Circular infrastructure in terms of institutional logics

The concept of the circular economy (CE) has gained popularity in addressingconcerns related to environmental sustainability. However, difficulties arose inscaling up and integrating CE solutions into the infrastructure sector. This paperargues that the institutional logics underlying the current infrastructure sector areincompatible with the logics on which CE is based. To examine this, we conducted astudy using literature and empirical evidence from the Dutch infrastructure agencythough in-depth interviews. By relating the arguments of interviewees to values,norms, and worldviews, we were able to establish and compare the prevailing logicsheld by infrastructure professionals with those related to CE. The results reveal aconflict between the dominant market logic in CE development and the prevalentstate and project logics that guide infrastructure practices. These findings highlightthe importance of strong leadership from public clients to incorporate CE principlesinto construction processes. By addressing the institutional barriers to CE scaling,this paper contributes to the ongoing discussion on implementing CE in theinfrastructure sector and provides valuable insights for policymakers and publicclients

Operationalizing contested problem-solution spaces: The case of Dutch circular construction

In shaping collective responses to societal challenges, we currently lack an understanding of how to grasp and navigate conflicting ideas on societal problems and potential solutions. The problem-solution space is an increasingly popular framework for conceptualizing the extent to which problem-oriented and solution-oriented views are divergent. However, this reflexive framework needs an operationalization to become useful in practice. We contribute to this debate by demonstrating how Q-methodology can be used to systematically identify, describe, and compare collectively held visions in relation to problems and solutions. We use the case of Dutch circular construction, and identify three conflicting imaginaries that inform us about disagreement and common ground. We conclude by discussing how policymakers can use different approaches to navigate contestation, presumably mobilizing actors for a collective response

A review on automated pavement distress detection methods

In recent years, extensive research has been conducted on pavement distress detection. A large part of these studies applied automated methods to capture different distresses. In this paper, a literature review on the distresses and related detection methods are presented. This review also includes commercial solutions. Thereafter, a gap analysis is conducted which is concluded that in particular the distresses related to pavement micro-texture need serious additional research in order to be implemented in a cost-effective fashion. Depth-related distresses are detectible fairly well, but rely on expensive tools

A systemic perspective on transition barriers to a circular infrastructure sector

Due to the large use of resources and waste generation, the transition to a circular economy (CE) has become a major sustainability-related topic in construction. Intentions to achieve circularity are shared widely, but developments are slow in practice. This study identifies systemic barriers to the circularity transition from a social-technical systemic perspective. We used the Mission-oriented Innovation System (MIS) framework to provide insights into the problems and potential solutions underlying the circularity mission, the structure of the system and the system dynamics. Based on the analysis of a wide range of policy documents and twenty in-depth interviews with stakeholders in the Dutch infrastructure sector, three vicious cycles were identified that form persistent barriers to the transition: (1) the CE contestation cycle given the contested nature of the circularity mission; (2) the knowledge diffusion cycle given the need to adopt and diffuse knowledge; and (3) the innovation cycle when it comes to procuring and upscaling circular innovations. These barriers all relate to processual, organizational and institutional challenges rather than to technological ones. This indicates that construction managers, policymakers and researchers in the field of infrastructure circularity should shift their focus from specific circular solutions to creating appropriate conditions for changing current and introducing novel processes that facilitate circular ways of doing things

CEIMA: A framework for identifying critical interfaces between the Circular Economy and stakeholders in the lifecycle of infrastructure assets

As the infrastructure sector lays claim to large amounts of natural resources and is responsible for a considerable amount of waste, to reduce resource usage and waste, organisations in this sector are considering the implementation of circularity. Despite an abundance of circular methods, principles and strategies provided in literature, the implementation of these approaches into everyday practice is often considered challenging. One of the main problems with implementing circularity is that professionals are not always aware of the full spectrum of circular approaches. Likewise, many CE experts lack the intricate knowledge that is accumulated through managing assets throughout their lifecycle. Following a Design Science Research-based approach, the Circular Economy Interface Matrix Analysis framework (CEIMA) is developed in which a bottom-up asset stakeholder perspective is linked to the existing top-down conceptualizations of circularity using an intermediate categorization. This framework connects infrastructure stakeholders to concrete applications of the Circular Economy by means of identification of possible interfaces. Based on the “9R” waste hierarchy, actions are formulated that provide a practical guide to more circular infrastructure. In this paper, the CEIMA framework is applied to two case studies involving bridges and distribution transformers respectively. The case studies demonstrated that the framework helps to bridge the knowledge gap between the conceptualizations of circularity and their application in the infrastructure domain. The identified interfaces between stakeholders and circular actions reveal key opportunities for stakeholders within the infrastructure sector to start with the implementation of circular actions. Finally, the framework offers a starting point for a broad discussion on the implementation of circularity. Both the resulting insights and the discussions are valuable for focussing stakeholder efforts in the transition towards a circular economy