SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Sustain. Cities
Sec. Urban Resource Management
Volume 7 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/frsc.2025.1576288
This article is part of the Research TopicEmbracing circularity in building retrofitting for sustainable transformationView all articles
A multidisciplinary Categorization of challenges of reuse of residential buildings
Provisionally accepted- 1Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (LG), Dresden, Germany
- 2Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Lower Saxony, Germany
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
The reuse of buildings provides environmental, economic, and social benefits, offering a sustainable alternative to new construction and urban expansion. However, the multidisciplinary nature of reuse and the involvement of diverse, often conflicting interests during decision-making create significant challenges. This study aims to identify and categorize the challenges associated with the reuse of residential buildings from a multidisciplinary and global perspective. In Addition to mapping the relationships between these challenges and the scales at which they occur, addressing the research question: What are the challenges and conflicts of interest that hinder the decision-making process in the reuse of buildings? Using a semi-systematic literature review complemented by thematic analysis, this research identifies 75 sub-challenges grouped into 10 overarching themes: (1) economic viability and financial challenges, (2) building conditions, (3) design-technical challenges, (4) location challenges, (5) decision making, (6) policy and regulations, (7) knowledge, capacity, and skills, (8) culture, perception, and awareness, (9) surrounding community, and (10) timeline. The study highlights the strong interconnections between these themes, with economic and financial challenges emerging as a central factor influencing many others. Current research on building reuse often adopts a narrow disciplinary focus, lacks a global multidisciplinary perspective, and overlooks interdisciplinary connections, with limited focus on residential buildings. This paper's originality lies in addressing these gaps by categorizing the challenges of reuse of residential buildings from multiple disciplines into a comprehensive framework, , providing a resource for researchers, educators, policymakers, and practitioners to address the challenges of building reuse and informing the development of decision-support tools. construction sector has increased greenhouse gas emissions by 45% since 199045% since (Foster, 2020;;WEF, 2016). Reuse of buildings can reduce demolition waste, CO2-equivalent emissions by 34-48% and material usage by 72%, while conserving approximately 56% of embodied energy compared to constructing a new apartment building (Young, 2008;Cellucci, 2021). Similarly, a study suggests that reuse of an entire building can preserve up to 95% of embodied energy (Gursel et al., 2023). With embodied energy as a key driver, there is strong literature consensus on the environmental benefits of reuse (
Keywords: Urban Regeneration 1, circular economy 2, Sustainable Urban Development 3, Reuse of buildings 4, urban revitalization 5
Received: 13 Feb 2025; Accepted: 27 May 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Ghoz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Lamiaa Abdelaziz Ghoz, Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (LG), Dresden, Germany
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.