Page 9 - Open Access December - 2025

POINT OF VIEW

substantial amount of uncertainty around the quality, durability, (C&D) Waste Management Rules and emerging Extended
and performance of reused or recycled materials due to the Producer Responsibility (EPR) mandates, with some states
inconsistent standards around safety and compliance and such as Karnataka piloting circular economy provisions in
[33]
lack of reliable testing methods for those material recycled/ public procurement . However, technical standards for the
reused. Consequently, this leads to significant ambiguity in use of recycled aggregates and secondary concrete remain
[34]
the material resale value which results in undermining the underdeveloped , constraining large-scale uptake. Market
economic sustainability and effectiveness of circularity in demand is still fragmented and price-sensitive, despite
construction [14,31] . However, with the use of digital innovations, municipal initiatives to incorporate processed C&D waste into
such as non destructive testing (NDT) and infrared spectroscopy, public works and the gradual expansion of green building
enable accurate assessment of material composition, structural certification schemes. Organisational and cultural readiness is
integrity, degradation, health and safety for future occupants limited, with awareness and professional capacity concentrated
and improving transparency in material flows, and facilitating in niche research and industry networks rather than mainstream
[31]
reuse/recycling . The high upfront costs and uncertain return practice. Logistics and supply chain integration, including
on investment, which are seen as major barriers , could material passports or traceability systems, is at a nascent
[13]
[25]
be mitigated by Government incentives, such as tax breaks, stage , limiting the scalability of recovery and reuse pathways.
[31]
subsidies, or grants, to offset costs of recycling initiatives . Overall, India demonstrates regulatory intent and pilot-level
Moreover, on the cultural and organisational spectrum, there experimentation, but gaps in technical capacity, market
is lack of awareness and knowledge among the SMEs about confidence, and systemic coordination continue to hinder the
the benefits of circularity , which has fostered a risk-averse transition toward a circular construction sector.
[32]
culture. This could only be converted to an enabler by investing
more on training and knowledge dissemination to improve the Enhancing the circular economy in construction therefore
understanding of circular practices. represents a critical shift away from the outdated “take-make-
dispose” model toward a regenerative, cradle-to-cradle
approach to resource utilisation. This transformation challenges
12. CRITICAL REFLECTIONS
long-standing practices by embedding sustainability at the
While MPs and digital tools promise greater traceability and core of design, material selection, and procurement processes.
reuse potential, their real-world deployment raises concerns The circular economy is not simply an environmental initiative,
around data ownership, platform interoperability, and long-term but a paradigm shift that demands systemic change across the
update integrity across a building’s lifecycle. Similarly, although construction value chain from how materials are sourced and
material custodianship represents a valuable paradigm shift from specified to how buildings are deconstructed, and materials are
conventional ownership models, the supporting legal, financial repurposed.
and contractual frameworks remain underdeveloped and Translating circular economy principles into effective material
inconsistently applied across jurisdictions.
selection strategies requires a multidimensional approach
Scope 3 emissions, though critical in evaluating the true that prioritises reuse, recyclability, and longevity alongside
sustainability of construction practices, continue to be difficult traditional performance and cost metrics. Environmental
to quantify accurately due to fragmented data, inconsistent impacts, embodied carbon, and Scope 3 emissions must now
methodologies, and limited supply chain transparency. This be factored into decision-making, shifting the focus from
complexity makes it challenging to assess whether reused short-term outcomes to long-term sustainability. green public
materials deliver genuine carbon savings when considering procurement (GPP) plays a vital role in this transition, using the
logistics, processing, or maintenance needs. purchasing power of public institutions to stimulate demand for
sustainable, circular materials and products. The integration of
Collectively, these challenges underscore a persistent clear sustainability criteria into procurement, GPP, can accelerate
disconnect between conceptual optimism and implementation market transformation and promote innovation.
realities. Bridging this gap requires not only technological
innovations, but also more robust regulatory guidance, industry- To support these evolving priorities, a robust conceptual
wide education, standardisation of tools and metrics, and framework is needed that integrates the environmental,
incentive mechanisms that reward circular behavior. technical, economic, and social dimensions of material selection.
Such a framework must also leverage emerging tools and
The review of barriers and enablers indicates that India’s practices, including material passports that enable transparency
readiness for circularity in construction remains uneven across and reuse, custodianship models that ensure life-cycle
categories. On the regulatory front, momentum is visible accountability, and digital infrastructure capable of tracking and
through the strengthening of Construction and Demolition managing materials over time. Moreover, addressing Scope 3

THE INDIAN CONCRETE JOURNAL | DECEMBER 2025 15