Koch, C; Pedersen, T A and Fredslund, L (2024) Platforms of second-hand building material: A hub in the circular economy or fantasies of entrepreneurs? In: Thomson, C (ed.) Proceedings of 40th Annual ARCOM Conference, 2-4 September 2024, London South Bank University, UK.
Abstract
All around the western world “platforms” for capture and redistribution of second-hand building materials are emerging, tapping into a rhetoric of circular economy. A development crucial for an acceleration of climate change mitigation. Adopting a combination of institutional theory and product platform concepts from a mass customization discourse, we study some of the building material platforms present in Europe within an explorative abductive framework. Empirically we use interviews, internet screening and document analysis in a 3-year longitudinal fashion. The results show that so far, none of these platforms is reaching the volumes, commercialization and documentation of recovered material matching the EU ambitions of recycling, such as stated in the European taxonomy for sustainable financing. The platforms are struggling to implement circularity facing institutional challenges such as, collaboration, supply chain, distribution of roles, transfer of liability, financing structure, and forms of ownership. Attempts to build platforms without a physical flow of materials have run into limitations. As has also small start-ups, a set up that does not sit well with the requirement of circular flows. On the other hand, alliances with institutional players - demolishers, logistics companies, re- or upcycling companies- with integrated digital support- seem to support their development.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | circularity; platforms; Europe |
| Index terms: | circularity, recycling, document analysis, documentation, circular economy, screening, interview, institutional theory, Europe, platform, liability, mass customization, taxonomy, internet, product platform, climate change, acceleration, financing, collaboration, building material, mitigation, ownership |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, waste management, sustainable materials, climate science, computing systems, building materials, innovation and technology management, data science, data analysis and analytics, economic analysis, manufacturing engineering, management, physical geography and landforms, economics, sustainable design, professional development, financial risk, digital design, project controls, sociology, liability law |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Cost Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Information Management, Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Digital Applications, Human Resources, Organizational Design, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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