Circular Economy for Climate-Resilient and Sustainable Construction

Year 2025, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 138 - 171, 30.09.2025

Aydın Oğuz , Osman Hansu

https://doi.org/10.46578/humder.1673599

Abstract

This study develops an integrated framework for applying Circular Economy (CE) strategies in climate-resilient construction, drawing on empirical evidence from four international case studies: the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia. Through Lifecycle Assessment (LCA), Material Flow Analysis (MFA), and Net Present Value (NPV) modeling, the research quantifies CE performance across planning, design, execution, and post-use phases. Key findings show that CE practices—such as modular construction, selective demolition, recycled aggregate use, and geopolymer concrete substitution—achieved carbon reductions of 20–40%, material recovery rates of 45–80%, and lifecycle cost savings between €500,000 and €1.2 million. Additionally, CE-aligned interventions enhanced climate resilience, evidenced by a 25% reduction in flood risk and a 20% increase in infrastructure lifespan. Results indicate that governance capacity, digital tool deployment, and material recovery infrastructure are critical enablers of CE performance. The proposed framework offers a replicable, lifecycle-based approach for aligning environmental and economic goals, enabling construction systems to simultaneously decarbonize and adapt to escalating climate pressures.

Keywords

Circular Economy in Construction , Climate-Resilient Infrastructure , Sustainable Construction Strategies , Lifecycle Assessment (LCA) , Material Recovery and Waste Minimization

İklim Dirençli ve Sürdürülebilir Yapılaşma için Döngüsel Ekonomi Yaklaşımı

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Döngüsel Ekonomi (DE) stratejilerinin iklim dirençli inşaat uygulamalarına entegrasyonunu amaçlayan bütüncül bir çerçeve geliştirmekte ve Hollanda, Birleşik Krallık, Japonya ve Avustralya’dan dört uluslararası örnek olay üzerinden elde edilen ampirik kanıtları temel almaktadır. Yaşam Döngüsü Değerlendirmesi (LCA), Malzeme Akış Analizi (MFA) ve Net Bugünkü Değer (NPV) modellemesi kullanılarak, planlama, tasarım, uygulama ve kullanım sonrası aşamalar boyunca DE uygulamalarının performansı nicel olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular, modüler inşaat, seçici yıkım, geri dönüştürülmüş agrega kullanımı ve jeopolimer beton ikamesi gibi DE uygulamaları sayesinde karbon salımında %20–40 oranında azalma, %45–80 arasında malzeme geri kazanımı ve proje başına €500.000 ile €1.200.000 arasında yaşam döngüsü maliyet tasarrufu sağlandığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, DE uyumlu müdahalelerin %25 oranında sel riski azalması ve %20 oranında altyapı ömrü artışı ile iklim dayanıklılığını güçlendirdiği tespit edilmiştir. Yönetişim kapasitesi, dijital araçların kullanımı ve malzeme geri kazanım altyapısı, DE performansının başlıca belirleyicileri olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Önerilen çerçeve, çevresel ve ekonomik hedeflerin birlikte gerçekleştirilmesine olanak tanıyan, yaşam döngüsü temelli ve tekrarlanabilir bir yaklaşım sunarak inşaat sistemlerinin hem karbon azaltımına hem de artan iklim baskılarına uyumuna katkı sağlamaktadır.

Keywords

İnşaat Sektöründe Döngüsel Ekonomi , İklim Dirençli Altyapı , Sürdürülebilir Yapılaşma Stratejileri , Yaşam Döngüsü Değerlendirmesi (LCA) , Malzeme Geri Kazanımı ve Atık Minimizasyonu

References

• World Economic Forum. (2024, June 26). Green building revolution could open $1.8 trillion global market opportunity by 2030. https://www.weforum.org/press/2024/06/green-building-revolution-could-open-1-8-trillion-global-market-opportunity-by-2030/
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). Waste management and the circular economy in selected OECD countries: Evidence from environmental performance reviews. OECD Publishing.
• European Commission. (2021). Impact of 2021 European floods on infrastructure projects. https://ec.europa.eu
• Mehta, P. K., & Monteiro, P. J. M. (2020). Concrete: Microstructure, properties, and materials (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Global Construction Review. (2022). Rising costs of construction materials: A global analysis. https://www.globalconstructionreview.com
• Normandin, K. (2021). Climate emergency and our built environment. Journal of Architectural Conservation, 27(3), 147–150.
• Regmi, B., Shah, B., & Uprety, S. (2021). Climatic effect on building facade: An approach to sustainable facade design of neighborhood row housing in Kathmandu Valley. Proceedings of 10th IOE Graduate Conference, 10, October.
• Lapão, L. (2020). Energy and climate change scenarios in the Mediterranean: An opportunity for cooperation. European Journal of Public Health, 30(Suppl. 5).
• Baran, E., Czernik, S., Hynowski, M., Michałowski, B., Piasecki, M., Tomaszewska, J., & Michalak, J. (2021). Quantifying environmental burdens of plasters based on natural vs. flue gas desulfurization (FGD) gypsum. Sustainability, 13(8), 4298.
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2021). Sixth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2021. https://www.ipcc.ch
• Deloitte. (2024). Circularity Gap Report 2024. https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/about/press-room/global-circularity-still-in-decline-circular-economy-megatrend.html
• Ministry of the Environment, Japan. (2023). Circular and ecological economy (Vol. 2). https://www.env.go.jp/en/policy/cee/pdf/Circular_and_Ecological_Economy_Vol2_Mid.pdf
• Kryeziu, D., Selmani, F., Mujaj, A., & Kondi, I. (2023). Recycled concrete aggregates: A promising and sustainable option for the construction industry. Journal of Human, Earth, and Future, 4(2).
• Ogunmakinde, O. E., Sher, W., & Egbelakin, T. E. (2021). Circular economy pillars: A semi-systematic review. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 23(3), 899–914.
• Vashishth, R., & Goel, M. (2023). Impact of circular economy in the construction sector: Review of current trends and future research direction. Sustainability, Agri, Food and Environmental Research, 11(1).
• Molchanova, R. (2023). Circular economy in the construction industry. Ekonomika i Upravlenie: Problemy, Resheniya, 4(3).
• Arup. (2023). Circular Buildings Toolkit. https://ce-toolkit.dhub.arup.com/
• Hansu, O., & Oğuz, A. (2025). Seismic risk, structural vulnerabilities, and retrofitting solutions: Lessons from the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake. Osmaniye Korkut Ata University Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 8(3), 1427–1452.
• Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2024). Building prosperity: Unlocking the potential of a nature-positive, circular economy for Europe. https://ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/building-prosperity
• World Steel Association. (2024). Sustainability Indicators 2024 Report. https://worldsteel.org/steel-topics/sustainability/sustainability-indicators-2024-report/
• Parmar, N., Vats, A., Devi, V., Kwatra, S., Srivastava, R. K., & Singh, S. B. (2024). Assessing the sustainability and performance of hempcrete. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change, 14(7), 609–622.
• Fraunhofer Building Innovation Alliance. (2025). Digitalization and BIM. https://www.bau.fraunhofer.de/en/fieldsofresearch/digitalization.html
• Al-Ali, A. R., Beheiry, S., Alnabulsi, A., Obaid, S., Mansoor, N., Odeh, N., & Mostafa, A. (2024). An IoT-based road bridge health monitoring and warning system. Sensors, 24(2), 469.
• Ramesh, B. M., Vongole, R. M., Nagraj, Y., Naganna, S. R., Sreedhara, B. M., Mailar, G., Ramesh, P. S., & Yaseen, Z. M. (2021). Valorization of incinerator bottom ash for the production of resource-efficient eco-friendly concrete: Performance and toxicological characterization. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.12497
• Puthussery, J. V., Kumar, R., & Garg, A. (2017). Evaluation of recycled concrete aggregates for their suitability in construction activities: An experimental study. Waste Management, 60, 270–276.
• Brandão, R., & Verissimo, L. (2024). Circular economy adoption in construction: A pathway to sustainable development and UN SDG 11 achievement. In W. Leal Filho, A. L. Salvia, & C. R. Portela de Vasconcelos (Eds.), An agenda for sustainable development research (pp. 201–220). Springer.
• Shukla, B. K., Bharti, G., Sharma, P. K., Sharma, M., Rawat, S., Maurya, N., & Srivastav, Y. (2024). Sustainable construction practices with recycled and waste materials for a circular economy. Asian Journal of Civil Engineering, 25, 5255–5276.
• Oğuz, A., & Hansu, O. (2025). Climate-adaptive modular micro-living for urban regeneration: A passive design and low-carbon construction framework. In SETSCI Conference Proceedings (Vol. 23, pp. 149–154). SETSCI.
• Gasparri, E., Arasteh, S., Kuru, A., Stracchi, P., & Brambilla, A. (2023). Circular economy in construction: A systematic review of knowledge gaps towards a novel research framework. Frontiers in Built Environment, 9, 1239757.
• Romero-Perdomo, F., Carvajalino-Umaña, J. D., Moreno-Gallego, J. L., Ardila, N., & González-Curbelo, M. Á. (2022). Research trends on climate change and circular economy from a knowledge mapping perspective. Sustainability, 14(5), 1521.
• Larsen, V. G., Tollin, N., Antoniucci, V., Birkved, M., Sattrup, P. A., Holmboe, T., & Marella, G. (2022). Filling the gaps: Circular transition of affordable housing in Denmark. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1078(1), 012078.
• Cui, Y., Ai, W., Tekle, B. H., Liu, M., Qu, S., & Zhang, P. (2023). State of the art review on the production and bond behaviour of reinforced geopolymer concrete. Low-carbon Materials and Green Construction, 1(25).
• European Commission. (2022). Circular Economy Action Plan for sustainable construction. https://www.ec.europa.eu
• Försterling, G., Orth, R., & Gellert, B. (2023). Transition to a circular economy in Europe through new business models: Barriers, drivers, and policy making. Sustainability, 15(10), 8212.
• Klöpffer, W., & Grahl, B. (2014). Life cycle assessment (LCA): A guide to best practice. Wiley-VCH.
• Brunner, P. H., & Rechberger, H. (2017). Practical handbook of material flow analysis. CRC Press.
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2020). ISO 14040:2006/Amd 1:2020 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Principles and framework (Amendment 1). https://www.iso.org/standard/76121.html
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2020). ISO 14044:2006/Amd 2:2020 Environmental management — Life cycle assessment — Requirements and guidelines (Amendment 2). https://www.iso.org/standard/76122.html
• Ghanbari, M., Olaikhan, A. A. J., & Skitmore, M. (2024). Enhancing project portfolio selection for construction holding firms: A multi-objective optimization framework with risk analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management.
• Kendirci, M. F., Oğuz, A., & Hansu, O. (2025). Industry 4.0 driven risk management for climate resilient smart cities: A hybrid framework for Southeastern Türkiye. In SETSCI Conference Proceedings (Vol. 23, pp. 247–262). SETSCI.
• Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Herrmann, I. T., & Moltesen, A. (2015). Does it matter which Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) tool you choose?—A comparative assessment of SimaPro and GaBi. Journal of Cleaner Production, 86, 163–169.
• Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Withanage, S., & Habib, K. (2021). Life cycle assessment and material flow analysis: Two under-utilized tools for informing e-waste management. Sustainability, 13(14), 7939.
• Pei, W., Biljecki, F., & Stouffs, R. (2022). Dataset for urban scale building stock modelling: Identification and review of potential data collection approaches. ISPRS Annals of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, X-4/W2, 225–232.
• Birat, J. (2023). Materials and actor network theory, a way to flesh out life cycle assessment? Matériaux & Techniques, 111(1).
• Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management. (2022). Room for the River: A Comprehensive Approach to Flood Resilience. https://www.government.nl
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2024). 2023 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-status-report-buildings-and-construction
• Klijn, F., Asselman, N., & Wagenaar, D. (2018). Room for Rivers: Risk reduction by enhancing the flood conveyance capacity of The Netherlands’ large rivers. Geosciences, 8(6), 224.
• Vourdoubas, J. (2024). Review of the benefits of green roofs. International Journal of Current Science Research and Review, 7(9).
• Mohamad, D. (2024). Assessment of permeable pavements for urban flood mitigation and community resilience. International Journal of Science and Society, 6(2).
• Idris, M. A., Markham, C., Mena, K. D., & Perkison, W. B. (2024). Examining management and employees’ perceptions of occupational heat exposure and the effectiveness of a heat stress prevention intervention on safety and well-being among natural gas construction workers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 21(9).
• Tu, J., Wen, J., Yang, L. E., Reimuth, A., Young, S. S., Zhang, M., Wang, L., & Garschagen, M. (2023). Assessment of building damage and risk under extreme flood scenarios in Shanghai. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 23(10), 3247–3265.
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), & United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Secretariat. (2021). Building circularity into nationally determined contributions (NDCs) – A practical toolbox. https://www.unep.org/resources/toolkits-manuals-and-guides/building-circularity-nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2021). Circularity Platform. https://www.unep.org/circularity
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2021). Circular Economy: From Indicators and Data to Policy-Making. https://www.unep.org/resources/report/circular-economy-indicators-and-data-policy-making
• Bello, A., Isa, R. B., Oke, A. E., Arogundade, S., & Lewis, J. M. O. (2024). Circular economy implementation in the construction industry: An examination of the barriers in a developing country. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation.