By Darcy Arnold-Jones, Architect and Circular Economy Lead at Marks Barfield Architects and Consultant at Reusefully

Looking Beyond the Site Boundary

I find myself increasingly questioning our ‘business as usual’. The silly questions do not seem so silly anymore and BAU does not necessarily equate to best practice. As the environment in which we build radically shifts, it stands to reason that our practices also need to adapt. Perhaps the greatest shift required is not technical but professional. Architects have traditionally been trained to specify new materials but increasingly our role is reversing: from material specifiers to material stewards.

For years we received waste reports on projects boasting 97/98% recycling, the reality of which is far from sustainable. I would urge every industry professional to visit a waste management facility to understand where the materials we waste end up. The result is often quality materials being downcycled. And so, we need to move from demolition to stewardship.

Stewardship differs from ownership. An architect may never own the materials specified on a project, yet every design decision influences how long those materials remain in use and whether they are maintained, adapted, discarded or extracted again. Stewardship is about recognising that responsibility extends beyond practical completion.

Key to this is the acknowledgment that we do not work purely within the redline boundary; there are wider effects and systems at play at hundreds of ‘sites beyond our sites’. In one of Marks Barfield Architect’s (MBA) mixed-use developments, the site measured 4100m2. In comparison, just the land area needed in the core material production was over 2000 times that. While these quarries and swathes of forest serve a great number of buildings, their direct impacts on the surrounding areas cannot be overlooked.

Sustainable accreditations mention responsible material sourcing or suggest you look at local transport links, but the reality of material extraction is much more shocking. The effects of this are starting to be scrutinised harder by industry professionals (such as Will Arnold’s Future Build: How Construction Can Heal Our Planet). The use of a single concrete block can be traced back to limestone mining in countries like Canada, where limestone is key for the basis of habitats and impossible to restore. Iron ore mining for steel demands huge amounts of fresh water, with processes contaminating local soils and waterways, impacting ecosystems and community health.

From Material Stewardship to Practical Reuse

So, my one ask from the industry is to consider: What is already in your fridge? Before writing a shopping list, most of us check what we already have. We instinctively value the ingredients we own and maximise expiry dates. Buildings deserve the same treatment. Clients, designers and contractors have a responsibility for the materials already present. We should be asking ourselves from the outset:

• Have you prioritised reuse on site where possible?
• How can you extend the value of these materials?
• Have you considered the number of lives designed into new materials?

In practice, through my work at MBA and Reusefully, we have been applying regenerative principles by treating materials as assets rather than waste. This means considering every system affected by a project - ecological, social, cultural and economic - rather than focusing solely on the building. Too often, cost and programme are prioritised over critical thinking. There needs to be a shift from a purely economic space-based mindset, with value according to NIAs, to a material asset and systems mindset. We have become remarkably good at valuing square metres; we are far less adept at valuing the materials that make them. The challenge is to shift to a mindset that recognises materials, building histories and places as long-term assets whose value extends far beyond a three-year development programme or a ten-year lease.

Walk around central London and you'll find huge quantities of quality, near-new materials leaving offices daily. Companies like Reusefully are going a long way to rectify this, but if Architects aren’t on board from project inception, it becomes a losing battle. Our duty of care extends beyond RIBA stages 0-7. Buildings do not cease to exist when our appointments end. Stewardship requires us to think beyond procurement stages and consider the full life of the materials we specify. While the industry is making significant strides in deconstruction and material redistribution, we cannot simply dismantle buildings and hope others will champion reuse while we return to a blank canvas. There needs to be a balance. The only way to drive up demand for reuse at scale is to start considering reuse on our own projects first.

The encouraging reality is that cost, carbon and programme can align. There are direct project benefits to be gained by questioning the brief and making strategic decisions from the outset. Reuse in situ has kept our projects on budget with material costs rising, and on time with material lead-in times growing. On one project we prioritised the reuse of raised access floors and fire doors. The former because it was an easy win, the latter because it made financial sense… and we fancied a challenge! This yielded such significant cost savings that we explored the reuse of other materials, donating them to wider community projects. By creating more resilient communities, localising industries and shortening supply chains, the circular economy is growing three times faster than the overall UK economy and employs almost one million people. At current growth rates, it could add another 100,000 jobs per year(1).

Circularity costs more when it isn’t de-risked at inception; when labour, extended deconstruction periods, early design stage auditing and on-site remediation, reinstallation and recertification haven’t been considered. However, the solution is relatively simple: establish your strategy and pick your battles. Ask the right questions at the early stages - “Is the carbon, condition and labour associated with recovery justified?” - then prioritise and eliminate.

Redefining the Architect's Role

It goes against the traditional training of an architect to approach projects with a ‘how can we build less’ mindset but as our role reverses and we start to consider material stewardship and resilience rather than opulence and ego, we have the opportunity to really build better places. There is something inherently defeatist about apathy. Progress begins with the belief that change is possible, and that change is most effective when it happens collectively.

Architects have long described themselves as custodians of place. The next step is to become custodians of materials that make place. Every specification we write influences landscapes we may never see, communities we may never meet and resources that will outlive us. The question is no longer whether we can build differently, but whether we are prepared to accept the responsibility that comes with doing so. Stewards, not consumers.

1. Confederation of British Industry (CBI)'s The Future is Green report, published in February 2025