In this issue, Irene Mazzei, PhD, and Tim Bowes team up to speak to a range of professionals across the supply chain to assess the challenges faced in realising a Circular Economy.

During the last five years the lighting industry has seen a rapid increase of awareness around sustainability and circularity topics: what once was only a desirable feature is quickly turning into a must-have in product design.

Numerous lighting manufacturers have embraced the concept of the circular economy (CE) and evolved their design and business operations to make their products more circular – but something is missing. Circular approaches in projects and installations are still met with uncertainty and a slower uptake, in favour of more conventional ones. Business models need to be made more efficient and competitive, so that re-using, repairing, remanufacturing and repurposing a luminaire becomes more attractive than procuring a brand new one.

How do we develop not just the push, but also the pull? How do we get other stakeholders in the value chain – up and down stream – to understand and realise the possibilities and move away from the current mindset and approach?

What is the circular economy?

Today our industrial economy is ‘linear’ by design. It is set-up to encourage us to consume and buy new. We extract material from the ground, we process it, we consume it, and we dispose it – and then start all over again. However, there is an increasing acceptance that this approach cannot continue. If we carry on as we are, it is projected we will be extracting between 170-184Gt/year by 2050, roughly double what was extracted in 2016 [1].

The construction industry has a significant focus on carbon reduction; however, with 55% of today’s emissions being addressed by renewable energy and energy efficiency, the Ellen Macarthur Foundation highlights that the CE will play a key role in reducing the remaining 45% of emissions [2].

It is fundamental that we collectively accept that transformative change is needed if we are to continue to have an economy that can support future generations. However, with the built environment being one that “hinders transformative change” [3], this may be easier said than done.

The CE is “an economic system that is restorative and regenerative by design” [4]. Representing an alternative approach, it asks us to look more holistically to balance the needs of the environment, business and people. It is based on three key principles [5]: eliminate waste and pollution; circulate products and materials; and regenerate nature.

It is the second principle that this article hopes to explore. How do we look to release the value of the work we are doing with product design not just today but also in the future?

How does the Circular Economy add value?

In lighting we are working with materials that are defined as within the CE as ‘technical nutrients’. Using the Ellen Macarthur Foundation’s butterfly diagram (Figure 1) we can show how different circular approaches can add economic value. The smaller the loop, the greater the social, economic and environmental value is there to be retained. But how do each of these stages allow us to realise this value? Figure 2 provides a brief overview of each of these loops.

The objective of this article is to gather the opinions of different professionals on the common challenges and opportunities associated with realising some of the wider systemic and business changes needed to truly realise a CE not just today, but also in the future. We interviewed manufacturers, designers, industry associations and contractors, the latter providing insights on the downstream value chain’s own perspective on this topic. The next section contains contributions from Nigel Harvey (Recolight – Luminaire recycling provider), Paul Beale (18 Degrees – lighting designer), Benz Roos (Speirs Major Light Architecture – lighting designer), Ali Kay (Stoane Lighting – manufacturer) and James Ivin (Overbury – fit-out specialist).

Stakeholders’ Inputs

The first question we posed our interviewees was about the extent to which circular thinking features in their projects, and whether circular approaches are being developed in their practice. We also asked what they think can be done to implement more circularity in projects:

Manufacturer: “In the last five years we have seen several projects where facilities managers and building owners have taken proactive steps to convert halogen products to LED technology. While feature chandeliers or pendants are the most likely products to be viable for remanufacturing, we do see more adoption of remanufacturing of small or more standard lighting equipment. In those cases, this needs an engaged stakeholder and project team who are looking for these opportunities and we can work with them to present the business and sustainability case for a remanufacturing approach rather than replacement; this is done through LCA (Life Cycle Assessment), embodied carbon calculation, energy saving calculations.”

Lighting Designer: “Circularity is becoming an increasingly integral part of our conversations with clients, though its implementation remains highly project-specific. While new-build projects or Cat A refurbishments typically default to installing brand new luminaires, we are actively exploring opportunities to re-use and repurpose existing equipment, particularly where the client has a strong ESG agenda or where there is alignment with broader sustainability goals. That said, the re-use of luminaires remains the exception rather than the rule. This is not for lack of interest, but because most commercial developments – especially in the speculative office market – prioritise design uniformity, perceived newness, and programme certainty. Nonetheless, we continue to advocate for re-use wherever feasible, for example by salvaging luminaires from one floor of a building and redeploying them elsewhere on the same estate, or by specifying modular lighting systems that allow for future disassembly and redeployment. We are also increasingly collaborating with manufacturers and remanufacturing partners who can support quality assurance, compliance, and performance testing to make re-use viable in real-world applications.”

Lighting Designer: “We are trying now to start with making inventories of existing equipment on projects to see how we can take things forward. Repairability is not so much on the mind of clients. If you are lucky enough to speak with people in charge of maintenance, that it is very much part of the discussion. For example, this morning we presented a scheme to a museum and the maintenance person was in the meeting, so circular products do get the preference. We have recently finished a first circular project in which we have actively refurbished 70% of the equipment.”

Luminaire Recycling provider: “Designing and manufacturing new products to CE principles largely results in potential or future circularity. The circularity is only fully realised if/when the product is reworked or upgraded, which should be many years after supply. But the urgency of the climate crisis and the need to decarbonise now means we need circularity today.  An even better outcome is, where possible, to reuse and upgrade existing fittings, rather than replacing the entire fitting. Clearly upgrading with a high efficiency light source is essential to making this strategy deliver carbon savings.”

Contractor: “Contractors are inherently risk averse, so there is a conundrum of suggesting changes, which may not always be well received or could add time onto programmes and create more redesign work for the whole project team. We are putting processes in place from the tender stage to identify elements for reuse as early as possible and drive connections amongst projects internally and externally, to ensure luminaires are used for their intended purposes.”

We also tried to explore the reasons why a design originally made following CE principle may change, and which aspects can hinder its development:

Manufacturer: “In our experience, it’s the projects where the stakeholders, especially the lighting designers/architects and building owners, are looking to embed lower impact and circular principles from the outset of the project that are most likely to stay the course. it takes a committed team of stakeholders who back the approach, as different things need to be considered – like safe removal of equipment, transportation, and storage of equipment while other renovations happen. In some cases that barrier can be related to perception around remanufacturing, perhaps that it represents a less attractive/safe/reliable solution. These perceptions are often unjustified, with remanufacturers offering new warranties and by necessity with no difference in terms of safety, reliability, or compliance. It’s also true that, sometimes, the financial argument doesn’t stack up due to low numbers, in these cases the administrative costs associated with design, testing, compliance and the remanufacture taking legal responsibility for that product cannot be justified by the client.”

Lighting Designer: “The gap between circular design intent and delivery remains wide. Even when circular strategies are explored during concept design, they often fall away during procurement or value engineering. Clients and contractors tend to favour products with known lead times, warranties, and minimal perceived risk. Consequently, circular lighting options – particularly those involving remanufacturing or second-life products – can be seen as adding complexity or introducing liability. One key barrier is programme alignment. The timelines required to extract, inspect, and recertify existing luminaires often don’t fit neatly into fast-track construction programmes. Furthermore, remanufactured products rarely appear on approved supplier lists or design guides, limiting their uptake by main contractors and M&E consultants. We’ve also encountered resistance due to ambiguity around compliance, especially with emergency lighting and testing requirements. That said, the conversation is shifting. More clients are asking the right questions, and manufacturers are beginning to offer luminaires designed for multiple life cycles. But scaling this up will require structural change, not just design enthusiasm.”

Lighting Designer: “Costs and architectural design are the biggest barriers. In the end, most architects still prefer aesthetics over environmental impact. This is especially true for encapsulated products. In a recent project [7] we managed to install LED channels which can be repaired. Throughout the process we had to justify it, because it would be so much easier to use flexible LED tape, which cannot be repaired.”

Luminaire Recycling provider: “Reuse is more “circular” than replacing old fittings with new.  But all too often, reuse is not considered during a project. Reuse of the product that will be displaced by new product is frequently an afterthought. And by that time, it is almost always too late to ‘rehome’ or find another reuse option for that product. This just one of the reasons why it is better for designers to seek to reuse existing product rather than specifying new. It does require a different approach to creativity – a ‘creativity of constraint’. But we really do need that change if we are to embed circularity within our industry. We also need a change in the ‘standardisation’ and ‘perfection’ mindset when considering projects. Do we really need exactly the same fitting on every floor of a ten-storey building? Does every fitting need to be completely free of surface defects and blemishes? That standardisation and perfection is the enemy of circularity.”

Contractor: Reuse targets may be implemented from the concept stage, but aspirations can also be dropped later and be included in the contractor’s tender package around Stage 4. Supply and demand are not aligned in the current market; what compromises are the designers willing to take based on the level of risk and impact, to avoid major disruptions within the project? Which brings the most common barrier: time. The reuse market remains much slower than the conventional one (buying new and with guarantee of stock).

Finally, we asked which inputs would be useful to have from other stakeholders in the industry to facilitate the adoption of not just circular products but of circular business models:

Manufacturer: “With some exceptions, I believe it’s fair to say that for the most part it’s not common that original equipment manufacturer, or lighting design professionals, are still involved in a project after completion. It is very likely that maintenance team responsible for the installation will be reactive, fixing or even replacing luminaires as and when they fail. Planned collaborative efforts between stakeholders could lead to more circular projects with appropriately timed and planned interventions that maximise luminaire lifetime and keep lighting designs true to the original brief. While we already see the emergence of business models such as lighting as a service and guaranteed luminaire buyback schemes, I see potential for other manufacturer business models such as luminaire health checks at planned intervals. I also see the potential for through project lifetime professional lighting design consultancy services where lighting professionals can perhaps quantify lumen depreciation, and colour shift alongside surveys and advise on appropriate actions to keep schemes compliant and designs faithful to original intent.”

Lighting Designer: “To enable circular business models, we need aligned commitment across the value chain. From developers and landlords, we need clear client-side ambition – ideally written into the brief – to prioritise re-use and reduce embodied carbon. From manufacturers, we need transparency around product origins, disassembly protocols, and the availability of testing or re-certification services. From contractors, we need willingness to collaborate and a shift away from risk-averse procurement practices that default to “new equals safe.” Perhaps most of all, we need data: environmental, performance and cost benchmarks that demonstrate the tangible benefits of circular design in real terms. Only then can circularity be judged not as a well-meaning exception, but as a rational default.”

Lighting Designer: “The biggest hurdle is that operation / maintenance teams are mainly not part of the design teams. This attitude needs to change to make a difference.”

Luminaire Recycling provider: “As the electricity supply grid continues to decarbonise, so the role played by embodied carbon will become correspondingly larger. So, we need to see more commitments from purchasers, specifiers, and public procurement bodies to prioritise reuse over new, where this is technically feasible without compromise to energy efficiency.”

Contractor: Lighting designers should allow for less specialist areas to be open for reused luminaires. Manufacturers should have take-back and refurbishment services, map materials, and keep track of where their products end up. Local authorities should offer up safe storage space in case project timelines are crossing over. Projects should allow for more time so that more reuse options can be explored. The industry should collectively commit to minimise what goes in spaces (e.g. CAT A).

Conclusions

Without systemic and significant change, even the most “circular” product will follow the current linear model, and will end up being discarded when no longer needed within a project. If we are to realise the CE, we must start working out how we enable the various circular value loops.

This does not (only) come down to product design, and a single “one size fits all approach”; it does require business and approach change. Common themes that could support this have been highlighted by stakeholders in this article, including:

– Having an involved and engaged team in a project

– Incentivising client buy-in

– Planning maintenance efforts throughout the lifetime of the project

– Embedding flexibility in installations and allowing for “creative constraints”

– Supporting digitalisation efforts as a key opportunity for wider stakeholder involvement

But, most importantly, collaboration across industry is crucial – both within the lighting industry and with external stakeholders.

The dialogue is already open in the lighting industry and events such as the upcoming Circular Lighting Live 2025 conference or the 2050 Connected conference are a great opportunity to start exploring possibility across the value chain, to be able to overcome some of the barriers that separate the industry from a truly circular economy.

www.greenlight-alliance.com