CSA Group

Transitioning to the circular economy is a huge change that can't be undertaken blindly, especially if doubts exist around the scope, costs, and potential outcomes. For industries and organizations positioned within the realm of the built environment, wading into this transition is especially daunting.

To move ahead, guidelines are needed that make the path forward clear, the footing reliable, and ensure each step is properly aligned with circular principles.

We spoke with Dwayne Torrey, Director of Construction and Infrastructure Standards at CSA Group, about how the organization is designing standards that will help bring the clarity, alignment, and direction needed to make progress toward built environment circularity.

CSA Group is rooted in a mission to advance safety, health, and sustainability—how does that come to life in your work on circularity in the built environment?

CSA Group’s mission comes to life in those moments when you are sitting with industry and can see where strong intent runs into practical barriers. Circularity is a great example. There is real momentum around it but also a fair bit of uncertainty about what it looks like in practice.

A key part of CSA Group’s efforts has been helping bring clarity and structure to that. We work with volunteers and subject matter experts who help establish common terminology, define system boundaries, and connect circular principles across the full life cycle of buildings and infrastructure.

While this may sound straightforward, it is foundational. Once people are aligned on definitions, scope, and desired outcomes, real progress becomes possible.

It is also about building trust. If we want people to reuse materials or approach design differently, they need confidence that what they’re doing is safe, reliable, and fit for purpose. That is exactly where standards can make a meaningful impact.

How do you feel that implementing circular solutions will benefit the built environment, communities, and Canada?

Circularity often starts as an environmental conversation but quickly expands to touch on other key issues, such as resilience of local supply chains, new jobs, and advanced technologies, which amplify its overall impact.

In the built environment, approaches like designing for disassembly, adaptability, and eventual deconstruction help us get more value out of materials over time. Instead of the straight line from build to landfill, we begin to plan for multiple life cycles. This change in mindset helps accomplish several important outcomes, including reduced landfill waste, increased material supply, and lowering embodied carbon, just to name a few.

At the community level, circularity supports resilience. It can reduce the disruption associated with repeated demolition and rebuild cycles, while also creating opportunities for local industries focused on reuse, repair, and material recovery.

On a national scale, the benefits can support competitiveness. Reducing reliance on virgin materials, improving resource efficiency, and supporting decarbonization are all strategic advantages for Canada. Circularity brings these elements together in a very practical way.

One example is the Mountain Equipment Co-op (MEC) building in Ottawa, a two-story retail space constructed using reused structural materials from a building deconstructed on the site. About 75% of the deconstructed building’s materials were recovered from the original 40-year-old structure. In addition, about 80% of materials were sourced within 500km of the site. The design incorporated Design for Disassembly principles, including bolted steel connections and panelized, screwed wood members, allowing for future building extensions or adaptations.

What do you consider to be your biggest success in advancing the circular economy in the built environment? Can you share any stories of impact your work has had that have surprised you?

One of the things I am most proud of is that, in many ways, this is not new work for CSA Group. It is a continuation of work we have been doing for decades.

CSA Group helped pioneer circular thinking in construction long before it even had a name. Standards like CSA Z782, "Guideline for design for disassembly and adaptability in buildings," helped introduce practical concepts around building design and use, leading to the development of an international standard (ISO) on the same topic.

We also facilitated the development of one of the first guidelines on durability in buildings back in the 1990s, where we helped establish the idea that extending asset life is one of the most effective ways to reduce environmental impact.

What is particularly notable today is seeing those early principles come back into focus at a system level and how quickly perspectives can align. While circularity is often initially seen as adding cost or complexity, many people quickly realize it can actually reduce risk and improve long-term value. That shift from “nice to have” to “core business logic” is where real progress happens.

What are some of the challenges you typically face working to advance the circular economy, especially within the built environment?

One of the biggest challenges is that circularity is not just about changing a material or design detail, it cuts across the entire system. It requires coordination across design, construction, operations, and end‑of‑life, and that is not how the industry has traditionally been structured.

To illustrate this in practice, consider a new office building project on the site of an existing structure which may need to be demolished. To make it a circular project, a developer could work with an architect to identify opportunities to retain and incorporate parts of the existing structure within their new design. The architect may determine that a portion of the building will need to be replaced, while other parts can be deconstructed and adapted into the new building.

The project may also require regulatory approvals and processes that accommodate circular construction approaches. A local company could then deconstruct the old building and salvage reusable materials. The developer may also source other reused materials, such as steel, wood, or brick, from a material depot run by a local NGO. A manufacturer could provide fittings for non-structural wall assemblies designed for reuse or reconfiguration. Finally, the developer or owner may adopt digital tools to store and maintain building records for future building repairs and adaptations.

This example highlights the level of coordination required across the value chain to make a circular project successful.

One of the more practical barriers we see right now is the lack of infrastructure to support circularity, particularly around material recovery. Even when buildings are deconstructed instead of demolished, there are often no established depots, marketplaces, or logistics systems to handle, store, and redistribute those materials at scale. Without these systems, it becomes difficult to close the loop in a meaningful way.

If we want people to reuse materials or approach design differently, they need confidence that what they’re doing is safe, reliable, and fit for purpose.

There is also a confidence gap. If someone is going to reuse material, they need assurance that it will perform reliably, which means having test methods, grading approaches, and clear guidance in place.

Ultimately, the potential for circularity is highest when we scale the entire system together. This involves design practices, standards, supply chains, and recovery infrastructure. We are still in the early stages of building that ecosystem.

Are there any upcoming initiatives, projects, trends, or advancements related to your work you'd like to share?

I am particularly excited about the work CSA Group is doing to build a more coherent framework for circularity in the built environment. We are in the process of developing a new standard that will support general principles and establish common terminology so that everyone is working from the same foundation.

In parallel, we are also advancing more practical guidance by exploring what circularity looks like for key materials such as wood, steel, and concrete. This includes defining how circular practices can be implemented and measured across the full life cycle of a project or asset.

At the same time, there are significant industry shifts. We are seeing more conversations around design for disassembly, durability, and extending the life of existing buildings. Although these ideas have been around for a while, they are becoming more mainstream.

On top of this, we are seeing ambitious projects that extend circular thinking beyond individual buildings to entire communities. For example, the area surrounding Edmonton’s City Centre Airport is currently being redeveloped as a 536-acre carbon-neutral community for up to 30,000 Edmontoniansto live and work. Many of the airport's buildings were carefully deconstructed, allowing materials and even entire building components to be recovered and reused elsewhere. Materials such as asphalt, concrete, and gravel were processed for use in future construction projects, while specialized aviation equipment found new applications at other airports.

Through this approach, the project is expected to divert more than 90% of building materials from landfills, illustrating the significant environmental and economic benefits that can be achieved when resource recovery is built into redevelopment planning from the outset.

For me, one of the most exciting opportunities is to connect these threads so that emerging practices, research, and standards all reinforce each other and make circularity easier to implement at scale.

Looking ahead, what are your hopes for the circular economy over the next decade, and how do you envision contributing to this vision? How can other individuals and organizations help support your mission and/or advance circularity in the built environment?

Looking ahead, we hope to see circularity become the default way we think about the built environment. My hope is that it is not considered “innovative,” but simply how projects are planned and delivered.

If we get this right, buildings and infrastructure will be designed with their full life cycle in mind, from initial design through to eventual reuse or recovery. They will be built using modern methods of construction and supported by material passports and other digital tools enabling more efficient use of resources, life extensions of materials and components, and lower carbon emissions. We will also have better ways to define and measure performance, so decisions are based on evidence rather than assumptions.

CSA Group’s role, and mine as well, is to continue to bring experts together and turn collective knowledge and best practices into clear guidance and tools that others can leverage.

Meaningful progress will require contributions from individuals from across the sector. Participating in standards development, sharing real-world examples, and being willing to try new approaches in projects and procurement are all practical steps that can help move things forward. Achieving circularity is truly a collective effort.