Dijital Çağda Yapılı Çevrede Döngüsellik: Sistematik Analiz

Year 2025, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 365 - 390, 30.09.2025

Burcu Kısmet , Meryem Birgül Çolakoğlu

https://doi.org/10.53710/jcode.1618537

Abstract

Küresel iklim değişikliğinin etkilerini azaltmak için Birleşmiş Milletler ve diğer uluslararası kuruluşlar ile hükümetler ve STK'lar, özellikle 2050 yılına kadar karbon nötrlüğü sağlamayı hedefleyen stratejiler geliştirmektedir. Bu stratejilerden biri, lineer ekonomi modelinden ("al-yap-at") döngüsel ekonomi modeline ("üret-kullan-yeniden kullan-geri dönüştür") geçiştir. Mimarlık-İnşaat-Mühendislik-Operasyon (AECO) sektörü, küresel ekonomik faaliyetlerin temel itici gücü olarak, döngüsel ekonomi ilkelerine uyum sağlamak amacıyla yeniden yapılandırılmalıdır.

Bu çalışma, döngüsel ekonomi ve yapılı çevre arasındaki ilişkiyi dijitalleşme perspektifinden incelemektedir. 2016-2024 dönemindeki yayınları kapsayan sistematik bir literatür taraması, Scopus ve Web of Science (WoS) veritabanlarında "döngüsel ekonomi", "yapılı çevre" ve "dijital teknolojiler" anahtar kelimeleri kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Analizler, Excel ve VOSviewer yazılımıyla yapılmış ve günümüzdeki eğilimler, anahtar kelimeler, tematik bağlantılar ve gelecekteki araştırma alanları belirlenmiştir. 2016 yılından itibaren bu alandaki çalışmaların sürekli ve artan ivme ile arttığı tespit edilmiştir. BIM, blockchain ve IoT gibi dijital teknolojiler, kaynak optimizasyonu, atık azaltımı ve yaşam döngüsü değerlendirmelerini iyileştirerek sürdürülebilir uygulamaların benimsenmesini desteklemektedir. Çalışma, AECO sektöründe döngüsel geçişi desteklemek için kapsamlı çerçeve ve stratejik yol haritalarının gerekliliğini vurgulamaktadır. Aynı zamanda da bulguların tartışılması kısmında farklı döngüsel ekonomi tanımlamaları analiz edilmiş, döngüsel ekonomi ile bağlantılı olan kavramlar ve anahtar kelimeler ortaya konmuştur. Bu çalışma, döngüsel ekonomi alanında akademisyenler, sektör uzmanları ve politika yapıcılar için değerli bilgiler sunmakta, sektörün karbon nötrlüğü ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma hedeflerine katkı potansiyelini ortaya koymaktadır.

Keywords

döngüsel ekonomi , yapılı çevre , mimarlık , bibliyometrik analiz , sürdürülebilirlik

Circular Built Environment During the Digital Age: A Systematic Review

Abstract

As the effects of the Industrial Revolution have significantly contributed to global climate change and the studies reveal that by 2050, the world's energy demand will double while fossil fuel reserves are projected to deplete. To mitigate the risks associated with exceeding the 1.5°C global warming threshold, international organizations, including the United Nations, as well as governments and NGOs, are implementing strategies aimed at achieving carbon neutrality by mid-century. One such approach involves transitioning from the "take-make-waste" model of the linear economy to the circular economy (CE), which operates on principles of "make-use-reuse-recycle."

The AECO (Architecture-Construction-Engineering-Operation) industry, a key driver of global economic activity, plays a central role in this transformation by rethinking and restructuring the AECO industry to align with CE principles. This study examines the intersection of circular economy principles and the built environment through the lens of Industry 4.0. A systematic literature review combining descriptive and bibliometric analysis, covering publications from 2016 to 2024 from Scopus and Web of Science (WoS), was conducted using keywords related to CE, the built environment, and digital technologies. The analysis, performed with VOSviewer, highlights key trends, thematic connections, and potential areas for future research. Digital technologies such as building information modeling (BIM), blockchain, and the Internet of Things (IoT) have emerged as powerful tools to support CE implementation. By enabling resource optimization, reducing waste, and enhancing lifecycle assessments, these technologies facilitate the adoption of sustainable practices within the AECO sector. These studies underscore the importance of advancing frameworks like life cycle assessment (LCA) and cradle-to-cradle (C2C) to support circular transitions in the built environment. Furthermore, the results demonstrate the increasing momentum and global interest in leveraging digitalization to achieve sustainability goals in the sector.

This study offers valuable insights for academics, industry professionals, and policymakers by mapping the current state of CE research in the AECO industry and identifying emerging trends. It emphasizes the need for comprehensive frameworks and strategic roadmaps to enable the circular transition of the AECO sector. Future research should focus on deepening interdisciplinary collaboration and integrating CE with related sustainability concepts to enhance understanding and accelerate implementation. By doing so, the AECO industry can make significant contributions toward global carbon neutrality and sustainable development goals.

Keywords

circular economy , built environment , architecture , bibliometric analysis , sustainability

Supporting Institution

İSTANBUL TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MİMARİ TASARIMDA BİLİŞİM DOKTORA PROGRAMI TEZİ KAPSAMINDA VE TÜBİTAK 2211-A - Yurt İçi Genel Doktora Burs Programı DESTEĞİ İLE GERÇEKLEŞMİŞTİR.

References

• Aghaei Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
• Amin, Z., Ali, N. M., & Smeaton, A. F. (2021). Attention-based design and user decisions on information sharing: A thematic literature review. IEEE Access, 9, 88255–88273. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3087740
• Bonsu, N. O. (2020). Towards a circular and low-carbon economy: Insights from the transitioning to electric vehicles and net zero economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120659
• Bornmann, L., Mutz, R., & Daniel, H. D. (2012). A reliability-generalization study of journal impact factors. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(2), 389–393.
• Cobo, M.J., López-Herrera, A.G., Herrera-Viedma, E. and Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: a practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5, 146-166.
• Çetin, S., De Wolf, C., & Bocken, N. (2021). Circular Digital Built Environment: An Emerging Framework. Sustainability, 13(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116348.
• Eberhardt, L. C. M., van Stijn, A., Rasmussen, F. N., Birkved, M., & Birgisdottir, H. (2020). Towards circular life cycle assessment for the built environment: A comparison of allocation approaches. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 588(3), 032026. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/588/3/032026 Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF). (2013). Towards the circular economy, opportunities for the consumer goods sector, 2. Retrieved October 26, 2024, from https://www.werktrends.nl/app/uploads/2015/06/Rapport_McKinseyTowards_A_Circular_Economy.pdf
• Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF). (2014). Towards the circular economy Vol. 3: Accelerating the scale-up across global supply chains. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved October 26, 2024, from https://emf.thirdlight.com/file/24/cDm30tVcyxPQsxcD10AcOo2GK/Towards%20the%20circular%20economy%20Vol%203%3A%20Accelerating%20the%20scale-up%20across%20global%20supply%20chains.pdf
• Ellen MacArthur Foundation (EMF) & McKinsey. (2015). Growth within: A circular economy vision for a competitive Europe. Ellen MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved February 20, 2025, from https://emf.thirdlight.com/link/8izw1qhml4ga-404tsz/@/preview/1?o
• Esmaeilian, B., Wang, B., Lewis, K., Duarte, F., Ratti, C., & Behdad, S. (2018). The future of waste management in smart and sustainable cities: A review and concept paper. Waste Management, 81, 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.09.047
• European Commission. (2015, December 2). Closing the loop: Commission adopts ambitious new Circular Economy Package [Press release]. European Commission Press Corner. Retrieved February 20, 2025, from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/memo_15_6204
• European Union (EU). (2023, December 1). Circular economy: Definition, importance and benefits. European Parliament. Retrieved February 11, 2025, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20151201STO05603/circular-economy-definition-importance-and-benefits
• European Union (EU). (2021, March 11). A new Circular Economy Action Plan: For a cleaner and more competitive Europe. European Commission. Retrieved February 11, 2025, from https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_en
• Gan, V. J. L., Lo, I. M. C., Ma, J., Tse, K. T., Cheng, J. C. P., & Chan, C. M. (2020). Simulation optimisation towards energy efficient green buildings: Current status and future trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, 262, 120012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120012
• Gravagnuolo, A., Angrisano, M., & Fusco Girard, L. (2019). Circular Economy Strategies in Eight Historic Port Cities: Criteria and Indicators Towards a Circular City Assessment Framework. Sustainability, 11(13), 3512. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133512.
• Guz, A. N., & Rushchitsky, J. J. (2009). Scopus: A system for the evaluation of scientific journals. International Applied Mechanics, 45(4), 351–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10778-009-0189-4
• Hammersley, M. (2001). On ‘systematic’ reviews of research literature: a ‘narrative’ response to Evans and Benefield. British Educational Research Journal, 27, 543-554. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920120095726
• Heisel, F. & Rau-Oberhuber, S. (2020). Calculation and evaluation of circularity indicators for the built environment using the case studies of UMAR and Madaster. Journal of Cleaner Production, 243.
• Hoosain, M. S., Paul, B. S., & Ramakrishna, S. (2020). The Impact of 4IR Digital Technologies and Circular Thinking on the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability, 12(23). https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310143
• International Energy Agency (IEA). (2019). 2019 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction: Towards a zero-emissions, efficient and resilient buildings and construction sector. World Green Building Council. Retrieved January 10, 2025, from https://www.worldgbc.org/sites/default/files/2019%20Global%20Status%20Report%20for%20Buildings%20and%20Construction.pdf
• Jin, R.Y., Gao, S., Cheshmehzangi, A. & Aboagye-Nimo, E. (2018). A holistic review of off-site construction literature published between 2008 and 2018. Journal of Cleaner Production, 202, 1202-1219.
• Joensuu, T., Edelman, H. & Saari, A. (2020). Circular economy practices in the built environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124215.
• Khan, A., Sepasgozar, S., Liu, T., & Yu, R. (2021). Integration of BIM and immersive technologies for AEC: A scientometric-SWOT analysis and critical content review. Buildings, 11(3), 126. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030126
• Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., & Hekkert, M. (2017). Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 127, 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.005
• Kirchherr, J., & van Santen, R. (2019). Research on the circular economy: A critique of the field. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 151, 104480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104480
• Kirchherr, J., Yang, N.N., Schulze-Spüntrup, F., Heerink, M.J. & Hartley, K. (2023). Conceptualizing the Circular Economy (Revisited): An Analysis of 221 Definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 194, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107001
• Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O.P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J. & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering–a systematic literature review. Information and software technology, 51(1), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009
• Kitchenham, B. A., Budgen, D., & Brereton, P. (2015). Evidence-based software engineering and systematic reviews. CRC press.
• Kneese, A. V. (1988). The economics of natural resources. Population and Development Review, 14(2), 281–309. https://doi.org/10.2307/1973579
• Metabolic. (2019, October 15). Seven pillars of the circular economy. Metabolic. Retrieved February 11, 2025, from https://www.metabolic.nl/news/the-seven-pillars-of-the-circular-economy/
• Olawumi, T., Chan, D. W. M., Ojo, S., & Yam, M. C. H. (2022). Automating the modular construction process: A review of digital technologies and future directions with blockchain technology. Journal of Building Engineering, 46, 103720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103720
• Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., & Mulrow, C. D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
• Petersen, K, Vakkalanka, S. & Kuzniarz, L. (2015). Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology, 64, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007
• Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. Chelsea Green Publishing. Retrieved February 11, 2025, from https://www.chelseagreen.com/product/doughnut-economics/
• SCImago. (2024). Journal Rankings. Retrieved from https://www.scimagojr.com
• Shahruddin, S. and Zairul, M. (2020). BIM requirements across a construction project lifecycle: a PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12,569-590. https://www.ijicc.net/images/vol12/iss5/12529_Shahruddin_2020_E_R2.pdf
• Shojaei, A., Ketabi, R., Razkenari, M., Hakim, H., & Wang, J. (2021). Enabling a circular economy in the built environment sector through blockchain technology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.011
• Tijssen, R. J. W., & van Raan, A. F. J. (1994). Mapping changes in science and technology: Bibliometric co-occurrence analysis of the R&D literature. Evaluation Review, 18(1), 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9401800110
• United Nations (UN) Environment Programme (UNEP). (2020). Building circularity. UNEP. Retrieved May 11, 2024, from https://buildingcircularity.org/
• United Nations (UN) Habitat. (2020). World cities report 2020: The value of sustainable urbanization. Nairobi, Kenya: UN-Habitat. Retrieved May 10, 2024, from https://unhabitat.org/World%20Cities%20Report%202020
• United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). (2019). Sustainable development goals: Guidelines. UN. Retrieved May 10, 2024, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/SDG_Guidelines_AUG_2019_Final.pdf
• Usman, M., Ali, N., & Wohlin, C. (2023). A quality assessment instrument for systematic literature reviews in software engineering. e-Informatica Software Engineering Journal, 17(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.37190/e-Inf230105
• Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84, 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
• Yang, L., Zhang, H., Shen, H., Huang, X., Zhou, X., Rong, G. & Shao, D. (2021). Quality Assessment in Systematic Literature Reviews: A Software Engineering Perspective. Information and Software Technology, 130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2020.106397
• Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., & Visser, M. S. (2013). Some modifications to the SNIP journal impact indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 7(2), 272–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.11.011
• World Green Building Council. (2019, September 23). World Green Building Week 2019. World Green Building Council. Retrieved February 21, 2025, from https://worldgbc.org/wgbw19/
• Zhuang, G.L., Shih, S.G. & Wagiri, F. (2023). Circular economy and sustainable development goals: Exploring the potentials of reusable modular components in circular economy business model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 414, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137503.