Difference between revisions of "BCRW 2022"
Abel Maciel (talk | contribs) (→Session 2: Circular Economy) |
Abel Maciel (talk | contribs) (→A Blockchain-based Tack-Back Framework to Support the Extended Producer Responsibility Implementation for Construction Products and Materials) |
||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
===Collective Digital Factories for Buildings=== | ===Collective Digital Factories for Buildings=== | ||
===A Blockchain-based Tack-Back Framework to Support the Extended Producer Responsibility Implementation for Construction Products and Materials=== | ===A Blockchain-based Tack-Back Framework to Support the Extended Producer Responsibility Implementation for Construction Products and Materials=== | ||
+ | [http://www.linkedin.com/in/arghavanakbarieh/ Arghavan Akbarieh] | ||
The global society is transitioning from linear to circular economy. It is encouraged by the ever-increasing awareness of the significance of circular practices, especially recycling. Recycling leads to obtaining secondary materials and prevents resource extraction and depletion. In the construction industry, recycling falls under waste management strategies and is a technologically-established practice. It could solve the current problem of soaring construction material prices due to supply shortages. Yet, despite technological advancements, recycling is often done sporadically and depends on the capacity or interest of local parties after the end-of-lifecycle (EoL) of built assets. As a consequence, valuable recyclable materials sometimes end up in landfills or are transported to other locations for recycling. This situation creates two problems. Firstly, it paints an unrealistic picture of the available materials in the market. More importantly, no one is officially responsible for recycling materials, which could leave the recyclable materials orphaned and creates a free-rider problem between generations of construction professionals. One policy that addresses EoL handling and recycling is the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), which holds producers accountable for treating their products in the EoL phase. EPR is not yet implemented in the construction sector for many reasons. Buildings are (1) complex and unique products - built with a different selection of thousands of components and materials, (2) built through the collaboration of several parties who finally hands them over to owners, and (3) long-term assets with a lifecycle of at least 50 years. Tracking thousands of materials sold to contractors and passed on to owners for several decades after the sale point is not easy for construction producers. However, thanks to digital technologies such as blockchain and Building Information Modelling (BIM), it is currently possible to keep an ongoing, meticulous and tamper-proof record of product information. Based on the state-of-the-art review, design thinking and experimental methodologies, this study proposes a smart contract-based material take-back framework to overcome the above-mentioned issues by supporting the EPR implementation in the construction industry. This study looks into who is responsible for recycling what and financially incentivizes them to engage in future recycling activities. This establishes recycling responsibilities, regulates recycling activities and brings transparency to the construction material supply chain. The suggested framework consists of (1) an accounting base (through capturing the salvage value), (2) a blockchain base, and (3) a financial transition instrument. Furthermore, a work-in-progress proof-of-concept is developed to test the feasibility of the framework. | The global society is transitioning from linear to circular economy. It is encouraged by the ever-increasing awareness of the significance of circular practices, especially recycling. Recycling leads to obtaining secondary materials and prevents resource extraction and depletion. In the construction industry, recycling falls under waste management strategies and is a technologically-established practice. It could solve the current problem of soaring construction material prices due to supply shortages. Yet, despite technological advancements, recycling is often done sporadically and depends on the capacity or interest of local parties after the end-of-lifecycle (EoL) of built assets. As a consequence, valuable recyclable materials sometimes end up in landfills or are transported to other locations for recycling. This situation creates two problems. Firstly, it paints an unrealistic picture of the available materials in the market. More importantly, no one is officially responsible for recycling materials, which could leave the recyclable materials orphaned and creates a free-rider problem between generations of construction professionals. One policy that addresses EoL handling and recycling is the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), which holds producers accountable for treating their products in the EoL phase. EPR is not yet implemented in the construction sector for many reasons. Buildings are (1) complex and unique products - built with a different selection of thousands of components and materials, (2) built through the collaboration of several parties who finally hands them over to owners, and (3) long-term assets with a lifecycle of at least 50 years. Tracking thousands of materials sold to contractors and passed on to owners for several decades after the sale point is not easy for construction producers. However, thanks to digital technologies such as blockchain and Building Information Modelling (BIM), it is currently possible to keep an ongoing, meticulous and tamper-proof record of product information. Based on the state-of-the-art review, design thinking and experimental methodologies, this study proposes a smart contract-based material take-back framework to overcome the above-mentioned issues by supporting the EPR implementation in the construction industry. This study looks into who is responsible for recycling what and financially incentivizes them to engage in future recycling activities. This establishes recycling responsibilities, regulates recycling activities and brings transparency to the construction material supply chain. The suggested framework consists of (1) an accounting base (through capturing the salvage value), (2) a blockchain base, and (3) a financial transition instrument. Furthermore, a work-in-progress proof-of-concept is developed to test the feasibility of the framework. | ||
Revision as of 22:59, 26 June 2022
Contents of the 3rd Blockchain in Construction Research Workshop, hosted by Northumbria University in collaboration with the Construction Blockchain Consortium. The workshop took place on the 20th and 21st of June 2022 in Amsterdam.
Contents
- 1 Presentations
- 1.1 Session 1: Information Management
- 1.1.1 BIM Single Source of Truth for Construction Supply Chain (CSC)
- 1.1.2 Decentralised Information Management Along the Entire Lifecycle of the Building Asset
- 1.1.3 Construction Management Process Automation using Blockchain and Smart Contracts
- 1.1.4 Harnessing Blockchain Technology and the Platform Business Model to Improve Regulatory Compliance and Enhance Interoperability Within the Built Environment Technology Ecosystems
- 1.2 Session 2: Circular Economy
- 1.3 Session 3: Smart Contracts
- 1.4 Session 4: Blockchain in Construction
- 1.5 Session 5: Governance
- 1.1 Session 1: Information Management
- 2 Reference
Presentations
Session 1: Information Management
BIM Single Source of Truth for Construction Supply Chain (CSC)
Decentralised Information Management Along the Entire Lifecycle of the Building Asset
Construction Management Process Automation using Blockchain and Smart Contracts
Harnessing Blockchain Technology and the Platform Business Model to Improve Regulatory Compliance and Enhance Interoperability Within the Built Environment Technology Ecosystems
Session 2: Circular Economy
Collective Digital Factories for Buildings
A Blockchain-based Tack-Back Framework to Support the Extended Producer Responsibility Implementation for Construction Products and Materials
Arghavan Akbarieh The global society is transitioning from linear to circular economy. It is encouraged by the ever-increasing awareness of the significance of circular practices, especially recycling. Recycling leads to obtaining secondary materials and prevents resource extraction and depletion. In the construction industry, recycling falls under waste management strategies and is a technologically-established practice. It could solve the current problem of soaring construction material prices due to supply shortages. Yet, despite technological advancements, recycling is often done sporadically and depends on the capacity or interest of local parties after the end-of-lifecycle (EoL) of built assets. As a consequence, valuable recyclable materials sometimes end up in landfills or are transported to other locations for recycling. This situation creates two problems. Firstly, it paints an unrealistic picture of the available materials in the market. More importantly, no one is officially responsible for recycling materials, which could leave the recyclable materials orphaned and creates a free-rider problem between generations of construction professionals. One policy that addresses EoL handling and recycling is the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), which holds producers accountable for treating their products in the EoL phase. EPR is not yet implemented in the construction sector for many reasons. Buildings are (1) complex and unique products - built with a different selection of thousands of components and materials, (2) built through the collaboration of several parties who finally hands them over to owners, and (3) long-term assets with a lifecycle of at least 50 years. Tracking thousands of materials sold to contractors and passed on to owners for several decades after the sale point is not easy for construction producers. However, thanks to digital technologies such as blockchain and Building Information Modelling (BIM), it is currently possible to keep an ongoing, meticulous and tamper-proof record of product information. Based on the state-of-the-art review, design thinking and experimental methodologies, this study proposes a smart contract-based material take-back framework to overcome the above-mentioned issues by supporting the EPR implementation in the construction industry. This study looks into who is responsible for recycling what and financially incentivizes them to engage in future recycling activities. This establishes recycling responsibilities, regulates recycling activities and brings transparency to the construction material supply chain. The suggested framework consists of (1) an accounting base (through capturing the salvage value), (2) a blockchain base, and (3) a financial transition instrument. Furthermore, a work-in-progress proof-of-concept is developed to test the feasibility of the framework.
Session 3: Smart Contracts
- Digital Twins and Blockchain: How an Alternative Built Environment Business Model can be Enabled by Tokenisation
- Cybersecurity of Digital Twins in the Built Environment
- IOTA ledger and IoT: A Secure Sustainable Infrastructure for the Construction Industry
Session 4: Blockchain in Construction
Session 5: Governance
Reference
Proceeding DOI: https://doi.org/10.47330/CBC.2021.AOFW3842