Rethinking the Construction Industry Under the Circular Economy: Principles and Case Studies

  • Alessia MangialardoEmail author
  • Ezio Micelli
Conference paper
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)


The research on new ways to make our existing city more sustainable in economic and environmental terms has become a central theme at the national and international levels, with important implications for city management. The collective agenda is focused on retaining, refurbishing and recycling the existing elements by transforming wastes into new resources. This continuous cycle represented by the extension of the product life cycle and the enhancement of the discarded parts in the built environment is changing the economic system used for many centuries. The current linear economy model is going progressively to be converted into a more circular economy. Many sectors—like infrastructure, foods, enterprises, design etc.—are improving their efficiency by adopting a more circular pattern, but construction companies seem to be very far from this purpose. As one of the main sectors responsible of global energy consumption and waste production, the construction industry has to undergo a radical change in perspective on urban development, along with a new social, cultural, and economic interest in rebuilding the existing city in a sustainable way. The aim of this research is to highlight how to transform the construction industry through the circular economy to make urban reuse strategies more sustainable in social, economic and especially environmental terms. The paper considers not only the theoretical implications of the economic paradigm of circularity, but also case studies through which it is possible to evaluate its relevance in terms of design, production and management of such a new perspective. Through a critical analysis of the more relevant circular interventions in Europe to upcycle obsolete buildings, the research highlights the new fundamental rules for the construction industry to regenerate the existing cities. In particular, the cases studies show how the economic and environmental benefits apply to a circular model in the construction industry and how this system is able to generate new social and economic value in existing buildings. The second element is to show how to combine the circular economy with costs via technologies able to match circularity and environmental efficiency.


Circular economy Construction industry Sustainable urban regeneration Pre-fab components Modular construction components 


  1. Addis, W., & Schouten, J. (2004). Design for deconstruction: Principles of design to facilitate reuse and recycling. London: CIRIA.Google Scholar
  2. Andersen, M. S. (2007). An introductory note on the environmental economics of the circular economy. Sustainable Science, 2(1), e133–e140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arup. (2016). The circular economy in the built environment. Accessed at:
  4. Benhamou, F. (2003). Who owns cultural goods? The case of the built heritage. In V. Ginsburg (Ed.), Economics of the arts and culture (pp. 2–20). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  5. Bisello, A., Grilli, G., Balest, J., Stellin, G., & Ciolli, M. (2017). Co-benefits of smart and sustainable energy district projects: An overview on economic assessment methodologies. In Green Energy and Technology, 127–164. Scholar
  6. Braungart, M., & McDonough, W. (2009). Cradle to cradle: Patterns of the planet. London: Vintage books.Google Scholar
  7. Campeol, G., Carollo, S., & Masotto, N. (2017). Development theories and infrastructural planning: The Belluno province. Green Energy and Technology, 299–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheshire, D. (2017). Building revolutions—Applying the circular economy to the built environment (1st ed.). London: Riba Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Coscia, C., & Curto, R. (2017). Valorising in the absence of public resources and weak markets: The case of “Ivrea, the 20th century industrial city”. In: S. Stanghellini et al. (Eds.) Appraisal: From theory to practice. Results of SIEV 2015 (pp. 79–99). Berlino: Springer.Google Scholar
  10. de Filippi, F., Coscia, C., Boella, G., Antonini, A., Calafiore, A., Cantini, A., et al. (2016). MiraMap: A we-government tool for smart peripheries in smart cities. IEEE Access, 4, 3824–3843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ellen MacArthur Foundation, Stiftungsfonds für Umweltökonomie und Nachhaltigkeit, Deutsche Post Foundation, McKinsey Center for Business and Environment (2015). Growth within: A circular economy vision for a competitive Europe. New York: McKinsey & Company.Google Scholar
  12. European Commission. (2016). Construction and demolition waste. Accessed at:
  13. European Commission. (2017). Circular economy strategy. Accessed at:
  14. Fusco Girard L. (2015). Nuovo umanesimo e rigenerazione urbana: quali strumenti per una crescita economica inclusiva? In L. Mazzinghi & A. Spini (Eds.), Per una nuova visione della città. Polistampa: Firenze.Google Scholar
  15. Kohler, N., & Yang, W. (2007). Long-term management of building stocks. Building Research and Information, 34(3), 287–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lieder, M., & Rashid, A. (2016). Towards circular economy implementation: A comprehensive review in the context of manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 115, 36–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mangialardo, A., & Micelli, E. (2017). New bottom-up approaches to enhance public real estate property. In S. Stanghellini et al. (Eds.), Appraisal: From theory to practice (pp. 53–62). Cham: Springer International Publishing AG, Green Energy and Technology.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McDonough, W., Braungart, M., & Clinton, B. (2013). The upcycle: Beyond sustainability. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Micelli, E., & Mangialardo, A. (2017). Recycling the city—New perspective on the real-estate market and construction industry. Green Energy and Technology, 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mosannenzadeh, F., Bisello, A., Diamantini, C., Stellin, G., & Vettorato, D. (2017). A case-based learning methodology to predict barriers to implementation of smart and sustainable urban energy projects. Cities, 60, 28–36. Scholar
  21. Nasir, M. H. A., Genovese, A., Acquaye, A. A., Koh, S. C. L., & Yamoah, F. (2017). Comparing linear and circular supply chains: A case study from the construction industry. International Journal of Production Economics, 183, 443–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Power, A. (2008). Does demolition or refurbishment of old and inefficient homes help to increase our environmental, social and economic viability? Energy Policy, 36, 4487–4501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sauvé, S., Bernard, S., & Sloan, P. (2016). Environmental sciences, sustainable development and circular economy: Alternative concepts for trans-disciplinary research. Environmental Development, 17, 48–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of PaduaPaduaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Architecture Construction and ConservationUniversity IUAV of VeniceVeniceItaly

Personalised recommendations