| Title | Design for Disassembly: An Analysis of the Practice (or Lack Thereof) in the United States |
|---|---|
| ID_Doc | 10358 |
| Authors | Cruz-Rios, F; Grau, D |
| Title | Design for Disassembly: An Analysis of the Practice (or Lack Thereof) in the United States |
| Year | 2020 |
| Published | |
| Abstract | Construction consumes more resources and generates more solid waste than most industries. Recycling building components and their materials is not enough to eliminate solid waste and promote resource efficiency. The circular economy (CE) prioritizes reuse over recycling and proposes systemic changes in the way we build. Designing out waste is the core principle of the CE. Design for disassembly or design for deconstruction (DfD) is the practice of planning the future deconstruction of a building and the reuse of its materials and components. However, there are very few buildings in the world that have been designed to be disassembled. The study presented in this paper aims at identifying the barriers and opportunities for DfD and building components' reuse in the current design practice in the United States. The authors recorded, transcribed, and coded open-ended interviews with 13 architects from large design firms in the United States to answer the question of why architects do not currently design for disassembly. Data were analyzed with a grounded theory approach. The authors identified several barriers, among them: building owners' values, the challenges of a DfD-centered life cycle cost analysis, the lack of understanding about the environmental benefits of reuse (e.g., over recycling), and the architects' conflicting views about resiliency and disassembly. Prefabrication and product-service systems have emerged as opportunities for DfD and CE in the built environment. |
Similar Articles
| ID | Score | Article |
|---|---|---|
2065
|
O'Grady, T; Minunno, R; Chong, HY; Morrison, GM Design for disassembly, deconstruction and resilience: A circular economy index for the built environment(2021) | |
| 23027
|
Munaro, MR; Tavares, SF Design for adaptability and disassembly: guidelines for building deconstruction(2023) | |
| 22542
|
Rios, FC; Grau, D; Bilec, M Barriers and Enablers to Circular Building Design in the US: An Empirical Study(2021)Journal Of Construction Engineering And Management, 147.0, 10 | |
| 876
|
Minunno, R; O'Grady, T; Morrison, GM; Gruner, RL; Colling, M Strategies for Applying the Circular Economy to Prefabricated Buildings(2018)Buildings, 8, 9 | |
| 28664
|
Bertino, G; Kisser, J; Zeilinger, J; Langergraber, G; Fischer, T; Österreicher, D Fundamentals of Building Deconstruction as a Circular Economy Strategy for the Reuse of Construction Materials(2021)Applied Sciences-Basel, 11.0, 3 | |
| 28884
|
She, YC; Udawatta, N; Liu, CL; Tokede, O Circular Economy-Related Strategies to Minimise Construction and Demolition Waste Generation in Australian Construction Projects(2024)Buildings, 14.0, 8 | |
| 3773
|
Eberhardt, LCM; Birgisdottir, H; Birkved, M Potential of Circular Economy in Sustainable Buildings(2019) | |
| 20198
|
Condotta, M; Zatta, E Reuse of building elements in the architectural practice and the European regulatory context: Inconsistencies and possible improvements(2021) | |
| 5305
|
Minunno, R; O'Grady, T; Morrison, GM; Gruner, RL Exploring environmental benefits of reuse and recycle practices: A circular economy case study of a modular building(2020) | |
| 16973
|
Munaro, MR; Tavares, SF; Bragança, L The ecodesign methodologies to achieve buildings' deconstruction: A review and framework(2022) |