: A review of public policy proposals. Buildings & Cities, 7(1), pp. 775-790. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

Design for disassembly (DfD) has been identified as an effective strategy to facilitate the transition to a circular economy within the construction sector. Yet despite substantial technical research, technical solutions and growing expertise, its practical uptake remains limited. Increased efforts are required to achieve a more widespread uptake of DfD. To enhance its uptake, this study synthesises recommendations for public policies that could enable the broader adoption of DfD construction and then develops an action-oriented framework for public authorities. A broad synthesis of the literature on public policy DfD measures is provided. The reviewed literature was identified, screened and analysed to identify recurring policy proposals and their main areas of emphasis. The key measures were: (1) legislative development; (2) awareness-raising; (3) development of building certification; (4) extended producer responsibility; (5) actions of local authorities; (6) economic incentives; and (7) stakeholder cooperation. PRACTICE RELEVANCE An action plan is created for public authorities to promote the wider adoption of DfD construction. This identifies existing obstacles and clarifies how different governance instruments can be harnessed to support implementation. Fragmented discussion on policy support for DfD is synthesised and translated into a structured framework for public authorities, politics and civil society organisations. A limited empirical basis for many proposed measures shows the need for stronger evidence on policy effectiveness.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: building codes; building design; circular economy; deconstruction; design for disassembly; policy instruments; policy measures; reuse
Index terms: policy instrument, proposal, civil society, politics, effectiveness, building design, public policy, design for disassembly, building code, circular economy, construction sector, local authority, evidence, economic incentive, governance, certification, public authority, policy measure, cooperation, strategy, implementation
Subjects: policy studies, business, sustainable design, architectural design, psychology, administrative law, economic analysis, management, contractual arrangements, regulatory law, industry analysis, performance management, public policy, administrative processes, political science, project planning, sociology, sustainability and energy, evaluation and assessment methods
Topics: Organizational Design, Project Management, Research Practice, Procurement, Legal Issues, Quality Management, Design Practice, Sustainability, Contract Administration, Governance, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy
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