We are not able to resolve this OAI Identifier to the repository landing page. If you are the repository manager for this record, please head to the Dashboard and adjust the settings.
A growing interest has been expressed in the issue of building adaptability over the past
decade, perceiving it as an intrinsic criterion for sustainability. In light of the circular economy (CE)
and its application in the construction sector, more attention has been paid to buildings’ design for
adaptability (DfA) towards the realization of circular buildings. DfA is considered a key enabler
for other circular design strategies such as design for disassembly (DfD), multi-functionality, spatial
transformability, and design reversibility. However, implementation and assessment frameworks,
and design-support tools for the circular building, are still in development as the characterization of
circular buildings continues with endeavors to draw a defined shape by identifying the prerequisites
for circularity where the design takes an important place. For the sake of objectifying the role of DfA
in circularity frameworks in buildings, this paper carries out an analytical review and discussion on
two types of assessment and design-support frameworks; the first addresses adaptability criteria
and considerations in assessment frameworks that handle the concept individually while the second
classifies existing circularity assessment endeavors into four main categories under which multiple
tools are reviewed. A reflection on the scope and objectives for both types is later performed, illustrating
the state of adaptability evaluation and criteria as well as its role in circularity frameworks.
Results show that the concept of building adaptability lacks quantitative methods that quantify a
building’s capacity to adapt as well as empirical data that prioritize the most valuable criteria facilitating
adaptations. Moreover, many circularity assessment frameworks fail to consider adaptability
criteria at all hierarchal levels of a building composition. To address this shortcoming, a series of
conceptual considerations and requirements is proposed towards a potential establishment of an
inclusive framework of a circularity design-support tool in buildings. The study is concluded by
identifying gaps and recommendations for further developments in the field
Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.