Mapping material Circularity in a built environment
Yohaan Kukreja
Design Strategist | Sustainable Venture Creation | Innovation Consultant | UX Design & Research | Sustainability & Impact-Driven Strategy
A framework to develop and utilise circular materials in architecture, design and construction
The construction industry is responsible for nearly 40% of global CO? emissions. Yet, within these challenges lies an extraordinary opportunity: to revisit and reconsider how materials shape our homes, spaces, and cities.
I) Introduction
This article presents an analytical investigation into the ‘greenification’ of the built environment and its related industries, including architecture, interior design, and construction. It does so through the lens of design-driven material innovation (source) and by examining state-of-the-art solution providers.
This article builds on these insights to propose a framework for material innovation — designed to help innovators, manufacturers, and designers map existing materials and develop new ones by correlating intrinsic material properties with lifecycle processes. By bridging these two classifications, the framework provides actionable pathways to align materials and products with cradle-to-cradle cycles, reducing waste and minimizing carbon footprints.
This framework integrates two overlapping classifications:
By combining these classifications, we can create actionable categories that guide material choices across architecture, design, and construction as well as other industries.
II) Contextual Study of our economy & reasons to transition out of it
The linear economy is fueled by redundant and endless consumption, driven by humans striving to fulfill instant gratification — e.g., manufacturing cheap components and products. In an attempt to satisfy these desires, our systems have evolved to prioritize profitability over circularity. This approach has led to the creation of blanket material solutions. These “one-size-fits-all” choices neither consider compatibility with the larger systems they are part of nor the impact of their utilization and subsequent disposal. Their sole purpose is to make larger operations profitable and maximize the capitalistic gains of specific (often higher-up) stakeholders across the supply chain.
Humans are part of nature’s larger system (eco-centricity), not at the center of it (ego-centricity). To thrive, we must acknowledge that we exist within a perceivable world (“n”) and an unknowable “n+1” dimension that represents the vast ecological systems we’re part of. Every action we take exists on a scale of how closely it aligns with nature’s principles. By adopting nature’s operating system (https://toolbox.biomimicry.org/core-concepts/earths-operating-system/), we can reduce our chances of extinction. To achieve this, we must focus on controlling population growth, reducing consumption, adopting circular material economies like Cradle2Cradle, and embracing co-creation with nature through humility and symbiosis.
The rise of design-driven material innovation marks the beginning of a new green revolution. However, there’s a pressing need for a framework to guide upstream stakeholders — designers, manufacturers, and decision-makers — in understanding and selecting materials. Such a framework will ensure that materials are circular, supporting sustainable downstream cycles, even when their final use or disposal is unpredictable.
III) The Framework for Circular Material Selection :
Classification Type 1 ) Intrinsic Classification (Nature of Materials): This section focuses on the nature of materials & their inherent properties :
1) Biotic Materials or Living Materials
1.1) Derived Biotic Materials : Materials taken from living organisms without killing them (e.g., wool, silk).
Example of Derived Biotic Materials : Biocement by Biomason — This company grows cement using bacteria, mimicking natural limestone formation without the carbon emissions of traditional cement manufacturing. Widely used in tiles and pavers.
1.2) Processed Biotic Materials : Materials derived from living organisms and processed, often resulting in their destruction. (e.g., mycelium, bacterial cellulose).
Example of Processed Biotic Materials : Mycelium bricks by MycoWorks are grown in controlled environments, offering an alternative to fired clay bricks with minimal carbon emissions.
2) Abiotic Materials : Non living materials that can further be classified as :
2.1) Abiotic Naturally Occurring: Non-living materials from natural sources with minimal human intervention (e.g., stone, sand).
Example of Abiotic Naturally Occuring Material in Construction: CarbonCure Technologies is a company that injects captured carbon dioxide into concrete mixes, where it mineralizes and becomes a permanent part of the material. Here the Abiotic Naturally Occuring Material is Carbon Dioxide.
2.2) Abiotic Synthetic: Non-living materials synthesized or engineered through advanced human processes (e.g., plastics, glass).
Example of Abiotic Synthetic Materials in construction : ByFusion transforms unrecyclable plastic waste into ByBlocks, durable construction blocks that require no adhesives or fillers. These blocks offer a sustainable alternative to conventional construction materials like concrete or bricks. By repurposing plastic waste, ByFusion prevents it from entering landfills or oceans, while simultaneously reducing the reliance on materials with higher carbon footprints, such as traditional cement.
The distinction between biotic and abiotic materials highlights how living systems contribute to material creation. This process of co-creation occurs where human innovation intersects with natural systems. While humans are often the primary beneficiaries, materials or products that also provide benefits to the environment or the broader ecosystems they are part of are categorized as ‘regenerative materials.’
3) Regenerative materials or materials with regenerative properties.
These materials actively restore or regenerate natural resources, ecosystems, or biodiversity throughout their lifecycle. By participating in nature’s cycles, they achieve maximum alignment with biomimetic principles. This property enables maximum resemblance in terms of ‘fitting in’ to the larger system or ecosystem, but again, it’s on a scale of bio-mimicry because how many systems will it regenerate or seamlessly fit into? A dead tree is surely part of over 100 systems in all of nature.
The next challenge is how many systems we can make our materials part of at their end of lifecycle.
Example. Notpla ’s Ooho is an edible bubble made from seaweed that utilises its material properties as it’s product’s unique feature. These bubbles encapsulate liquids that require the bubble to be bitten into. The biocompatable nature of the material, makes it ingestable or biodegradable if discarded in nature.
Classification Type 2 ) Origin Classification : This category examines how materials are sourced, created, and valorized from their original state, offering a structured way to classify materials based on the processes that bring them into existence.
1) Valorization through Upcycling (from a state of uselessness to human made systems).
As per Dr. Sung K’s Understanding upcycling and circular economy and their interrelationships through literature review for design education (Sung, Kyungeun. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.373.), it can be derived that an ‘Upcycled material’ is a material derived from waste or previously used products that have been converted or transformed into a new product with higher value ie. enhanced qualities, more sustainable nature, while reducing environmental harm by minimizing additional resource expenditure, extending its lifecycle and temporarily or permanently reducing the waste it contributes to at the end of it’s life cycle.
Upcycled materials often retain intrinsic properties from their original state, creating parallels with their source. These parallels depend on the upcycling process and the intended application of the final product. Broadly, these connections can be categorized as:
1.1) Visual : Textures, colors, and shapes from the original material often remain, creating a strong visual connection. (Eg. ARDH Collective Dateform, a beautiful finished hard board material made from waste date seeds)
领英推荐
1.2) Functional : Core material properties like strength, elasticity, water resistance, etc., can persist or improve in the outcome. Functional similarities can be leveraged to find a suitable application for the upcycled material/product eg. old fabric scraps can be turned into durable insulation. (Eg. Thermafleece British Wool Insulation Utilizes british sheep’s wool to create insulation for traditional & new building projects)
1.3) Emotional/Contextual : Tied to the story of their origins — the upcycled material can invoke the same feeling as the material of origin did, amplifying their appeal in their new environment or context. (Eg. @tinglondon transforms discarded leather belts into bespoke flooring tiles and wall coverings. Retaining the distinct patterns, wear, and colors of individual belts, evoking a sense of history and craftsmanship which is ideal for interiors that tell a story of reclaimed luxury.)
Beyond these parallels, upcycled materials inherently amplify an environmental narrative. Whether through waste diversion, resource traceability, or highlighting the dangers of resource misuse, these materials emphasize their contribution to sustainability. This environmental story often transcends their visual, functional, or emotional links, reinforcing their value in broader ecological and societal contexts.
2) Alchemy in the Anthropocene: Valorizing through Recycling :
Unlike upcycled materials, which retain some connection — be it visual, functional, or emotional — to their original form and elevate their value through creative repurposing, recycled materials undergo fundamental changes to their state of being. While Upcycling focuses on “upping value” by transforming waste into higher-quality or more sustainable products, recycling emphasizes maintaining usability or “valorization through downcycling,” where materials may lose some intrinsic qualities but remain functional in production cycles. Recycling processes break materials down at a molecular or structural level, often resulting in substances that no longer resemble their original state. This fundamental alteration makes recycled materials versatile yet energy-intensive, as the processes required to achieve this transformation are significant.
While upcycling celebrates innovation and storytelling through retained material characteristics, recycling focuses on reprocessing to create raw materials that can be reintegrated into production systems. This distinction is critical when evaluating material strategies in architecture and construction, where functionality, resource availability, and lifecycle impact are paramount.
Recycled materials are intrinsically different from the original state of their raw material. For such a drastic difference to occur, their original materials need to be modified far beyond a point of reversal. These processes & materials can be positioned on a scale of how far they are taken past a state of fundamental change or “point of no return.” This clarity can be incredibly valuable in architecture and construction, where material selection impacts sustainability, functionality, and cost-efficiency. Here’s why the scale is important :
If we were to place recycled materials on a scale of how far they are altered from their original state, we have 3 main categories :
2.1) Mechanically Reprocessed: Mechanically reprocessed materials undergo minimal transformation and retain much of their original structure and properties. The recycling process generally involves physical methods such as shredding, grinding, or sorting the material without altering its molecular or chemical structure.
Example: Glass and aluminum are often mechanically reprocessed. For instance, aluminum cans are simply cleaned and compacted for reuse, and glass bottles can be melted and reformed without significant chemical changes. These materials retain most of their original characteristics (like strength or transparency) after recycling.
2.2) Thermally or Chemically Processed: Moderate distance; significant transformation. When materials are thermally or chemically processed, they undergo significant changes at the molecular or structural level, which alters their original properties. These materials are subject to high heat, chemical reactions, or both, which transform their composition, strength, or durability. The key here is that the material’s original structure is still discernible, but its functionality or characteristics are modified enough that it cannot be easily restored to its natural or original state.
Example: ARDH Collective ’s DuneCrete is made from previously unsable desert sand that is engineered into a low carbon concrete alternative.
2.3) Reconstitution into New Materials : Furthest from the original state; completely unrecognizable. Reconstitution into new materials is the most profound form of transformation in recycling and material innovation, where the original material is fundamentally altered, often to the point of being completely unrecognizable. This process involves breaking down the material — whether organic or synthetic — into its core components, often at a molecular or chemical level. These components are then restructured or recombined using advanced techniques to form entirely new substances with different properties, functions, and forms. This drastic transformation or modification from an organic material’s base state of equilibrium is bound to result in consequences which humans are often blind to since the purpose and the upstream function is what we’ve always been factored into consideration.
Example. PLA & wood flour based floor panels for flooring in construction — Prefabricated panel were made using 3D printing by researchers at the US Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the University of Maine (UMaine) — both part of the SM2ART public-private partership.
3) Responsibly Sourced :
3.1) Reclaimed or reused : Utilizing materials already in circulation reduces dependency on virgin resources and extends the lifespan of finite materials. Considering our rapidly diminishing reserves of vrigin materials & growing reserves of ‘complex materials’ in landfills & other ‘mines of tomorrow’
Example. Sawkill Lumber reclaimes wood from old structures, processes it & supplies it to new construction projects in NewYork.
3.2) Manufactured with a larger positive purpose : we cant not make plastic tomorrow, we need to slowly transition out & developing materials with a larger agenda or plan to map them at their downstream to responsibly do away with them at their down stream or store them somewhwre where we can retireve, utlisice or get reid of them forver through carbon offsetted means (for the time beign ) or to buy time to debvelop better solutions on the side
Example. Smileplast Limited transforms post-consumer and industrial plastic waste into vibrant, durable decorative panels, which are used in construction for interior cladding, furniture, and bespoke design elements, seamlessly combining sustainability with aesthetic innovation.
3.3) Naturally grown with the purpose of being utilised : materials derived from natural biological processes or naturally occuring renewable resources specifically cultivated or harnessed for functional use in architecture and construction. Unlike reclaimed or upcycled materials, these are not waste products but are intentionally grown or cultivated to serve as sustainable alternatives to conventional materials. These materials align with cradle-to-cradle principles, aiming to minimize environmental impact and promote circularity.
Example. LIGNOTREND Produktions GmbH (Germany): Provides engineered timber solutions using responsibly grown wood from forests managed for regenerative cycles.
3.4) Lab Grown : Lab-grown materials refer to those engineered in controlled environments, such as laboratories or industrial settings, often involving biotechnological processes, precision engineering, or synthetic chemistry. Unlike naturally grown materials, which rely on traditional or natural agricultural and forestry methods, lab-grown materials are created to enhance specific characteristics or meet particular needs that may not be achievable through natural growth alone.
Example. In an effort to provide an environmentally friendly and low-waste alternative, researchers at MIT Media Lab have pioneered a tunable technique to generate wood-like plant material in a lab.
IV) Conclusion
While nature’s materials are context-specific — designed to emerge from natural systems, serve a specific purpose, and ultimately break down after fulfilling their designated role — humanity seeks materials that act as blanket solutions. We want materials that are light weight, strong, durable, water proof, colored, insulated and above all, cheap! adding, yet another unrealistic constrain. Meeting these demands, requires extreme modification way past what would have been otherwise found in non human nature. Such extreme modifications often come at a cost that, if we’re not in luck, manifests through additional complex, voluminous & untraceable waste, that we aren’t capable of handling responsibly.
As humans, we need to acknowledge that we’re a small stakeholder in the grander scheme of things. While we may have some abilities to modify materials, our existence lies at the mercy of nature. Life and our realities are a beautiful occurrence. We must respect this beauty and not exploit this voiceless force or take it for granted simply because it has allowed us to believe that we are ‘the ones in control’. Instead, working to exist & innovate in symbiosis with nature , is our last option at ensuring the future of humanity lasts far longer than it seems it will last today.
While this is a framework to select & innovate better materials, there are also ways to convert linear materials to circular ones or within the cradle2cradle cycles, convert technical material to biological ones eg bioremediation. The next article explores some of these techniques.