Image source: Gensler
Unlocking circular value across the lifecycle of commercial offices
There is a quiet contradiction at the crux of our industry. We talk increasingly of circularity, yet too often we treat it as an intervention rather than a foundation. A later-stage adjustment; a well-intentioned overlay. Something to be considered once the real decisions have already been made.
And so, despite the ambition, progress remains uneven across the landscape. The will is present; yet in practice, circularity remains easier to overlook than embrace. Circularity is as much a commercial proposition as it is an environmental one. In a market shaped by uncertainty, the most valuable assets will be those designed to adapt, be reconfigured, and ultimately reused. An office might not be built to last forever in original form; but it should endure in value.
Circularity often arrives too late
The industry’s challenge lies less in ideas and more in timing. Circular thinking is too often introduced after the strategic brief has been set. By that point, the parameters are fixed; programme, cost and design intent already defined within a largely linear and traditional model. What follows is a familiar pattern: ambition without clarity and aspiration without practical delivery. In reality, circularity is not a design feature; it is a strategic position.
Circular thinking should prompt different questions at the outset:
What will this asset become in 20 years’ time?
Where will its material stock go next?
What value might be recovered in the future?
Without these considerations embedded at the beginning of the project, circularity becomes constrained; reduced to ad hoc material swaps or isolated reuse initiatives. Important, certainly; but rarely enough on their own. Seen through a lens of project and cost management, the priority is timing; defining value early enough to make a meaningful difference.
New build: part of the solution
New build is often cast as the antagonist in the narrative of circular economy. In my view, the reality is more nuanced. New construction is rarely the problem in itself; the real constraint is applying linear thinking to new materials.
A building conceived with its future in mind can hold significant circular value. Designing for disassembly, embedding material passports and planning for deconstruction rather than demolition are not theoretical ideas. They are practical decisions that shape an asset’s long-term worth.
Equally, circular thinking in new build should encourage the intelligent reuse of existing materials. Reclaimed steel, raised floors, façades, finishes and components can all find new life within new developments, reducing embodied carbon while extending the usefulness of materials already in circulation. The most forward-looking buildings may not be built entirely from new products, but from a thoughtful combination of old and new.
Ultimately, circularity is defined as much by a material’s next use as by its previous one. A new building, properly considered, can become a material bank; an asset not only in use, but also in reserve. Residual value is no longer speculative; it is designed, documented and, eventually, recoverable.
Retrofit: a pragmatic battleground
If new build represents potential, retrofit represents reality. It is often more complex, more constrained and, at times, more expensive. Adapting a building that was never designed for evolution brings technical, commercial and programme challenges that cannot be overlooked; and yet, the value case remains compelling.
This is particularly true as the planning landscape continues to evolve. While the National Planning Policy Framework stops short of mandating a ‘retrofit first’ approach, the direction of travel is increasingly clear. Local authorities, especially in London, are becoming some of the strongest proponents of retrofit and embodied carbon reduction in the UK planning landscape. Both the City of London Corporation and Westminster City Council have embedded increasingly durable expectations around reuse, retention and whole-life carbon into their planning approaches; signalling a wider shift in how development value is assessed.
Retaining structure, extending lifespan and reducing embodied carbon are all tangible benefits when considered early. More importantly, retrofit forces a discipline of thinking that is inherently circular; working with what exists rather than defaulting to replacement.
The debate is sometimes reduced to extremes; preservation versus demolition, purity versus pragmatism. But the more useful perspective is one of lifecycle value. If an intervention meaningfully extends the life of a building and creates future reuse potential, then it contributes to circularity in a way that matters. Retrofit earns its place when it extends an asset’s life and creates new opportunities for future use.
Fitouts: the hidden frontier
If there is a silent contradiction in commercial offices, it sits within Cat A and Cat B fitouts. Here, the lifecycle of space is measured in years; while the lifespan of components often stretches far beyond. Furniture, glazing, mechanical and electrical systems; designed for durability yet routinely discarded long before their useful life is realised.
We are depreciating assets faster than we are designing them. However, there are clear opportunities to rethink this model:
Earlier engagement with incoming occupiers where possible, to reduce abortive Cat A works.
Greater standardisation; a shift towards ‘kit of parts’ design thinking.
Leasing, buy-back, and reconditioning models for key components.
Stronger alignment of a capital allowances strategy from the outset, to unlock investment in circular solutions.
Use of digital tools and visualisation to avoid premature changes to cost and critical path.
Alongside this sits a broader shift in accountability. Occupiers play a critical role; not only in how space is used, but in how it is relinquished. Designing for disassembly; specifying for reuse; extending the life of components beyond a single tenancy; these are practical steps that move the dial. Fitout is no longer a downstream activity; it is an essential part of the circular equation.
From cost to recoverable value
For circularity to move beyond intent, it must be measured in commercial terms. This is as much about redefining value as it is about reducing impact. Whole-life cost and whole-life carbon begin to align when residual value is considered not as an afterthought, but as a line item within the cost plan. Materials and components are no longer sunk costs; they become future assets, with the potential for recovery, reuse or resale.
Emerging approaches hint at what is possible:
Pre-deconstruction audits that identify recoverable value.
Early engagement with reuse markets; a form of ‘futures thinking’ for materials.
Greater transparency between time invested and value returned.
Shared commercial models between developers and the deconstruction supply chain.
The fundamental question shifts to, ‘what might we be willing to invest today, if tomorrow’s financial recovery is understood with confidence?’ Finding an answer requires better data; stronger markets; and, most importantly, a change in mindset. The direction is clear; circularity can be understood as a redistribution of value across time.
What’s holding the industry back
Progress is slowed by more than reluctance alone; the barriers are very real. Procurement models remain largely linear; designed for certainty of supply rather than circular flows. Storage, logistics and sequencing introduce complexity that the current system is not optimised to handle well.
Supply chains and reuse markets, while evolving, are still fragmented. Access to reclaimed materials at scale remains scattered; and responsibility across the value chain is often unclear. Risk is another factor; where concerns around warranties, performance and insurance persist, and not always grounded in evidence; but influential, nonetheless.
Then there is data; or the lack of it; or at least, its messiness. Without reliable information on material provenance, condition and future value, decision-making remains cautious. The challenge is circular in itself; markets need data to mature, but data depends on market activity and willingness.
None of this is insurmountable, but it does require acknowledgement. The system is not resisting circularity; it just hasn’t been designed for it yet.
Who moves first
Change rarely happens evenly. In this context, leadership will come from those willing to act ahead of full market maturity. Developers have a pivotal role; setting ambition at the brief stage, testing new commercial models and creating assets that demonstrate what is possible.
Project managers, cost managers and designers also have a critical role to play. They are often the first interpreters of ambition and the custodians of value throughout delivery. The decisions they influence in the earliest stages frequently determine whether circular aspirations survive contact with programme, procurement and budget realities.
Policy and planning will also accelerate direction, providing the frameworks that reward long-term thinking. Governments have a range of mechanisms at their disposal; from tax incentives and accelerated capital allowances to embodied carbon regulation, material recovery credits and future carbon trading mechanisms. Much as renewable energy was accelerated through subsidies and policy intervention, the circular economy is likely to benefit from a combination of market signals and government support.
The public sector also has influence; as client, as occupier and as standard setter. Circularity will not scale through consensus alone, but through visible and credible examples of delivery, supported by commercial incentives that make doing the right thing the economically rational choice.
What can be done now
The shift requires action more than perfection. There are steps that can be taken immediately:
Embed circular principles within the strategic brief, rather than after design has begun.
Undertake early circular audits to understand value creation and recovery opportunities.
Reflect reuse and residual value within cost planning and feasibility studies.
Introduce clear circular requirements within procurement processes.
Pilot projects that test approaches, building confidence through delivery.
Designed to change
The commercial office is not a static object. It is a living system; shaped by changing occupier needs, evolving technologies, and shifting market expectations. The real opportunity is to design for that change from the outset. Circularity offers a form of optionality; the ability to retain value, extend building life, and adapt with purpose.
The greater opportunity lies in creating assets that endure through change; through reuse; through reinvention. In a circular economy, buildings built to last must also be designed to change.
