The Hidden Systems Behind Circularity
- Kelley Tapia
- 6 days ago
- 4 min read
Why material reuse depends as much on people and process as materials
At first glance, studying circularity can look like a technical exercise: catalog the materials, estimate their embodied carbon, identify what can be reused, and move on. But in practice, the moment a circularity audit is completed, the conversation almost immediately shifts - from materials themselves to the human systems that shape their fate.
One of the earliest surprises in this work was how quickly well-intentioned reuse recommendations could feel like mandates. Circularity audits often identify materials with the highest already-spent embodied carbon - elements that “make sense” to deconstruct and reuse at their highest possible value. But when those findings land in a project without sufficient context, timing, or collaboration, they can unintentionally become design drivers rather than design considerations. What begins as an opportunity can feel forced.
That tension reveals something important: materials don’t move through projects on their own. Contracts, schedules, risk tolerance, labor, and trust all play determining roles.
Contracts quietly decide outcomes
In most projects, construction managers follow the drawings and specifications. If deconstruction processes - sequencing, protection, storage, hand-off - aren’t clearly described in the project documents, reuse becomes difficult to execute, regardless of intent. For circularity to function, the owner, architect, and construction manager must align early on what success looks like and how it will be supported contractually.
Ownership of salvaged materials is another quiet but powerful factor. Traditionally, materials not reused onsite are assumed to be demolished and landfilled. When salvage is introduced, decisions about ownership, storage, liability, and potential resale often default back to the owner. Without clarity, reuse can stall - not because it’s undesirable, but because responsibility is unclear.
And while it’s undeniably faster and cheaper to demolish than deconstruct, industry norms are slowly shifting. Just as managing multiple waste streams on job sites has become standard practice, material salvage is beginning to follow - though it still requires more time, planning, and coordination than most contracts anticipate.
Time, labor, and sequencing matter more than intent
Deconstruction takes longer than demolition. It requires manual removal, sorting, staging, and coordination with reuse partners - often while a construction schedule continues to march forward. Labor force capacity becomes a determining factor, as does clarity around who pays for which parts of the process. In some cases, owners fund the careful removal, while reuse partners coordinate pickup and transport. These logistics must be aligned early to work.
Because it’s rarely feasible to deconstruct everything, teams must prioritize.
Focusing on the highest-value or highest-impact material streams - interior doors, light fixtures, structural timber, brick or stone elements - often yields the greatest benefit while keeping scope manageable. Reduced landfill waste and lower tipping fees can help offset some of the added effort, but the real gains come from intentional sequencing rather than speed alone.
Trust and risk tolerance shape what’s possible
Construction managers often carry the greatest perceived risk when reuse is proposed, since they own the schedule. Uncertainty around quantities, conditions, or how materials were originally assembled - sometimes decades earlier - can make reuse feel risky before work even begins.
What helps shift that perception is simple but powerful: a deconstruction walk-through with reuse partners before any approach is mandated. Seeing materials firsthand, understanding removal methods, and aligning on timing transforms abstract risk into something tangible and manageable.
People make circularity real
Across projects, two roles consistently unlock circularity: owners willing to invite collaboration, and knowledgeable disassembly specialty contractors. A holistic circularity audit (pre-demolition assessment) organizes assets in a way that allows teams to see not just what exists, but what might be possible.
Curiosity and craftsmanship matter. When teams are willing to explore together - without assuming every idea must succeed - the process becomes generative rather than burdensome.
Circularity also reshapes who gets invited into the conversation. Construction managers, in particular, must be at the table during pre-design. Their insight helps align walk-throughs, schedule constraints, and material removal time-frames long before construction pressures set in.
Metrics are necessary - but not sufficient
Embodied carbon data helps ground conversations, but it remains approximate unless exact manufacturer, product, and facility information is available. The future promise of material passports - QR codes embedded in products - could dramatically improve accuracy and enable repair and replacement strategies that extend material life.
Until then, collaboration fills the gap. Success doesn’t require perfect data. Successfully deconstructing and reusing even a single material stream - such as unmounting, sorting, and redistributing interior doors - is a meaningful achievement.
Collaboration is the real infrastructure
Circularity requires more conversations than conventional projects - and more comfort with uncertainty. Early owner commitment to a circularity audit opens the door to reuse partnerships and realistic scheduling. When alignment comes too late, schedule pressure often overrides opportunity.
What circularity auditing ultimately reveals is simple and profound: designing buildings responsibly means thinking about how they will be unmade as carefully as how they are assembled. This work reframes demolition as a missed opportunity and repositions existing buildings as material banks rather than liabilities.
The question I’m carrying forward is this:
How do we help more owners and teams see that a circularity audit doesn’t prescribe outcomes - it creates informed choice? By identifying materials that can be retained, reused, or recovered before deconstruction begins, circularity audits can reduce embodied carbon, lower disposal costs, improve certainty, and expand possibility - while still honoring the realities of design, time, risk, and collaboration.
