Circle Forward: Circular progression within the London market

What happens when circular economy ambitions leave the policy document and enter the project plan?  

In London, this transition is already taking shape, and our recent roundtable, which marked the launch of our Circle Forward campaign, brought together built environment professionals to explore how circularity is moving from policy ambition into project reality.  

The discussion confirmed an important shift: the case for circularity has largely been made. The real challenge now is how to make it repeatable, commercially credible and deliverable at scale. As one contributor put it, “We are not fighting for awareness anymore. What we are fighting for now, is the operational delivery side of things.”

A key takeaway was that circularity cannot sit with one discipline or project stage. It depends on how clients, designers, contractors, consultants and the wider supply chain, connect decisions across the full project lifecycle.  

Another contributor described circularity as “not a single circle” but “more like Olympic rings”, moving from sector to sector and becoming stronger through connection. 

Policy has created momentum, but delivery needs enabling conditions

London’s policy landscape has helped shift circular economy from a “nice to have” into an expectation on many projects, encouraging teams to consider retention, reuse, adaptability and waste reduction earlier in the design process.

Policy can set the direction, but it cannot deliver circularity on its own. Project teams need early evidence, clear ownership and practical routes for reuse. One example discussed was a scheme where drylining was intended to be retained, but later testing found it was not fire-safe and had to be removed. The lesson was clear: circular commitments are only credible when they are backed by early investigation, realistic feasibility work and supply chain engagement. Without these conditions, circular requirements risk becoming a reporting exercise rather than a catalyst for meaningful change.

Circularity succeeds when it is designed into the brief, not added to the project

Timing is critical. Circular strategies work best when they shape the brief, design intent, procurement route and the programme from the outset. When reuse is introduced later, it can quickly become associated with cost uncertainty, programme risk or added complexity.

This means treating circularity as a managed process, not a one-off audit. Teams need to understand what exists, test what can be retained, engage the supply chain and protect reuse opportunities through each project stage. Circularity is not a single design decision; it is a sequence of decisions that must survive cost, programme and delivery pressures. 

The business case must move beyond cost to value

Circular decisions are rarely made by one person. They are shaped by wider project priorities around risk, cost, programme, leasing, carbon and asset value. A reuse opportunity could be viewed as a saving, a planning benefit or a stronger story about asset identity, depending on how it is framed.  

For circularity to become mainstream, the commercial case must move beyond the lowest upfront cost. Quantity surveyors, agents and project managers can be key gatekeepers where circular options are perceived to add risk. However, examples discussed showed that clients may support a slightly more expensive option when the carbon benefit, environmental case or wider asset value is clear. The next step therefore, is stronger evidence that connects circular choices to business relevance.  

Circularity needs to be desirable, not just responsible

Perception can determine whether circular solutions are embraced or resisted. Reused materials can be framed as compromised or second-hand, but when the design narrative is strong, they can bring authenticity, character and memory into a building.

This is an important cultural shift. Circular economy should not only be positioned through compliance, carbon and waste metrics. It also has a design and storytelling role. If reuse is to scale, the industry must make circularity visible, valued and desirable; something clients, occupiers and communities actively want to be associated with. 

The market needs infrastructure, not just intent

Many practical barriers are not about ambition, but infrastructure. Circularity cannot depend on goodwill, last-minute matchmaking or individual project teams trying to solve systemic issues in isolation.

For a dense market like London, this is particularly acute. Storage is constrained, logistics are complex and programme pressures are high. Reuse hubs and digital platforms can help, but only if they provide trusted data, clear ownership models and practical routes to reuse. They must make circularity easier for project teams, not simply move responsibility elsewhere.

Metrics matter, but shared definitions matter first

Circularity metrics can create a common language and help teams understand “what good looks like”. But circularity should not be reduced to a single score. A product with low recycled content, for example, may still perform well if it is durable, demountable, reusable, low carbon or able to retain future material value.

Before circularity can be measured consistently, there needs to be greater alignment on core definitions, evidence requirements and material-specific standards. With clearer foundations, metrics can support better design decisions, more transparent procurement and greater market confidence.

What needs to change by 2030?

By 2030, circularity needs practical delivery systems as much as ambition:  clearer governance, credible commercial models, consistent standards, better data and a cultural shift away from default consumption.

As part of Cundall’s Circle Forward campaign, the London roundtable reinforced that circular progression is not just about better individual projects, it is about market transformation. London shows that policy can create momentum and that project teams can deliver meaningful circular outcomes.  

The challenge now, is to understand how these practices can be replicated, adapted and scaled across the UK. The opportunity lies in moving from ambition to normalisation: from circular economy as a specialist conversation to circularity as part of everyday decisions across development, design, construction and asset management.  

The next chapter is about using London’s lessons to help other UK markets understand what has worked in practice, and where local policy, delivery capacity and market infrastructure still need to evolve.