Secondary Raw Materials for Circular Economy in Construction Sector: A Review

Abstract:

Construction and demolition waste (CDW) is very high in quantity, 30% - 40% of total solid waste and their management is inadequate and lack the integration of sustainability concepts. This situation leads to severe environmental effects, which are mainly associated with the production of new building materials due to the low recovery rate. In fact some studies show that 5-10% of total energy consumption across the EU is related to the manufacture of construction products. For this reason, CDW is a priority for many policies globally. For several years, a growing trend towards more sustainable construction processes has been taking place with a focus on secondary raw materials with lower environmental impacts on the entire life cycle. For this reason, this paper intends to contribute to increasing knowledge in this field through a review article. The review has the aim to evaluate the research gap, strategies to reduce construction waste and to promote the recycled materials use for a circular economy in construction sector. The results of the study showed that interest in this field of research has grown strongly over the years: the most publications on the subject relate to the last five years. On the other hand, issues relating to the topic did not attract particular interest in the range 2010-2016, in fact the number of publications in this period did not exceed 4%. The research showed that Europe is among the communities most sensitive to the issue and it has clearly revealed that there are still many barriers and research gaps to be overcome on this issue and the study has tried to identify the main ones.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 919)
• Pages: 260-269
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/p-evs7s1
• Online since: May 2022
• Authors: Marianna Rotilio*, Federica Cucchiella, Valeria Annibaldi
• Keywords: Bibliometric Analysis, Circular Economy, Construction Waste, Demolition Waste, Review, Secondary Raw Materials

References

[1] Valve, H.; Lazarevic, D.; Humalisto, N., When the circular economy diverges: The co-evolution of biogas business models and material circuits in Finland. Ecological Economics 2021, 185.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107025

[2] Donner, M.; Verniquet, A.; Broeze, J.; Kayser, K.; De Vries, H., Critical success and risk factors for circular business models valorising agricultural waste and by-products. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2021, 165.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105236

[3] Bag, S.; Yadav, G.; Dhamija, P.; Kataria, K. K., Key resources for industry 4.0 adoption and its effect on sustainable production and circular economy: An empirical study. Journal of Cleaner Production 2021, 281, 125233.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125233

[4] Ranta, V.; Aarikka-Stenroos, L.; Ritala, P.; Mäkinen, S. J., Exploring institutional drivers and barriers of the circular economy: A cross-regional comparison of China, the US, and Europe. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2018, 135, 70-82.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.08.017

[5] Yadav, G.; Luthra, S.; Jakhar, S. K.; Mangla, S. K.; Rai, D. P., A framework to overcome sustainable supply chain challenges through solution measures of industry 4.0 and circular economy: An automotive case. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020, 254.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120112

[6] Kayikci, Y.; Kazancoglu, Y.; Lafci, C.; Gozacan, N., Exploring barriers to smart and sustainable circular economy: The case of an automotive eco-cluster. Journal of Cleaner Production 2021, 314.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127920

[7] Guerra, B.C.; Leite, F., Circular economy in the construction industry: An overview of United States stakeholders' awareness, major challenges, and enablers. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2021, 170.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105617

[8] Akanbi, L. A.; Oyedele, L. O.; Omoteso, K.; Bilal, M.; Akinade, O. O.; Ajayi, A. O.; Davila Delgado, J. M.; Owolabi, H. A., Disassembly and deconstruction analytics system (D-DAS) for construction in a circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production 2019, 223, 386-396.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.172

[9] European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. (2020).

DOI: 10.54648/eerr1996017

[10] Annibaldi, V.; Cucchiella, F.; De Berardinis, P.; Gastaldi, M.; Rotilio, M., An integrated sustainable and profitable approach of energy efficiency in heritage buildings. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020, 251.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119516

[11] Annibaldi, V.; Cucchiella, F.; De Berardinis, P.; Rotilio, M.; Stornelli, V., Environmental and economic benefits of optimal insulation thickness: A life-cycle cost analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2019, 116.

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.109441

[12] Cucchiella, F.; D'Adamo, I.; Gastaldi, M.; Stornelli, V., Solar Photovoltaic Panels Combined with Energy Storage in a Residential Building: An Economic Analysis. Sustainability 2018, 10, (9), 3117.

DOI: 10.3390/su10093117

[13] Pantoli, L.; Gabriele, T.; Donati, F. F.; Mastrodicasa, L.; Berardinis, P. D.; Rotilio, M.; Cucchiella, F.; Leoni, A.; Stornelli, V., Sensorial Multifunctional Panels for Smart Factory Applications. Electronics 2021, 10, (12).

DOI: 10.3390/electronics10121495

[14] Cucchiella, F.; D'Adamo, I.; Gastaldi, M.; Koh, S. C. L., Implementation of a real option in a sustainable supply chain: an empirical study of alkaline battery recycling. International Journal of Systems Science 2014, 45, (6), 1268-1282.

DOI: 10.1080/00207721.2012.761458

[15] Jin, R.; Yuan, H.; Chen, Q., Science mapping approach to assisting the review of construction and demolition waste management research published between 2009 and 2018. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2019, 140, 175-188.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.09.029

[16] Tam, V.W.Y.; Tam, C. M., A review on the viable technology for construction waste recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2006, 47, (3), 209-221.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2005.12.002

[17] López Ruiz, L. A.; Roca Ramón, X.; Gassó Domingo, S., The circular economy in the construction and demolition waste sector – A review and an integrative model approach. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020, 248.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119238

[18] Negash, Y. T.; Hassan, A. M.; Tseng, M.-L.; Wu, K.-J.; Ali, M. H., Sustainable construction and demolition waste management in Somaliland: Regulatory barriers lead to technical and environmental barriers. Journal of Cleaner Production 2021, 297.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126717

[19] Illankoon, I. M. C. S.; Tam, V. W. Y.; Le, K. N., Environmental, Economic, and Social Parameters in International Green Building Rating Tools. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice 2017, 143, (2).

DOI: 10.1061/(asce)ei.1943-5541.0000313

[20] Mahpour, A., Prioritizing barriers to adopt circular economy in construction and demolition waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2018, 134, 216-227.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.01.026

[21] Toller, S.; Wadeskog, A.; Finnveden, G.; Malmqvist, T.; Carlsson, A., Energy Use and Environmental Impacts of the Swedish Building and Real Estate Management Sector. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2011, 15, (3), 394-404.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00340.x

[22] Herczeg, M.; McKinnon, D.; Milios, L.; Bakas, I.; Klaassens, E.; Svatikova, K.; Widerberg, O., Resource Efficiency in the Building Sector. Resource Efficiency in the Building Sector (2014).

[23] COM (2014) 0445 final, EUROPEAN COMMISSION - Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Resource Efficiency Opportunities in the Building Sector. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions (2014).

DOI: 10.54648/eerr1996017

[24] European, C., Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Farm to Fork Strategy for a Fair, Healthy and Environmentally-Friendly Food System. COM(2020) 381 Final. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions (2020).

DOI: 10.54648/eerr1996017

[25] Hertwich, E.; Lifset, R.; Pauliuk, S.; Heeren, N., Resource efficiency and climate change: Material efficiency strategies for a low-carbon future. Resource Efficiency and Climate Change: Material Efficiency Strategies for a Low-Carbon Future (2020).

DOI: 10.18356/9789280737714c006

[26] Petticrew, M., Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. Bmj 2001, 322, (7278), 98-101.

DOI: 10.1136/bmj.322.7278.98

[27] Rodríguez‐Fernández, M.; Gaspar‐González, A. I.; Sánchez‐Teba, E. M., Sustainable social responsibility through stakeholders engagement. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2020, 27, (6), 2425-2436.

DOI: 10.1002/csr.2023

[28] Khudhair, A.; Li, H.; Ren, G.; Liu, S., Towards Future BIM Technology Innovations: A Bibliometric Analysis of the Literature. Applied Sciences 2021, 11, (3).

DOI: 10.3390/app11031232

[29] Alaloul, W. S.; Alzubi, K. M.; Malkawi, A. B.; Al Salaheen, M.; Musarat, M. A., Productivity monitoring in building construction projects: a systematic review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 2021, ahead-of-print, (ahead-of-print).

DOI: 10.1108/ecam-03-2021-0211

[30] Forcael, E.; Ferrari, I.; Opazo-Vega, A.; Pulido-Arcas, J. A., Construction 4.0: A Literature Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, (22).

DOI: 10.3390/su12229755

[31] Haigh, R.; Sandanayake, M.; Bouras, Y.; Vrcelj, Z., A review of the mechanical and durability performance of kraft-fibre reinforced mortar and concrete. Construction and Building Materials 2021, 297.

DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.123759

[32] Qin, D.; Hu, Y.; Li, X., Waste Glass Utilization in Cement-Based Materials for Sustainable Construction: A Review. Crystals 2021, 11, (6).

DOI: 10.3390/cryst11060710

[33] Nazir, F.A.; Edwards, D. J.; Shelbourn, M.; Martek, I.; Thwala, W. D. D.; El-Gohary, H., Comparison of modular and traditional UK housing construction: a bibliometric analysis. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology 2020, 19, (1), 164-186.

DOI: 10.1108/jedt-05-2020-0193

[34] Amirbagheri, K.; Núñez-Carballosa, A.; Guitart-Tarrés, L.; Merigó, J. M., Research on green supply chain: a bibliometric analysis. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 2018, 21, (1), 3-22.

DOI: 10.1007/s10098-018-1624-1

[35] Merigó, J. M.; Pedrycz, W.; Weber, R.; de la Sotta, C., Fifty years of Information Sciences: A bibliometric overview. Information Sciences 2018, 432, 245-268.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2017.11.054

[36] Huang, B.; Wang, X.; Kua, H.; Geng, Y.; Bleischwitz, R.; Ren, J., Construction and demolition waste management in China through the 3R principle. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2018, 129, 36-44.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.09.029

[37] Gálvez-Martos, J.-L.; Styles, D.; Schoenberger, H.; Zeschmar-Lahl, B., Construction and demolition waste best management practice in Europe. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2018, 136, 166-178.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.04.016

[38] Ghisellini, P.; Ripa, M.; Ulgiati, S., Exploring environmental and economic costs and benefits of a circular economy approach to the construction and demolition sector. A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018, 178, 618-643.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.207

[39] Ghisellini, P.; Ji, X.; Liu, G.; Ulgiati, S., Evaluating the transition towards cleaner production in the construction and demolition sector of China: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production 2018, 195, 418-434.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.084

[40] Zhu, J.; Hassan, S.-U.; Mirza, H. T.; Xie, Q., Measuring recent research performance for Chinese universities using bibliometric methods. Scientometrics 2014, 101, (1), 429-443.

DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1389-1

[41] Aslam, M. S.; Huang, B.; Cui, L., Review of construction and demolition waste management in China and USA. Journal of Environmental Management 2020, 264.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110445

[42] Jain, M. S., A mini review on generation, handling, and initiatives to tackle construction and demolition waste in India. Environmental Technology & Innovation 2021, 22.

DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2021.101490

[43] Lima, L.; Trindade, E.; Alencar, L.; Alencar, M.; Silva, L., Sustainability in the construction industry: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Cleaner Production 2021, 289.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125730

[44] Hu, H.; Geertman, S.; Hooimeijer, P., Green Apartments in Nanjing China: Do Developers and Planners Understand the Valuation by Residents? Housing Studies 2014, 29, (1), 26-43.

DOI: 10.1080/02673037.2014.848268

[45] Tan, Y.; Ochoa, J. J.; Langston, C.; Shen, L., An empirical study on the relationship between sustainability performance and business competitiveness of international construction contractors. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015, 93, 273-278.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.034

[46] Kirchherr, J.; Piscicelli, L.; Bour, R.; Kostense-Smit, E.; Muller, J.; Huibrechtse-Truijens, A.; Hekkert, M., Barriers to the Circular Economy: Evidence From the European Union (EU). Ecological Economics 2018, 150, 264-272.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.028

[47] Trianni, A.; Cagno, E., Dealing with barriers to energy efficiency and SMEs: Some empirical evidences. Energy 2012, 37, (1), 494-504.

DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2011.11.005