CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2Sustainable Building Design and AssessmentSustainable Supply Chain ManagementRecycled Aggregate Concrete Performance

The Uncertainty of Reusable Building Components/Materials A Subsidiary of Circular Economy in the Africa Construction Sector: The Issue of Affordable Housing in Kenya

Open access
Christian Jonathan·2024·Journal of Materials and Polymer Science
DOI 10.47485/2832-9384.1053
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

There is growing interest in the adaptation of circular economy approaches in the construction sector, for developing African countries like Kenya with an increase in construction activities leading to more generation of construction wastes. The approach of circularity presents an alternative to reuse these construction or demolition wastes thereby lowering environmental risks and providing for a lower price for building components/materials required for affordable building projects. However, there is little, or no information on these reusable building components/materials, which lowers the confidence by construction stakeholders in using them. No information on its possible new life longevity (durability), its possible maintenance budget, and no means of enabling a design team to plan for its acquisition (accessibility) in a design project. This paper adopted a review of previous literature on these topics to search for possible solutions to the research questions, of which some literature provided only a list of requirements needed to give a level of information to reusable building elements. The paper went further to provide proposals for an information catalogue that would enable the insertion of reusable building elements’ Indicators of service (availability, reliability, and maintainability) obtainable from experience with the elements. Also, a format for a maintenance budget plan would be required during the new service life of the reused element. And a means of simulation using the Monte Carlo simulation tool to obtain reliable viability of access to reusable building elements in a transitional building in its design stage. These proposals would have to be put into practice to ascertain their effectiveness, meanwhile, other areas of further studies are provided in the paper.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper reviews literature on reusable building components/materials in circular construction and proposes information tools to reduce uncertainty for affordable housing in Kenya. It proposes an indicators-of-service catalogue, a maintenance-budget template, and Monte Carlo simulation for access planning, but does not empirically test them.

Key findings

  • The paper identifies stakeholder uncertainty about reused components/materials due to missing information on durability, maintenance costs, and accessibility, and argues this lowers confidence in reuse.
  • It reports context figures: Kenya has a record 2 million housing deficit among the low-income population, and global cities contribute 50% of global greenhouse gas emissions and consume nearly 70% of global energy sources.
  • It proposes an information catalogue for Indicators of Service—availability, reliability, and maintainability—including a 1-to-5 grading scale for conditional probability of failure.
  • It proposes a maintenance-budget plan for the reused element’s new life cycle and a Monte Carlo simulation approach to assess access to reusable elements in a flexible/transitional affordable-housing design.

Methods

  • Design: a review of previous literature on circular economy, reusable building components/materials, indicators of service, maintenance budgeting, and design uncertainty.
  • Data/sample: no primary empirical sample is reported; the paper draws on cited literature and examples, including Kenya and Indonesia.
  • Analysis: identifies research gaps in prior literature and develops proposal templates for IOS information, maintenance budgeting, and Monte Carlo simulation.

Limitations

  • The paper states its proposals “would have to be put into practice to ascertain their effectiveness” and lists further studies, including material testing for longevity, stakeholder opinion on qualification, real-project maintenance-cost comparison, and non-transitional design simulation.
  • Evident from the text: the paper presents proposals and literature synthesis without empirical validation, quantitative results, or a tested case study.
  • Evident from the text: several proposals rely on assumptions, such as a flexible/transitional design and respondent probability distributions for Monte Carlo inputs.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.47485/2832-9384.1053

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

17 of 27 cited sources checked · 12 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Stakeholders' perception of reusable components is affected by potential risk factors associated with the approach.

    “It is obvious the benefits of reusable building components/ materials, but the adoption of these approaches globally not only in Africa or Kenya, but stakeholders' perception is also affected by the potential risk factors associated with the approach (Rakhshan et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rakhshan et al., 2020 source
  • Premisecitation

    Prior literature lacks an outline to determine the performance level or reusability of recovered building elements.

    “Lack of outline to determine the performance level or reusability of recovered building elements.(Rakhshan et al., 2020)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Rakhshan et al., 2020 source
    • cites Gorgolewski & Morettin, n.d.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Premisecitation

    Accessibility of reusable building components/materials often requires more time to acquire, which a design team would need to address if intending to build with them.

    “Another issue is the accessibility of these reusable building components/materials as they often require more time to acquire, these are issues that a design team would need to answer, (Rakhshan et al., 2020) if there is an intention to build with reusable building components/materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rakhshan et al., 2020 source
  • Premisecitation

    Lack of trust or confidence in salvaged building elements can be attributed to a lack of quality or performance certifications.

    “The lack of trust or confidence in salvaged building elements can also be attributed to a lack of quality or performance certifications (Rakhshan et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rakhshan et al., 2020 source
  • Premisecitation

    Prior literature did not emphasize how to quantify the longevity of selected building materials and components.

    “No specific emphasis on how to quantify the longevity of selected building materials and components.(Citraningrum et al., 2023)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Citraningrum et al., 2023 source

      Section 3.3 discusses respondents’ doubts about the durability of reused materials, and the comparison table records opinions about whether they last longer or shorter than new materials. Neither passage addresses whether prior literature emphasized methods for quantifying the longevity of selected materials and components. Searches for longevity quantification and service-life measurement found no such statement in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.70)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 20
  • May combine two claims. 7

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Stakeholders in Indonesia still doubt the durability and maintainability of reusable building elements.

    “many stakeholders (Architects, Builders, Engineers, Contractors, etc) in the context of Indonesia still doubt the durability and maintainability of reusable building elements (Citraningrum et al., 2023).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Citraningrum et al., 2023 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Reusing building components/materials has lower environmental impacts than recycling because it requires lower processing, and it improves solid waste management enabling healthier cities.

    “There are lower environmental impacts when reusing building components/ materials compared to recycling because there is lower processing required, these actions would also improve solid waste management enabling healthier cities (Citraningrum et al., 2023).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Citraningrum et al., 2023 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Prior simulation work was not intended for designing with reusable building components/materials.

    “The simulation was not intended for designing with reusable building components/materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Martani et al., 2013 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Prior literature did not give procedures for quantifying or managing individual building elements.

    “The reference did not give procedures for quantifying or managing individual building elements.(Rahla et al., 2021)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rahla et al., 2021 source

      The review’s study-summary table (page unavailable) describes a BIM-based tool for managing materials and components and studies that quantify impacts of reusing building elements. Neither those passages nor searches for procedures to quantify or manage individual elements establish the claim that this reference did not give such procedures. (LLM, conf=0.70)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Economic drivers are one motive for reusing building components, as possible lower prices of recovered materials could lower project construction costs.

    “Furthermore, research by (Rakhshan et al., 2020) reveals that economic drivers are one of the motives for reusing building components, as the possible lower prices of recovered materials could enable the lowering of project construction costs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rakhshan et al., 2020 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In Indonesia, respondents are skeptical about using recovered materials from demolition or construction waste, particularly their durability.

    “As revealed by a poll of respondents by (Citraningrum et al., 2023) in Indonesia there is skepticism about using recovered materials from demolition or construction wastes, particularly the durability of these recovered products”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Citraningrum et al., 2023 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The design team or contractors would need to put extra effort into finding reusable building components/materials, and the design needs to remain flexible.

    “The design team or contractors would need to put extra effort into finding these reusable building components/materials, the design also needs to remain flexible, and it would be preferable to acquire the reused elements during the design stage (Rakhshan et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rakhshan et al., 2020 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    There is little or no information on reusable building components/materials, and this lowers construction stakeholders' confidence in using them.

    “However, there is little, or no information on these reusable building components/materials, which lowers the confidence by construction stakeholders in using them.”
    • Also stated in: § ISSN 2832-9384 · plain
      “However, stakeholders' perception of using reusable components remains uncertain due to a lack of information on reusable components/materials.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rakhshan et al., 2020 source

      The Reuse barriers section (page unavailable) says information about reused components’ characteristics and certificates can be unavailable, leaving their remaining capacity unknown. It also says lack of confidence in component quality and lack of guarantees hinder reuse. It does not establish that there is little or no information on reusable components generally, or explicitly link that information gap to stakeholders’ confidence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Maintainability is vital in the new life of reusable building components/materials and requires extra attention.

    “It's important to note that maintainability is vital in the new life of reusable building components/ materials (Rahla et al., 2021), therefore requires extra attention (Citraningrum et al., 2023)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Rahla et al., 2021 source
    • cites Citraningrum et al., 2023 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Using reusable building components/materials could create job opportunities for stakeholders in the supply chain.

    “create more possible job opportunities for stakeholders involved in the supply chain”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Information like IOS could become an integral part of reclamation audits and construction and demolition waste audits.

    “Information like the IOS could become an integral part of reclamation audits, construction, and demolition waste audits (Morgane & Marilyn, 2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Morgane & Marilyn, 2020

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    A simulation tool could enable the design team to understand the possible number of reused elements accessible for specific building design stages.

    “A tool that could enable the design team to understand the possible number of reused elements accessible (available) for the specific building design stages.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Using reusable building components/materials in Kenya's construction sector could mitigate construction waste and provide environmental benefits.

    “The adoption of a circular economy in Kenya's Construction Sector involving the use of reusable building components/materials could enable the mitigation of construction waste, and environmental benefits”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premiseown data

    Prior literature provides only a list of requirements needed to give a level of information to reusable building elements.

    “This paper adopted a review of previous literature on these topics to search for possible solutions to the research questions, of which some literature provided only a list of requirements needed to give a level of information to reusable building elements.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Circularity in the construction sector can be divided into design, construction, and demolition.

    “Furthermore, the study by (Chen et al., 2022) suggested that Circularity in the Construction Sector could be divided into the three categories of Design, Construction, and Demolition of which the design stage involves designing for deconstruction/ disassembly and designing with reusable building components and materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chen et al., 2022

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Using reusable building components/materials could enable the low-income population to achieve an affordable home if reusable components/materials are obtainable at lower price than new products.

    “could enable achieving an affordable home by the low-income population if the reusable building components/materials are obtainable at lower price compared to the new products.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Information on the financial maintenance budget would enable users and stakeholders to determine budgeting from the initial or design stage.

    “This information would enable users and stakeholders to determine the budgeting even from the initial or design stage.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The design stage of circularity involves designing for deconstruction/disassembly and designing with reusable building components/materials.

    “Furthermore, the study by (Chen et al., 2022) suggested that Circularity in the Construction Sector could be divided into the three categories of Design, Construction, and Demolition of which the design stage involves designing for deconstruction/ disassembly and designing with reusable building components and materials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chen et al., 2022

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Monte Carlo simulation can estimate uncertainty using respondents' probability distributions as input conditions, and is more reliable because it allows estimating outcomes of a multi-variable process and retrieving the most viable outcome after multiple simulations.

    “it is possible to estimate this uncertainty with Monte Carlo Simulation which would use the respondent's probability distributions as input conditions for simulations.This is more reliable because it allows the estimating of outcomes of the multi-variable process.Which then allows the retrieval of the most viable outcome after multiple simulations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    A suggestion to include visual inspection, structural testing, and refurbishment of salvaged building components for functional and regulatory standards still lacks attributes on the components' indicators of service.

    “A suggestion by (Gorgolewski & Morettin, (n.d.)) to include visual inspection, structural testing, and refurbishment of salvaged building components for functional and regulatory standards but still lack attributes on the components' indicators of service.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gorgolewski & Morettin, (n.d.)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A level of information could enable approximation for maintenance budgeting for adopted reused elements.

    “This would enable the approximation for a maintenance budgeting for adopted reused elements”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A level of information or level approximation on expected indicators of service could boost confidence in reusing reusable building elements.

    “A level of information or level approximation on their expected indicators of service could boost confidence in reusing these elements.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
22 of 22

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    A reusable building component/material can be in a new life cycle after being directly recovered, refurbished, repaired, repurposed, or recycled from other elements.

    “Assuming a reusable building component/material is in its New Life Cycle after R-actions of either being directly Recovered, Refurbished, Repaired, Repurposed, or Recycled from other elements, an estimated number of new year's life cycle is approximated followed by an approximated frequency for which the components could need to be maintained (i.e repainted).”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The simulation proposal assumes a flexible, transitional design process for an affordable home for the lower-income class in Kenya, built in phases incrementally with reusable building components/materials, taking into account acquisition cost.

    “Assuming, a Flexible, transitional design process for an affordable home for the lower income class in Kenya, which is intended to be built in phases incrementally with reusable building components/materials of doors, windows, plumbing fittings, etc. also taking into consideration the cost involved in acquiring these elements.”
2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bartlett, E. V, & Simpson, S. (1998). Durability and Reliability, Alternative Approaches to Assessment of Component Performance Over Time. Retrieved from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/%E2%80%9C-Durability-and-Reliability-%2C-Alternative-to-of-%E2%80%9D-Bartlett/3120a973b4cffb9f84f49d782ac6edbf3760710c

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jonathan, C.
Affiliations
Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Corresponding author
Christian Jonathan
Venue
Journal of Materials and Polymer Science
Publisher
Uniscience Publishers LLC
Published
2024-05-03
ISSN
2832-9384 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.47485/2832-9384.1053
OpenAlex
W4396618472
Semantic Scholar
668b8353d80b0cc2004fdcd7c7011cfb7aa912dd
Cited by
0
References
9
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Materials and Polymer Science (publishedVersion)
  • Virtual Community of Pathological Anatomy (University of Castilla La Mancha) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Building Design and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Recycled Aggregate Concrete Performance
Keywords
construction and demolition waste, circular economy, affordable housing, Kenya, maintainability, maintenance budgeting, Monte Carlo simulation, construction waste management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-18.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-18.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review