circular construction - Recreate

October 2, 2026
Dizajn-bez-naslova-20-1280x474.png

After more than five years of research, technical development, real-life demonstrations and collaboration across the construction value chain, the Horizon 2020 project ReCreate – Reusing precast concrete for a circular economy officially concludes on 30 September 2026.

ReCreate started on 1 April 2021 with a clear objective: to investigate how precast concrete elements from existing buildings can be identified, carefully deconstructed, assessed, documented, refurbished, redesigned and safely reused in new construction.

Originally planned as a 48-month project and later extended to complete the demonstration activities, ReCreate was coordinated by Tampere University and received €12.49 million in EU funding.

The project brought together 22 partners from five countries, organised around real-life pilot activities in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany. Its ambition went well beyond proving that individual concrete slabs or columns could be reused. ReCreate set out to develop the technical, digital, economic, regulatory and organisational conditions required to turn reuse into a repeatable construction process.

More than five years later, the project leaves behind not only buildings and reused concrete elements, but also methods, tools, datasets, technical guidance, publications, business insights and practical lessons for the next generation of circular construction projects.

Why reuse precast concrete elements?

Concrete is the most widely used construction material globally, and the built environment represents a substantial share of the world’s human-made material stock. Cement production alone remains one of the world’s largest sources of anthropogenic CO₂ emissions.

When a concrete building reaches the end of its first use, conventional practice typically involves demolition followed by crushing and recycling of concrete.

ReCreate investigated a higher-value alternative: keeping structural elements intact and using them again as structural components.

This distinction is fundamental. Recycling preserves material, but destroys the product. Reuse preserves the concrete, reinforcement, geometry and much of the value already invested in manufacturing the component.

However, ReCreate recognised from the beginning that technical feasibility alone would not be enough.

Existing buildings were rarely designed for disassembly. Documentation may be incomplete. Connections can be difficult to separate without damaging the elements. Reclaimed components need reliable quality assurance. Supply and demand need to meet at the right place and time. Designers need information about available elements early enough to design with them. Permitting, liability and certification need workable procedures.

The project was therefore structured around one central question:

What does the complete system for concrete element reuse need to look like?

A complete reuse chain – from donor building to new construction

ReCreate’s research followed the entire journey of a precast concrete component.

The project addressed six core questions: how to deconstruct existing buildings while recovering different element types; how to verify their properties and quality reliably and cost-effectively; how to refurbish and reassemble them; how logistics and information should be managed; which regulatory and practical barriers must be addressed; and what type of business ecosystem can make reuse commercially viable.

This resulted in a project structure covering the complete reuse process:

precast concrete systems → pre-deconstruction audit → deconstruction → logistics and processing → quality management → redesign and reassembly, supported by work on environmental impacts, business models, policy and social acceptance, communication and transferability.

The current ReCreate knowledge base is organised across 11 Work Packages, ranging from analysis of precast systems to ethics and project management.

Knowing what exists: precast systems, inventories and digital data

Reuse begins with knowledge of the existing building stock.

ReCreate analysed precast concrete systems used across Europe since the post-war period, looking at building typologies, component types and connections. The project developed an open taxonomy and interactive digital map covering archival material from eleven European countries: Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechia, Romania and Bulgaria.

This matters because visually similar buildings can contain very different structural systems, while technically comparable elements may exist across different national contexts.

ReCreate also developed digital workflows for capturing data about individual reclaimed components. The project’s database links elements to their donor buildings and stores information including provenance, geometry, condition and material properties, using traceable identifiers and interoperable data exchange through IFC/BIM environments.

Technologies investigated within the project included laser scanning, portable X-ray, RFID and QR identification, BIM integration and digital marketplace concepts. The goal was to ensure that data collected before and during deconstruction could remain connected to the physical element throughout testing, refurbishment, design and installation.

The project also developed ReCreate Studio, a prototype Autodesk Revit plug-in intended to allow designers to work directly with a database of available reclaimed components.

In parallel, ReCreate developed an LCA & LCC Tool for Precast Concrete Reuse, combining an element catalogue with project-specific calculations for transport distance, associated CO₂ emissions and transport costs, allowing reclaimed elements to be compared with equivalent newly produced components.

Deconstruction instead of demolition

The second major challenge was physical recovery.

Most existing precast buildings were assembled with connections intended to remain permanent. Grouted joints, reinforcement and cast-in-place connections can make clean separation difficult, and poor deconstruction methods can damage otherwise reusable components.

ReCreate therefore developed a BIM-aided pre-deconstruction audit to identify the number, dimensions, properties and connections of elements before work begins and to support sequencing, logistics and worker safety.

The project then tested and evaluated different deconstruction methods and equipment through real-life pilots.

The objective was not simply to remove elements from buildings. It was to maximise the number of components recovered without compromising structural integrity, quality or safety.

The methodology has already moved beyond the research environment. In Finland, project partner Umacon applied the ReCreate deconstruction approach in its first commercial project, Melkinlaituri.

Erik Stenberg

Quality assurance: can a reclaimed element safely carry another building?

One of ReCreate’s most technically important areas was quality management.

Reclaimed structural elements may have been in service for several decades. Their original documentation may be incomplete, their previous exposure conditions uncertain, and additional damage may occur during deconstruction, transport or storage.

ReCreate therefore developed systematic assessment procedures combining:

  • available technical documentation and knowledge of the original building;
  • visual inspection and damage classification;
  • non-destructive testing;
  • targeted destructive testing where required;
  • assessment of load-bearing capacity;
  • durability and remaining service-life evaluation;
  • documentation linked to the digital identity of each element.

The testing addressed concrete strength, reinforcement configuration, carbonation, corrosion, frost damage, chlorides, alkali–aggregate reaction and mechanical damage, as well as potentially harmful substances and other conditions relevant to future use.

Results across the four pilot countries were encouraging. The tested reclaimed elements were generally in good condition, concrete grades measured in the investigated elements were higher than original design values, and identified harmful substances could be removed before detachment.

The Dutch cluster developed a particularly structured framework for reclaimed hollow-core slabs, based on knowledge assessment, damage evaluation, structural reliability and aesthetic checks, complemented by damage catalogues, inspection checklists and classifications according to the intervention or further testing required.

ReCreate partners have also contributed to standardisation work. In Sweden, project researchers have been involved in developing a standard for the reuse of precast concrete elements, addressing structural integrity, durability, remaining service life and appropriate testing procedures.

Designing with what already exists

Reuse also changes the logic of architectural and structural design.

In conventional construction, a design is developed and components are manufactured to specification.

With reuse, the components already exist.

Their dimensions, geometry, reinforcement, condition and connection details become design parameters.

The Dutch final demonstrator clearly captured this shift: designing first and searching for elements later is time-consuming and creates risk. A more effective approach places available elements at the centre of the design process, while keeping adjustments as simple as possible because every modification adds cost.

ReCreate therefore investigated new architectural and structural design methods, connector solutions and approaches to reassembly.

The project also showed how reuse requires stronger collaboration between architects, structural engineers, contractors, deconstruction specialists and component suppliers much earlier than in conventional linear construction.

Proof through real projects

The most important feature of ReCreate was that the methodology was not confined to laboratories.

It was tested through real donor buildings and reuse applications in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany.

Each country brought different construction systems, regulatory conditions and market structures, allowing ReCreate to test whether knowledge could be transferred across contexts.

Finland: one donor building, four reuse pilots

The Finnish pilot began with a 1982 office building in Tampere.

During deconstruction in 2023, approximately 260 elements were salvaged, primarily hollow-core slabs, columns and beams. The components were subsequently refurbished in a precast factory for reuse.

Those elements were then used in four separate pilot applications.

The first residential pilot installed 25 reclaimed hollow-core slabs in floor structures in autumn 2024 and provided practical experience with quality control, product approval and environmental permit requirements. Installation itself was reported as straightforward.

The second pilot used 27 hollow-core slabs in roof structures in an industrial construction project in 2025, testing reuse in a larger and more complex project environment.

The third pilot, a residential project in Tampere’s Hiedanranta district, incorporated 55 reclaimed structural elements: 35 hollow-core slabs, 13 columns and seven beams. Columns and beams were refurbished to suit the new building frame.

The fourth and main Finnish pilot was the Sammonkatu exhibition pavilion, constructed in 2026 using 30 columns, six beams and five hollow-core slabs. The project tested how architectural and structural design must adapt to an existing stock of reclaimed components and served as a public demonstration of the Finnish cluster’s work.

The Finnish case also produced significant regulatory and commercial lessons. Finnish authorities clarified that reclaimed building elements do not automatically become waste if they remain in a usable state throughout the process, removing an important potential barrier to reuse.

ReCreate methods also moved into commercial practice through projects including Melkinlaituri, demonstrating that the reuse process could operate outside the original research pilots.

Sweden: from H22 to stock-based design

Sweden explored reuse through two distinct pilots.

The first was the H22 exhibition pavilion in Helsingborg, completed in 2022.

According to the final Swedish demonstrator presentation, 94% of the pavilion by weight consisted of reused material, with concrete elements sourced from four different places. The pilot also tested a partnering model in which architectural design, structural design and constructability were addressed simultaneously, creating a more flexible design process and new roles for project participants.

The pavilion also demonstrated design for disassembly, using connections that allow the reused components to be separated again.

The Swedish cluster then expanded the work through the Grönkulla row houses, ongoing in 2026. This pilot combines renovation, partial deconstruction, conversion of existing structures and new row houses incorporating reused concrete.

A central concept developed through the Swedish work was stock-based design: instead of treating reclaimed elements as substitutes added late in design, available material stocks become an input from the beginning.

The Swedish cluster investigated reuse from several donor sources, including a multi-family residential building, an industrial warehouse, an office building and an existing preschool foundation.

The Netherlands: from Prinsenhof to Circular Centre Netherlands

The Dutch pilot centres on the transformation of elements recovered from Prinsenhof A in Arnhem into components for the Circular Centre Netherlands in Heerde.

Prinsenhof A contained more than 8,000 m² of floor area, with a precast structural system dominated by hollow-core slabs spanning between load-bearing façade elements. Deconstruction was carried out in 2022. Because of the wet connections and structural topping, the slabs and façade elements had to be separated by sawing before they could be lifted and transported.

The reclaimed components were stored at Lagemaat and systematically inventoried for geometry, reinforcement, structural capacity and material properties.

The new Circular Centre Netherlands consists of five buildings, with the office building serving as the main ReCreate pilot. Its structure combines reclaimed hollow-core slabs and precast façade elements with other reused structural materials.

Structural reuse here required more than checking individual components. The design team had to investigate the stability function of reused load-bearing façade panels, reinforce certain lintels and determine where elements were sufficiently stiff for longitudinal and transverse stability.

A full-scale mock-up became an important part of the Dutch methodology.

It was used to test structural design assumptions, tolerances and connection details before construction of the full building. The testing revealed practical issues such as dimensional mismatch between hollow-core slabs and façade elements and highlighted the importance of effective diaphragm action in floor joints.

This pilot demonstrates a central ReCreate lesson: successful reuse requires technical verification at the level of the whole structural system, not only assessment of individual elements.

Prinsenhof

Germany: reuse rooted in decades of experience

The German cluster built on more than 25 years of research into precast concrete reuse at Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg.

Two major applications were developed.

The Youth Center in Hohenmölsen is designed as an approximately 835 m², two-storey building incorporating 484 deconstructed precast concrete elements from a local GDR-era “P-Halle” residential building only around four kilometres away.

The available element stock includes exterior wall panels, interior walls and floor slabs and directly informs the architectural and structural design of the new building.

The second pilot is the Sports Club Kolkwitz, an approximately 290 m² extension and associated public-use facilities, designed to incorporate 80 reclaimed precast elements recovered from a donor building in Großräschen, approximately 40 km away.

The deconstruction campaign at that donor building illustrates the difference between theoretical technical reusability and what can actually be recovered for a specific reuse project. Of 707 deconstructed elements, 211 floor slabs, 224 interior wall elements and 104 exterior wall elements were classified as technically reusable; a smaller subset was ultimately “rescued” for planned reuse, including spare and test elements.

The German pilots therefore provide particularly valuable evidence on element portfolios, selective recovery, stock-based design and the logistics of matching donor and recipient projects.

Environmental performance: reuse must be assessed as a whole process

ReCreate also evaluated the environmental implications of reuse through life-cycle assessment.

The environmental benefit comes primarily from avoiding the production of equivalent new structural components. However, the project also accounted for the impacts of deconstruction, transport, storage, refurbishment and reassembly.

This is important because reuse is not automatically the lowest-impact solution in every possible situation. Distance, processing requirements and the condition of the reclaimed elements all matter.

Research developed within ReCreate has therefore focused not only on embodied-carbon savings, but also on practical methodologies for calculating climate benefits and on the development of EPD approaches for reclaimed building components.

The project’s work confirms one of the central principles of circular construction: preserving value locally and regionally is critical. The closer donor buildings, processing facilities and recipient projects can be connected, the stronger both the environmental and economic case for reuse becomes.

From technical feasibility to a functioning business ecosystem

A structurally sound reclaimed element is not yet a market.

For widespread reuse, the sector needs functioning supply chains, clear responsibilities, predictable quality-assurance procedures, logistics, storage solutions, digital information systems and viable business models.

ReCreate therefore devoted an entire work stream to the business ecosystem surrounding reuse.

The project examined profitability at company level as well as the broader circular value chain: which actors are needed, where new roles may emerge, how technology creates economic value, how risks are allocated, and how regulatory and social barriers influence business viability.

The final project synthesis makes the key lesson particularly clear.

Concrete element reuse is technically feasible. Precast elements can be safely deconstructed, assessed, refurbished and integrated into new construction.

But the process requires flexibility. Donor buildings, available elements and recipient projects must be matched, and design teams need to work with the dimensions, properties, condition and availability of existing components rather than fully predefined solutions.

Coordination is equally critical because deconstruction, testing, storage, transport, refurbishment, design and construction overlap and involve several actors. Reuse therefore works best when demolition and future construction projects are connected early enough for recovered materials to inform design and delivery.

The remaining challenge is not one technology

By the end of ReCreate, the most important barriers were no longer primarily technical.

The project identified four interrelated bottlenecks:

  • quality assurance, permitting, certification, liability and contractual responsibilities remain insufficiently standardised;
  • demand remains fragmented, and supply and demand must align in timing, location, quantities and element properties;
  • costs and risks are unevenly distributed across deconstruction, testing, storage, design adaptation and coordination;
  • both formal institutions, such as regulation and standards, and informal ones, such as professional practices and attitudes, still need to evolve.

The project’s conclusion is therefore important:

the central challenge is not a single technical barrier, but the alignment of markets, regulations, processes and actors.

A roadmap from pilots to mainstream construction

ReCreate’s final roadmap identifies five developments needed to move reuse from pioneering projects into wider construction practice:

  1. Reuse becomes financially competitive
  2. New partnerships develop around element reuse
  3. Digital solutions support reuse
  4. Circularity becomes a core design principle
  5. New professional identities and competences emerge

The roadmap treats mainstreaming as a socio-technical transition: technological solutions need to develop together with business models, regulation, industry practices, societal attitudes and professional skills.

That is perhaps the clearest summary of what more than five years of ReCreate have shown.

A substantial open knowledge base

One of ReCreate’s objectives from the outset was to ensure that the work would remain useful beyond the life of the grant.

The project website now brings together a substantial body of material, including:

  • an interactive map and taxonomy of European precast systems;
  • digital element databases and BIM workflows;
  • pre-deconstruction audit guidance;
  • deconstruction methodologies;
  • quality-management procedures;
  • design and reassembly research;
  • LCA and LCC approaches;
  • business-model and ecosystem research;
  • legal and policy analysis;
  • scientific publications;
  • pilot documentation;
  • digital tools and datasets.

The ReCreate scientific-publications library includes research on deconstruction, quality assurance, digital workflows, structural reuse, design, business models, environmental assessment and policy.

→ Explore the complete ReCreate project structure 

→ Explore the ReCreate tools

→ Browse the scientific publications

→ Explore official project deliverables and results

Final Conference: bringing the complete reuse process together

On 23 September 2026, GBC Croatia organised the ReCreate Final Conference, bringing together 155 participants from 26 countries.

The conference was structured around the complete reuse journey of a precast concrete element — from deconstruction and digital documentation to quality assurance, redesign and reassembly. The four country clusters then showed how these approaches were tested in practice through demonstrators in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany.

The discussion finally moved from individual technologies and pilot projects to the wider conditions needed for scale-up: viable business models, clearer regulatory pathways, functioning markets, digital tools, new design approaches and the professional competencies required to make reuse part of everyday construction practice.

→ Watch the full Final Conference

22 partners, one circular construction challenge

ReCreate brought together universities, research organisations, cities, public building owners, architects, structural engineers, precast manufacturers, contractors, deconstruction companies, digital specialists and organisations working on sustainable construction.

The final consortium included:

Tampere University, LIIKE Oy Arkkitehtistudio, Ramboll Finland, Consolis Parma, Skanska, Umacon and the City of Tampere in Finland;

KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Helsingborgshem and Consolis Strängbetong in Sweden;

Eindhoven University of Technology, TNO, Circular Structural Design, Consolis VBI, Lagemaat and IMd Structural Engineers in the Netherlands;

Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, ECOSOIL Ost, P. Jähne Ingenieurbüro, the City of Hohenmölsen and Lohmann und Robinski in Germany;

and Green Building Council Croatia.

→ Meet the ReCreate partners

From “can it be done?” to “how can it become normal practice?”

ReCreate closes with a much stronger evidence base than existed when the project began.

Across four European contexts, precast concrete elements have been identified in donor buildings, carefully deconstructed, assessed, digitally documented, refurbished, redesigned and integrated into new construction.

The project has developed practical methods and tools for pre-deconstruction audits, deconstruction, quality management, logistics, traceability, redesign and environmental and economic assessment. It has generated guidance for future projects and roadmaps for industry and policymakers.

It has also demonstrated where the next challenge lies.

The question is no longer simply whether structural concrete elements can be reused.

They can.

The next phase is about making reuse predictable, scalable and economically viable: connecting demolition and construction projects earlier, creating regional markets for reclaimed elements, standardising quality and certification procedures, developing digital information flows, clarifying responsibilities and ensuring that architects, engineers, contractors, clients and authorities have the knowledge and confidence to work differently.

ReCreate officially ends on 30 September 2026.

Its results do not.

Continue exploring ReCreate

More than five years of research, development and demonstration cannot be captured in one article.

We invite professionals, researchers, policymakers, students and everyone interested in circular construction to continue exploring and using the knowledge produced through ReCreate.

Explore the ReCreate project pilots
Explore project results and Work Packages
Explore ReCreate tools
Explore Section for practitioners (reports explained)
Browse scientific publications
Meet the project partners
Browse ReCreate news and project stories
Explore official project results on CORDIS

To the project coordinator, all ReCreate partners, researchers, industry partners, cities, pilot teams and everyone who contributed to the project over more than five years: thank you for the knowledge, work and collaboration that made ReCreate possible.

The project ends here. The work of making structural reuse part of everyday construction continues.

 

 


September 25, 2026
Final-Conference-12-1280x640.png

The ReCreate Final Conference took place online on 23 September 2026. Over three hours, the project partners showed what came out of five years of work on reusing precast concrete elements. They also discussed what still has to change for reuse to become normal practice. The conference was organised by GBC Croatia and brought together 155 participants from 26 countries.

Why reuse?

Project coordinator Satu Huuhka (Tampere University) opened by setting the scale of the problem. Human-made mass now exceeds all living biomass on Earth. Cement alone is the third-largest source of human-made CO₂ emissions. ReCreate’s answer is to treat existing precast concrete buildings as a source of building elements, not as waste to be crushed.

What ReCreate developed

The first panel, moderated by Ena Luketić (GBC Croatia), followed a single concrete element on its journey. It starts in the donor building, goes into a database and through quality checks, and ends up in a new design. Each panelist led one step of that journey in ReCreate:

  • Simon Wijte (TU/e) on deconstruction
  • Kjartan Gudmundsson (KTH) on digital tools and tracking
  • Jukka Lahdensivu (TAU) on quality assurance
  • Patrick Teuffel (CSD) on redesign and reassembly
Four countries, four demonstrator stories
  • Finland: Inari Weijo (Ramboll Finland) and Eric Rawlins (LIIKE) presented the Finnish cluster. About 260 elements were salvaged from a 1982 office building in 2023. They were then reused in four pilots: two residential buildings, an industrial building and the Sammonkatu exhibition pavilion in Tampere. The pavilion was built in 2026 from 30 columns, 6 beams and 5 hollow core slabs.
  • Sweden: Helena Westerlind (KTH) presented the Swedish pilots, including the H22 exhibition pavilion.
  • The Netherlands: Sebastiaan van Hellenberg Hubar (IMd) presented the Circular Centre Netherlands office building. It is built from elements of the deconstructed Prinsenhof building in Arnhem. The main lessons were that the elements have to sit at the centre of the design, and that it pays to keep things simple, because every adjustment adds cost. A full-size mock-up was used to test the structural design, the tolerances and the connections.
  • Germany: Jakob Fischer (BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg) presented the extension of the Kolkwitz sports club, built with 80 elements from a donor building about 40 km away. He also presented the youth centre in Hohenmölsen, which will reuse 484 elements. It is set to become the largest reuse project with precast concrete elements in Germany.
Cross-cutting lessons

The second panel stepped back from the individual pilots. It asked what holds true across all of them, once the technical side is solved. The topics were:

  • business models and value chains (Leena Aarikka-Stenroos, TAU)
  • policy, legal, social and organisational conditions (Paul Jonker-Hoffrén, TAU)
  • architecture, design and acceptance (Erik Stenberg, KTH)
  • the project-wide synthesis (Satu Huuhka)
From pilots to wider practice

Lauri Alkki and Eetu Lehmusvaara (TAU) summed up the key lesson: reuse is technically feasible, but it challenges existing processes and project logics.

The main bottlenecks they identified are:

  • quality assurance, permitting, certification and liability are not yet standardised
  • demand is weak and fragmented
  • costs and risks are unevenly distributed along the value chain

To guide the way forward, ReCreate developed a roadmap built on five developments:

  1. reuse becomes financially competitive
  2. new partnerships form around element reuse
  3. digital solutions support reuse
  4. circularity becomes a core design principle
  5. new professional competences emerge
An engaged audience

Participants kept the Q&A and chat busy all afternoon. Questions covered element refurbishment, connections, storage hubs, insurance, design for disassembly and whole-life carbon.

Missed it? Watch the recording

The full conference recording is available on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnaJS6lShxo

The reports mentioned during the conference are available in the Resources section of this website.

Thank you to all speakers, partners and participants who joined us!


September 7, 2026
Final-Conference-5-1280x640.png

The ReCreate project is coming to its final conference, bringing together the key results, experiences and lessons learned from several years of research, development and demonstration work on the reuse of precast concrete elements.
ReCreate explores how precast concrete elements from existing buildings can be identified, deconstructed, assessed, documented, redesigned and reused in new construction.
At the final conference, project partners will present the key results, practical demonstrator experiences from Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany, and the main lessons learned for circular construction practice. The detailed agenda is provided below.

The event is free and open to everyone interested in circular construction, resource efficiency and low-carbon building practices, including professionals, researchers, public authorities, policymakers, students and other stakeholders.
Register for the online conference using the link below and join us to discover what ReCreate has developed, tested and learned about bringing precast concrete reuse closer to practice.

REGISTER HERE

 

 

 


September 1, 2026
Dizajn-bez-naslova-20-1280x474.png

After more than five years of research, technical development, real-life demonstrations and collaboration across the construction value chain, the Horizon 2020 project ReCreate – Reusing precast concrete for a circular economy officially concludes on 30 September 2026.

ReCreate started on 1 April 2021 with a clear objective: to investigate how precast concrete elements from existing buildings can be identified, carefully deconstructed, assessed, documented, refurbished, redesigned and safely reused in new construction.

Originally planned as a 48-month project and later extended to complete the demonstration activities, ReCreate was coordinated by Tampere University and received €12.49 million in EU funding.

The project brought together 22 partners from five countries, organised around real-life pilot activities in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany. Its ambition went well beyond proving that individual concrete slabs or columns could be reused. ReCreate set out to develop the technical, digital, economic, regulatory and organisational conditions required to turn reuse into a repeatable construction process.

More than five years later, the project leaves behind not only buildings and reused concrete elements, but also methods, tools, datasets, technical guidance, publications, business insights and practical lessons for the next generation of circular construction projects.

Why reuse precast concrete elements?

Concrete is the most widely used construction material globally, and the built environment represents a substantial share of the world’s human-made material stock. Cement production alone remains one of the world’s largest sources of anthropogenic CO₂ emissions.

When a concrete building reaches the end of its first use, conventional practice typically involves demolition followed by crushing and recycling of concrete.

ReCreate investigated a higher-value alternative: keeping structural elements intact and using them again as structural components.

This distinction is fundamental. Recycling preserves material, but destroys the product. Reuse preserves the concrete, reinforcement, geometry and much of the value already invested in manufacturing the component.

However, ReCreate recognised from the beginning that technical feasibility alone would not be enough.

Existing buildings were rarely designed for disassembly. Documentation may be incomplete. Connections can be difficult to separate without damaging the elements. Reclaimed components need reliable quality assurance. Supply and demand need to meet at the right place and time. Designers need information about available elements early enough to design with them. Permitting, liability and certification need workable procedures.

The project was therefore structured around one central question:

What does the complete system for concrete element reuse need to look like?

A complete reuse chain – from donor building to new construction

ReCreate’s research followed the entire journey of a precast concrete component.

The project addressed six core questions: how to deconstruct existing buildings while recovering different element types; how to verify their properties and quality reliably and cost-effectively; how to refurbish and reassemble them; how logistics and information should be managed; which regulatory and practical barriers must be addressed; and what type of business ecosystem can make reuse commercially viable.

This resulted in a project structure covering the complete reuse process:

precast concrete systems → pre-deconstruction audit → deconstruction → logistics and processing → quality management → redesign and reassembly, supported by work on environmental impacts, business models, policy and social acceptance, communication and transferability.

The current ReCreate knowledge base is organised across 11 Work Packages, ranging from analysis of precast systems to ethics and project management.

Knowing what exists: precast systems, inventories and digital data

Reuse begins with knowledge of the existing building stock.

ReCreate analysed precast concrete systems used across Europe since the post-war period, looking at building typologies, component types and connections. The project developed an open taxonomy and interactive digital map covering archival material from eleven European countries: Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechia, Romania and Bulgaria.

This matters because visually similar buildings can contain very different structural systems, while technically comparable elements may exist across different national contexts.

ReCreate also developed digital workflows for capturing data about individual reclaimed components. The project’s database links elements to their donor buildings and stores information including provenance, geometry, condition and material properties, using traceable identifiers and interoperable data exchange through IFC/BIM environments.

Technologies investigated within the project included laser scanning, portable X-ray, RFID and QR identification, BIM integration and digital marketplace concepts. The goal was to ensure that data collected before and during deconstruction could remain connected to the physical element throughout testing, refurbishment, design and installation.

The project also developed ReCreate Studio, a prototype Autodesk Revit plug-in intended to allow designers to work directly with a database of available reclaimed components.

In parallel, ReCreate developed an LCA & LCC Tool for Precast Concrete Reuse, combining an element catalogue with project-specific calculations for transport distance, associated CO₂ emissions and transport costs, allowing reclaimed elements to be compared with equivalent newly produced components.

Deconstruction instead of demolition

The second major challenge was physical recovery.

Most existing precast buildings were assembled with connections intended to remain permanent. Grouted joints, reinforcement and cast-in-place connections can make clean separation difficult, and poor deconstruction methods can damage otherwise reusable components.

ReCreate therefore developed a BIM-aided pre-deconstruction audit to identify the number, dimensions, properties and connections of elements before work begins and to support sequencing, logistics and worker safety.

The project then tested and evaluated different deconstruction methods and equipment through real-life pilots.

The objective was not simply to remove elements from buildings. It was to maximise the number of components recovered without compromising structural integrity, quality or safety.

The methodology has already moved beyond the research environment. In Finland, project partner Umacon applied the ReCreate deconstruction approach in its first commercial project, Melkinlaituri.

Erik Stenberg

Quality assurance: can a reclaimed element safely carry another building?

One of ReCreate’s most technically important areas was quality management.

Reclaimed structural elements may have been in service for several decades. Their original documentation may be incomplete, their previous exposure conditions uncertain, and additional damage may occur during deconstruction, transport or storage.

ReCreate therefore developed systematic assessment procedures combining:

  • available technical documentation and knowledge of the original building;
  • visual inspection and damage classification;
  • non-destructive testing;
  • targeted destructive testing where required;
  • assessment of load-bearing capacity;
  • durability and remaining service-life evaluation;
  • documentation linked to the digital identity of each element.

The testing addressed concrete strength, reinforcement configuration, carbonation, corrosion, frost damage, chlorides, alkali–aggregate reaction and mechanical damage, as well as potentially harmful substances and other conditions relevant to future use.

Results across the four pilot countries were encouraging. The tested reclaimed elements were generally in good condition, concrete grades measured in the investigated elements were higher than original design values, and identified harmful substances could be removed before detachment.

The Dutch cluster developed a particularly structured framework for reclaimed hollow-core slabs, based on knowledge assessment, damage evaluation, structural reliability and aesthetic checks, complemented by damage catalogues, inspection checklists and classifications according to the intervention or further testing required.

ReCreate partners have also contributed to standardisation work. In Sweden, project researchers have been involved in developing a standard for the reuse of precast concrete elements, addressing structural integrity, durability, remaining service life and appropriate testing procedures.

Designing with what already exists

Reuse also changes the logic of architectural and structural design.

In conventional construction, a design is developed and components are manufactured to specification.

With reuse, the components already exist.

Their dimensions, geometry, reinforcement, condition and connection details become design parameters.

The Dutch final demonstrator clearly captured this shift: designing first and searching for elements later is time-consuming and creates risk. A more effective approach places available elements at the centre of the design process, while keeping adjustments as simple as possible because every modification adds cost.

ReCreate therefore investigated new architectural and structural design methods, connector solutions and approaches to reassembly.

The project also showed how reuse requires stronger collaboration between architects, structural engineers, contractors, deconstruction specialists and component suppliers much earlier than in conventional linear construction.

Proof through real projects

The most important feature of ReCreate was that the methodology was not confined to laboratories.

It was tested through real donor buildings and reuse applications in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany.

Each country brought different construction systems, regulatory conditions and market structures, allowing ReCreate to test whether knowledge could be transferred across contexts.

Finland: one donor building, four reuse pilots

The Finnish pilot began with a 1982 office building in Tampere.

During deconstruction in 2023, approximately 260 elements were salvaged, primarily hollow-core slabs, columns and beams. The components were subsequently refurbished in a precast factory for reuse.

Those elements were then used in four separate pilot applications.

The first residential pilot installed 25 reclaimed hollow-core slabs in floor structures in autumn 2024 and provided practical experience with quality control, product approval and environmental permit requirements. Installation itself was reported as straightforward.

The second pilot used 27 hollow-core slabs in roof structures in an industrial construction project in 2025, testing reuse in a larger and more complex project environment.

The third pilot, a residential project in Tampere’s Hiedanranta district, incorporated 55 reclaimed structural elements: 35 hollow-core slabs, 13 columns and seven beams. Columns and beams were refurbished to suit the new building frame.

The fourth and main Finnish pilot was the Sammonkatu exhibition pavilion, constructed in 2026 using 30 columns, six beams and five hollow-core slabs. The project tested how architectural and structural design must adapt to an existing stock of reclaimed components and served as a public demonstration of the Finnish cluster’s work.

The Finnish case also produced significant regulatory and commercial lessons. Finnish authorities clarified that reclaimed building elements do not automatically become waste if they remain in a usable state throughout the process, removing an important potential barrier to reuse.

ReCreate methods also moved into commercial practice through projects including Melkinlaituri, demonstrating that the reuse process could operate outside the original research pilots.

Sweden: from H22 to stock-based design

Sweden explored reuse through two distinct pilots.

The first was the H22 exhibition pavilion in Helsingborg, completed in 2022.

According to the final Swedish demonstrator presentation, 94% of the pavilion by weight consisted of reused material, with concrete elements sourced from four different places. The pilot also tested a partnering model in which architectural design, structural design and constructability were addressed simultaneously, creating a more flexible design process and new roles for project participants.

The pavilion also demonstrated design for disassembly, using connections that allow the reused components to be separated again.

The Swedish cluster then expanded the work through the Grönkulla row houses, ongoing in 2026. This pilot combines renovation, partial deconstruction, conversion of existing structures and new row houses incorporating reused concrete.

A central concept developed through the Swedish work was stock-based design: instead of treating reclaimed elements as substitutes added late in design, available material stocks become an input from the beginning.

The Swedish cluster investigated reuse from several donor sources, including a multi-family residential building, an industrial warehouse, an office building and an existing preschool foundation.

The Netherlands: from Prinsenhof to Circular Centre Netherlands

The Dutch pilot centres on the transformation of elements recovered from Prinsenhof A in Arnhem into components for the Circular Centre Netherlands in Heerde.

Prinsenhof A contained more than 8,000 m² of floor area, with a precast structural system dominated by hollow-core slabs spanning between load-bearing façade elements. Deconstruction was carried out in 2022. Because of the wet connections and structural topping, the slabs and façade elements had to be separated by sawing before they could be lifted and transported.

The reclaimed components were stored at Lagemaat and systematically inventoried for geometry, reinforcement, structural capacity and material properties.

The new Circular Centre Netherlands consists of five buildings, with the office building serving as the main ReCreate pilot. Its structure combines reclaimed hollow-core slabs and precast façade elements with other reused structural materials.

Structural reuse here required more than checking individual components. The design team had to investigate the stability function of reused load-bearing façade panels, reinforce certain lintels and determine where elements were sufficiently stiff for longitudinal and transverse stability.

A full-scale mock-up became an important part of the Dutch methodology.

It was used to test structural design assumptions, tolerances and connection details before construction of the full building. The testing revealed practical issues such as dimensional mismatch between hollow-core slabs and façade elements and highlighted the importance of effective diaphragm action in floor joints.

This pilot demonstrates a central ReCreate lesson: successful reuse requires technical verification at the level of the whole structural system, not only assessment of individual elements.

Prinsenhof

Germany: reuse rooted in decades of experience

The German cluster built on more than 25 years of research into precast concrete reuse at Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg.

Two major applications were developed.

The Youth Center in Hohenmölsen is designed as an approximately 835 m², two-storey building incorporating 484 deconstructed precast concrete elements from a local GDR-era “P-Halle” residential building only around four kilometres away.

The available element stock includes exterior wall panels, interior walls and floor slabs and directly informs the architectural and structural design of the new building.

The second pilot is the Sports Club Kolkwitz, an approximately 290 m² extension and associated public-use facilities, designed to incorporate 80 reclaimed precast elements recovered from a donor building in Großräschen, approximately 40 km away.

The deconstruction campaign at that donor building illustrates the difference between theoretical technical reusability and what can actually be recovered for a specific reuse project. Of 707 deconstructed elements, 211 floor slabs, 224 interior wall elements and 104 exterior wall elements were classified as technically reusable; a smaller subset was ultimately “rescued” for planned reuse, including spare and test elements.

The German pilots therefore provide particularly valuable evidence on element portfolios, selective recovery, stock-based design and the logistics of matching donor and recipient projects.

Environmental performance: reuse must be assessed as a whole process

ReCreate also evaluated the environmental implications of reuse through life-cycle assessment.

The environmental benefit comes primarily from avoiding the production of equivalent new structural components. However, the project also accounted for the impacts of deconstruction, transport, storage, refurbishment and reassembly.

This is important because reuse is not automatically the lowest-impact solution in every possible situation. Distance, processing requirements and the condition of the reclaimed elements all matter.

Research developed within ReCreate has therefore focused not only on embodied-carbon savings, but also on practical methodologies for calculating climate benefits and on the development of EPD approaches for reclaimed building components.

The project’s work confirms one of the central principles of circular construction: preserving value locally and regionally is critical. The closer donor buildings, processing facilities and recipient projects can be connected, the stronger both the environmental and economic case for reuse becomes.

From technical feasibility to a functioning business ecosystem

A structurally sound reclaimed element is not yet a market.

For widespread reuse, the sector needs functioning supply chains, clear responsibilities, predictable quality-assurance procedures, logistics, storage solutions, digital information systems and viable business models.

ReCreate therefore devoted an entire work stream to the business ecosystem surrounding reuse.

The project examined profitability at company level as well as the broader circular value chain: which actors are needed, where new roles may emerge, how technology creates economic value, how risks are allocated, and how regulatory and social barriers influence business viability.

The final project synthesis makes the key lesson particularly clear.

Concrete element reuse is technically feasible. Precast elements can be safely deconstructed, assessed, refurbished and integrated into new construction.

But the process requires flexibility. Donor buildings, available elements and recipient projects must be matched, and design teams need to work with the dimensions, properties, condition and availability of existing components rather than fully predefined solutions.

Coordination is equally critical because deconstruction, testing, storage, transport, refurbishment, design and construction overlap and involve several actors. Reuse therefore works best when demolition and future construction projects are connected early enough for recovered materials to inform design and delivery.

The remaining challenge is not one technology

By the end of ReCreate, the most important barriers were no longer primarily technical.

The project identified four interrelated bottlenecks:

  • quality assurance, permitting, certification, liability and contractual responsibilities remain insufficiently standardised;
  • demand remains fragmented, and supply and demand must align in timing, location, quantities and element properties;
  • costs and risks are unevenly distributed across deconstruction, testing, storage, design adaptation and coordination;
  • both formal institutions, such as regulation and standards, and informal ones, such as professional practices and attitudes, still need to evolve.

The project’s conclusion is therefore important:

the central challenge is not a single technical barrier, but the alignment of markets, regulations, processes and actors.

A roadmap from pilots to mainstream construction

ReCreate’s final roadmap identifies five developments needed to move reuse from pioneering projects into wider construction practice:

  1. Reuse becomes financially competitive
  2. New partnerships develop around element reuse
  3. Digital solutions support reuse
  4. Circularity becomes a core design principle
  5. New professional identities and competences emerge

The roadmap treats mainstreaming as a socio-technical transition: technological solutions need to develop together with business models, regulation, industry practices, societal attitudes and professional skills.

That is perhaps the clearest summary of what more than five years of ReCreate have shown.

A substantial open knowledge base

One of ReCreate’s objectives from the outset was to ensure that the work would remain useful beyond the life of the grant.

The project website now brings together a substantial body of material, including:

  • an interactive map and taxonomy of European precast systems;
  • digital element databases and BIM workflows;
  • pre-deconstruction audit guidance;
  • deconstruction methodologies;
  • quality-management procedures;
  • design and reassembly research;
  • LCA and LCC approaches;
  • business-model and ecosystem research;
  • legal and policy analysis;
  • scientific publications;
  • pilot documentation;
  • digital tools and datasets.

The ReCreate scientific-publications library includes research on deconstruction, quality assurance, digital workflows, structural reuse, design, business models, environmental assessment and policy.

→ Explore the complete ReCreate project structure 

→ Explore the ReCreate tools

→ Browse the scientific publications

→ Explore official project deliverables and results

Final Conference: bringing the complete reuse process together

On 23 September 2026, GBC Croatia organised the ReCreate Final Conference, bringing together 155 participants from 26 countries.

The conference was structured around the complete reuse journey of a precast concrete element — from deconstruction and digital documentation to quality assurance, redesign and reassembly. The four country clusters then showed how these approaches were tested in practice through demonstrators in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany.

The discussion finally moved from individual technologies and pilot projects to the wider conditions needed for scale-up: viable business models, clearer regulatory pathways, functioning markets, digital tools, new design approaches and the professional competencies required to make reuse part of everyday construction practice.

→ Watch the full Final Conference

22 partners, one circular construction challenge

ReCreate brought together universities, research organisations, cities, public building owners, architects, structural engineers, precast manufacturers, contractors, deconstruction companies, digital specialists and organisations working on sustainable construction.

The final consortium included:

Tampere University, LIIKE Oy Arkkitehtistudio, Ramboll Finland, Consolis Parma, Skanska, Umacon and the City of Tampere in Finland;

KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Helsingborgshem and Consolis Strängbetong in Sweden;

Eindhoven University of Technology, TNO, Circular Structural Design, Consolis VBI, Lagemaat and IMd Structural Engineers in the Netherlands;

Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg, ECOSOIL Ost, P. Jähne Ingenieurbüro, the City of Hohenmölsen and Lohmann und Robinski in Germany;

and Green Building Council Croatia.

→ Meet the ReCreate partners

From “can it be done?” to “how can it become normal practice?”

ReCreate closes with a much stronger evidence base than existed when the project began.

Across four European contexts, precast concrete elements have been identified in donor buildings, carefully deconstructed, assessed, digitally documented, refurbished, redesigned and integrated into new construction.

The project has developed practical methods and tools for pre-deconstruction audits, deconstruction, quality management, logistics, traceability, redesign and environmental and economic assessment. It has generated guidance for future projects and roadmaps for industry and policymakers.

It has also demonstrated where the next challenge lies.

The question is no longer simply whether structural concrete elements can be reused.

They can.

The next phase is about making reuse predictable, scalable and economically viable: connecting demolition and construction projects earlier, creating regional markets for reclaimed elements, standardising quality and certification procedures, developing digital information flows, clarifying responsibilities and ensuring that architects, engineers, contractors, clients and authorities have the knowledge and confidence to work differently.

ReCreate officially ends on 30 September 2026.

Its results do not.

Continue exploring ReCreate

More than five years of research, development and demonstration cannot be captured in one article.

We invite professionals, researchers, policymakers, students and everyone interested in circular construction to continue exploring and using the knowledge produced through ReCreate.

Explore the ReCreate project pilots
Explore project results and Work Packages
Explore ReCreate tools
Explore Section for practitioners (reports explained)
Browse scientific publications
Meet the project partners
Browse ReCreate news and project stories
Explore official project results on CORDIS

To the project coordinator, all ReCreate partners, researchers, industry partners, cities, pilot teams and everyone who contributed to the project over more than five years: thank you for the knowledge, work and collaboration that made ReCreate possible.

The project ends here. The work of making structural reuse part of everyday construction continues.

 

 


June 15, 2026
Matias-Pajarre-TAU-6.jpg

Paul Jonker-Hoffrén, Tampere University

Introduction to the reports: “Work Processes Practice Change Checklist” and “Roadmap for Educational Needs”. The full reports are available here and here. These two documents deal with the near future of work in the circular construction economy. 
How circular construction work restructures actor relations

At its core, the report “Work Processes Practice Change Checklist” is a practice–oriented document that is intended to be used by project planners. It is based on the work processes research in ReCreate, and it follows the general structure of phases in circular construction projects as identified in ReCreate. In each phase, there is a checklist, with a number of work processes and the actors involved. The purpose of structuring the document this way is that the project planner can easily see which actors should co-operate with each other, organised by work process. Below, an example checklist is shown, which covers the deconstruction phase 

The idea is that by having a single document with all phases and the major work processes, the project planner also easily can manage information needs between actors that occur at different times. For example, labelling the deconstructed materials is a work process that connects to logistics, quality assurance and refurbishment. The labelling should be planned between the deconstruction firm and the refurbishment company, so that information needed for logistics and quality assurance can be easily added to a digital content management system (i.e. a common data environment). This is also why documenting data needs is a separate work process for all actors and all phases. 


Skills, material knowledge and digital proficiency 

The “Roadmap for Educational Needs” is also based on the empirical material. In this document, I discuss skills needs, again distinguishing the circular construction process by phase. The intention is to show that in circular work, there are many aspects that remain similar to existing construction work, although there are definitely features that are unique to circular work. The aim of the document is to provide content for the EU’s transition policies, as circular construction work relates to both the green and digital transitions. 
 
In the report, I show that many work processes feature mostly a reconfiguration of skills towards a new goal, rather that fully new skills. This should be interpreted as good news, as the construction sector does not necessarily need a full overhaul of its curriculum in education. However, there should be sufficient attention to BIM-modelling, data processing and near-future developments like materials passports. In other words: digital skills and digital infrastructure will be more important in the future. This could also entail the use of AI to aid supply and demand matching in architectural or structural design. Moreover, in line with the findings behind the other report, “Work Processes Practice Change Checklist”, there is great need for transversal skills, i.e. communication and knowledge sharing. This includes also knowledge of materials and how they behave – this may greatly reduce damage to recoverable materials and products.  
 
The report also shows that the values inherent in circular construction may have an impact on making the sector more attractive to young people, as circular economy imbues construction with a different meaning that traditional linear construction. This may be a pull factor. The report concludes with a few recommendations to current educational institutions in construction. Beyond the need for transversal skills, the report also calls for multidisciplinarity, e.g. structural engineers study more public policy and vice versa, or architects acquaint themselves to a greater extent with the work at construction sites. The overarching message is that in circular work, it is important to know what other actors do, and why they need information of a certain kind. 
 


Matias-Pajarre-TAU-5.jpg

Paul Jonker-Hoffrén, Tampere University

Introduction to the report: Guide to national implementation differences of norms applicable to reuse. The full report is available here. 

Transitioning the construction sector from a linear “take-make-waste” model to a circular one is a monumental task. The ReCreate project is researching how to reuse precast concrete elements—originally never meant for disassembly—across four European countries. However, as the project has progressed, actors on the ground have found that the biggest barriers aren’t always technical; they are often found in the fine print of national regulations. 

“Guide to national implementation differences of norms applicable to reuse” looks at the practical aspects of translating existing regulation for reuse of reclaimed precast concrete elements. It is based on the experiences gained from interactions with regulations and policies in ReCreate’s pilots. 

Finland: reclaimed precast concrete elements are not waste

In Finland, the ReCreate pilot faced a difficult question in conjunction with the temporary storage of the reclaimed elements: Are deconstructed concrete elements “products” or are they “waste”? If labelled as waste, the elements would be subject to expensive, time-consuming administrative processes like the “End-of-Waste” (EoW) process. In addition, such labelling also would possible have required different environmental permits. 

However, the Finnish ReCreate cluster was convinced reclaimed elements could not be waste. After intensive negotiations and dialogues with the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry published a landmark policy clarification: reclaimed elements do not automatically become waste if they are kept in a usable state throughout the process. 

This general statement was coupled with further criteria. The Ministry established that “certainty of further use” could be proven without a specific building address. Instead, actors must show that the reclamation is systematic and there is demand for the products. The municipality of Kangasala then formally decided, using the clarification, that the reclaimed elements stored at the Consolis Parma plant do not constitute waste.  

Beyond removing hurdles, the City of Tampere successfully tested a “land allocation competition” model, which ReCreate helped develop. In this system, developers who commit to circular methods (like reuse) are given preference in securing valuable land, providing a powerful financial incentive to innovate.

Sweden: temporary storage and chemicals

In Sweden, a similar interpretation of the waste status has not been reached as in Finland. Under the Swedish Environmental Code, reclaimed materials and products can only be stored for up to three years before the site is legally reclassified as a landfill. At the time of the report’s research, this issue was not resolved, and temporary storage remains a risk for the owner of the reclaimed elements. 

In Sweden, much attention is paid to adherence to REACH legislation, because the developer bears legal responsibility for this issue. However, the Swedish country cluster received a clarification from the Swedish Chemical Agency that the limit values according to REACH restriction rules only apply to chemical products, such as cement. In this legislation, reused concrete elements are rather defined as goods. 

The Netherlands: self-assessment of the waste status 

In the Netherlands, the waste status of recovered elements has not formally been discussed in ReCreate’s pilot project. However, in the context of environmental permits, the project partner Lagemaat was obliged to use a self-assessment tool, to determine whether the recovered materials constituted waste. This tool followed similar logic as the Finnish authorities, and the outcome indeed was the elements would not constitute waste. The tool only offers guidance, however. 

Germany: A case-by-case bureaucratic battle

The German regulatory situation is complicated because each state has differing regulations. The report therefore only deals with the states the pilot projects have been active in.  
To some extent, the complicated issue in Germany revolved around quality assurance rather than the acceptance of reclaimed elements as building materials. The latter, through the site-specific permits, is possible according to existing German law. Regarding quality assurance, the issue was mostly which authority would be responsible for acknowledging the adherence to standards. At the time of research for this report, the issue was not fully clear. One further issue that is a potential challenge to the scalability of the reuse of reclaimed elements is the liability of owners for the materials. On the other hand, this could spur innovations in insurance products. 

Common Themes: The Need for an “EU Umbrella”

All countries had very specific regulatory issues, but the ReCreate report identifies several common threads that affect everyone: 

  1. Quality management is probably the single most important issue for reuse regarding building permits. 
  2. Reusing materials currently requires significantly more negotiation and consensus-building than standard construction. This “interaction tax” is a hidden cost that currently burdens circular pioneers. 
  3. There is a unanimous call for the EU to provide a single, unambiguous definition of when reclaimed products become waste. Relying on 27 different national interpretations prevents the creation of a true cross-border market for reused materials. 
In conclusion, the message to companies is clear: start early, negotiate and communicate often, and document everything. The path to a circular future is currently being paved—reused element by reused element—through these difficult but necessary regulatory conversations.

January 19, 2026
Opname-Podcast-Groenbeton-1280x960.jpeg

For Dutch-speaking audience

As part of the ongoing discussion on circular construction and the reuse of concrete, the ReCreate project highlights two podcast episodes from the Dutch series In groen beton gegoten. These episodes bring together architects, engineers, researchers and industry experts to reflect on how adaptive design, reuse, and chain collaboration can help extend the life of concrete structures and reduce the need for demolition and new construction. 

In one episode, architect Bart van Kampen (De Zwarte Hond) and engineer Pim Peters (IMd Raadgevende Ingenieurs) argue that the sustainability of concrete lies in adaptive building and reuse rather than demolition and new construction. By designing buildings to be flexible and by giving existing concrete structures a second life, the value of concrete can be preserved for generations. They emphasize that circular construction is not only a technical challenge, but above all a system change in mindset, calculation methods, and regulations. 

LISTEN TO THE PODCAST HERE

Another episode focuses on the question of how to truly close the concrete chain. Experts Simon Wijte (Hageman / TU Eindhoven) and Jan-Pedro Vis (Renewi) discuss different forms of circular concrete, ranging from re-use of entire structures to concrete-to-concrete recycling and the use of residual materials. The discussion highlights that circular concrete starts with careful, selective demolition and depends on strong collaboration across the value chain, clear choices by clients, and new systems to make reusable concrete elements accessible and traceable.

LISTEN TO THE PODCAST HERE


January 12, 2026
image002-1280x857.jpg

In the run-up to the construction of Circulair Centrum Nederland, a full-scale mock-up has been built as a practical test setup. This provides the opportunity to test connection details, structural solutions, and dimensions in real conditions on site.

The evaluation highlighted one key point: the precast hollow-core slabs that were cut to size turned out to be slightly wider than the façade elements. Several solutions have been developed to accommodate this, and together with the parties involved it will be decided which option is the most practical.

In addition, the mock-up confirmed the importance of a good connection between the hollow-core slabs. Because they are separate elements, a solid joint is essential so that the floor behaves as one integrated structure.

In this way, the mock up helps to identify such issues early and to further improve the circular construction process step by step toward realization.

 


February 13, 2025
Finnish-cluster-real-life-mini-pilot-1.png

The Finnish cluster has completed its first mini pilot in the autumn of 2024. The first batch of reclaimed elements – 25 hollow-core slabs – were reused in a block of flats in Tampere.

The building was built by Skanska for the client, affordable rental housing company A-Kruunu. The elements originate from the Finnish cluster’s deconstruction pilot, in which an office building from the 1980s was deconstructed in Tampere city center during the autumn of 2023. The new building with the reused elements stands in Härmälänranta district, Potkurinkatu street, about 6 km to the South-West from the donor building’s location.

Finnish mini pilot building

’It’s great to take part in a pilot that develops circular construction. The project corresponds to our aim to develop housing construction in Finland. The location in Härmälänranta is also attractive’, explains A-Kruunu’s development manager, Ms. Leena Oiva.

The reclaimed hollow-core slabs were reused as floors above an air-raid shelter, which was most suitable for the elements in this building considering the dimensions of the elements.

’Assembly of the reused elements was easy. It did not differ from using virgin elements. The frame of the building is fully precast, so there is further potential for reuse at the end of life.’ says Mr. Toni Tuomola, regional manager for Skanska, and continues:

’Skanska is committed to a green deal for circular economy. We will focus on reusing construction products by exploiting the learnings from ReCreate. The practical experience acquired from the pilot is therefore highly valuable.’

Reused elements were meticulously quality controlled and factory refurbished

Mini pilot installation

The elements reused in the pilot were quality controlled and factory refurbished in Consolis Parma’s factory in Kangasala, a municipality neighbouring Tampere. The first pilot produced invaluable learnings about the need for environmental permits when refurbishing and reusing elements, as well as quality control and product approval of reclaimed elements.

‘Climate change mitigation is at the heart of our strategy. Our aim is to halve our emissions by 2035. In ReCreate, we are looking into the business possibilities of reused elements and how it could contribute to our portfolio of low-carbon products’, shares Mr. Juha Rämö, technology director for Consolis Parma.

‘In addition to the factory refurbishment, we can contribute such core competencies to reuse projects as product design, storage, inspection, testing, and traceability’, Rämö continues.

Business development manager (refurbishment), Ms. Inari Weijo explains the role of Ramboll Finland:

‘In this mini pilot, we at Ramboll developed designing the refurbishment of the reclaimed elements in collaboration with the factory. We also took care of the site-specific product approval of reused elements towards the authorities.’

She elaborates:

‘We acquired useful learnings how to manage the process. This will come in handy in the next pilots and in expanding Ramboll’s service offerings in the field of reuse.’

Mini pilot floor

New pilots are being negotiated

The Finnish cluster aims to pilot reuse of reclaimed precast concrete in more than one building project. Different kinds of buildings and projects will contribute versatile understanding about the requirements for reuse in different contexts. Real-life pilots help to identify barriers to reuse that must be removed in order for reuse to become mainstream.

‘This mini pilot was a valuable first step towards more widespread reuse’, says ReCreate’s coordinator and the Finnish cluster’s leader, Prof. Satu Huuhka from Tampere University.

ReCreate’s Finnish cluster is formed by Tampere University, Skanska, Consolis Parma, Ramboll Finland, Umacon, LIIKE architects, and the City of Tampere.


Patrick-Teuffel.png

In this exclusive interview, we delve into the pioneering work of Patrick Teuffel, founder of CIRCULAR STRUCTURAL DESIGN, as he leads the charge in revolutionizing structural design for a circular economy. With a focus on sustainability and decarbonization, Teuffel discusses his role in the ReCreate project, shedding light on innovative approaches to integrating reclaimed precast concrete elements into new constructions. From reimagining design processes to the challenges and benefits of incorporating AI, Teuffel provides invaluable insights into shaping a more environmentally responsible future in construction.

1. Can you please introduce yourself a bit, your organization and your role in the project?

As founder of CIRCULAR STRUCTURAL DESIGN, I am strongly focused on advancing the principles of the circular economy and decarbonization within the built environment in the context of structural design. With my background as a structural engineer, I bring a strong combination of technical expertise and sustainability principles to my work. As an academic as well as professional, I am committed to revolutionizing traditional construction practices by integrating circularity and sustainability into every aspect of the design process.

In addition to my entrepreneurial pursuits, I also act as a professor specializing in Innovation and Sustainability Strategies at SRH Berlin School of Technology. In this role, I have the opportunity to impart my knowledge and passion for creating more environmentally responsible solutions to future generations of professionals. My advisory role at the DGNB (German Sustainable Building Council) Innovation Board and the circular construction team at Circular Berlin further underscores my dedication to driving meaningful change within the industry.

At CIRCULAR STRUCTURAL DESIGN, our mission is to seamlessly integrate the principles of circular economy and sustainable design into every structural project we undertake. Our approach is guided by three core principles:

1.) Minimizing waste and emissions: We prioritize minimizing resource consumption and emissions associated with our structures, ensuring that our designs have minimal environmental impact.

2.) Keeping products and materials in use: Our commitment to extending the lifecycle of materials, components and buildings drives us to promote high-level reuse and repurposing wherever feasible, thus reducing resource consumption and waste generation.

3.) Using renewable resources: In response to the ongoing depletion of finite resources, we actively explore and incorporate renewable material options whenever possible.

It is our mission to bridge the gap between research and practice and to integrate the principles of circular economy into everyday structural design projects.

Within the ReCreate project I am the lead of the WP5 that explores aspects of redesign and reassembly. I, as a structural engineer, focus on the implications for the design process and the actual technical and practical implementation in the context of the reuse of existing components.

2. Can you provide more information on your work package and how it contributes toward the project?

WP5 consists of two parts: redesign and reassembly. We explore design implications of the stock-based design and develop new connection types or put existing connections to the test to reconnect existing precast concrete elements.

Traditionally the design process follows a linear model. The building design is developed first and the required structural elements, that are needed to accomplish this design, will be manufactured from scratch according to the dimensions required for the project.
The whole work process needs to be rethought when it comes to reusing elements. When maximizing the integration of reused elements in a stock-based design approach, the traditional design approach of form-follows-function will be replaced by a new principle: form-follows-availability.

To enable the load-bearing reuse of existing components, connection details are required with which these can be reconnected. This is why the documentation of connection details that already exist and allow for an easy reuse and developing new connection details that will also allow for an easier future disassembly are the second focus point in WP5.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the ReCreate project is, that these approaches are not only theoretically explored, but will be implemented in real live pilot projects. Hence a large part of WP5 is designing those pilots and sharing the lessons learned throughout the process.

3. Tell us more about task 5.1 on the framework of parameters for the development of the redesign and reassembly process for precast concrete elements in new buildings?

As stated, the design process is completely different from the status quo, when it comes to the integration of reclaimed elements. Here, the first step is to capture relevant information about the reclaimed precast concrete elements in order to know where and how those may be reused. So, the first thing you need to know is what those elements are. In task 5.1 we explore, what parameters and object properties need to be gathered and at what design stage different information needs to be available to enable architectural and structural design. Here, we are looking at typological and dimensional information and the structural capacity of the different elements.
This task closely interacts with other working packages, such as WP1: the analysis of precast concrete systems, WP2: the deconstruction as we are strongly interested in the shape and capability of each element after deconstruction, WP3: the logistics and processing and WP4: the quality management.

The knowledge gained through this process will be captured in a design guideline (deliverable 5.1) at the end of the project.

4. How does Task 5.3 highlight the challenges and complexities faced in the architectural and structural design process when reusing precast concrete elements?

Task 5.3’s focus is the understanding and developing of a design approach and actively implementing it in the design process in the pilot projects. The traditional approach of an architect developing a space concept first and an engineer designing the structural elements afterword to erect this space does not work when the pool of existing elements limits what they might be used for. Means: the design process needs to run “in reverse”. To understand the capability of the existing elements and what uses they can be put to, requires a close interaction of architects and engineers from the very beginning of the project.
Each country cluster approaches this separately and faces different architectural and structural challenges. Those experiences are discussed within the ReCreate project team and the experiences will be summarized in the form of a best-practice recommendation that incorporates the lessons learned from the project.

5. How does Task 5.3 propose to incorporate artificial intelligence (AI) and neural networks into the design process? What benefits are expected from using AI in this context?

When it comes to designing with reclaimed elements, different design approaches can be explored and different country clusters follow different approaches of how to start with a stock of reclaimed, prefabricated concrete elements and get to the finished product:  a building partially designed from those elements.
That insights gained and lessons learned will be gathered in a design manual that will be published as D5.1 at the end of the project.

Generally, the most straight-forward approach to designing with precast concrete elements is trial- and-error.

The larger the implicit knowledge about the reclaimed elements and reuse options are, the better the outcome will be.

Another possibility is a design optimisation aided by parametric design tools. Within the project research is undertaken how the design process can be aided by existing and newly developed design tools that allow for an optimisation.

Also, an AI-aided element matching between a pool of existing elements and a proposed new design will be explored. Especially when the list of reclaimed elements is very large, human trial-and-error can reach its limits. The AI-aided approach tries to do a first step by exploring a matching algorithm that highlights optimisation potential and best matches.

6. Can you tell us more on the processes and challenges that you are facing with the connections in task 5.2 and how do they influence the rest of your work? What are some of the risks that are present here? In the context of design for disassembly (DfD), how does Task 5.2 investigate the possibility of easier deconstructability in the new connections?

The feasibility and ease of new structural connections construction for reclaimed element has a large impact of the likelihood integration of reuse structural elements. In WP5 options to reconnect those structural elements will be explored. Particular attention is paid here to when the same connection points can be reused (with minor adjustments) during reinstallation. The connections that are to be used in the construction of the pilot projects are described. New connection types are also being developed in the project, those put a great emphasis on the possibility for a simple future deconstruction.
The general approach in the recreate project is, that both, new connection details that allow for an easier future disassembly are being developed in project funded university research studies. At the same time in the real life pilot projects conventional connection details that already exist, might also be used.

7. What is the relationship between the re-use of precast concrete elements and sustainability certificates, such as DGNB as discussed in Task 5.3?

When it comes to evaluating the sustainability of the reuse of precast concrete elements from an ecological viewpoint, two aspects can be highlighted. The reuse may help to save both finite resources and avoid new production emissions.
The topic of resource conservation in the context of a circular economy has recently come increasingly into focus, and green building certificates are trying to account for it. One example is here the the DGNB, where I am a member of the committee for lifecycle and circular design, the “DGNB Ausschuss für Lebenszyklus und zirkuläres Bauen“.

Important aspects such as reuse and deconstructability, which are addressed within WP5, are discussed here.

Additionally, a buildings carbon footprint is of course an important aspect to consider when it comes to evaluate the overall sustainability. Within WP5 internal meetings, the use of “LCA-as-a-Design-Tool” is repeatedly addressed. The goal is to actively identify and prioritize the lowest-emission design variant through regular design-integrated LCA (Life Cycle Assessment). Here we also closely collaborate with WP6.

8. How does Task 5.4 ensure a smooth implementation of the four real-life pilot projects, considering factors like transportation, supplementary materials, and equipment?

Let’s have another interview next year, then we can answer this question 😊

9. Who is Patrick Teuffel when he’s not working on the project and what does he like to do in his free time?

As for my personal preferences, I thoroughly enjoy engaging in sports like running and mountain biking, finding exhilaration in the great outdoors. Additionally, I have a passion for savoring good food, particularly exploring diverse culinary experiences. Living in the vibrant city of Berlin, I find immense pleasure in attending concerts and immersing myself in its dynamic cultural scene. Furthermore, I have a strong interest for exploration, fueled by my love for traveling and exploring the world, seeking out new adventures and experiences wherever I go. Last, but not least, I’m doing the final editing of this text in a spa – now you know where you can find me on a Sunday afternoon.





EU FUNDING

“This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 958200”.

Follow us: