The term 'circular building' has mainly become popular over the last years and is now widespread across architectural and building engineering – at least in Europe. With climate change high up on the political and corporate agenda and introduction of the European Unions' Green Deal, the identification of design criteria for 'circular building' is in demand. Numerous
approaches and projects have been proposed to develop evaluation criteria, ranging from sustainability rating systems (e.g., BREEAM and LEED), life cycle analysis methods, the Cradle to Cradle approach, Circular Building Service Companies (e.g., Oaplis and Werflink), research projects (e.g., BAMB, Facades leasing, FCRBE) and the European Waste Framework Directive
and Circular Economy Action Plan. Despite the proliferation of those knowledge resources, however, there is an apparent lack of technical criteria to what extent a 'circular building design' is characterized. The scientific literature is surprisingly scarce of clarifications, even though countless studies on reversible building design exist. This paper explores the apparent
discrepancy between professional and scientific use of the term 'circular building'. It suggests scientific design criteria based on commonly accepted circularity principles and environmental assessment modeling approaches. The paper answer a fundamental research question on the design criteria of a 'circular building' with an overarching aim to define robust indicators for their design and characterization.
