The dramatic increase in world’s population and economic growth triggered a higher demand for natural resources and increased carbon emissions (Krausmann, et al., 2009) to which the construction industry is one of the most important contributors (McKenna, 2022). Since 80 percent of the predicted building stock for 2050 is already in existence today (Blanco, Engel, Imhorst, Ribeirinho, & Sjödin, 2021) , reuse and adaptation strategies for existing assets are a fundamental part of any approach related to more sustainable construction.
Although the reuse and adaptation of building elements and the recycling of materials are not new ideas (Addis, 2006), there is a gap in theoretical knowledge of reuse of architectural elements. In this contribution, we will answer three questions: why we reuse (including historical and more recent approaches), what we reuse (defining the object of reuse) and how to reuse (defining its fundamental categories).
We argue that the motivations for reuse go beyond the good of the environment, the good of the project and the good of the organisation (Addis 2006). Our approach considers: a) the intrinsic architectural qualities in building elements that align with Vitruvius’ attributes: firmitas (structural stability), venustas (beauty) and utilitas (functionality); b) the intrinsic character of objects such as Riegl’s deliberate monuments that underpins their reuse. Most importantly, the quintessential concept for reuse is value. It derives from the descriptors in a) and
b) and can also include more contemporary ecological and sustainable attributes (Andersen, 2020).The object of reuse in Architecture are all those architectural elements that are or have already been in use, i.e. the reused architectural element is necessarily the one that has already been used and therefore is not
new. Therefore, the reused architectural element defines itself in opposition to the new one (Groys, 2000) and allows the mitigation of negative environmental impacts (Josefsson & Thuvander, 2020). Re-Architecture comprises four categories in its making:
Reclaim for Reuse: Equivalent use of architectural elements without no loss any of physical, functional and aesthetic qualities,
Reclaim to Adapt: Adapt use of architectural elements with partial loss of physical, functional and aesthetic qualities,
Reclaim for Repurpose: Change of use through an upcycling/downcycling process, with loss / partial loss of physical, functional and aesthetic qualities,
Reclaim for Recycle: loss of physical, functional and aesthetic qualities to produce new architectural elements.
We argue that we need a temporal imagination (Facer, 2023) that provides a critical and reflexive capacity to analyse existing architectural elements and to engage in dialogue with others who have different perceptions of physical, functional and aesthetic qualities and ecological ethics of use.We claim for a re-architecture of the built environment that is able to preserve the architectural elements already in existence, reclaim these materials for future reuse / adapt / repurpose / recycle and use radical creativity to extend the lifecycle of these
materials and minimise waste.