Given the built environment uses over 40% of the world’s raw materials and produces around one third of its waste, reuse could have substantial environmental impact: indeed, directly reusing construction materials could cut the built environment’s embodied carbon emissions by up to 75% by 2050 (according to the World Economic Forum and McKinsey).

Material reuse currently remains limited with, around only 1% of building materials directly reused. Although some materials are widely recycled, this involves additional processing and downcycling, limiting carbon savings compared to direct reuse. Change, however, is on the cards. 

Keeping materials in play

Leading markets are already demonstrating what circular approaches look like, for example by implementing take-up of material passports - digital inventories that catalogue every component within a building. These enable materials to be tracked, valued and resold, effectively reimagining decommissioned buildings as material banks.

In Copenhagen, Resource Rows is an example of material reuse at scale, utilising reclaimed waste brick, steel, concrete beams and wood for 92 homes. Similarly, the Gate 13 office development in Oslo used 80% reused components and materials, including steel, tile, brick, wood, cladding panels, windows, and even concrete floor plates.

A circular approach offers other advantages, including cutting waste and associated disposal costs. In the context of global volatility, sourcing reclaimed materials can also shorten supply chains and lead times. Recovering materials in the deconstruction phase can also deliver wider on ESG objectives. In London, a major office retrofit in Victoria Street successfully re-covered and sold materials for direct reuse, with the proceeds donated to support the local community.

Supportive policy changes

Policy is becoming more supportive in some markets. In the UK, the Greater London Authority requires circular economy statements for referable developments, obliging developers to quantify material flows and opportunities for reuse. This is reinforced by the growing policy focus on whole‑life carbon and industry‑led proposals for its regulation.

In Europe, the revised Energy Performance of Buildings Directive seeks to boost material reuse by requiring disclosure of global warming potential calculations across a building's whole lifecycle. In the US, Portland and San Francisco are introducing deconstruction ordinances that require buildings to be dismantled to maximise salvageable materials. 

Designing for disassembly

Considering how buildings are designed from the outset will enable quicker, easier and cheaper reuse of materials in the future.

Design for disassembly is emerging as a defining principle of circular real estate. Buildings are assembled using reversible connections, modular components and standardised systems, enabling materials to be removed intact and reused. Effectively, buildings become temporary assemblies of permanent resources.

Constructing in layers is another relevant design principle, where elements with shorter lifespans, such as facades or curtain walls, can be replaced or upgraded without disturbing longer‑life components like structural frames and cores. Japan provides a useful case study: buildings are typically conceived in layers to allow for easy disassembly, with a lifespan of 30 to 40 years, largely due to rapidly evolving earthquake safety regulations.

Together, the circular economy of materials and designing for disassembly has the potential to help the real estate sector to mitigate the worse effects of climate change. The real question is how quickly the industry can embed circular principles as standard practice.

Further information

Contact Sarah Brooks or Jo Conceicao

Managing sustainability and social value in retrofit projects