ArticleJournal of industrial ecology2025
Material stocks and embodied carbon in UK buildings: An archetype-based, bottom-up, GIS approach.
Article in Journal of industrial ecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- BUD-MI: a template that optimizes material intensity data collection and utilization.Journal of industrial ecology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decarbonizing construction through a circular economy requires an in-depth understanding of the materials stocked within, and flows into, between, and beyond, the global built environment. Archetype-based bottom-up material stock analysis (MSA) is increasingly used to estimate the quantity, location, and embodied carbon of different construction materials within existing buildings. European MSA studies typically employ archetypes based on building use (e.g., residential/non-residential) and/or age (e.g., historic/modern), potentially missing significant variation in material composition across different construction types. Such work also generally focuses on residential buildings and derives aggregated and/or synthetic material intensities (MIs), with non-residential buildings in the United Kingdom rarely being considered through real-world design data. This paper investigates the suitability of different archetyping approaches in the bottom-up estimation of material stocks and embodied carbon in UK buildings. Concrete is revealed to consistently contribute the majority of material mass irrespective of use or construction type, with steel consistently representing a majority of superstructural embodied carbon. Despite the relative agreement between overall structural MIs for use- and construction-based archetypes, varying material and sub-/superstructural composition introduces increased heterogeneity in individual-material and sub-building MIs when considering building construction type. Mapping of use- and construction-based MIs to the building stock level is shown to be inhibited by the infrequent specification of construction type within the utilized inventory. This gives rise to a novel, parallel use and/or construction archetyping approach, reiterating the need for the inclusion of building construction types within both MSA archetyping approaches and national building inventories. Supplementary Information: The online version of this article (doi:10.1111/jiec.70066) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.