Interpreting Circularity in Green Building Rating Systems Using the 10R Framework: A Comparative Analysis of LEED, BREEAM, GREENSHIP, and BGH

Abstract

Buildings and the construction sector are among the most significant contributors to global resource consumption. The emergence of Green Building Rating Systems (GBRS) is driving more sustainable construction; yet, most GBRS still lack explicit end-of-life considerations and do not indicate which circular-economy strategies their indicators support. This study interprets circularity in GBRS by applying the 10R Framework—Refuse, Rethink, Reduce, Reuse, Repair, Refurbish, Remanufacture, Repurpose, Recycle, and Recover—in leading international and national GBRS. A terminology-based analysis based on qualitative content analysis was conducted by mapping indicators from four GBRS (LEED BD+C (v.4)), BREEAM New Construction (v.7), BGH Tahap Perencanaan, and GREENSHIP New Building (1.2)) onto the 10R circularity framework, using both explicit and implicit indicator descriptions. The frequencies and credit weights of each R-strategy were analyzed linguistically and normalized to percentages for comparison and evaluation of how thoroughly and in what ways each GBRS embeds circular economy principles. This study shows that in LEED BD+C (v.4), BREEAM New Construction (v.7), BGH Tahap Perencanaan, and GREENSHIP New Building (v.1.2), “circularity” is defined almost exclusively through up-front design thinking (R1) and measurable resource cuts (R2), with downstream loops (R3–R9) remaining marginal and end-of-life strategies receiving virtually no credit.