The panel’s answer is blunt: until circularity in construction makes commercial sense, adoption will be slow.
Today, there isn’t yet enough regulatory pressure or material scarcity to force change. That means innovation must match or beat business-as-usual on cost, scalability and confidence. Timber frame has reached that point; other materials are still climbing the curve.
Oliver explains that Barrett’s switch to timber frame succeeded because it aligned environmental benefit with cost and availability.
But the extremes are clear:
Straw fibre can be high-performance and low-carbon, but suppliers often can’t meet volume for major developers.
Sheep’s wool is promising, yet supply, thermal performance and processing consistency still lag.
Mineral and stone fibre remain cheaper and abundant for now.
To advance circularity in construction, new materials must be both sustainable and scalable.
Paul Lynch challenges assumptions head-on. His company is already delivering straw-based systems at industrial scale:
60,000 m² of wall elements per year per factory
12-storey certified buildings in Sweden
Hundreds of homes across Europe
Automated production lines
Passive House certified products with full EPDs and LCAs
His message: if developers ask “can we get this at scale?”, the answer is increasingly yes and that shifts the dial for circularity in construction.
Chaline Church points to a growing trust gap: nearly half of buyers mistrust sustainability terminology.
But people do understand:
healthy homes
low toxins
better indoor air quality
safe materials for children
So instead of talking about circularity in construction in abstract terms, consultants and developers should translate benefits into language customers can feel and value.
Chaline explains why some natural materials are rejected despite looking “green”:
Wool contaminated by pesticides
Newspaper fibres polluted by inks and binders
Regional soil or clay containing heavy metals
Wood products with inconsistent treatment histories
Achieving circularity in construction requires rigorous assessment of provenance, chemistry and processing, not just swapping one material for another.
Paul highlights regenerative farming as a multiplier: straw from regenerative farms can double carbon storage compared to conventional crops.
One factory using regenerative straw can match the annual carbon-saving targets of entire nations. This closes the loop between agriculture, housing and climate, strengthening the business case for circularity in construction.
Because most buyers are still focused on bedrooms, location, schools and monthly bills.
Sustainability rises in importance only when it cuts costs. That’s why developers must lead, not wait. Oliver explains that even if customers don’t ask for circularity in construction explicitly, developers must prepare for a future where embodied carbon and resource scarcity shape every decision.
The panel suggests reframing:
“Healthy homes” instead of “sustainable homes”
“Lower maintenance over life cycle” instead of “circular materials”
“Better air quality for your family” instead of “low VOC adhesives”
This human-centred framing makes circularity in construction relatable and compelling.
A recurring theme is collaboration:
Developers need suppliers who can guarantee consistency.
Suppliers need developers to commit to pilots.
Consultants need clear, shared priorities to guide decisions.
Paul’s appeal: don’t wait for the perfect moment. Start with pilot homes or an innovation house. Progress in circularity in construction happens incrementally, not by waiting for certainty.
Oliver outlines a clear path he uses internally:
Set a long-term direction — Barrett has committed to net zero by 2040.
Prioritise innovation — some issues (labour, land, embodied carbon) need immediate solutions.
Support suppliers — especially SMEs needing help with EPDs and certification.
Trial rigorously — through showhomes, university chambers or controlled projects.
Scale only when robust — when cost, quality and customer experience align.
This disciplined approach enables circularity in construction to scale responsibly.
Brownfield, contaminated and sensitive sites increasingly favour proposals that use healthier, lower-impact materials.
If circularity in construction helps unlock land, improve planning outcomes and reduce embodied carbon, it becomes a strategic advantage, not just an environmental ambition.
Chaline explains how materials that appear natural but are synthetic can trigger subtle neurological discomfort. Real materials often support:
faster healing
lower stress
reduced anxiety
improved learning outcomes in schools
Circular materials often perform better because they remain closer to their natural state, strengthening both the wellbeing and carbon case.
This conversation shows that the industry is ready for deeper change, but needs guidance on material health, circular design, embodied carbon and customer communication.
This is the kind of work we support at Darren Evans Ltd.
From circular design strategies to embodied-carbon modelling and innovation pilots, we help clients turn promising ideas into scalable, investable solutions.
If this resonates with your challenges, let’s talk.
Why is circularity in construction still niche?
Because cost, supply chain readiness and customer understanding haven’t fully aligned yet.
Are bio-based materials strong enough for large buildings?
Yes. Straw systems are already used in multi-storey apartments and major logistics centres.
How can developers get started?
Pilot one home or typology, measure performance and customer response, then scale.
Do customers really care about healthy homes?
Yes, far more than they care about technical sustainability language. Health resonates emotionally and practically.
Real change begins with conversations like this that are open, curious and ready to build differently.
