Validating national reuse indicators from regional demolition data: a Swedish example

Construction accounts for a substantial share of global emissions and waste, highlighting the need to shift from linear to circular resource flows and to prioritise deconstruction and reuse over demolition and disposal. Enabling this transition requires reliable methods for identifying and quantifying products embedded in existing buildings. This Swedish study examines whether key performance indicators (KPIs) derived from demolition‑permit documentation can be generalised across regions to support product‑level stock estimation for circular construction. Using a bottom‑up method, regional similarities and differences were assessed using data on product quantities from preschool and multifamily‑building demolitions (n = 38) in Umeå and Stockholm. Six product categories were compiled from demolition permits and compared statistically with Greater Gothenburg values. The results show that while several products exhibit modest regional variation, others—gypsum boards and clay roof tiles in preschools, and wooden windows in multifamily buildings—display statistically significant differences, indicating that national KPIs would misrepresent regional building stocks. Where no significant differences were found, regional datasets were aggregated to propose national KPIs. Improved demolition‑permit documentation would enhance KPI robustness, underscoring the need for standardised, higher quality data. Expanding datasets and validating the results against demolition outcomes will be essential to strengthen KPI applicability.

PRACTICE RELEVANCE

When can national KPIs serve as a reliable forecast of reusable building products from demolition? When must regional differences be considered? For products with limited regional variation, such as roofing felt and timber frameworks, national KPIs can inform circular-construction planning. In contrast, gypsum boards, clay roof tiles and certain window types show substantial regional differences, likely driven by construction traditions and documentation practices, making region-specific KPIs necessary. Until greater stability from further data collection is demonstrated, regional KPIs should remain the basis for quantifying products, with national indicators applied only where consistency is evident. To improve data quality, policymakers should promote harmonised pre‑demolition audits, standardised reporting and digital documentation. Practitioners can use KPIs in early‑stage planning, while municipalities could integrate them into permit processes and make the data publicly accessible to strengthen regional reuse capacity.