precast concrete - 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.

 

 


January 26, 2026
Jakob-Fischer-1-1280x670.png

Author: Jakob Fischer, Brandenburg University of Technology

The tender for structural engineering services for the new youth center building is an essential part of the procurement process. Following the award of the building design contract (see also episode 1 and episode 2 of this blog series), applicants were able to bid for the structural engineering services for the new building at the end of 2025. Here, too, there was a 4-week publication phase during which incoming bidder questions were answered by the client (the city of Hohenmölsen).

Procedural conditions (Part A)

Apart from the award procedure, the procedural conditions (Part A of the tender documents) essentially cover the same content as those for the object planning ( Episode 1). In contrast to the award procedure for the object planning, there is no two-stage process for the structural design. This means that the documents to be submitted also include the binding offer prepared by the bidder. A separate invitation to tender and the evaluation by means of so-called selection criteria are therefore not required. Further significant differences can mainly be found in Appendix A01: Suitability criteria. These are described below.

Suitability criteria

Of the nine suitability criteria established and to be fulfilled by the company or the bidding consortium, three criteria have minimum requirements:

  1. Annual turnover
  • self-declaration of total turnover in the years 2022 to 2024 and separately for services in the field of structural engineering with at least average requirements in accordance with fee zone II (according to Appendix 14 to § 51 (5), 52 (2) HOAI 2021)
  1. Reference services Planning
  • self-declaration regarding the subject matter of comparable previous contracts
  • minimum requirements:
    • at least one comparable reference service (each completed after January 1, 2022)
    • eligible costs of the reference object (cost groups 300 to 400) at least €500,000 (gross)
    • at least service phases 1-4 of the service description for structural design ($51 HOAI) must have been completed
    • the reference object must have a gross floor area of at least 250 m²
    • the references must have used precast reinforced concrete elements as load-bearing components
  1. Reference services for planning and execution
  • self-declaration regarding the subject matter of comparable previous contracts
  • minimum requirements:
    • the comparable reference services must have been completed after January 1, 2008
    • chargeable costs of the reference project (cost groups 300 to 400) at least €500,000 (gross)
    • at least service phases 1-6 of the service description for structural design ($51 HOAI) must have been completed
    • the reference object must have a gross floor area of at least 250 m²
    • the references must include the use of precast reinforced concrete elements as load-bearing components
  1. Staff
  • specified as the annual average for the years 2022 to 2024
  • specified according to positions in the company (e.g. owner, architect, technician, etc.)
  1. Project management
  • information on the project manager and deputy (name, qualifications, and professional experience in years)
  • minimum requirements:
    • proof of professional certification as an architect or engineer in accordance with state law for the project manager and his/her deputy
    • the project manager must have at least 10 years of professional experience and be authorized to submit building documents
    • the deputy project manager must have at least 5 years of professional experience
  1. Information on the use of subcontractors
  2. Legal grounds for exclusion (within the meaning of Sections 123, 124, and 125 of the German Act against Restraints of Competition (GWB))
  3. Self-declaration regarding the lack of Russian connection of the services
  4. Self-declaration regarding collective bargaining agreements, minimum hourly wages, and equal pay (Section 11 TVergG LSA)

Award criteria

The structural engineering services were awarded in a single stage, i.e., after suitability had been determined, the bids were directly subjected to so-called award criteria in order to then determine the most economical bid according to the number of points achieved.

A bid can achieve a maximum total score of 1000 by fulfilling all criteria. Two criteria were used, each with two sub-criteria.

  1. Fee parameters

1.1. Total fee (450 points)

1.2. Hourly rates for additionally commissioned services (150 points)

  1. Concept for project implementation

2.1. Project management (200 points)

2.2. Planning concept (200 points)

To calculate the score for the subcriterion “total fee,” the bid with the lowest bid price automatically receives the highest score. All other/higher bids receive a lower score according to a specific formula. The points for the subcriterion “hourly rates” are awarded according to the same principle.

For the “project implementation concept,” bidders had to use presentation materials to illustrate the approaches and methods they would use to effectively implement the structural engineering requirements. The evaluation was carried out by a committee appointed by the client.

When evaluating project management (criterion 2.1), the employer (the city of Hohenmölsen) attaches particular importance to the structural design being managed by individuals who “[…] personally have comprehensive knowledge and relevant practical experience in the design and construction of buildings using, ideally reusing, precast reinforced concrete elements.” In addition, if the above condition applies, this criterion also evaluates which personal reference project was ideally carried out by the project management in relation to “circular construction.” Furthermore, it is considered particularly positive if the project management already has experience with reused reinforced concrete elements in planning. It is also considered positive if the overall design was planned with load-bearing precast reinforced concrete elements. Relevant additional qualifications are also taken into account in the evaluation.

The sub-criterion “project management” is evaluated according to the expected degree of target achievement.

The sub-criterion “planning concept” is evaluated, among other things, on the basis of how convincingly the bidder can present its planning approach in a comprehensible manner and demonstrate how the integration of reusable precast concrete elements is taken into account in the planning and construction, including coordination with the object planner and structural engineer. Potential difficulties and possible solutions should also be presented.

Another key criterion for ReCreate is the integration and presentation of the communication concept with scientific support, represented here by the BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg. The client attaches great importance to effective and targeted information exchange.

The sub-criterion “planning concept” is evaluated according to the expected degree of target achievement.

 


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.

 


Authors-Lauri-Alkki-Leena-Aarikka-Stenroos-Tampere-University.png

Introduction to the report: Actor ecosystems and critical actors in precast concrete reuse of the ReCreate project. The full report is available here.

Authors: Lauri Alkki & Leena Aarikka-Stenroos; Tampere University

The reuse of precast concrete elements is gaining momentum as a sustainable practice in the construction sector. But what does it take to make this happen? Harnessing reuse changes the process of construction as well involved companies’ and other stakeholders, and therefore it is crucial to understand who the relevant actors are and what roles in a circular construction project are putting reuse to use. A construction project reusing precast concrete elements requires collaborative contributions from multiple complementary actors that can be considered as an “actor ecosystem” of concrete element reuse. Based on our case study examining several concrete element reuse projects from the organization and management perspective, we can share some insights on this. Let’s dive into the tasks and key actors forming the actor setting and actor ecosystem enabling reuse, driving this innovative approach.

 

Key tasks, actors and their roles in concrete element reuse process

To successfully reuse precast concrete elements, a variety of tasks along the full reuse process must be conducted by the construction actors with learning and problem solving-oriented and collaborative mindset. Each individual task is crucial in ensuring that the process runs smoothly from deconstruction to the final construction of new building(s) from harvested elements. Next, we explain the key tasks of concrete element reuse and the main actors contributing to them:

  1. Planning the Deconstruction: This task focuses on planning the deconstruction (i.e., so-called reverse construction) implementation process and related logistical aspects, ensuring that it can be carried out safely and efficiently. In this task it is also essential to plan the necessary quality assurance actions that can be implemented already at the demolition site prior to deconstruction. In addition, when planning the deconstruction, it is valuable to take inventory of elements that can be detached to begin exploring their reuse potential. Key actors in this task are typically demolition companies and structural engineering companies planning the deconstruction, its implementation, and needed initial quality assurance actions as well as architect and structural engineering companies sketching the future usage of the potential detached elements.
  2. Deconstruction: The actual process of dismantling buildings and extracting reusable concrete elements falls under this task. It requires specialized skills and equipment to ensure that the elements are not damaged during removal. Demolition companies with dismantling capabilities, knowledge and tools are the primary actors here.
  3. Logistics: Managing the transportation and storage of deconstructed elements is essential to keep the process efficient. This task includes planning the logistics of moving elements from the deconstruction site to storage and then to the new construction site(s). Logistics companies and the actors operating at the deconstruction site (e.g., deconstruction companies) as well as the actors who are responsible for the intermediate storage (e.g., concrete element manufacturing companies) and the new site where the dismantled elements are going (e.g., construction companies) often handle this task. 
  4. Refurbishment, Quality Assurance, and Redesign: Once the elements are deconstructed, they need to be refurbished, quality checked and redesigned to fit into new architectural and structural plans in line with the client’s requirements and to ensure that the reused concrete elements meet all safety and structural standards. These tasks involve both creative and technical expertise to ensure that the elements are both functional and aesthetically safety to use such as building condition surveys already before deconstruction and after deconstruction testing the elements as well as refurbishing them to be ready to use. These tasks are closely related to the new building (partly) made from the detached and reused elements, since designers need to ensure that detached elements fit into new building designs and that necessary modifications and refurbishments can be carried out according to these designs. Manufacturing companies and structural engineering companies are most often responsible for the refurbishment and quality assurance processes, and architect and structural engineering companies are key actors in the redesigning processes with strong support from the construction company (and client(s)). 
  5. Reuse of the elements: Finally, the actual reuse of the deconstructed elements in new construction project(s). This implementation phase involves integrating the refurbished elements into new building designs at the construction site. At this task, it is essential to coordinate logistics and schedules regarding the factory refurbishment of reusable elements and the progress of the construction site so that the elements arrive at the site at the right time, ready for installation. Overall, however, installation is mostly carried out in the same way (possible minor differences in preparatory and finishing work depending on the details of the reusable elements), regardless of whether the element is new or reused. Construction companies play a key role in this task, as they are responsible for the operation and progress of the construction site.
  6. Permitting and Regulation: Navigating the regulatory landscape shaping how easy or difficult it is to use the reuse principle is crucial for the success of concrete reuse projects. This task involves obtaining the necessary permits (e.g., demolition and construction permits) and ensuring compliance with local regulations (e.g., whether dismantled elements are considered waste or not, and what procedures can or cannot be used to utilize them), in collaboration with the relevant public authority and department responsible in the current situation, as well as the actors applying for the required permits. Local authorities, such as cities and their various departments (e.g. the department responsible for granting permits, developing zoning or promoting circularity through plot donation and acquisition), play a pivotal role in enabling reuse. This is achieved in collaboration with the owners of the donor and new buildings, who are responsible for applying for permits.

 

Depending on the reuse project phase, the division of tasks and the actors involved can vary (see Figure 1 for an example). The capabilities of each actor, their ability to collaborate, and the overall industry setting in their respective countries influence how the tasks are distributed and how the actor ecosystem organizes along the project. Furthermore, data collection, analysis, modelling, usage and sharing is a critical factor affecting positively the preservation of element value: therefore, actors should collaborate and ensure jointly that data is monitored and harnessed throughout the reuse process to support planning and implementation of each phase and reach optimized projects. In this regard, it is essential to gather relevant data to enable reuse, store the data in a way that allows for easy transfer, and ensure that all relevant actors have access to it. It is also important that these actors have the capability to analyze the data to ensure the safe usage of reused elements. Thus, open data transfer and communication ensures that actors understand what each considers valuable in the reuse process, avoiding the destruction of another actor’s value.

Figure 1. Example of an actor ecosystem enabling precast concrete element reuse: key actors per each process phase, their tasks and collaboration. The example is from the Finnish reuse pilot project in Tampere region.

Conclusion: the power of collaboration

The successful reuse of precast concrete elements hinges on a well-coordinated actor ecosystem with complementary skilled and collaborative minded companies and experts. Each actor brings unique expertise and competences to the table, which is why actor settings cany vary a lot depending on the case. Collaboration and knowledge sharing are essential to enable and optimize all tasks and process phases, and thus to ensure that concrete elements can be reused effectively and sustainably. All in all, as we move towards more circular construction practices, the insights from these pilot projects provide examples to think about how you should organize when planning to reuse concrete elements and repurpose existing materials to create a more sustainable world, in collaboration with skilled, future-looking expert partners.

The published deliverable and more detailed pilot projects findings can be found on the ReCreate and the studies behind this blog are also openly available here and here.


Paul-Jonker-Hoffren-Tampere-University-1-1.png

Introduction to the report: Legal and technical requirements in reusing precast concrete of the ReCreate project. The full report is available here.

Paul Jonker-Hoffrén, Tampere University

The ReCreate report, Legal and technical requirements in reusing precast concrete, provides a comprehensive analysis of the legal and technical requirements for reusing precast concrete elements in four European countries: Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Germany. It examines regulations at the EU, national, and local levels, focusing on deconstruction and reuse processes, and identifies common challenges and country-specific issues. It represents the understanding of the state of the art until the beginning of 2023. This report is based on general knowledge rather than the experiences of the industrial partners, which will be reported in a forthcoming report. Therefore, some aspects discussed in the current report will be out of date already due to developments in policy.

Deconstruction Norms

Deconstruction and demolition permits are nationally regulated. In Finland and Sweden, the legislation acknowledges reuse and requires demolition permits to consider reusable components. In the Netherlands, a demolition notification is generally sufficient unless environmental laws apply, which can require more comprehensive permits. Germany follows federal and state building codes with more structured requirements. Waste management is governed by the EU Waste Framework Directive, which sets recycling targets but lacks explicit reuse goals, resulting in ambiguity. Finland and Sweden faced uncertainties about whether deconstructed components are classified as waste (until recently), complicating reuse due to administrative burdens. The Netherlands does not consider deconstructed concrete elements as waste if free from hazardous substances, facilitating reuse. This will be tested in the real-life pilot project in the Netherlands, nonetheless. Germany has legal provisions to avoid waste status, but debates continue on their efficacy. Local environmental protection laws generally do not impose special restrictions on deconstruction for reuse in Finland and the Netherlands. Sweden and Germany have raised concerns regarding specific hazardous substances and water protection laws, with Germany expecting clarification through upcoming ordinances. Occupational safety regulations in all countries align with EU directives, ensuring minimum safety standards. Finland and Sweden emphasize public sector and social partner involvement in occupational safety regulations and workplace rules; Germany relies on sector-based organization; the Netherlands supplements national laws with private certification schemes. Detailed work safety plans and checklists guide safe deconstruction practices in all countries at the project level, which are based on national law or decrees.

Norms on Reuse

Technical requirements for reused concrete elements follow the same standards as new materials, primarily based on Eurocodes and national annexes. However, challenges arise in assessing the material properties of reused components due to lack of original documentation and potential degradation, necessitating improved testing standards. Finland and Sweden apply existing standards designed for new products, which may not adequately address reuse-specific concerns. The Netherlands and Germany have developed additional guidelines and standards to better assess existing structures for reuse.

Product approval is nationally controlled, as the EU Construction Products Regulation currently exempts existing products like reused elements. Finland and Sweden lack clear, consensus-based approval processes, leading to ad hoc practices and uncertainty. Germany and the Netherlands have more institutionalized procedures, including certifications and assessment guidelines, though complexities remain. Designer qualifications for reuse projects are regulated nationally; Finland has specific legal requirements and guidelines, while Sweden and the Netherlands have no special legislation, and Germany regulates via state building codes. Building permits for reuse projects generally require case-by-case collaboration with authorities in all countries, reflecting the novelty and evolving nature of reuse practices. Sustainability policies at international, EU, and national levels provide overarching goals supporting reuse but often lack direct enforceability. Recent initiatives in Finland (e.g., circular construction competitions) and municipal programmes in Sweden demonstrate emerging practical incentives for reuse. The Netherlands and Germany integrate sustainability into building codes and climate laws but tend to focus more on operational energy than embodied emissions, indicating room for policy development.

Discussion

Four key cross-cutting barriers hinder large-scale deployment of reuse: (1) ambiguity in waste status and end-of-waste criteria complicates administrative processes; (2) lack of tailored technical requirements for reused materials leads to conservative and cumbersome testing; (3) product approval pathways are unclear or inconsistent, especially in Nordic countries; and (4) sustainability policies are often too general to drive immediate change. The Netherlands stands out positively in waste classification and product approval, while Finland and Sweden are in earlier stages of regulatory adaptation. Germany offers legal options for reuse but faces challenges in standardizing practices. The report emphasizes the need for clearer interpretations, harmonized technical guidelines, streamlined approval processes, and concrete sustainability incentives to accelerate the adoption of reuse.

Conclusion

While the normative frameworks across the four countries share common elements derived from EU directives, their maturity and practical implementation regarding reuse vary significantly. The primary challenge lies not in creating new regulations but in adapting existing ones to explicitly support reuse of building components. Finland and Sweden are developing foundational practices, particularly in product approval, whereas the Netherlands and Germany have more progressive, institutionalized systems. Cross-country knowledge exchange and stakeholder collaboration are vital for overcoming barriers. The report lays the groundwork for further empirical research and policy development to foster circular economy transitions in construction.

The report, as a general overview of legal and technical requirements in the ReCreate project countries, highlights comparative insights across countries, facilitating understanding of shared challenges and unique national circumstances in promoting the reuse of precast concrete elements.


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.


October 18, 2024
Arnaldur-Bragi-Jakobsson.png

Arnaldur Bragi Jakobsson

Second Wind explores the potential of reusing pre-cast concrete elements from an obsolete apartment building in Helsingborg, Skåne County, Sweden.

As part of the ReCreate initiative, which encourages the sustainable repurposing of concrete components, I collaborated with Helsingborgshem, the city’s municipal housing company, to develop a new rowhouse typology of approximately 100 m², alongside a two-story multifamily apartment building on the same plot.
The project aimed to minimize modifications to the existing structural components, preserving their original form as much as possible while adapting them to new uses. The rowhouses, arranged in an L-shape with a southwest-facing courtyard, serve as rental units and highlight the potential of reused materials in creating modern, functional spaces. The apartment buildings, located on the north and south sides of the site, further demonstrate the versatility of these repurposed elements.

 

Throughout this process, I sought to maintain a connection to the original architectural context of the Drottninghög area, respecting its mid-20th-century character while introducing new, sustainable housing solutions. This project illustrates the significant environmental benefits and creative opportunities in reusing existing building materials, paving the way for more sustainable construction practices.

 

Rowhouse plan (Arnaldur Bragi Jakobsson)





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: