
www.buildingsandcities.org/journal-content/special-issues/understanding-demolition2.html
This special issue examines why demolition occurs, its consequences and how a more sustainable approach can be created.
In the sustainability discourse, the long-lasting nature of buildings and building stocks is rarely investigated. This special issue explores when, why and how demolition occurs with the aim to understand its environmental, socio-economic and cultural drivers, and consequences for policy and practice. The potential for avoiding building replacement (demolition and subsequent new build) and favouring retention is probed. Older buildings tend to be seen either as a problem and a threat, e.g. a contributor to climate change due to their allegedly excessive use of energy or, if they are heritage buildings, as being themselves threatened by the changing climate. New knowledge has emerged that challenges this perception, suggesting that older can potentially outperform new build. Profound questions arise about the nature of 'development' in the Global North. In particular, about public policies and whether the role and business models of the construction industry need to be reconfigured to a larger emphasis on stewardship of the existing building stock.
Guest editor: Satu Huuhka
This special issue frames demolition as a phenomenon. It is usually taken for granted or at most seen as a necessary evil; an inconvenient but inevitable part of the never-ending development of modern cities and societies. As a result, demolition has so far mainly been approached as a technical undertaking, a practical problem that mechanical engineering can help to solve effectively. There has been fairly little problematisation in- or outside of academia whether and how demolition helps to build environmentally, economically and socially sustainable cities, and when it is in fact helpful toward these goals.
The papers in the issue contribute insights from different scales, from the level of a building to that of a city. Eight case studies from various contexts, mainly Europe, but also the US and Australia, contribute novel methods, findings and policy insights.
The papers are categorised as: (1)
drivers and policies on demolition versus retention; (2) environmental and
social impact assessment on building level; and (3) practical demolition
decision-making. The contributions suggest, among other findings, positive
environmental impacts from building retention as opposed to demolition, and
discuss how policy designs from the city to the building level can either
encourage or discourage retention. Due to its implications, demolition and its alternatives should gain importance on
research, design, planning, construction and real estate agendas in the years
to come.
Understanding demolition [Editorial]
S. Huuhka
Policy tensions in demolition: Dutch social housing and circularity
P. Jonker-Hoffrén
Demolition or retention of existing buildings: drivers at the masterplan scale
H. Baker, A.
Moncaster, S. Wilkinson & H. Remøy
Demolition or adaptation?: post-industrial buildings in Ukraine
I. Serhiiuk
& I. Kalakoski
Renovate
or replace?: Consequential replacement LCA framework for buildings
S. Huuhka,
M. Moisio, E. Salmio, A. Köliö & J. Lahdensivu
GHG
emissions from building renovation versus new-build: incentives from assessment
methods
R.K. Zimmermann,
Z. Barjot, F.N. Rasmussen, T. Malmqvist, M. Kuittinen & H. Birgisdorttir
Social
life cycle assessment of adaptive reuse
R. Lundgren
Decision-making
analysis for Pittsburgh's deconstruction pilot using AHP and GIS
Z. Zhang
& J.D. Lee
Decision-support
for selecting demolition waste management strategies
M. van den
Berg, L. Hulsbeek & H. Voordijk
When is Demolition Justified?
Colin Rose
Time to Question Demolition!
André Thomsen
Design as communicative activity: implications for sustainability assessment software
T Säwén, A Sasic Kalagasidis & A Hollberg
Indoor temperature and office work performance in a temperate climate
T Kramer & S Schiavon
Moving homes and energy poverty: residents’ concerns, capabilities and responses
M Jalas, J Rinkinen, S Numminen & E Valkealahti
Reference study for biogenic carbon storage in the residential building stock
O Iliescu, I Talvitie, A Amiri & S Junnila
Building space heating and cooling in NDCs 4.0
T P Lützkendorf
Building component reuse as sociomaterial interaction: lessons from precast concrete
J Uusikartano, L Alkki & V Capitani
Validating national reuse indicators from regional demolition data: a Swedish example
F Ericsson, K Mjörnell & U Janson
Climate change risk and decision-making [editorial]
S Foxell & I Cooper
Technologies of reconstruction [editorial]
P Tombesi
Urban form metrics for building occupancy modelling: applications and impacts
D Reiter, M Jehling & R Hecht
Retrofit realism: affordable low-carbon policies for existing homes
N Eyre & R Khosla

The most important part of any journal is our people – readers, authors, reviewers, editorial board members and editors. You are cordially invited to join our community by joining our mailing list. We send out occasional emails about the journal – calls for papers, special issues, events and more.
We will not share your email with third parties. Read more
Latest Commentaries
Practitioners’ Views of POE
Post-occupancy evaluation (POE) is widely valued but weakly embedded in practice. Ant Marsh, Kate van Someren, Lara Clarke and Tom Randall (Arup Building Performance and Commissioning Services) explain the findings from a survey and focus groups with UK construction industry practitioners. They identified fragmented responsibility, split commercial incentives and a persistent fear of “bad news”. Making POE routine requires a shift from producing reports to a focus on improving outcomes by owning and acting on learning.
Who is Responsible for Climate Change?
Ian Cooper (Eclipse Research) explores the questions of responsibility raised in the recent Buildings & Cities special issue ‘Climate Change Risk and Decision-Making’. Focusing here on carbon emissions and mitigation, global responses will require grounding in what can work locally. New responsibilities arise for the wide range of built environment decision-makers: clients, professionals and their institutions, central and local governments, product suppliers, financiers, insurers, etc. A framework is needed to manage the complexity of responsibilities especially for variety of actors, the time frames and spatial scales.