IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i7p1984-d219575.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Human Health and Well-Being in Relation to Circular and Flexible Infill Design: Assessment Criteria on the Operational Level

Author

Listed:
  • Bob Geldermans

    (Department of Architectural Engineering + Technology, Delft University of Technology, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Martin Tenpierik

    (Department of Architectural Engineering + Technology, Delft University of Technology, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands)

  • Peter Luscuere

    (Department of Architectural Engineering + Technology, Delft University of Technology, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands)

Abstract

This paper addresses the connection between circular building design and residential health and well-being. The general research objective is to determine assessment criteria for the performance of indoor partitioning products in a circular model. The overarching aim is to establish a more integrated and inclusive approach to the transition from linear to circular built environments. This ties in with recent calls for a more comprehensive evidence-base to better inform the policy debate, in the light of interrelated Sustainable Development Goals. The paper emphasises the operational level, looking closer at the actual performance of circular economy implementation, providing more grip on performance indicators of infill components in circular applications, specifically partition walls. Next to partitioning one can think of other components in the infill domain, such as kitchens, bathrooms and mechanical, electrical, plumbing installations. After a brief background sketch, a literature review is reported regarding indoor environmental quality and indoor air quality in general and the linkage with circular and flexible building (products) in particular. Next, an analysis is made of three assessment schemes that address the operational level. Subsequently, several criteria are synthesized and tested. It was shown that the assessment schemes have overlapping and complementary features that, in unison, provide a solid basis for an integrated assessment of circularity potential and health impact of infill products. The test-case helped to pinpoint generic, as well as case-specific, learning points. The interface between product performance and building performance over time remains a grey zone, insufficiently covered by current criteria. More stringent coordination efforts are essential to safeguard circularity potential and healthy living environments pre-use, post-use and not least in-use.

Suggested Citation

  • Bob Geldermans & Martin Tenpierik & Peter Luscuere, 2019. "Human Health and Well-Being in Relation to Circular and Flexible Infill Design: Assessment Criteria on the Operational Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-26, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:7:p:1984-:d:219575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/1984/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/7/1984/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Drissen, E. & Vollebergh, Herman, 2018. "Kan de Circulaire Economie een Bijdrage Leveren aan de Energietransitie?," Other publications TiSEM 18c96300-71fb-45cf-b094-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Bob Geldermans & Martin Tenpierik & Peter Luscuere, 2019. "Circular and Flexible Infill Concepts: Integration of the Residential User Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Douglas Mulhall & Michael Braungart, 2010. "Cradle To Cradle criteria for the built environment," EKONOMIAZ. Revista vasca de Economía, Gobierno Vasco / Eusko Jaurlaritza / Basque Government, vol. 75(04), pages 182-193.
    4. Marcel C. Hollander & Conny A. Bakker & Erik Jan Hultink, 2017. "Product Design in a Circular Economy: Development of a Typology of Key Concepts and Terms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 21(3), pages 517-525, June.
    5. Korhonen, Jouni & Honkasalo, Antero & Seppälä, Jyri, 2018. "Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 37-46.
    6. Marcus Linder & Steven Sarasini & Patricia Loon, 2017. "A Metric for Quantifying Product-Level Circularity," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 21(3), pages 545-558, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kirchherr, Julian & Piscicelli, Laura & Bour, Ruben & Kostense-Smit, Erica & Muller, Jennifer & Huibrechtse-Truijens, Anne & Hekkert, Marko, 2018. "Barriers to the Circular Economy: Evidence From the European Union (EU)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 264-272.
    2. Cristina Sousa Rocha & Paula Antunes & Paulo Partidário, 2023. "Design for Circular Economy in a Strong Sustainability Paradigm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-30, December.
    3. Nancy Bocken & Lars Strupeit & Katherine Whalen & Julia Nußholz, 2019. "A Review and Evaluation of Circular Business Model Innovation Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-25, April.
    4. Andrea Cecchin & Roberta Salomone & Pauline Deutz & Andrea Raggi & Laura Cutaia, 2021. "What Is in a Name? The Rising Star of the Circular Economy as a Resource-Related Concept for Sustainable Development," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 83-97, June.
    5. Massimiliano Borrello & Stefano Pascucci & Luigi Cembalo, 2020. "Three Propositions to Unify Circular Economy Research: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-22, May.
    6. Magnus Sparrevik & Luitzen Boer & Ottar Michelsen & Christofer Skaar & Haley Knudson & Annik Magerholm Fet, 2021. "Circular economy in the construction sector: advancing environmental performance through systemic and holistic thinking," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 392-400, September.
    7. Daniel Jugend & Hugo Henrique dos Santos & Susana Garrido & Regiane Máximo Siqueira & Jaime A. Mesa, 2024. "Circular product design challenges: An exploratory study on critical barriers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 4825-4842, July.
    8. Deborah Sumter & Jotte de Koning & Conny Bakker & Ruud Balkenende, 2020. "Circular Economy Competencies for Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Fernanda Cortegoso Oliveira Frascareli & Marcelo Furlan & Enzo Barberio Mariano & Daniel Jugend, 2024. "A macro-level circular economy index: theoretical proposal and application in European Union countries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(7), pages 18297-18331, July.
    10. Konstantinos Mantalovas & Gaetano Di Mino, 2020. "Integrating Circularity in the Sustainability Assessment of Asphalt Mixtures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    11. Meleddu, Marta & Vecco, Marilena & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2024. "The Role of Voluntary Environmental Policies Towards Achieving Circularity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    12. Figge, Frank & Thorpe, Andrea Stevenson & Good, Jason, 2021. "Us before me: A group level approach to the circular economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    13. Erik Roos Lindgreen & Roberta Salomone & Tatiana Reyes, 2020. "A Critical Review of Academic Approaches, Methods and Tools to Assess Circular Economy at the Micro Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-27, June.
    14. E. Sardianou & V. Nikou & K. Evangelinos & I. Nikolaou, 2024. "What are the key dimensions that CE emphasizes on? A systematic analysis of circular economy definitions," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 547-562, September.
    15. Mariia Kravchenko & Daniela C. A. Pigosso & Tim C. McAloone, 2020. "A Trade-Off Navigation Framework as a Decision Support for Conflicting Sustainability Indicators within Circular Economy Implementation in the Manufacturing Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, December.
    16. Raphaëlle Stewart & Monia Niero, 2018. "Circular economy in corporate sustainability strategies: A review of corporate sustainability reports in the fast‐moving consumer goods sector," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 1005-1022, November.
    17. Chiappetta Jabbour, Charbel Jose & De Camargo Fiorini, Paula & Wong, Christina W.Y. & Jugend, Daniel & Lopes De Sousa Jabbour, Ana Beatriz & Roman Pais Seles, Bruno Michel & Paula Pinheiro, Marco Anto, 2020. "First-mover firms in the transition towards the sharing economy in metallic natural resource-intensive industries: Implications for the circular economy and emerging industry 4.0 technologies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    18. Hyunsoo Lee, 2019. "Development of Sustainable Recycling Investment Framework Considering Uncertain Demand and Nonlinear Recycling Cost," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Alfonso Aranda-Usón & Pilar Portillo-Tarragona & Luz María Marín-Vinuesa & Sabina Scarpellini, 2019. "Financial Resources for the Circular Economy: A Perspective from Businesses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, February.
    20. Lahcen, Bart & Eyckmans, Johan & Rousseau, Sandra & Dams, Yoko & Brusselaers, Jan, 2022. "Modelling the circular economy: Introducing a supply chain equilibrium approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:7:p:1984-:d:219575. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.