Conscious architecture and circular economy for a transition in building: The IMIP project as a case study
Submitted: 2025-07-07
|Accepted: 2025-10-03
|Published: 2025-11-07
Copyright (c) 2025 VITRUVIO - International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Downloads
Keywords:
Conscious architecture, sustainable construction, circular economy, cork insulation, life cycle assessment
Supporting agencies:
European Interreg Sudoe Program 2021-2024
Abstract:
This research explores the role of design in fostering sustainable transitions through systemic thinking in the building sector, addressing the dynamic, multi-scalar, multi-species, and transdisciplinary challenges inherent in socio-ecological and socio-technical transformations. The study is grounded in Transition Design principles, recognizing the agency of ecological, human, and computational intelligence. By embracing systemic approaches, this paper underscores the importance of long-term thinking, collective action, pluralistic perspectives, and value co-creation among diverse actors. The results highlight the IMIP (Innovative Eco-Construction System Based on Interlocking Modular Insulation Wood & Cork-Based Panels) project’s contribution to circular economy principles, demonstrating its environmental and social impact through a comprehensive Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), as an innovative holistic approach to low-energy construction and near-zero-emissions strategies in construction, leveraging local timber and cork as materials for construction systems in building. These results demonstrate the potential of locally based bio-based materials and modular construction systems to promote circularity, reduce ecological footprints, and enhance community resilience. The findings reinforce the significance of design as a driver of systemic change in the building sector, emphasizing the interdependencies and feedback loops between human actions, natural ecosystems, and technological infrastructures.
References:
Avelino, F. , Wittmayer, J. M., Pel, B., Weaver, P., Dumitru, A., Haxeltine, A., Kemp, R., Jørgensen, M.S., Bauler, T., Ruijsink, S., & O’Riordan, T. (2019). Transformative Social Innovation and (Dis)Empowerment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 195–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.05.002
Berger, M., Van der Ent, R., Eisner, S., Bach, & V., Finkbeiner, M. (2014). Water Accounting and Vulnerability Evaluation (WAVE): Considering Atmospheric Evaporation Recycling and the Risk of Freshwater Depletion in Water Footprinting. Environmental science & technology. 48(8), 4521-4528. https://doi.org/10.1021/es404994t
Bocken, N. M., Short, S. W., Rana, P., & Evans, S. (2014). A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of cleaner production, 65, 42-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039
Bourg, D., & Erkman, S. (2003). Perspectives on industrial ecology. Greenleaf Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4000/developpementdurable.961
Churkina, G ., Organschi, A., Reyer, C.P.O., Ruff, A., Vinke, K., Liu, Z., Reck, B.K., Graedel, T.E., & Schellnhuber, H.J. (2020). Buildings as a global carbon sink. Nature Sustainability 3(4): 269–76. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0462-4
Consorci Centre de Ciencia i Tecnologia Forestal de Catalunya. (2024). LIFE21-NAT- ES-LIFE UNCINATA Restoration, conservation, and resilience of mountain pine (Pinus uncinata) Forests on Limestone in the Pyrenees European Commission. Life Public Database.
Economidou, M., Todeschi, M., Bertoldi, P., D’Agostino, P., Zangheri, P., & Castellazzi, L. (2020). Review of 50 years of EU energy efficiency policies for buildings. Energy and Buildings, 225, 110322, ISSN 0378-7788, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110322
Elkington, J. (1998). Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st-century Business. Environmental Quality Management 8(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.3310080106
Elkington, J. (2018). 25 years ago I coined the phrase “triple bottom line.” Here’s why it’s time to rethink it. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it
EUFORGEN (E uropean Forest Genetic Resources Programme). n.d. Pinus nigra. Euforgen.org. Accessed May 16, 2025. https://www.euforgen.org/species/pinus-nigra
European Ec onomic and Social Committee. (2023). Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Wooden construction for CO2 reduction in the building sector’. Official Journal of the European Union C 184/18, 25 May 2023. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52022AE6006
European Co mmission. (2020). Circular economy action plan: For a cleaner and more competitive Europe.
FAO (Food a nd Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). (2020). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2020.
Finkbeiner, M., Inaba, A., Tan, R., Christiansen, K., Klüppel, H.J. (2006). The new international standards for life cycle assessment: ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 11(2), 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1065/lca2006.02.002
Geissdoerfe r, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N.M.P., & Hultink, E.J. (2017). The circular economy – a new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048
Gil, L. (20 14). Cork: a strategic material. Frontiers in chemistry, 2, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2014.00016
Gilabert-Sanz, S., Sánchez Riera, A., Oliver-Villanueva, J.V., Monleón Domènech, M., Redondo Domínguez, E. (2024). BIM information exchange for improving energy efficiency in buildings based on wooden construction systems in the European Southwest. VLC arquitectura, 11,(1), 139-165. https://doi.org/10.4995/vlc.2024.20244
Gustavsson, L., Pingoud, K., & Sathre, R. (2006). Carbon dioxide balance of wood substitution: comparing concrete- and wood-framed buildings. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 11(3), 667–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-006-7207-1
Harvard Business Review. (2018). 25 Years Ago I Coined the Phrase ‘Triple Bottom Line.’ Here’s Why It’s Time to Rethink It. June 25, 2018. https://hbr.org/2018/06/25-years-ago-i-coined-the-phrase-triple-bottom-line-heres-why-im-giving-up-on-it
Hurmekoski, E. (2017). How can wood construction reduce environmental degradation? Helsinki: European Forest Institute.
IMIP (Innova tive Eco-Construction System Based on Interlocking Modular Insulation Wood & Cork-Based Panels). (2020). Interreg Sudoe. April 30, 2020. https://interreg-sudoe.eu/en/proyectos/innovative-eco-construction-system-based-on-interlockingmodular-insulation-wood-cork-based-panels/
Irwin, T. (2 015). Transition design: A proposal for a new area of design practice, study, and research. Design and Culture, 7(2), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/17547075.2015.1051829
Irwin, T., T onkinwise, C., & Kossoff, G. (2020). Transition design: The importance of everyday life and lifestyles as a leverage point for sustainability transitions. Cuadernos del Centro de Estudios en Diseño y Comunicación, no. 105. https://doi.org/10.18682/cdc.vi105.4189
Köhler, J., Geels, F. W., Kern, F., Markard, J., Onsongo, E., Wieczorek, A., Alkemade, F., Avelino, F., Bergek, A., Boons, F., Fünfschilling, L., Hess, D., Holtz, G., Hyysalo, S., Jenkins, K., Kivimaa, P., Martiskainen, M., Mühlemeier, M. S., Nykvist, B., Pel, B., Raven, R., Rohracher, H., Sandén, B., Schot, J., Sovacool, B., Turnheim, B., Welch, D., & Wells, P. (2019). An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 31, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.01.004
Luengo, E., Gilabert-Sanz,S., Oliver-Villanueva, J.V., Osuna-Sequera, C., & Hermoso, E. (2024). Bending behaviour of cross-laminated timber stressed-skin panels manufactured with mountain pine (Pinus uncinata Ramond Ex DC.). Wood Material Science & Engineering, 19(4), 906–917. https://doi.org/10.1080/17480272.2023.2291134
Murray, A., Sk ene, K. & Haynes, K. (2017). The circular economy: An interdisciplinary exploration of the concept and application in a global context. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 369–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2693-2
Pomponi, F., & Moncaster, A. (2017a). A theoretical framework for circular economy research in the built environment. In Building information modelling, building performance, design and smart construction, 31–44. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50346-2_3
Pomponi, F., & Moncaster, A. (2017b). Circular economy for the built environment: a research framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 710–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.055
Smith, R., Dav is, J., & Brown, L. (2021). The economic benefits of prefabrication in rehabilitation projects. Construction Research Congress Proceedings, 456–65.
Stahel, W.R. (2016). The circular economy. Nature, 531(7595), 435–438. https://doi.org/10.1038/531435a
Steffen, W., Ri chardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S. R., de Vries, W., de Wit, C. A., Folke, C., Gerten, D., Heinke, J., Mace, G. M., Persson, L. M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers, B., & Sörlin, S. (2015). Sustainability. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science (New York, N.Y.) 347(6223), 1259855. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855
Tonkinwise, C. (2016). Design for transitions—from and to what? Design Philosophy Papers 13(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1038/531435a
UNEP. (2020). Gl obal Status report for buildings and construction. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. n.d.
Villanova-Civera , I., Romero, J., Oliver-Villanueva J.V., & Gilabert-Sanz, S. (2024). Life cycle assessment of innovative eco-construction system: Interlocking Modular Insulation Panels (IMIP) 2024. EHABEND 2024: Construction Pathology, Rehabilitation Technology and Heritage Management. 10th REHABEND Congress; Gijón (Spain).
