Fragmentation to Harmonisation: An Empirical Comparison of Circularity Assessment Methods in Modular and Conventional Building Retrofits

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:This paper provides empirical evidence of method convergence/divergence in circularity assessment, useful for developing harmonized standards.

🏢実務担当者:Construction firms can use the finding that modular retrofit systems outperform conventional in circularity, but must account for higher upfront carbon.

🏛政策担当者:The study highlights the need for standardized circularity metrics that balance long-term circularity and near-term carbon targets.

The transition from linear to circular economy models in construction has led to the rapid development of circularity assessment methods; however, substantial fragmentation persists due to divergent definitions, indicators, system boundaries, and temporal frameworks. While previous studies have systematically reviewed these methods, limited empirical research compares methods and performance when applied to practice based identical building cases. This study addresses this gap through a controlled comparative analysis of four circularity assessment approaches applied to two functionally equivalent façade retrofit systems: a conventional adhesive-bonded external wall insulation (EWI) system and a prefabricated modular system designed for disassembly. The methods include a simplified circularity / Design-for-Disassembly (DfD) assessment, the STaMPD hierarchical DfD framework, the Whole Building Circularity Indicator (WBCI) with Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), and a combined single and multi-cycle LCA approach with supplementary DfD evaluation. Results show consistent convergence in identifying the modular system as superior in circularity performance, confirming that fundamental design features, such as reversible connections and functional independence, are robustly detected. However, significant divergence in outcomes arises from differences in indicator selection, weighting, hierarchy, and temporal framing. Single-lifecycle LCA indicates substantially higher upfront embodied carbon for the specific modular system case (+82%), highlighting a key tension between particular circular reversible design and short-term carbon targets. Multi-cycle LCA accounted for re-use enabled by disassembly but remains sensitive to allocation methods and future reuse assumptions.

• semanticscholar https://avantipublishers.com/index.php/ijaet/article/download/1824/1230first seen 2026-07-03 05:53:40