A consortium of 7 organisations
2023
A consortium of 7 organisations and others
The "Circular Economy Taxonomy Study," published in February 2023, was conducted by a consortium of seven organizations and involved 29 market participants from various European countries. The study aimed to assess the market-readiness of the proposed Circular Economy EU Taxonomy criteria for building activities by applying them to 38 real case studies, comprising 35 new construction projects and 3 renovation projects. The findings revealed a concerning reality: none of the examined projects aligned with the EU Taxonomy criteria for circular economy practices. Key barriers included a lack of relevant data, internal knowledge gaps, and insufficient implementation plans. Additionally, structural challenges such as the absence of aligned frameworks, definitions, and digital tools hindered the adoption of circular economy principles in the construction sector. Despite some positive indicators, such as 90% of projects adhering to the EU Construction & Demolition Waste Protocol, significant shortcomings were noted. For instance, only 40% of projects prepared 90% of their waste for reuse or recycling, which is a fundamental requirement of the Taxonomy. Furthermore, while a majority conducted life cycle assessments, many faced obstacles in publishing their results due to the lack of accessible member state registers. The study emphasizes the need for clearer definitions and methodologies from the EU Commission to facilitate the implementation of circular economy practices. It advocates for the use of Building Material Passports as a vital tool for enhancing documentation and fostering greater circularity within the construction industry, ultimately aiding the transition towards a sustainable built environment.
The Circular Economy Taxonomy Study, published in February 2023, was conducted by a consortium of seven organizations and involved 29 market participants from Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Spain, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Turkey. The study aimed to assess the market-readiness of the proposed Circular Economy EU Taxonomy criteria for building activities by applying them to 38 real building case studies
The results showed that none of the 35 new construction projects nor the 3 renovation projects could be classified as aligned with the EU Taxonomy criteria for circular economy. The reasons for this include a lack of relevant circular economy-focused data, internal knowledge gaps, and the absence of clear implementation action plans and performance indicators. Additionally, structural reasons such as a lack of appropriately aligned frameworks, definitions, digital tools, and clear references for documenting alignment hinder the active engagement with and implementation of circular economy principles in construction and real estate. The study provided valuable insights into the challenges faced by financial and real estate organizations and offered recommendations and practical solutions for applying the criteria. Some key recommendations for the Taxonomy include adjusting the methodology to market reality, providing clear definitions and methodologies, and ensuring the necessary circumstances for implementing circular economy practices are available. For application, the study suggested the use of Building Material Passports as a crucial method of documentation for implementing more circularity and consequently for the circular economy Taxonomy.
The study was conducted by a consortium of 7 European green building councils, joined by 29 market participants from 10 European countries. It assessed the market-readiness of the proposed EU Taxonomy circular economy criteria for buildings, by applying them to 38 real building case studies (35 new construction, 3 renovation).
- The overall finding is that none of the 38 buildings could be classified as aligned with the proposed taxonomy criteria. This is mainly due to lack of relevant circular economy data, knowledge gaps, and lack of implementation plans among organizations. There are also structural barriers like lack of frameworks, definitions, tools and documentation guidance.
- 90% of projects adhered to the EU Construction & Demolition Waste Protocol, but only 40% prepared 90% of waste for reuse/recycling (Taxonomy requirement). 70% met the lower DNSH requirement of 70% waste reuse/recycling.
- 90% of projects conducted a life cycle assessment, but 80% could not publish results publicly due to lack of member state registers.
- 70% of projects supported circularity in design (resource efficiency, adaptability, dismantlability). 80% met the related DNSH requirement.
- None met the material quotas (minimum 50% reused/recycled/renewable). Only 1/3 met the renewable materials quota. Lack of data, high benchmarks and ambiguity in methods were key challenges.
- 90% avoided asbestos and hazardous substances (SVHCs).
- 70% used electronic tools to document materials/components and provide end-of-life guidance, but 60% lacked full information on maintenance and reuse pathways.
The study provides recommendations to the EU Commission and Platform on Sustainable Finance regarding ambiguities in scope, definitions, documentation needs etc. It also highlights the need for better frameworks, tools, infrastructure and ecosystems to enable circularity in the built environment.In summary, the proposed taxonomy criteria are very ambitious and pose implementation challenges currently. But such testing studies help build organizational capacities and identify areas for improvement towards a circular economy.