Background: The built environment is responsible for substantial material throughput, waste generation, and lifecycle environmental impacts. Scholarship across materials science, construction management, policy, and industrial ecology emphasizes reuse, recycling, and design-for-disassembly as central strategies for decoupling building-sector growth from resource depletion (Jawahir & Bradley, 2016; Jones & Comfort, 2018). Yet implementation remains fragmented by technical, economic, regulatory, and social barriers (Hart et al., 2019; Hjaltadóttir & Hild, 2021).

Objectives: This article constructs an integrative, publication-ready conceptual and methodological framework—grounded exclusively in the provided literature—that synthesizes material-level interventions (e.g., wood-plastic composites, recycled timber), component- and building-level reuse strategies (e.g., whole-house deconstruction, load-bearing component reuse), procurement and policy levers (e.g., circular procurement), and enabling digital-technological tools (e.g., BIM for demolition planning). It aims to reconcile disparate empirical findings into a coherent research agenda and actionable decision framework for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers.

Methods: A critical integrative review approach was used, combining thematic synthesis, cross-case comparative analysis, and systems-mapping. Source materials included experimental materials research, case studies of deconstruction and reuse, life-cycle and economic feasibility analyses, policy and procurement scholarship, and technological studies on digital tools for demolition and waste estimation (Keskisaari & Kärki, 2018; Bouslamti et al., 2012; Zaman et al., 2018; Cheng & Ma, 2013). Each source was interrogated for contribution to technical feasibility, economic viability, regulatory impediments, stakeholder dynamics, and design implications. Claims are triangulated across multiple sources, and where tensions exist, alternative interpretations are explored.

Results: The synthesis identifies four mutually reinforcing domains necessary for scalable circularity in the built environment: (1) material innovation and substitution pathways (e.g., wood-plastic composites employing industrial wastes); (2) building- and component-level recovery systems (e.g., systematic deconstruction and reuse of load-bearing elements); (3) institutional and market mechanisms (e.g., circular procurement and cost-competitive reuse supply chains); and (4) digital and process enablers (e.g., BIM-based waste estimation and mapping of material flows). Critical bottlenecks identified include uncertain cost attribution for secondary materials, quality and performance variability in reclaimed materials, regulatory ambiguity over reused structural elements, and information asymmetries inhibiting reuse markets (Yeung et al., 2017; Sigrid Nordby, 2019; Serwanja & Sheidaei, 2016).

Conclusions: Transitioning to circular built environments requires coordinated interventions across technical, institutional, and informational axes. Design for Reuse, integrated procurement strategies, and digital traceability constitute a combined pathway to reduce lifecycle impacts while maintaining safety and cost-effectiveness. Research priorities include standardized performance metrics for reclaimed materials, procurement models that internalize circularity benefits, and scalable logistics models for deconstruction and material redistribution. The article closes by proposing a detailed research and policy agenda that operationalizes the integrated framework introduced.

Circular economy, reuse, recycled timber

Keskisaari, A.; Kärki, T. Utilization of Industrial Wastes from Mining and Packaging Industries in Wood-Plastic Composites. J. Polym. Env. 2018, 26, 1504–1510.

Bouslamti, A.; Irle, M.A.; Salvador, V.; Bondu, M.; Hulo, S.; Caron, B. Why Simulate a Sample of Recycled Wood? Maderas Cienc. tecnol. 2012, 14, 145–153.

Ankur, G. Accelerating Circularity in Built-Environment through ‘Active-Procurem Ent’: An Aggregated Assessment Framework to Make Sustainable Choices w Hile Using Secondary Material at Early Design Phase. Master’s Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands, 2019. Available online: https://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:6bdb4827-82f5-43c7-aba9-79c0db9e6ef5 (accessed on 8 April 2025).

Lantz, S.F.; Falk, R.H.; Feasibility of Recycling Timber from Military Industrial Buildings. Use of Recycled Wood and Paper in Building Applications. Available online: https://www.fpl.fs.usda.gov/documnts/pdf1997/lantz97a.pdf (accessed on 25 March 2025).

Zaman, A.; Arnott, J.; Mclntyre, B.K.; Hannon, J. Resource Harvesting through a Systematic Deconstruction of the Residential House: A Case Study of the ‘Whole House Reuse’ Project in Christc Hurch, New Zealand. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3430.

Brütting, J.; De Wolf, C.; Fivet, C. The Reuse of Load-Bearing Components. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 225, 012025.

Yeung, J.; Walbridge, S.; Haas, C.; Saari, R. Understanding the Total Life Cycle Cost Implications of Reusing Structural Steel. Env. Syst. Decis. 2017, 37, 101–120.

Sigrid Nordby, A. Barriers and Opportunities to Reuse of Building Materials in the Norwegian Construction Sector. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 225, 012061.

Bertin, I.; Ferraille, A.; Laratte, B.; Roy, R. Design for Reuse (DfReu) Applied to Buildings; Anticipate Disassembly for the End-of-Life (EoL), in Order to Preserve Resources. In Proceedings of the Eco Design 2019 International Symposium, Yokohama, Japan, 25–27 November 2019.

Serwanja, E.; Sheidaei, M. Evaluation of Recycling & Reuse of Building Materials from Demolition: Cost Feasibility and Environmental Impact Assessment. Master’s Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2016. Available online: https://odr.chalmers.se/server/api/core/bitstreams/4851b7c5-6a7e-4d98-958f-f3d18fad944d/content (accessed on 20 March 2025).

Gupta, S.; Chen, H.; Hazen, B.T.; Kaur, S.; Gonzalez, E.D.S. Circular economy and big data analytics: a stakeholder perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2019, Vol. 144, pp. 466–474.

Gyori, G. The role of public procurement to foster social equity and justice: critical reflections on the circular procurement concept. Local Environment, 2022, Vol. 27 Nos 1/10, pp. 1242–1253.

Hart, J.; Adams, K.; Giesekam, J.; Tingley, D.D.; Pomponi, F. Barriers and drivers in a circular economy: the case of the built environment. Procedia CIRP, 2019, Vol. 80, pp. 619–624.

Hjaltadóttir, R.E.; Hild, P. Circular economy in the building industry European policy and local practices. European Planning Studies, 2021, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 2226–2251.

Hossain, M.U.; Ng, S.T.; Antwi-Afari, P.; Amor, B. Circular economy and the construction industry: existing trends, challenges and prospective framework for sustainable construction. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2020, Vol. 130, p. 109948.

Jawahir, I.S.; Bradley, R. Technological elements of circular economy and the principles of 6R-based closed-loop material flow in sustainable manufacturing. Procedia CIRP, 2016, Vol. 40, pp. 103–108.

Jones, P.; Comfort, D. The construction industry and the circular economy. International Journal of Management Cases, 2018, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 4–15.

Kanther, S. Circular Framework in the Design & Planning Phase of Construction. Full-Text Theses & Dissertations. 2025. https://jdc.jefferson.edu/diss_masters/47

Cheng, J.C.; Ma, L.Y.J.W.M. A BIM-based system for demolition and renovation waste estimation and planning. 2013.

Cheng, J.C.; Won, J.; Das, M. Construction and demolition waste management using BIM technology. International Group for Lean Construction Conference (IGLC), Perth, Australia, 2015.

Chitkara, K. Construction Project Management. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 1998.

Chong, W.K.; Hermreck, C.J.R. Understanding transportation energy and technical metabolism of construction waste recycling. Conservation & Recycling, 2010, Vol. 54, pp. 579–590.

Citherlet, S.; Defaux, T. Energy and environmental comparison of three variants of a family house during its whole life span. Building and Environment, 2007, Vol. 42, pp. 591–598.

Cochran, K.; Townsend, T.; Reinhart, D.; Heck, H. Estimation of regional building-related C&D debris generation and composition: Case study for Florida, US. 2007, Vol. 27, pp. 921–931.

Cole, R.J.; Kernan, P.C. Life-cycle energy use in office buildings. Building and Environment, 1996, Vol. 31, pp. 307–317.