The future of circular environmental impact indicators for cultural heritage buildings in Europe

Abstract

Background The European building and construction sector is extremely resource-intensive. This makes the renovation of existing buildings, including the adaptive reuse of cultural heritage buildings (ARCH), important for reducing the materials and energy intensity of the sector. Currently, Europe is embarking on a Circular Economy (CE) strategy that directly affects the environmental indicators for buildings and landscapes, including ARCH. However, there is a misalignment between macro-level European CE policy goals and micro-level renovation and management of existing buildings and ARCH. The analysis shows that macro European Union-level indicators are too narrowly defined to effectively guide the implementation of CE at the micro-project level for ARCH. Results This policy study develops a comprehensive ARCH Circular Environmental Impact Indicator Framework to close this gap by: (1) defining the research question; (2) identifying the causal network; and (3) selecting the best indicators. The study compares Circular Environmental Indicators for ARCH projects to current and developing European management schemes. Best practices in environmental impact assessment at the project level are highlighted for the building and construction sector in Europe. Conclusions The proposed new framework is a comprehensive and suitable list of explicitly circular environmental indicators for ARCH. The framework has immediate practical applications for practitioners and policymakers interested in the CE regime for buildings in Europe.

From “Decent work and economic growth” to “Sustainable work and economic degrowth”: a new framework for SDG 8

“…In this paper, we first analyse SDG 8 from the perspective of strong sustainability, as phenomena, institutions and ideologies, and as the next step, provide a new alternative indicator framework. The new "Degrowth and Sustainable Work" framework roughly follows the approach of Foster et al (2020) and Niemeijer and de Groot (2008) for selecting indicator sets. This process includes three steps: (1) defining a research question, (2) identifying a causal network (in this case the wider national and global policy arena), and (3) selecting indicators.…”

Exploring the Relationship between Environmental and Economic Payback Times, and Heritage Values in an Energy Renovation of a Multi-Residential Pre-War Building

“…There is no general protection of this typology, and no more than a handful are classified as monuments. A majority of the remaining "Landshövdingehus" are described in the local Historic Environment programmes [24], more often as part of a valuable neighbourhood rather than as individual buildings. Generally, the Historic Environment programmes are a source of knowledge about the history and heritage value of the local built environment.…”

“…Consequently, besides the large societal and cultural value of historic buildings, their preservation also has benefits with respect to environmental impact compared to new constructions [23]. In this respect, existing buildings hold a key role in the current transition towards resource-efficiency and the circular economy [24].…”

Indicators for Ex-Post Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Adaptive Reuse Impacts in the Perspective of the Circular Economy

“…Foster and Kreinin [43] also performed an in-depth review of environmental indicators for the adaptive reuse of cultural heritage in the perspective of the circular economy, able to demonstrate the environmental savings of adaptive reuse. Then, Foster et al [44] developed a Circular Environmental Impact Indicator Framework for cultural heritage adaptive reuse in order to integrate macro-European Union-level indicators with environmental indicators at the micro scale.…”