From the article: Abstract. This exploratory and conceptual article sets out to research what arguments and possibilities for experimentation in construction exists and if experimentation can contribute towards more innovative construction as a whole. Traditional, -western- construction is very conservative and regional, often following a traditional and linear design process, which focuses on front-loaded cost savings and repetitive efficiency, rather than securing market position through innovation. Thus becoming a hindrance for the development of the sector as a whole. Exploring the effects of using the, in other design-sectors commonly and successfully practiced, “four-phased iterative method” in architectural construction could be the start of transforming the conservative construction industry towards a more innovative construction industry. The goal of this research is to find whether the proposed strategy would indeed result in a higher learning curve and more innovation during the - architectural- process. Preliminary research indicates that there is argumentation for a more experimental approach to construction.
Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW) is the main driver of resource consumption and waste generation in Europe. Although most European countries achieved 70% recovery rate of CDW, the majority is used for backfilling. Therefore, opportunities for Circular Economy (CE) practices in CDW management are underexploited. This research identifies the innovative practices, barriers, and enablers for developing tailored-made designs of Urban Resource Centre (URC) for managing CDWs in four European cities namely Riga, Tartu, Kavala, and Barcelona. Qualitative methods using multiple case studies were used to draw generalizations from cases. Data was collected from reports and interviews with different stakeholders, and a validation workshop for designing URC of each city. Current innovative practices include recycling and upcycling of CDWs; use of green points, exchange platforms, and waste management apps; repair cafés; selective demolition; and (pilot) initiatives on resource centers that function as material exchange point, recycling center, workstation for repair and creative ideas, and prototyping hub, among others. The identified barriers and enablers can be categorized as governmental, market, and individual factors. First, local governments (municipalities) play a key role for facilitating CDW management via both support such as provision of subsidies, green procurement, and mandatory waste sorting, and through strict regulatory requirements. Second, URCs must be locally rooted with inclusion of citizens, grass roots initiatives, and schools/universities to increase community acceptance, awareness, and education on CDW management. Third, partnerships with local stakeholders, such as repair cafes, waste management companies, and local NGOs, is needed to operate the URCs both in short- and long-terms. And fourth, the creation of niche markets such as linking localism (e.g. locally crafted CE stores) and supplying to businesses in need of CDWs, can support the operation of URCs. The identified barriers and enablers can help further improve the design of URCs for each city.
MULTIFILE