A consortium of 7 organisations
2023
The Circular Economy Taxonomy Study, published by a consortium of seven organizations in February 2023, evaluated the market-readiness of the EU Taxonomy criteria for circular economy in building activities. It applied these criteria to 38 case studies, finding that none of the projects met the criteria due to a lack of relevant data, internal knowledge gaps, and the absence of clear implementation plans. Although 90% of projects adhered to the EU Construction & Demolition Waste Protocol, only 40% prepared the required waste for reuse or recycling. The study identified significant structural barriers and provided recommendations for better frameworks and documentation. Key suggestions included adjusting methodologies to align with market realities and using Building Material Passports to enhance circularity. Overall, while the proposed taxonomy is ambitious, testing studies like this are crucial for building capacities and identifying areas for improvement toward a circular economy.
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.