Throughout the European Union governments have reduced their investment in social housing, a trend that has also affected the Netherlands. Providers of social rental housing have faced policy changes that have challenged the dominant role in the unique Dutch unitary rental market regime. This paper examines the extent to which a revival of this dominant role can be attributed to the government’s recent interventions. It contextualises the subsequent challenges facing the housing market currently and in the future based on a review of relevant literature, policy documents, and input from interviewed experts. The largely qualitative interpretation shows that recent government interventions have given providers of social rental housing back some of the previous autonomy they had lost in terms of financing and regulation. We argue that providers of social rental housing are regaining a more important role in providing housing for low- and medium-income groups.

This position paper consolidates the work of researchers from various departments and areas of expertise across the Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment at Delft University of Technology. It discusses the relevance, applications, and different methods of community engagement in the built environment. The inclusion of main take-away, recommendations for community engagement, and a range of example projects demonstrating various methods, bridge the gap from scientific knowledge to application in practice.

The latest policy and research recommendations focus on advancing transition of housing to the circular economy framework to tackle environmental and affordability challenges. A key strategy for this is industrialised construction, which combines controlled manufacturing methods with strategies that facilitate future disassembly, allowing for adaptations, maintenance, and material reuse. Despite its importance, long-term housing solutions that integrate both industrialised construction and disassembly remain rare. This study obtained insights into circular industrialised housing from the Solar Decathlon Europe competition through interviews and observations with fifteen participating teams in Wuppertal, Germany, in 2022. The competition’s build challenge provided a unique opportunity to examine the practical application of both industrialised and disassembly approaches, where teams developed highly energy-efficient, affordability-conscious, and scalable housing systems. On-site interviews with team members from diverse disciplines took place midway through the competition’s assembly phase. These were further informed by observing team Azalea’s housing disassembly in Spain, which took place shortly before reassembly in Germany. Thematic and content analyses were conducted using a predefined framework based on holistic factors and lifecycle processes. Our results reveal the critical impact of Cultural factors, particularly during the (re)design process and provide new data to aid our understanding of the (dis)assembly process. This study contributes towards the development of a circular industrialised housing framework.

Burgerberaden, ook wel burgerfora genoemd, worden steeds vaker gezien als instrument om bewoners te laten meepraten en meedenken over complexe maatschappelijke problemen, zoals duurzaamheid, wonen en klimaatverandering. Dit hoofdstuk verkent de mogelijkheden om burgerberaden in te zetten als instrument om het transformeren van gebouwen naar woningen te bevorderen. Dit vanuit de hypothese dat het tempo van veel nieuwbouw-, renovatie- én transformatieprocessen niet zozeer wordt bepaald door technische of financiële uitdagingen, maar door de tijd die we in Nederland nodig hebben voor participatie- en besluitvormingsprocessen.

Transformatie van gebouwen is geen vastgoedactiviteit waar elke partij zomaar mee aan de slag kan. Er is onder andere kennis nodig van de markt, technische en financiële kennis, kennis van woningexploitatie en van het verbouwen van panden, inzicht in de lokale woningmarkt en de leefbaarheid van buurten. Bovendien is geld nodig voor aankoop, transformatie en beheer. Woningcorporaties zijn organisaties die vanuit hun doelstellingen, marktrol en competenties in aanmerking komen om aan de slag te gaan met transformaties. Maar: corporaties zijn bijzondere organisaties. De afgelopen tien jaar is hun rol veranderd van een speler met een ruim mandaat en een breed palet aan vastgoedactiviteiten, naar een positie met meer focus op de huisvesting van huurders met een laag inkomen of huishoudens die om andere redenen een kwetsbare positie hebben op de woningmarkt. Transformatie van vastgoed naar woningen is voor corporaties nog steeds mogelijk, mits dat past binnen hun wettelijke mogelijkheden en eigen doelstellingen.

Following the work presented in Deliverable 4.6, this report focuses on the development and application of a toolbox designed to foster collaborative knowledge construction among stakeholders addressing affordable and sustainable housing procurement in a local context. [...]

“De woningcrisis biedt kansen. De kans om een duurzaam en langdurig gezond woonklimaat te realiseren.”

Woningnood is geen nieuw verschijnsel in ons land. Al in de negentiende eeuw leidde snelle bevolkingsgroei en verstedelijking tot een huisvestingstekort; de woningwet van 1901 moest daar een eind aan maken. In de wederopbouwjaren na de tweede wereldoorlog kwam de woningbouw maar langzaam op gang. En in de jaren 80 van de vorige eeuw was ‘geen woning, geen kroning’ de leus van demonstranten die aandacht vroegen voor woningnood.

Collectief wonen is aan een opmars bezig in Europa, en zeker in Nederland. Te midden van een ongekende wooncrisis zoeken steeds meer mensen naar mogelijkheden om samen met anderen te voorzien in toekomstbestendige huisvesting. Sleutelwoorden daarbij zijn gemeenschapsgericht, duurzaam en betaalbaar. Maar waarom komen deze initiatieven zo moeilijk van de grond? En wat kunnen we leren van andere Europese landen? Welke potentie biedt het transformeren van bestaande gebouwen naar collectieve woonvormen? Dit hoofdstuk geeft voorbeelden van projecten waarbij gebouwen met een niet-residentiele functie zijn omgebouwd naar woonvormen met collectieve kenmerken. Het hoofdstuk onderzoekt de belangrijkste kenmerken, uitdagingen en kansen van deze transformaties door middel van bestaande literatuur en de bespreking van enkele concrete cases.

It is recommended to integrate specific management competencies in academic education to support the transition towards environmentally sustainable practices, particularly in the construction and real estate sector. This paper explores how architectural management education can integrate environmental sustainability within its current university programmes. In recent years TU Delft explored and experimented with various education initiatives to bring forward environmental sustainability knowledge and to connect with policy, societal and industry practices. This paper describes what we learned from both bottom-up and top-down initiatives implementing environmental sustainability in construction and real estate management education. Bottom-up educational initiatives show that knowledge about transition policies, stakeholder experiences, business models and management practices from a European perspective can help students across the globe to apply knowledge into their local context, reflecting on the overarching management principals across stakeholders, institutions, academic disciplines and cultures. Top-down initiatives show that the university has a vision on integrating sustainability in its curriculum, but that integrating environmental sustainability in construction and real estate management education is still challenging. Adapting the academic curriculum to integrate building and portfolio responses to environmental challenges might be a way forward and the experiences from numerous elective courses and educational initiatives can be a basis to identify the development of a future standard curriculum.

The very purpose of management is to achieve desired goals. Management ensures that planes fly, the sick are healed, or peace is maintained. Management in the built environment ensures that the built environment fits with user requirements, during operation and (re-)development. Management needs feedback on whether its area of attention is moving in the right direction and the desired goals are reached. Performance measurement provides that feedback.
Performance, as used in this textbook, is the extent to which the current state of a focus area corresponds to its desired state. The concept is very familiar to all of us: we check performance naturally and frequently throughout the day as we examine whether our actions have produced the desired results and use this information to plan new actions. For example, when preparing a meal, we frequently check that the vegetables are cooking according to the recipe (performance measurement) and appropriately adjust the heat of the oven (performance management). This textbook focuses on the technique of performance measurement, with occasional references to what management can do with the results of performance measurement.

Implementing circular building components can contribute to the transition to a circular economy. There are many possible circular design options for building components. Knowledge on which options are feasible to implement remains limited. Existing feasibility studies do not compare multiple circular design options, building components and/or are based on interviews rather than observation. They list barriers but do not identify their relative importance throughout a development process. In this article we present a longitudinal study on stakeholder choices in 5 development processes of 8 circular building components. The researchers co-created with stakeholders from initiative up to market implementation. Through process reflection and analysis, we identified choices which influenced the perceived feasibility of circular design options within different building components throughout their development. We found that circular design options perceived as feasible vary between different building components. Specific applications and context influence their feasibility. Moreover, perceived feasibility changes throughout the development process.

The built environment can become more sustainable by gradually replacing building components with circular ones. Kitchens are a logical component to be made circular, given their relatively short lifespan, product-based nature, and affordable prototypes. Since various designs for circular kitchens can be developed, understanding the feasibility of these designs is crucial for their successful implementation. This knowledge, however, remains limited. Therefore, this article aimed to determine which types of circular kitchens are feasible. Circular kitchens available or announced in the Dutch housing sector within the past five years were compared using an adapted version of the CBC generator, a comprehensive design framework for circular building components. The comparison included the Circular Kitchen (CIK), developed as part of an international research project. Data were sourced from manufacturers’ websites and online publications supplemented by interviews with two outliers to verify the results. The analysis encompassed seven circular kitchens, with two developed by established manufacturers and five by start-ups. The manufacturers mostly communicated about their kitchen’s physical design. The established manufacturers’ circular kitchens were found to be more similar to their non-circular kitchens, while start-ups applied more radical innovations. Furthermore, the kitchens that had a frame structure using technical materials or a panel-based structure using biological materials were more likely to be feasible. These findings can facilitate future circular kitchen development by improving these kitchens’ feasibility, thus aiding the transition to a more circular built environment. Furthermore, this research contributes scientifically by adapting a comprehensive design framework (the CBC generator) to compare circular designs.

Circularity is positioned as an alternative model to achieve sustainable prosperity. Lean construction highlights not only building delivery with less but also contributing to sustainable development. However, lean is criticized for reducing waste only within organizational boundaries while neglecting the impact of waste beyond the boundaries. On the contrary, circularity originates to reduce waste in the system and is currently seeking approaches to implement waste reduction in circular production. To speed up the transition to sustainable resource consumption, the co-act between lean and circular construction seems evident. This research studies resource consumption in product-service systems (PSSs), which are acknowledged to reduce resource consumption. This research first assesses the ability of PSSs to slow and close the loops. After this, the research discusses the complementarities of circularity and lean to co-act toward the same goal. The multiple case studies demonstrate that PSSs have the potential to slow and close the loops. However, PSSs are not inherently circular, but each PSS needs to be designed to be circular system-by-system. Furthermore, the theoretical discussion encourages lean to co-act with circularity. The PSSs provide a system view to lean: to reduce current and future waste and to avoid value losses in multiple life cycles.

The built environment can be made more circular by gradually replacing building components with more circular components during construction, renovation, or maintenance. However, many different design options can be seen as circular. Although there is a growing number of studies about circular design options, research on what makes these options feasible or not feasible in practice is limited. This type of research requires intensive, long-term involvement with practitioners. Therefore, this article presents a longitudinal case study of an exemplary circular building component: the circular kitchen. The researchers actively engaged in a co-creation with industry partners to develop a circular kitchen design, supply chain model, and business model. All the choices made from initiative to market implementation were documented. Five lessons were drawn from an analysis of the stakeholder choices that can aid the future development of feasible circular building components: about ambition, aesthetics, design scale, participation, and focus.

The construction sector can become more sustainable by applying the Circular Economy concept, which distinguishes two main pathways: substituting materials for biological materials, or optimizing the use or reuse of technical materials. Practitioners sometimes choose one pathway over the other, but knowledge of which of these pathways yields the best circular performance for the building industry is lacking. To determine which pathway is the most circular, the performance of biological, technical, and hybrid variants for a circular kitchen and renovation façade are developed and compared with one another and with the linear ‘business-as-usual’ (BAU) practice components. The novel methods of Circular Economy Life Cycle Assessment (CE-LCA) and Circular Economy Life Cycle Costing (CE-LCC), and traditional material flow analysis (MFA) are used. The results show that the biological kitchen and façade consistently perform best in the CE-LCA, but perform second best and worst in the MFA respectively, and consistently perform the worst in the CE-LCC. Technical solutions perform best in the MFA. However, while the technical kitchen performs second best in the CE-LCA and best in the CE-LCC, the technical façade performs worst in the CE-LCA and third best in the CE-LCC. A purposeful, reversible, hybrid application of biological and technical materials yields the most consistent circular performance overall, performing best in the CE-LCC (saving 17 % compared to BAU), second best in the MFA (saving 23 % compared to BAU), and third best in the CE-LCA (an increase of 21 % compared to the BAU). This study shows that neither a purely biological nor purely technical solution performs best overall, but that a purposeful hybrid solution can mitigate the disadvantages of both pathways. Further research is recommended to assess more building components and other hybrid variants.

In het Kamerdebat in januari 2020 kreeg de woningnood een plek op de politieke agenda. Terecht, er is sprake van een woonprobleem, maar met het aanwijzen van Valkenburg en Almere Pampus als bouwlocaties zijn we er niet. Een gedeelde woonvisie voor de lange termijn ontbreekt. Het bijzondere is dat er wordt gesproken van een wooncrisis, maar tegelijkertijd woont Nederland ruimer dan ooit. Wij pleiten naast nieuwe locaties voor een ruimtedieet: slimmer en efficiënter wonen in bestaande gebouwen.

Het in april 2020 verschenen rapport Ruimte voor Wonen (RvW) maakt deel uit van de Brede Maatschappelijke Heroverwegingen van kabinet Rutte III. Over de volle breedte van de collectieve sector zijn zestien maatschappelijke opgaven geïdentificeerd, waarvoor implicaties van diverse beleidsopties in kaart worden gebracht. Het uiteindelijke doel is om in de toekomst onderbouwde keuzes mogelijk te maken door inzicht te verschaffen in effectieve beleids- en uitvoeringsopties en de mogelijke gevolgen daarvan. Het is goed nieuws dat er een rapport ligt met een weloverwogen analyse van de huidige problemen en opties voor de toekomst. Op 17 maart 2021 vinden Tweede Kamerverkiezingen plaats. Wonen staat hoog op de politieke agenda en speelt straks vermoedelijk een belangrijke rol in de formatie. Het RvW-rapport biedt een basis voor geïnformeerde beleidsvorming, maar die basis is helaas nog onvolledig. Het 1M Homes-initiatief van de Faculteit Bouwkunde van de TU Delft wil een bijdrage leveren aan een visie op de toekomstige woonopgave. Allereerst door te reageren op de diagnose en de opties voor de toekomst uit het RvW-rapport. De kern van dit commentaar is dat RvW een redelijk gefocust, maar beperkt, perspectief biedt. Het is volgens ons van groot belang voor de lange termijn om die blik te verbreden: het gaat niet alleen om nieuwbouw, maar zeker ook over aanpassing van de bestaande woningvoorraad, de verdeling van de bestaande woonruimte, de kwaliteit van de woonomgeving en bredere welvaartseffecten van verstedelijking.

The building industry is responsible for the highest resource use, amount of waste and emissions of all industries. The principles of the Circular Economy (CE) could offer an approach to create a more sustainable built environment. For a transition towards a circular built environment, a comprehensive assessment method is needed to support the development of circular building products. As a step towards such a method, we developed an economic assessment in the form of a Circular Economy Life Cycle Cost (CE-LCC) model. It is based on existing Life Cycle Cost techniques and adapted to meet the requirements of CE products. The model is developed to (1) consider products as a composite of components and parts with different and multiple use cycles, (2) include processes that take place after the end of use, (3) provide practical and usable information to all stakeholders, and (4) facilitate alignment of the functional unit and system boundaries with LCA. To test the model, it has been applied to the case of the Circular Kitchen (CIK). Three variants of the CIK were compared to each other and the ‘business-as-usual’ case to determine which variant is the most economically competitive on the long term. The model indicates that the most flexible variant of the CIK has the lowest LCC outcome, even when considering multiple interest, lifespan and remanufacturing and recycling scenarios. Although, the model could benefit from further research and application, it can support the transition towards a more sustainable (building) industry.