Reorganising specification practice for component reuse: an exploratory study
Despite increasing policy attention to circular economy strategies, building component reuse remains limited in mainstream construction practice. Existing research has demonstrated the environmental potential of reuse and identified the importance of material information, assessment and inter-organisational collaboration. However, these dimensions are examined separately, while less attention has been given to material specification as a focal practice that connects them to reclaimed components. A qualitative case study of a large UK commercial refurbishment investigates material specification based on semi-structured interviews (n = 8) with project participants and project documents. Drawing on Schatzki’s practice theory, the analytical framework traces the reorganisation of practical understandings, general understandings, rules and teleoaffective structures, as well as the recomposition of specification doings and sayings. The findings show that specifications were developed differently across three different material vignettes (structural steel, Portland stone, marble) as material conditions emerged and requirements changed. The paper positions material specification as an evolving practice rather than a one-off decision. Information, collaboration and formal requirements alone did not enable reuse; their effectiveness depended on how they were connected and reorganised around particular materials. This explains the varying results within the same project and provides a framework for analysing material specification practices. PRACTICE RELEVANCE Component reuse depends on connecting material information, responsibilities and requirements throughout specification and delivery. Project teams should recognise that producing reliable information involves costs for surveys, inventories, testing, certification, tracking and coordination, and they should allocate time and budget for these activities early. The evidence needed at specification should also reflect the material and its intended function. Safety-critical structural components may require early verification of provenance, dimensions, condition and performance, whereas facade and interior components may need provisional specifications supported by staged inspection and agreed criteria for acceptable variation. Responsibility should remain continuous across assessment, dismantling, storage, transport and installation, especially where conditions may change during handling. Specifications should be revised if new evidence affects feasibility, and changes to the intended reuse outcome should be documented. These measures help prevent information gaps, unallocated costs and organisational handovers from reducing reuse potential.