IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p721-d1021234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Impact Assessment of Circular Construction: Case of Living Lab Ghent

Author

Listed:
  • Nuri Cihan Kayaçetin

    (Building Physics and Sustainable Design Unit, Department of Engineering Technology, Ghent Technology Campus, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

  • Chiara Piccardo

    (Building Physics and Sustainable Design Unit, Department of Engineering Technology, Ghent Technology Campus, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

  • Alexis Versele

    (Building Physics and Sustainable Design Unit, Department of Engineering Technology, Ghent Technology Campus, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

Abstract

The construction industry is considered to have a high potential in achieving the sustainable development goals. The circular economy is a promising framework that supports the shift from a linear-construction industry to an environmental-friendly and efficient sector. On the other hand, there is a lack of effort in measuring the impact of construction-related activities on users and society. The gap is greater when the context of social impacts is related to circular and bio-based construction. For this purpose, a social impact assessment framework was developed in the Interreg 2 seas CBCI project and tested on a residential prototype: Living Lab (LL) Ghent. Under 13 impact categories relevant to 4 stakeholder categories, circular and bio-based construction materials and methods were assessed for production and construction phases. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected through expert workshops and questionnaires. The results include identification of new indicators (urban mining, social economy, and post-intervention manuals) for several circular construction methods. The social impacts of the LL were discussed depending on each stakeholder category. It was seen that there are several positive impacts related to workers and the local community. Certain recommendations were also provided specifically on a construction-sector basis which may be integrated into existing social impact assessment guidelines.

Suggested Citation

  • Nuri Cihan Kayaçetin & Chiara Piccardo & Alexis Versele, 2022. "Social Impact Assessment of Circular Construction: Case of Living Lab Ghent," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:721-:d:1021234
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/721/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/721/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ana Nadazdi & Zorana Naunovic & Nenad Ivanisevic, 2022. "Circular Economy in Construction and Demolition Waste Management in the Western Balkans: A Sustainability Assessment Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Rafaela Tirado & Adélaïde Aublet & Sylvain Laurenceau & Guillaume Habert, 2022. "Challenges and Opportunities for Circular Economy Promotion in the Building Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Aníbal Maury-Ramírez & Danny Illera-Perozo & Jaime A. Mesa, 2022. "Circular Economy in the Construction Sector: A Case Study of Santiago de Cali (Colombia)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Korhonen, Jouni & Honkasalo, Antero & Seppälä, Jyri, 2018. "Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 37-46.
    5. Jaime A. Mesa & Carlos Fúquene-Retamoso & Aníbal Maury-Ramírez, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment on Construction and Demolition Waste: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    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. Cyrine Mrad & Luís Frölén Ribeiro, 2022. "A Review of Europe’s Circular Economy in the Building Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Aníbal Maury-Ramírez & Nele De Belie, 2023. "Environmental and Economic Assessment of Eco-Concrete for Residential Buildings: A Case Study of Santiago de Cali (Colombia)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Grouiez, Pascal & Debref, Romain & Vivien, Franck-Dominique & Befort, Nicolas, 2023. "The complex relationships between non-food agriculture and the sustainable bioeconomy: The French case," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    4. Mohajan, Haradhan, 2021. "Cradle to Cradle is a Sustainable Economic Policy for the Better Future," MPRA Paper 111334, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 10 Oct 2021.
    5. Bruno Michel Roman Pais Seles & Janaina Mascarenhas & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour & Adriana Hoffman Trevisan, 2022. "Smoothing the circular economy transition: The role of resources and capabilities enablers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1814-1837, May.
    6. Davide Bruno & Marinella Ferrara & Felice D’Alessandro & Alberto Mandelli, 2022. "The Role of Design in the CE Transition of the Furniture Industry—The Case of the Italian Company Cassina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-20, July.
    7. Monia Niero & Charlotte L. Jensen & Chiara Farné Fratini & Jens Dorland & Michael S. Jørgensen & Susse Georg, 2021. "Is life cycle assessment enough to address unintended side effects from Circular Economy initiatives?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(5), pages 1111-1120, October.
    8. Francesca Gennari, 2023. "The transition towards a circular economy. A framework for SMEs," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(4), pages 1423-1457, December.
    9. Jaroslaw Golebiewski & Josu Takala & Oskar Juszczyk & Nina Drejerska, 2019. "Local contribution to circular economy. A case study of a Polish rural municipality," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 21(3), pages 771-791.
    10. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    11. D. D’Amato, 2021. "Sustainability Narratives as Transformative Solution Pathways: Zooming in on the Circular Economy," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 231-242, June.
    12. Łukasz Brzeziński & Adam Kolinski, 2024. "Challenges of the Green Transformation of Transport in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-34, April.
    13. Baoting Peng & Xin Shen, 2024. "Does Environmental Regulation Affect Circular Economy Performance? Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-19, May.
    14. Nikos Chatzistamoulou & Phoebe Koundouri, 2020. "The Economics of Sustainable Development," DEOS Working Papers 2005, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    15. Halkos, George & Managi, Shunsuke, 2023. "New developments in the disciplines of environmental and resource economics," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 513-522.
    16. Yu Hao & Yingting Wang & Qiuwei Wu & Shiwei Sun & Weilu Wang & Menglin Cui, 2020. "What affects residents' participation in the circular economy for sustainable development? Evidence from China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1251-1268, September.
    17. Jose García‐Quevedo & Elisenda Jové‐Llopis & Ester Martínez‐Ros, 2020. "Barriers to the circular economy in European small and medium‐sized firms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2450-2464, September.
    18. 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.
    19. Antonello Monsù Scolaro & Stefania De Medici, 2021. "Downcycling and Upcycling in Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse of Pre-Existing Buildings: Re-Designing Technological Performances in an Environmental Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, October.
    20. Anca C. Farcas & Charis M. Galanakis & Carmen Socaciu & Oana L. Pop & Dorin Tibulca & Adriana Paucean & Mirela A. Jimborean & Melinda Fogarasi & Liana C. Salanta & Maria Tofana & Sonia A. Socaci, 2020. "Food Security during the Pandemic and the Importance of the Bioeconomy in the New Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11, December.

    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:15:y:2022:i:1:p:721-:d:1021234. 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.