Aarne Savinainen, Kia Dillström, Ursula Salakka, Mari Hupponen, Mika Horttanainen
Report of the PlastLIFE project coordinated by the Finnish Environment Institute
Aarne Savinainen, Kia Dillström, Ursula Salakka, Mari Hupponen, Mika Horttanainen
Report of the PlastLIFE project coordinated by the Finnish Environment Institute
Challenges of Logistics and Legislation in the Recycling of Construction and Demolition Plastic Waste
Authors: Aarne Savinainen1), Kia Dillström1), Ursula Salakka1), Mari Hupponen1), Mika Horttanainen1)
1) Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology LUT, LUT School of Energy Systems, Sustainability Science
Co-funder: EU LIFE SIP - funding program
Publisher: Finnish Environment Institute (Syke), syke.fi/en
Cover photo: Adobe Stock
The online publication (pdf) is available in the internet: plastlife.fi (in English) > Circular economy research > Publications on the circular economy, and in Helda open repository (helda.helsinki.fi) Syke-hankkeiden julkaisuja -collection.
ISBN 978-952-11-5821-6 (pdf)
Year of issue: 2026
Challenges of logistics and legislation in the recycling of construction and demolition plastic waste
Plastics have long been widely utilized in the building and construction (B&C) sector in a great number of applications and consequently, masses of construction and demolition (C&D) plastic waste are generated annually in the European Union (EU) and Finland. Despite this, plastic contents in C&D waste are still relatively poorly studied. Additionally, as practices promoting linear economy have long been prevailing, there are currently many issues relating to C&D plastic recycling
The main purpose of this report was to identify and discuss the legislative and logistical challenges and barriers of C&D plastic recycling in the EU and Finland. The report was carried out in the form of literature review, and it provides a general overview on the current situation regarding C&D waste and its management in the EU and Finland.
The current legislative framework of the EU isn’t yet sufficient to create conditions for the markets to embrace secondary plastic materials instead of primary plastics. Some of the main challenges and barriers for the recycling of C&D plastic waste in the EU were identified to be lacking enforcement and implementation of the current legislation and policies, low taxation on both waste incineration and landfilling, the lack of EU-wide End-of-Waste (EoW) criteria, and insufficient recycling targets overlooking C&D plastics. Some of the challenges apply to Finland as well. The lack of regard for C&D plastics other than film plastics, lack of disincentive for incineration, slow progress in circularity measures and overlapping environmental legislation are among challenges hampering the recycling of C&D plastics in Finland.
In terms of logistical challenges and barriers, both the EU and Finland have struggled with the separate collection of C&D plastics, lack of treatment stations, and tracing, transparency and data issues relating to C&D plastic waste. In Finland, there is no strong culture for plastic recycling – let alone C&D plastic recycling – and distances between processing facilities are lengthy. Recycling especially demolition plastic waste is often very challenging or even not possible due to inaccessibility, dirtiness and contamination, cost of logistics, and lack of treatment and processing options.
Overall, there is a need for further research regarding plastics in the current European building stock, utilization and placement of plastics in new construction, plastics in C&D waste, and the cost of logistics in the C&D plastic recycling chain. However, despite all kinds of challenges and barriers, C&D plastic recycling shows great promise. With necessary research and legislative changes, planned construction, high level of plastic tracing, development of the existing and new technologies, and a broad cultural shift towards embracing circular economy of all plastics, high circularity of C&D plastics can be achieved both in the European Union and Finland
Keywords: construction, demolition, plastic waste, waste management, waste legislation, logistics of waste management
Tiivistelmä
Logistiset ja lainsäädännölliset haasteet rakennus- ja purkumuovijätteen kierrätyksessä
Muoveja on pitkään hyödynnetty useissa sovelluksissa rakennussektorilla, ja rakennus- ja purkumuovijätettä syntyykin suuria määriä vuosittain sekä Suomessa että Euroopan Unionin (EU) tasolla. Tästä huolimatta rakennus- ja purkujätteen muovisisältöä on tutkittu suhteellisen vähän. Lisäksi rakennus- ja purkumuovijätteen kierrätykseen liittyy tällä hetkellä monia ongelmia lineaaritalouden käytänteiden oltua pitkään valloillaan.
Tämän raportin pääasiallisena päämääränä oli tunnistaa ja tarkastella lainsäädännöllisiä ja logistisia haasteita sekä esteitä, jotka liittyvät rakennus- ja purkumuovijätteen kierrätykseen EU:ssa ja Suomessa. Raportti tehtiin kirjallisuuskatsauksena, ja se tarjoaa yleiskatsauksen rakennus- ja purkujätteeseen sekä sen hallintaan Suomessa ja EU-tasolla.
Nykyisellään EU-lainsäädäntö ei ole riittävä luomaan markkinaympäristöä, jossa kierrätysmuovit olisivat etulyöntiasemassa neitseellisiin muoveihin verrattuna. Muun muassa nykyisen lainsäädännön ja toimintaperiaatteiden puutteellinen toimeenpano, matala jätteenpoltto- ja kaatopaikkaverotus, EU-tason ei-enääjätettä (EEJ) -kriteerien puuttuminen sekä rakennus- ja purkumuovijätteen huomiotta jättäminen kierrätystavoitteissa tunnistettiin raportissa olennaisimmiksi haasteiksi ja esteiksi rakennus- ja purkumuovijätteen kierrätykselle EU:ssa, tietyin osin myös Suomen kohdalla. Lisäksi keskittyminen rakentamisen kalvomuoveihin, riittämättömät toimenpiteet jätteenpolton vähentämiseksi, kiertotalouden toimien hidas eteneminen, ja ympäristölainsäädännön päällekkäisyys hankaloittavat kierrättämistä Suomessa. Sekä EU:lla että Suomella on ollut vaikeuksia rakentamisen ja purkamisen muovijätteiden erilliskeräyksen kanssa. Tämän lisäksi muihin logistisiin ongelmiin kuuluvat jätteenkäsittelyasemien vähyys sekä seuranta-, läpinäkyvyys- ja dataongelmat. Suomessa ei ole vahvaa muovinkierrätyskulttuuria varsinkaan rakennus- ja purkumuoveille, ja muovijätteiden käsittelylaitosten väliset matkat ovat pitkiä. Saavutettavuusongelmat, likaisuus ja kontaminoituminen, logistiikan kustannukset sekä vähäiset käsittelymahdollisuudet tekevät erityisesti purkumuovijätteiden kierrättämisestä usein hyvin haastavaa tai jopa mahdotonta
Jatkotutkimusta tarvitaan nykyisen eurooppalaisen rakennuskannan muoveihin, uudisrakentamisen muovinkäyttöön, ja syntyvään rakennus- ja purkumuovijätteeseen liittyen, sekä rakennus- ja purkumuovijätteen arvoketjun logistiikan hinnan selvittämiseksi. Rakennus- ja purkumuovin kierrättämisellä on kuitenkin potentiaalia kaikista haasteista ja esteistä huolimatta. Olennaisen tutkimustyön ja lainsäädännöllisten muutosten, suunnitelmallisen rakentamisen, muovien korkean tason seurannan, olemassa olevien ja uusien teknologioiden kehityksen sekä laajan muovien kiertotaloutta tukevan kulttuurillisen muutoksen kautta sekä Suomessa että EU:ssa voidaan saavuttaa korkea-asteinen rakennus- ja purkumuovien kierto.
Asiasanat: rakentaminen, purkaminen, muovijäte, jätehuolto, jätelainsäädäntö, jätehuollon logistiikka
Abbreviations
ABS acrylonitrile butadiene styrene
B&C building and construction
ca. circa
C&D construction and demolition
CEAP circular economy action plan
ECVM European Council of Vinyl Manufacturers
EEA European Environment Agency
EoW (EEJ) End-of-Waste (ei-enää-jätettä)
EPS expanded polystyrene
EU European Union
HDPE high-density polyethylene
HIPS high-impact polystyrene
HVAC heating, ventilation and air conditioning
ICIS Independent Commodity Intelligence Services
kt kilotonne
LDPE low-density polyethylene
LLDPE linear low-density polyethylene
MDPE medium-density polyethylene
Mt megatonne
NIR near infrared
PA polyamide
PC polycarbonate
PE polyethylene
PEX cross-linked polyethylene
PF phenolic foam
PIR polyisocyanurate
PMMA polymethyl methacrylate
PP polypropylene
PS polystyrene
PUR polyurethane
PVC polyvinyl chloride
SAN styrene acrylonitrile
SBS styrene butadiene styrene
UHMWPE ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene
ULDPE ultra-low-density polyethylene
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
VLDPE very low-density polyethylene
WFD Waste Framework Directive
XPS extruded polystyrene
The building and construction (B&C) sector is responsible for over a fifth of total enduse of plastic in Europe (Plastics Europe 2024, 49). Vast amounts of plastics of various sorts and forms are embedded into buildings, used and mixed with traditional construction materials, and utilized as packaging. Sooner or later, all this plastic is ending up as waste. Despite this, not a lot of comprehensive studies concerning plastic in construction and demolition (C&D) waste have been made.
Plastics are a multi-purpose material, and different types of plastics are widely used in B&C making the sector the second largest end-user of plastic in Europe and responsible for over 20% of all plastic use (Plastics Europe 2024) Due to the versatile material properties – including advantageous mechanical and insulation properties as well as durability and chemical resistance – plastics offer great utility in a variety of B&C applications (Pimentel Real 2022, 35)
In buildings, plastics are utilized in electrical, thermal and acoustic insulation, piping and ducts, fenestration, and in numerous other, often not visible, applications (Pimentel Real 2022, 35–36; Plastics Europe 2024, 100) Plastics can also be found in glues, varnishes, some paints, cushioning and several appliances (Häkkinen, Kuittinen & Vares 2019, 7). Additionally, a wide range of plastics can be mixed with other more conventional materials for construction purposes (Lamba et al. 2022).
Globally, plastics are used in B&C at a growing rate (Santos, Esmizadeh & Riahinezhad 2024, 479) While end-user consumption in the European B&C sector has slightly decreased in the past years (Plastics Europe 2024, 63), total annual plastic mass derived from building demolition and renovation is projected to grow significantly in the coming decades along with the increased activity of these practices (Cristóbal García et al. 2024, 17–18).
Several studies on C&D waste exist, but studies specifically concentrating on the plastic amounts and the range of polymers in C&D waste are few (Santos et al. 2024, 481). Depending on the regional scope, plastic content in C&D waste can vary greatly (Damgaard et al. 2022; Liikanen et al. 2018), and identification of plastics from a waste stream can prove to be challenging and uncertain (Lahtela, Hyvärinen & Kärki 2019). There is an urgent need for more research on the matter as plastics have become more prevalent in the B&C sector.
Both Finland and the European Union have ambitious goals for circularity with B&C sector being a key focus area (Ministry of the Environment 2021; European Commission n.d.a) Achieving the characteristics of a circular economy in the European B&C sector would require large-scale transition. Although plastic recycling from C&D waste has been increasing, recycling rates are still low and virgin materials still dominate the plastic markets (Plastics Europe 2024, 58, 86–87)
In 2023, the construction industry generated 12.6 million tonnes (Mt) of waste in Finland alone (Statistics Finland 2024a). The approach for C&D plastic waste has been energy recovery with limited focus on more preferrable alternatives such as recycling (Kiviranta & Hakala 2021; Ylä-Mononen & Alkio 2022,
28) In 2022, only 24% of post-consumer plastics from the B&C sector was recycled in Finland with the rest directed to energy recovery through incineration (Plastics Europe 2024, 87). However, there is a gradual shift in the approach as new measures for improving circularity are being implemented (YläMononen & Alkio 2022, 29).
A high percentage of C&D plastic waste is theoretically recyclable, but there are several challenges slowing down improvements in recycling rates (Santos et al. 2024). To facilitate better recycling/utilization rate of C&D plastic waste in general, it is important to identify and characterize different types of plastics used in the B&C sector and point out challenges that act as barriers for better circularity This report aims to contribute to these objectives with Finland and the EU as a regional scope and with a specific focus on challenges arising with logistics and legislation regarding the recycling of C&D plastic waste.
The research questions of this report are:
• What types of plastics are used in the B&C sector?
• How much plastic waste is derived from C&D activities and what polymers are common in C&D waste?
• What kind of challenges are related to the current legislative and policy framework concerning C&D plastic waste recycling in the European Union and Finland?
• What kind of challenges are related to the logistics of recycling C&D plastic waste in the European Union and Finland?
This study - literature review, done mainly in the summer of 2025 - was funded by the Rethinking Plastics in a Sustainable Circular Economy (PlastLIFE) project (LIFE21-IPE-FI-PlastLIFE). The PlastLIFE project was co-funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or CINEA. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. PlastLIFE is a Finnish plastic circularity project developing measures to create a sustainable national circular economy around plastics. The project involves a total of 17 parties in 2025, including the Finnish Environment Institute, Finnish Ministry of the Environment, the city of Helsinki, multiple universities and universities of applied sciences, and others such as industry actors. (Kiertotalousratkaisuja 2025.)
Plastics have become an essential part of construction with a variety of polymers utilized in a multitude of applications. They offer an inexpensive, versatile material with useful properties and potential for reducing the environmental burden of the B&C industry.
Today, plastics are a widely trusted material in the B&C industry, and they are used both as a replacement and a complement to more traditional construction materials (Agarwal & Gupta 2017, 635). Plastic use in buildings is diverse, and the purpose of a polymer can range from a supporting auxiliary (e.g. an adhesive) to a structural application (e.g. a polymer composite) (Santos et al. 2024, 480).
From the outside, the most visible plastic application in buildings is the outer layer, plastic siding or cladding. These can be used in place of more traditional cladding materials, such as wood, brick or aluminium. In addition to the impact on the appearance of a building, plastic sidings provide protection from weather elements such as rain and changing temperatures. (Agarwal & Gupta 2017, 635.) Plastic rainwater gutters also assist in preventing the accumulation of water (Plastics Europe 2024, 100).
Plastics offer great utility in thermal, acoustic, and electrical insulation. Plastics are known for their low thermal conductivity, and most plastics are also water resistant. Insulation applications can be found all over a building as they are used in walls, basement, attic and roofing. Many roofing systems include a polymer-based membrane which protect other roof structures from the outside weather, but in newer buildings roofing plastics are also designed to minimize heat transfer in the pursuit of elevated energyefficiency Plastics are added to walls in forms of panels, wraps and films to provide water and air leakage proofing. A variety of plastics, both thermoplastics and thermosets, are excellent electrical insulators as well, and they are widely used as wire and cable insulation. (Agarwal & Gupta 2017, 636–638, 640.)
Plastics excel also in piping and tubing systems. Pipes have traditionally been made of metallic materials like copper, steel or aluminium, but metal pipes are susceptible to rusting and corrosion. This, however, isn’t the case with plastic pipes as they are nonconductive. Non-plastic piping can also have an issue with leak-prone pipe connections while plastic-based pipe systems can be created with minimal and nearly seamless connective parts. Overall, plastic piping systems offer suitable properties while being cost-competitive, well maintainable and if needed, easily replaceable. (Agarwal & Gupta 2017, 644.)
Favourable properties such as light weight, impact and shatter resistance and self-standing ability have made plastics an attractive option in glass-glazing applications. Additionally, plastic glazing offers improved insulation due to lower thermal conductivity which supports the efforts for creating a more energyefficient building stock Plastics are also used in window profiles, doors and to replace wood in decks, fences, and railings which reduces hazardous chemical use that is necessary for some wooden applications (Agarwal & Gupta 2017, 642–643, 646.)
A variety of polymers can be mixed with other materials to produce construction bricks, blocks and tiles Also, concrete mixtures for road construction can contain varying amounts and types of plastic Plastic use in construction products is a way to divert plastic waste from landfills and reduce the environmental impact of the construction industry. (Lamba et al. 2022 ) Plastics are also used in e.g. pillars, barriers, base plates and traffic cones (Plastics Europe 2024, 100).
Film plastic use in packaging, covering and protecting purposes (Chauhan, Peltokorpi & Seppänen 2023, 510) is a significant part of plastic use in B&C. Different film and packaging plastics are the easiest to recycle (Zhu et al. 2022, 33) and especially packaging waste is produced in high volumes in construction and renovation sites (Santos et al. 2024, 480).
In Europe, some of most used plastic types in B&C include
• polyvinyl chloride (PVC),
• polyethylene (PE) in forms such as high- (HDPE), low- (LDPE), linear low-density- (LLDPE) and cross-linked polyethylene (PEX),
• polystyrene (PS), often in the forms of expanded (EPS) and extruded (XPS) polystyrene,
• polyurethane (PUR), and
• polypropylene (PP) (zu Castell-Rüdenhausen 2025; Plastics Europe 2024, 53; Santos et al. 2024, 480; SYSTEMIQ 2022, 22; Laitinen et al. 2022, 13).
In 2020, total plastic demand of the construction sector in the European Union and the United Kingdom was 10.3 Mt In terms of mass, the most significant polymer in the market was PVC which accounted for 3.7 Mt of the demand. PVC was followed by polyolefins and styrenics with demands of 2.8 Mt and 1.4 Mt, respectively. Other plastics in the market together amounted for 2.6 Mt. Mentioned figures are rounded values (SYSTEMIQ 2022, 22).
Polyolefins are a polymer group consisting of different types of PE, and PP (Plastics Europe n.d.; Soares & McKenna 2012). PS, EPS and XPS, acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and styrene acrylonitrile (SAN) form the group of styrenics (Styrenics n.d.a). As a note, the figures used as a source for plastic demand (SYSTEMIQ 2022, 22) seem to only include PS and PS foam (EPS and XPS) panels in the category of styrenics
Other polymers used in B&C include in no specific order e.g. phenolic foam (PF), polyisocyanurate (PIR), polyamide (PA), polycarbonate (PC), and polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) (Plastics Europe 2024, 53; SYSTEMIQ 2022, 91; Schiavoni et al. 2016). In table 1, a non-exhaustive list of B&C polymers is presented along with their respective example use purposes.
Table 1. Examples of polymers used in B&C with their respective use purposes.
Polymer Use purposes
PVC
PE (e.g. HDPE, LDPE, LLDPE, PEX)
flooring, window and door profiles, cables, roofing, pipes and fittings, sidings, membranes and films, packaging
films (HDPE, LDPE, LLDPE), piping (HDPE, PEX) and tubing (LDPE), cables (HDPE, LDPE), heavyduty bags (LDPE, LLDPE)
PS (e.g. EPS, XPS) insulation, packaging, road construction (EPS)
PUR insulation, furniture, covering
PP piping, carpet fibres, packaging
ABS & SAN piping and fittings (ABS), packaging (ABS), covering (SAN)
PF insulation
PIR insulation
PA roofing, cladding, gratings, carpets, tubing, coating, packaging, road and structure construction
Source
Salminen et al. 2025; ECVM 2024; VinylPlus 2024; UNEP 2023
UNEP 2023; Phillips, Whelton & Eckelman 2021; Plastics Europe n.d.
Schiavoni et al. 2016; Styrenics n.d.b
de Souza, Kahol & Gupta 2021; Schiavoni et al. 2016
UNEP 2023; Plastics Europe n.d.
Deshmukh et al. 2024; Satterthwaite 2017; Styrenics n.d.c
Schiavoni et al. 2016
Schiavoni et al. 2016
Tamošaitienė et al. 2024; Rayjadhav et al. 2024; Santos et al. 2024
PC windows, fenestration, sheds, roofing, walls, insulation Mohammed, Menkabo & Budaiwi 2023
PMMA windows, fenestration, carpets
Santos et al. 2024; Zheng et al. 2023
PVC is the most used polymer in the European B&C sector (Plastics Europe 2024, 53). PVC is 57% chlorine by molecular weight (VinylPlus 2024, 65) and its favourable properties include e.g. resistance of water and solvents and from tearing (UNEP 2023; Tamošaitienė et al. 2024, 7).
PE is used in the B&C sector in multiple types The basic types of PE can be classified as
• ultra-low- (ULDPE with a density of 0.890–0.905 g/cm3),
• very low- (VLDPE; 0.905–0.915 g/cm3),
• linear low- (LLDPE; 0.915–0.935 g/cm3),
• low- (LDPE; 0.915–0.935 g/cm3),
• medium- (MDPE; 0.926–0.940 g/cm3), and
• high-density polyethylene (HPDE; 0.940–0.970 g/cm3) with ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) usually having a tenfold molecular weight compared to HPDE (McKeen 2023, 514).
The classification of basic PE types may have variance between different sources regarding density ranges and grouping (McKeen 2023, 514; Soares & McKenna 2012, 22–24; Plastics Europe n.d.) and for example, a classification of HDPE, LDPE and LLDPE is used (Plastics Europe n.d.). HDPE is a durable polymer with a high strength-to-density ratio, and it is harder than LDPE which is light and flexible (UNEP 2023, 11–12; Plastics Europe n.d.) Both HDPE and LDPE have great cold and impact resistance (UNEP 2023, 11–12). LLDPE is a very elastic polymer and stretches when put under stress (Plastics Europe n.d).
By cross-linking either HDPE or MDPE, another popular polyethylene-based polymer in B&C, PEX, is made (Phillips, Whelton & Eckelman 2021) As previously mentioned, different types of PE belong to the group of polyolefins along with another commonly used polymer, PP (Soares & McKenna 2012; Plastics Europe n.d.) In PP, light weight is combined with heat, water and chemical resistance (UNEP 2023).
Different types of polystyrenes are among the most used polymers in B&C, especially for insulation. PS is a hard and light polymer which doesn’t perform well under high mechanical stress If PS is blended with rubber, high-impact polystyrene (HIPS) is created. HIPS isn’t necessarily a B&C polymer but is commonly found in electrical and electronic appliance casings, houseware and packaging. (zu CastellRüdenhausen 2025, 2.)
PS can easily be expanded and thermoformed (UNEP 2023), and foamed PS polymers – EPS and XPS –are popular in insulation applications (Schiavoni et al. 2016, 993; Styrenics n.d.b). The structural build of EPS and XPS differ and regarding mechanical properties, XPS often has the advantage (Styrenics n.d.b) XPS also has a lower moisture absorption rate and a higher specific heat value, but otherwise, their insulation properties are of the same quality (Schiavoni et al. 2016, 993) Additionally, the two are used as packaging materials with EPS having utility in road construction as well (Styrenics n.d.b)
PUR is widely used in B&C as thermal insulation and in furniture applications. In PURs, favourable mechanical properties are combined with low density, and they are available as both flexible and rigid forms. (de Souza et al. 2021, 13.) For insulation purposes, PUR has utility both as an expanded insulation foam and as a material for panels and pipe sections (Schiavoni et al. 2016, 993). PUR can also be used to cover different kinds of surfaces and shapes as a spray foam (de Souza et al. 2021, 13–14).
ABS and SAN constitute to a relatively small part of plastic use in B&C (Plastics Europe 2024, 53). ABS polymers are made by compounding SAN with a thermoplastic rubber created via polymerization of styrene and acrylonitrile. Favourable properties of ABS polymers include e.g. impact resistance, dimensional stability and usability even in low temperatures. (Satterthwaite 2017, 318.)
In addition to PUR, EPS, and XPS, PF and PIR are among main insulation materials used in B&C. PF is denser compared to other plastic foams but has a specific heat value comparable to PIR and PUR and thermal conductivity similar to PIR. PIR materials are known for their superior fire resistance among foam polymers, and they have lower thermal conductivity compared to PUR. (Schiavoni et al. 2016, 993.)
PAs – or nylons – are lightweight plastics known for their great thermal, mechanical and chemical properties (Rayjadhav et al. 2024, 408). PAs and polyamide fibers have wide range of applications in the B&C sector (Tamošaitienė et al. 2024, 8; Santos et al. 2024, 480; Rayjadhav et al. 2024, 413–415).
PC is a useful polymer in B&C due to its e.g. durability, transparency, lightness, and fire, heat and ultraviolet resistance (Fukuoka et al. 2019, 145; Moretti et al. 2018, 407) Because of the thermal resistance and insulation properties, the use of PC as a window material is becoming more common especially in hot climates to save energy that would otherwise be used for cooling (Mohammed et al. 2023, 955)
PMMA – or acrylic – is also used as an alternative to glass structures in B&C due to its favourable properties. PMMA is light, has favourable thermal and acoustic insulation properties, and compared to glass,
has a higher visible light transmittance and doesn’t have a high risk for spontaneous shattering However, PMMA structures are more susceptible to scratching and deformation (Zheng et al. 2023, 1.)
Generally, plastic quantities in B&C are challenging to estimate accurately due to plastic being incorporated in buildings with some types of plastic applications having a lifetime up to 80 or even 100 years (Santos et al. 2024, 481; Gardner 2020, 7). As the lifetime can be extensive, efforts should be directed to assessing sale and waste stream analysis data from past decades in addition to documentation of current usage to estimate volumes of plastics in the building stock and identify possible future C&D plastic waste streams (Gardner 2020, 7). It has been estimated that the share of plastics in an average building in EU is 0.2% of total mass (Material Economics 2018, 143), with the quantity of plastics in a building depending on the building products, construction methods and the type of the building (Chauhan et al. 2023, 511)
Plastic amounts in buildings have been estimated to an extent, and with a growing focus in C&D plastics in Finland, there has been an effort to better understand the nature and volume of plastics in the Finnish building stock In late 2022, the Finnish Ministry of the Environment published a study (Laitinen et al. 2022) where an initial assessment of demolition plastics in Finnish public service buildings is made In the study, Laitinen et al. (2022) roughly estimate both the amount of demolition plastic (mostly that which could be recycled) and the polymer composition of the plastic in the buildings
The results of Laitinen et al.’s study (2022) don’t represent the actual amount of plastic in the assessed building stock. The scope of the study leaves out a significant number of applications with plastic content, e.g. paints, some plastic coverings, adhesives, and plastic components like underfloor heating pipes that are embedded in concrete and aren’t dismountable. Additionally, there is an assumption that no renovation has been made for the stock after construction, which isn’t accurate in reality. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 40.)
Regardless, Laitinen et al. (2022) suggest that the sample building stock of 17.3 million m2 – public service buildings built in the 1970s, -80s and -90s – contains approximately 120 kilotonnes (kt) of demolition plastics. Plastic amounts in different building types range from 5 to 11 kg/m2 depending on the decade of construction. A trend of slight increase in plastic use per m2 through the decades was noticed and PVC was estimated to be the most abundant polymer with a share of 55% of all plastics followed by EPS (19%), PE (including HDPE, LDPE, PEX etc.) (9%), PP (8%), PUR (6%) and styrene butadiene styrene (SBS) (3%). (Laitinen et al. 2022.)
In addition to polymer amounts, Laitinen et al. (2022) estimated demolition plastic amounts in selected building elements. 58 kt of demolition plastic was approximated to be in surface materials (e.g. flooring), accounting for 48% of all plastic estimated. The study also suggests that 17% of demolition plastic is in foundations (e.g. frost insulation) and 11% in structural frames (e.g. exterior wall and roof insulation). The plastic distribution between polymers and building elements is presented in Figure 1 A modelling tool that was developed in the study can be used by public property owners and demolition contractors to obtain estimates for plastic content and plastic types in buildings. (Laitinen et al. 2022.)
Figure 1. Estimation of demolition plastic amounts in Finnish public service buildings (built in 1970s, -80s and 90s) per selected polymers and building elements [kt] (modified from Laitinen et al. 2022).
Another study published by the Ministry of the Environment (Häkkinen et al. 2019) examined eight residential buildings and three daycare centres in Finland completed during 2007 to 2015. The plastic amount in the buildings ranged from 6 to 28 kg per gross surface area (m2) with 58–79% of the plastics been embedded into the buildings during the initial phases of their construction (Häkkinen et al. 2019). Considering both construction and replacing phases, the share of plastics used in the buildings was found to be well under 1% (Häkkinen et al. 2019), in line with the estimation of an average building in the EU (Material Economics 2018, 143)
Häkkinen et al. (2019) identified the most common plastic types in the examined buildings to be PVC, PUR, HDPE, PP and EPS. It was found that plastics were distributed relatively evenly in the examined residential buildings while coverings, underground structures, and building service installations were noted to have elevated plastic content in the daycare centres Regarding different types of building parts, electrical parts had by far the most plastic relative to their total weight with a share of 45–68% depending on the building type. Plumbing and HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) related components were the second most plastic-intensive category with a plastic share of 9–28%. They also discovered that in the examined residential buildings, plastics such as reinforcement in boards or binders in paints and glues constituted approximately 40% of all plastics. (Häkkinen et al. 2019.)
There are also studies done in other EU countries. Kleemann et al. (2016) investigated the material composition of several building types before demolition with four case studies in Vienna, Austria. The oldest examined building was completed in 1859 and the newest in 2003 and the plastic content in the buildings varied from 0.1 to 5.1 kg/m3 gross volume The general trend in the examined buildings was that newer ones had relatively more plastics than the older ones The highest plastic content was estimated to be in a reinforced concrete hospital building – the newest of the sample buildings – and the lowest in an industrial production building from 1900 made from steel and bricks (Kleemann et al. 2016.)
Just recently, a dynamic material flow analysis was conducted through a simulation to estimate the historical plastic stocks and flows in the German building and infrastructure sector. The simulation was run for the years 1950 through 2023 and it also provides data for contamination regarding 12 legacy substance categories. The analysis covers eight polymer categories, and common plastic applications utilized in buildings and infrastructure: profiles, flooring, piping, insulation, cables and film plastics. (Schmidt et al. 2025a.)
According to the simulation by Schmidt et al. (2025b), the largest plastic stock in German buildings and infrastructure is tied to pipes with well over 20 Mt. By far the most abundant polymers in the current pipe stock are PVC and PE with PE seeing a more pronounced increase as a piping material from the two in the past few decades. The simulation suggests that cables contain the second highest plastic mass with close to 20 Mt of PVC, PE and other polymers. The third most plastic is in insulation: over 11 Mt by which over half is in the form of EPS. (Schmidt et al. 2025b.)
Even though C&D is one of the major plastic waste sources (Pierri et al. 2024, 32), generally, there is a lack of knowledge on volumes of plastic in C&D waste (Lahtela et al. 2019). Plastics seem to account for only a minor share in total C&D waste generation on a national level (Damgaard et al. 2022), but individual mixed C&D waste streams may contain relatively high amounts of different polymers (Liikanen et al. 2018). To form a better understanding on the matter, gathering more information about the availability, properties and recyclability of C&D plastic waste is important.
C&D waste is generated during construction, renovation and demolition activities of a given building or another structure, and during earth and hydraulic engineering (Suomi.fi 2025). C&D waste often consists of various material fractions, plastics being one of them. C&D plastic waste is usually a mixture of plastics in different forms, shapes and sizes with divergence in generation tendencies between B&C activity phases (Santos et al. 2024, 480). The lifetime of plastic applications in C&D waste vary greatly with some becoming waste right after serving their purpose on construction sites (e.g. packaging) and others having been embedded in buildings for decades (e.g. piping) (Santos et al. 2024, 481; Gardner 2020, 7)
During construction activities, plastic waste is generated in the form of films (e.g. packaging and protective films), scraps, cutoffs (Santos et al. 2024, 480; Ministry of the Environment n.d.a) and surplus plastic products (Salminen et al. 2020, 5) Film plastics are the most common form of plastic waste in construction and renovation sites (Ministry of the Environment n.d.a). Easily recyclable plastic packaging makes up about 80% of the total plastic waste generation in construction (Santos et al. 2024, 481)
In demolition activities, plastic waste emerges from the demolished structures and plastic packaging waste generation is close to non-existent (Santos et al. 2024, 481). Overall, the most common plastic parts in C&D waste are pipes and fittings, insulation materials, sheeting and tarps, window frames and doors, and flooring materials (Pierri et al. 2024, 65). Per mass unit, mixed construction waste is estimated to contain considerably more plastics than mixed demolition waste (Salminen et al. 2025, 21).
The loss rate of plastic materials in construction activities isn’t widely known. It is often assumed that 10% of all input materials during construction are lost to waste, but the rate isn’t likely to be accurate for every material category as the assumption is essentially made with a lack of reliable information. According to a Dutch National building product database, plastics have an average loss rate of 4.2% during construction in the Netherlands, which is likely to be a more accurate estimation for EU countries than the rate of 10%. (Damgaard et al. 2022, 71–72.)
All stages of work in a construction site generate film plastic waste with some variance in intensity with the packaging of products, materials and equipment being a major source of waste (Ramboll 2020, 7). A case study (Pericot et al. 2014) assessing ten residential building works in Madrid, Spain found that in
Mediterranean traditional construction, the generation of plastic packaging waste was relatively steady especially when working on structures, partitions and finishes. Plastic films used for covering construction materials on pallets were identified of having a major share in generated plastic packaging waste. (Pericot et al. 2014, 1937.) Film plastic waste from construction tends to be of high quality despite accumulated impurities. Also, it is often almost free of labels and made from thick LDPE which contributes to a high demand from recyclers. (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2022, 23.)
Some studies have been conducted to determine plastic amounts in C&D waste. Liikanen et al. (2018) analysed the composition of six mixed C&D waste loads (a total of 1951 kg) in the Southern Karelia region in Finland. The masses of the waste loads varied significantly (from 131 kg to 883 kg), and the average composition of the wastes was determined by normalizing each load to 100 kg The results show that plastics had an 18% share in the wastes. (Liikanen et al. 2018.)
Liikanen et al. (2018) divided plastics in the mixed waste loads into three categories: non-PVC hard plastics, film plastics and PVC. Non-PVC hard plastics represented the largest portion in plastic waste with a share of ca. 72%, followed by film plastics and PVC with shares of ca. 22 and 6%, respectively (Liikanen et al. 2018) A thing to note is that the waste loads analysed in the study most likely originated from residential construction sites and demolition sites (Ministry of the Environment 2020, 13)
In another Finnish study, Lahtela et al. (2019) analysed two C&D plastic waste streams (86.1 kg and 57.7 kg) and a sample batch (1.1 kg) from the second stream to specifically identify the polymer composition of the wastes Plastics from the first stream were manually separated whereas for the other stream and the sample taken from it, mechanical separation by optical sensors was implemented. The analysis of polymer composition was made by near infrared (NIR) technology. In the first stream, the most abundant polymers were ABS (share of 34% of plastics), PP (21%), PVC (10%) and PA (9%) PP (48%), PE (28%) and PS (6%) appeared most often in the second stream. The composition of the sample batch consisting of smaller-sized particles was mostly alike to the second stream; largest differences appeared in the masses of ABS and PE. (Lahtela et al. 2019.)
Notably in Lahtela et al.’s study (2019), one item by itself contributed to almost all of ABS content in the first stream and without it, PP would’ve been the most abundant polymer of the stream. Also, a large amount of initially classified plastic material from the first stream was left out of the analysis since it could not be verified as plastic for certain. It was concluded that human influence and motivation is a significant factor in manual separation of plastics from C&D waste. (Lahtela et al. 2019.)
Kleemann et al. (2017) estimated the quantity and material composition of demolition waste from buildings in Vienna using a method of change detection based on image matching. Based on the results of the study, they raised doubts on data-based demolition waste statistics. In their assessment, the total annual volume of demolition waste in Vienna reached 2.8 million m3, whereas demolition statistics propose a waste volume of 1.7 million m3 The writers argue that figures purely based on statistical data are likely to underestimate actual waste amounts. (Kleemann et al. 2017.)
Based on the method used in Kleemann et al.’s study (2017), one year of demolition activity in Vienna would’ve resulted in 490 tonnes of PVC, 190 tonnes of PS, and 630 tonnes of “various plastics”. Compared to demolition waste statistics based on the average yield from 2013 and 2014, the generation of the three plastics would have been 58%, 46% and 31% larger, respectively. However, plastic share in total demolition waste volume would have decreased from 0.14% to 0.12%. (Kleeman et al. 2017.)
Looking outside of Europe, Cha et al. (2020) examined the recycling potential of demolition waste from different building structures in South Korea and alongside, surveyed demolition waste generation for different waste fractions. The sample size was over a thousand demolished residential buildings, and the investigated building structure types were reinforced concrete, concrete-brick, masonry-block and wood. Demolition plastic waste generation rate was the highest in reinforced concrete structures with 34.9 kg/m2
followed by masonry-block (21.9 kg/m2), concrete-brick (18.2 kg/m2) and lastly, wooden structures (5.2 kg/m2). In terms of kg/m2, reinforced concrete structure waste had a plastic share of 2.1% while masonryblock, concrete-brick and wooden structure waste contained 1.9, 1.2 and 0.6% plastics, respectively. (Cha et al. 2020.)
On a national to supra-national level, plastics don’t seem to hold a major share in C&D waste. According to a broad investigation (Damgaard et al. 2022) on European C&D waste generation and composition with over 90 reports and articles as a source, the total C&D waste generation in EU27 countries (when excluding soil, track ballast, dredging spoils and asphalt) accounts for approximately 280 Mt. Among EU Member States, an average plastic share in C&D waste is 0.2% (as a share of the total per capita C&D waste amounts) based on reported and partly revised waste data. (Damgaard et al. 2022, 15, 23–31.)
Notably, there is great difference between EU countries regarding reported plastic content in C&D waste as plastic shares range from zero up to 3.9%. However, some values might not represent plastic shares accurately, e.g. the value of 3.9% for Poland could be considered a result of improper reporting and/or sorting of the waste. Generally, available data for C&D waste is a representation of C&D management practices rather than an accurate picture of the material composition of the waste. (Damgaard et al. 2022, 26–32, 35).
Finland has received criticism for its practices on reporting C&D waste, with e.g. a high level of aggregation and uncertainty harming data quality (Damgaard et al. 2022, 18, 21, 43). According to Statistics Finland (2024b), the Finnish construction sector generated ca. 10.7–15.7 Mt of waste yearly during the years 2017 and 2023. Statistics Finland doesn’t provide statistics about the division of waste generation between new construction, renovation and demolition, and neither does it publish statistics specifically about C&D plastic waste If needed, there would be way to calculate the annual C&D (including also infrastructure construction) plastic waste generation with some limitations utilizing a database maintained by the Ministry of the Environment (Kujansuu 2025.)
Even though it would be possible to estimate the annual C&D plastic waste generation to a degree, there has been a lack of a comprehensive database system in Finland (Ministry on Environment 2020, 13). Overall, there is little monitoring regarding plastic generation in Finnish construction sites as of now with traceability of plastics being a problem as well (Laitinen et al. 2022, 19; Ministry on Environment 2020, 13). However, at the beginning of 2025, a new database called Rapu for C&D waste monitoring was established to respond to the legislative reform (environment.fi 2025)
Mixed C&D waste generation in Finland and the plastic content of the waste has been estimated through waste accounting. According to the results, 519 kt of mixed C&D waste was generated in the country in 2019. Construction was responsible for ca. 308 kt of the generated waste while the rest, ca. 211 kt came from demolition activities. The mixed C&D waste fraction was estimated to have 47 kt of C&D plastic waste (excluding plastic packaging) in it; 28 kt coming from construction and 19 kt from demolition. However, there are no official statistics regarding these waste fractions. (Salminen et. al 2025, 21, 92.)
There is a project under way that aims to model Finnish plastic flows in a comprehensive manner, covering the whole Finnish national economy. The project goes by the name STAR, and it runs through 2023–2026. (Finnish Environment Institute 2025.) Project results with C&D plastic waste flows integrated are expected to be compiled during the years 2025 and 2026. In August 2025, the C&D plastic waste calculations are a work in progress. (Haahti 2025.)
Although uncertainties and a lack of awareness regarding the generation and composition of C&D plastic waste exist, some polymer types occur more frequently in C&D waste than others. According to Plastics Europe and Conversio (2018), the most usual polymer types in post-consumer B&C waste generated in the EU28+2 (the 28 EU Member States, Norway, and Switzerland) in 2018 were PVC, HDPE, EPS, PP and LDPE. The respective amounts of generation of these polymers in 2018 are presented in Figure 2.
PVC is by far the most abundant polymer in European C&D waste, accounting for 52% of total postconsumer C&D plastic waste in 2018 Other polymers have much more moderate to low shares as the second most occurring polymer, HDPE, constitutes for 13% of the total generated waste amount. (Plastics Europe & Conversio 2018.)
What is interesting about the annual waste figures is that they are very different to the plastic demand in B&C. In 2018, 1.8 Mt of C&D plastic waste was generated in EU28+2 (Plastics Europe & Conversio 2018) and in 2022, the construction sector in EU27+1 (the 27 EU Member States and the United Kingdom) had a demand of 10.3 Mt of plastics (SYSTEMIQ 2022, 22). Possible reasons for this are
• the extensive lifetime of many plastic applications,
• annual construction rates being considerably higher than demolition rates (Damgaard et al. 2022, 54, 55), and
• the increased plastic share in some B&C applications. Perhaps the most notable thing in the figures is the discrepancy between the shares of PVC in total demand and waste generation, 36% and 52%, respectively. Interestingly, the share of PVC in European C&D plastic waste in 2018 is very similar to share of PVC in total plastic demand for the Western European construction sector in 1995 (APPRICOD 2006, 13) which was 55%. The sector’s consumption of selected polymers and plastic products is presented in Figure 3.
Lining
Profiles
Floor and wall coverings
Fitted furniture
Windows
Insulation
Pipes and ducts
Figure 3. Consumption of selected plastic products and polymers in the B&C sector in Western Europe in 1995 [kt] (modified from APPRICOD 2006, 13).
PVC excluded, the use and waste shares for other polymers seems to be quite alike in the recent figures. Overall, the consumption patterns of both past and present are relevant in predicting the amount and polymer content of C&D plastic waste generated today.
There are significant differences in the waste management practices of plastics derived from the B&C sector in European countries. Within the EU27+3 countries (the 27 EU countries and Norway, Switzerland and the United Kingdom), recycling rates of post-consumer plastics from B&C ranged from 0 to 40% in 2022 with the average being just over 17% 30% of the waste was directed to landfills and the rest, 52%, was incinerated. (Plastics Europe 2024, 83, 87.)
In Greece, Latvia, Cyprus and Malta, 100% of considered plastics are landfilled while Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Luxemburg, Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland have banned landfilling altogether. Although recycling of post-consumer B&C plastic waste has increased by over 33% in the EU between 2018 and 2022, the most prevalent trend in the EU has been the increase in incineration: in four years, energy recovery increased by 50%. Landfilling saw an increase as well as the practice grew by 40% in the same time frame. (Plastics Europe 2024, 86–87.)
In the EU 27+3 countries, plastic B&C applications had a recycled content of 30% in 2022. Most of it was attained via mechanical recycling with share of over 99% of manufactured recycled plastics. (Plastics Europe 2024, 54.) Compared to an average B&C plastic application, B&C film plastics have a higher average recycled content – 49 % in Europe in 2020 (Plastic Recyclers Europe & ICIS 2023, 30–31). The B&C sector, along with packaging, had the largest increase in post-consumer recycled content out of all sectors with a jump of 1 Mt between 2018 and 2022 (Plastics Europe 2024, 59)
In 2018, PVC was the most (mechanically) recycled B&C polymer in EU28+2 in both absolute and relative terms. 309 kilotonnes of post-consumer PVC waste derived from B&C activities was recycled, resulting in a recycling rate of 34%. LDPE, HDPE and PP all had quite similar recycling rates to each other
with rates of 27%, 24% and 23%, respectively. EPS (9%), PS (7%) and other polymers (8%) were recycled at a much lower rate. (Plastics Europe & Conversio 2018.)
With a considerable incineration capacity, Finland has widely utilized energy recovery from waste, and this applies to B&C plastic waste as well In the year 2022, Finland managed to recycle 24% of its postconsumer plastic waste from the B&C sector with 74% directed to energy recovery Finland has banned the landfilling of plastics, and only 2% of B&C plastic waste end up in landfills in the country. (Plastics Europe 2024, 76, 87.)
As of today, film plastics, piping systems, and PS foam insulation are recycled to a degree from C&D plastics in Finland. Excluding film plastics, the utilization C&D plastic waste is yet to receive significant attention. However, the limited study material shows that there is potential to establish and elevate recycling rates. In a Ministry of the Environment funded project called RAMPO (2021–2022), the recycling potential of some plastic waste flows from new construction was assessed. Only certain packaging films, pipes and insulation were included in the study, but the results indicated that all assessed applications were indeed suitable for recycling. Although major conclusions can’t be made regarding all waste flows from construction sites, the results of the study indicate promising possibilities for construction plastic waste recycling (Karppinen et al. 2025, 109, 111.)
Comparably, demolition plastic recycling is more complicated (Laitinen et al. 2022, 29). Still, some of it could, in theory, be recycled at a high level. A good example is the plastic in electrical parts: the plastic coating of electrical cables is very recyclable as cables are already highly recycled due to their copper content. However, electrical components embedded in the structures of buildings are very challenging to separate and recycle as they tend to break and mix with concrete during demolition. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 21, 26 )
Surface materials in buildings are a major plastic storage and therefore they make a good target for recycling efforts. Plastic surface materials are the single most significant plastic source from demolition, they are well recognizable and their dismantling show promise. A barrier for better recycling is provided by adverse compounds in some of the materials and their adhesives. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 25.)
Many of the plastic products in area components such as underground cables, water pipes, district heating pipelines, and subsurface drains, are obtained in recyclable condition after demolition even though contamination, breaking, mixing and dirtying can hamper the ease of recycling. Breaking and insufficiency regarding cleanness are a challenge with insulation in building foundations as well, with adverse chemical compounds creating an additional burden. Still, some insulation plastic is extracted in sufficient condition EPS insulation is being used in large volumes, so developments in the recycling technology of demolition insulation plastics could be great for recycling volumes (Laitinen et al. 2022, 22–23.)
Insulation plastics in the structural frame are very prone to mixing with other insulation materials and concrete. Separating insulation materials from each other is not sensible economically which is also true for detaching vapour barrier and roof-covering sheeting as their volume in the building is often low. Old sealing compounds contain e.g. lead which prevents recycling. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 24.)
Plastic HVAC components are varyingly dismountable and recyclable and overall, elevating their recyclability is challenging. Dismantling is not an option for underfloor heating pipes and HVAC components casted into concrete, and contamination is a burden for sewer pipes. Also, heating pipes are laborious to separate. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 28.) However, if extracted pipes are clean enough, recycling is possible (Pipelife n.d., 5).
Recycling C&D plastic waste isn’t straightforward, and consequently, a large part of it is still either landfilled or incinerated (Plastics Europe 2024, 86). A part of this troublesome situation has to do with the somewhat unclear and undefined legislation regarding the waste recycling chain. Plastic waste and its management have gained a lot of attention within the European Union in the past few years, and the push for circular economy paired with reformed legislation has put more pressure to Member States to increase recycling rates (zu Castell-Rüdenhausen 2021, 20).
In 2019, the European Union published the European Green Deal, a strategy which aims to make the EU a model society of environmental, social and economic sustainability (European Commission 2019). Consequently, the new circular economy action plan (CEAP) (European Commission 2020) was adopted in 2020 by the European Commission to guide the union towards a circular economy and sustainable growth (European Commission n.d.a).
The action plan includes 35 legislative and non-legislative measures to be implemented by the Commission with the B&C sector being a key focus area (European Commission n.d.a). CEAP also includes the EU’s plastic strategy, which focuses on, among others, making plastic recycling more profitable and more attractive to investors (European Commission n.d.b). CEAP provides overarching policy orientation for many areas including waste and recycling legislation (Wahlström et al. 2020, 8; European Commission n.d.a). This means that waste legislation and circular economy concepts are merged to a degree where distinguishing specific policies between them is not sensible or even possible (Wahlström et al. 2020, 8).
C&D waste – including plastics in the fraction – falls under the influence of Waste Framework Directive (WFD) (Directive 2008/98), which acts as the main legislation of waste-related matters in the EU For C&D waste management, there are three main objectives defined in the WFD: reduction of C&D waste generation, promotion of selective demolition, and by 2020, accomplishment of at least 70% rate of preparation for re-use, recycling or other way of material recovery of non-hazardous C&D waste. (European Commission n.d.c.)
WFD also provides priorities for approaching waste management in the form of a waste hierarchy. The waste hierarchy includes five options for waste management which are – from most to least preferrable –prevention, preparing for reuse, recycling, other recovery (e.g. energy recovery) and disposal (European Union n.d.). The waste hierarchy reflects the EU’s aspirations for a circular economy. C&D plastic waste as an input material for recycling operations has to fulfil the requirements of the WFD and the EU List of Waste (Pierri et al. 2024, 53). The EU List of Waste is a document designed to help with waste
management – including the management of hazardous waste – with related common terminology for classification of waste (European Commission n.d.d).
As packaging waste represents a major part of plastic waste within C&D waste, the packaging legislation’s sphere of influence extends to construction and demolition sites. The new Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (EU) (2025/40) includes among others, regulations for packaging waste management (European Commission n.d.e). Within the regulation, minimum percentages for recycled content in plastic packaging for 2030 and 2040 are laid out. Except for some contact-sensitive packaging and beverage bottles, plastic packaging should contain at least 35 and 65% of recycled material in 2030 and 2040, respectively. (Regulation (EU) 2025/40.)
The EU has also introduced a tax on its Member States regarding non-recycled plastic packaging materials. For every kilogram of non-recycled plastic packaging, a Member State will have to pay a tax of 0.80 euros. After the tax was introduced at the start of 2021, Member States have implemented varying measures to cover the new tax as some have included it to their national budgets and others have modified their tax policy on plastic products. (Zurawska & Blanco de Tord 2025, 1.) Due to inflation, a proposal has been made to increase the tax to 1 euro per kg. The increase would take place in 2028 after which the tax would be adjusted each year to alleviate the impact inflation has on the tax revenue stream (European Commission 2025a.)
Uncontrolled plastic waste trading has been identified as a practice causing harm to the health of both the people and the environment. Although waste shipment has been regulated in the EU through the Waste Shipment Regulation (EC) (No 1013/2006), there was a need to have additional regulation regarding plastic waste shipments specifically. As the 14th Conference of the Parties of the Basel Convention resulted in the modification of multiple entries for plastic waste classification, the EU decided to add to its plastic waste regulation by adopting the new entries from the conference. (European Commission n.d.f.)
The new EU rules regarding the shipment of plastic waste have been in force since the beginning of 2021 (European Commission n.d.f) Since then, additional reinforcement on the rules has been provided by the new Waste Shipment Regulation (EU) (2024/1157) which entered into force in 2024. The new regulation is intended to address issues relating to increased EU waste exports, illegal waste shipments, and protect the environment from adverse waste recovery in importing countries. (Pierri et al. 2024, 56.)
With the newly updated Construction Product Regulation (EU) (2024/3110), EU is improving the consistency of rules regarding construction product marketing within the Union. Along the revision of the regulation, circularity, and sustainability and environmental performance of construction products will receive additional attention. Measures for boosting circular economy efforts include e.g. encouragement for waste reduction and improved resource efficiency, and possible requirements for recycled content in products. (ReBuilt 2024.) Recycled content requirements among other circularity-enhancing measures could also be seen with the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (EU) (2024/1781). The regulation doesn’t yet include plastic construction products, but this could change in the future. (Salminen et al. 2025, 90.)
There are several policies regarding chemicals in the EU, most notably the REACH regulation. REACH entered into force in 2007 and is designed to protect both people and the environment from possible harmful effects of chemicals. (European Commission n.d.g). Regulations on chemicals are central when determining which fractions of plastic waste are suitable for circular purposes. Plastic materials and products are releasing over 500 chemicals that are potentially of concern for humans and the environment with only a fraction of plastic chemicals being non-hazardous. PUR, PC and PVC – which are used widely in B&C activities and found commonly in C&D waste – have especially elevated chance of containing hazardous chemicals. (Cristóbal García et al. 2024, 62.)
The EU has created guidelines to its Member States regarding different C&D waste fractions including plastic waste as efforts for recycling or reusing materials for their original purposes for potentially highvalue materials remain too low. The EU Construction & Demolition Waste Management Protocol (Oberender et al. 2024) includes non-binding guidelines and recommendations for the Member States regarding construction activities. Member States are encouraged to develop legislative frameworks and national protocols in line with the content of the protocol. The aim is to promote C&D waste management processes and the use of circular products and materials. (Oberender et al. 2024, xiv, 4 )
There are a multitude of European standards related to plastic recycling. For example, standard EN 15347 provides instructions and criteria for assessing and classifying sorted plastic materials based on their properties EN 18064 in turn provides quality recommendations and specifications for a variety of polymers to be used as plastic recyclates in products such as plastic pipes for construction and packaging. (Pierri et al. 2024, 49–50 )
Regarding future changes in legislation, the European Commission is currently planning a reform on circular economy legislation with a new Circular Economy Act, scheduled for 2026 (European Commission 2025b) Also, recorded to the circular economy action plan is a devotion to initiate a new Strategy for a Sustainable Built Environment which would among other reforms, possibly bring new C&D waste recycling targets to promote circularity in the built environment (European Commission 2020). However, the strategy is yet to be issued (European Parliament 2025).
Currently, the main legislative framework concerning C&D waste, its management and circular use in Finland is formed by
• the Waste Act (646/2011),
• the Government Decree on Waste (978/2021),
• the Construction Act (751/2023),
• the Ministry of the Environment Decree on Reporting on Construction and Demolition Material Waste (1089/2024),
• the Environmental Protection Act (527/2014),
• the Government Decree on Environmental Protection (713/2014),
• the Government Decree on the Recovery of Certain Wastes in Earth Construction (843/2017), and
• the Government Decree on Landfills (331/2013) (environment.fi 2025; Deloitte 2014; Ministry of the Environment n.d.b).
Finland has introduced a Strategic Programme for a Circular Economy (Ministry of the Environment 2021) which aims to make the country a thriving carbon-neutral circular economy (Ministry of the Environment n.d.c). The country has also established an official national program, Plastics Roadmap, to solve the challenges around plastics and establish a functioning circular economy for plastics by 2030. The first phase of the program started in 2018 and in 2022, Plastics Roadmap 2.0 was presented. (Saarnilehto 2025.) The program is planned to include the whole value chain of plastics and ideally, a broad range of stakeholder groups are brought together to create action to shift the country towards better plastic circularity (Karppinen et al. 2025, 12)
In late 2020, The Finnish Ministry of the Environment and eight other significant parties from Finnish industry and other fields published a signed green deal regarding construction plastics. The voluntary deal is largely based around film plastics in construction with goals to reduce and optimize consumption and boost circularity. Regarding recycling, the objective is to generally increase the use of plastics produced
from recycled materials, and more specifically, achieve a state where 40% of materials used to produce film plastics are recycled by 2027. (Sitoumus 2050 n.d.)
Although the resource situation of Ministry of the Environment is challenging, there is a priority to increase the sphere of influence of the green deal across the fields of contracting parties (Koivusalo 2023, 5). It has also been suggested that the inclusion of other C&D plastics to the deal could be considered (Ylä-Mononen & Alkio 2022, 29). However, broad investigations regarding other C&D plastics’ suitability for recycling is yet to be done (Karppinen et al. 2025, 154).
The Ministry of the Environment has also agreed a green deal with Rakli, the union of property owners in Finland, regarding sustainable demolition. The main aim of the deal is to enhance market operation for demolition materials generated in demolition and renovation activities to boost the recycling and reuse of these materials. The deal runs through 2025 and by then, pre-demolition audits should be a common practice in demolition and renovation projects of Rakli’s property owner members. More specifically, in 75% of projects, a pre-demolition audit should be implemented before demolition permit application (Ministry of the Environment n.d.d.)
In 2022, the Ministry of the Environment published the new Finnish National Waste Plan through 2027. For C&D waste management, mentioned goals include the reduction of waste and increase in high-quality material utilization with risk management. Utilization of waste should be increased to 70 mass-% excluding soil, rock and hazardous waste materials. Energy recovery and fuel production won’t be counted towards the goal. (Ministry of the Environment 2022, 9.) Finland has been unsuccessful in reaching the rate of 70% C&D waste utilization, a goal recorded in both EU and Finnish legislation. In fact, Finland has managed to utilize only 50 to 60% of generated C&D waste in recent years (Ministry of the Environment n.d.b.)
According to the Finnish Waste Act (646/2011), the holder of C&D waste is mandated to organise the waste management of a construction site in a way that maximizes the circularity of waste materials. A separate collection must be arranged for eleven different waste fractions, plastics being one of them (Ministry of the Environment n.d.b). The Extended Producer Responsibility scheme (the packer or importer is responsible for the generated waste) extends to only packaging waste generated in C&D activities (Kolehmainen 2025).
Section 15 of the Waste Act (646/2011) orders prohibition for separately collected waste to be directed to incineration or landfilling. Overall, only certain kinds of C&D waste – wastes that include only a minor amount of substances such as plastics – is allowed to be landfilled (Government Decree on Landfills 331/2013). A binding order of priority for waste management activities is laid out in the Waste Act (646/2011), aligning with the waste hierarchy in the WFD.
The new Construction Act (751/2023) – which entered into force at the beginning of 2025 – contains a mandate for certain C&D projects to prepare a report regarding C&D waste, including plastic waste amounts. For this purpose, a national database for accounting waste generated by C&D activities was established. If generation of demolition materials in a project is small, reporting isn’t needed. The mandate is expected to boost circular practices for C&D waste in Finland. (environment.fi 2025.)
Going further in the waste management chain, a transfer document is required for the transportation of C&D waste (excluding uncontaminated soil) in Finland. The purpose of the document is to ensure proper handling of the waste, and it includes information on the type, origin, producer and carrier of the waste with also a confirmation of the waste ending up in adequate treatment. The documents are reported in SIIRTO register for monitoring and waste flow control purposes. (environment.fi 2024.)
In addition to a new C&D waste database, a new national information system of the Finnish built environment called Ryhti is being developed. The Finnish Environment Institute is in charge of the system which will provide a solution to challenges regarding consistency, accessibility and centralization of data
regarding the built environment in Finland. The system is still in its building stage with first services been implemented, and data from municipalities and regional councils will start to accumulate gradually. (Ryhti n.d.a.)
Public construction procurement has also been targeted in efforts to better embrace recycled plastic material in the Finnish construction sector. Closed Plastic Circle – from Pilots into Practice -project, led by the city of Espoo and conducted during 2022 to 2024, produced procurement criteria for construction with specific focus on film plastics and their recycling (City of Espoo n.d.; Kriteeripankki n.d.)
The Finnish Government recently issued the Government Decree on End-of-Waste (EoW) criteria of mechanically recycled plastic raw material (270/2024). Although some general EoW criteria have already been laid out in the Waste Act (646/2011), the decree provides clarity on the requirements for C&D plastic waste to become eligible for circular purposes Along with the Decree, Finland joins Portugal and Spain in the group of EU Member States with national EoW criteria for (thermo)plastic waste specifically. (Pierri et al 2024, 68–69).
Like the EU, Finland is also preparing a Circular Economy Act, which is set to replace the current Waste Act. The end of the preparation term for the Act is scheduled at the end of 2025. Clarification of waste legislation and improvements to information regarding waste and waste management are expected among overall enhancing of the country’s circular economy practices. (Ministry of the Environment n.d.e.)
Circularity of plastic waste from construction has received limited attention from EU regarding policies (SYSTEMIQ 2022, 29). Considering that landfilling and incineration of plastic waste from B&C in the EU grew faster than recycling during 2018 to 2022, and over half of post-consumer plastics from the sector are being incinerated (Plastics Europe 2024, 5, 86), the current legislation isn’t supporting preferred circular practices in B&C waste management enough.
Although landfilling C&D plastic waste is already banned in some Member States (e.g. in Finland) (Plastics Europe 2024, 87), the EU still allows waste from C&D activities to be directed to landfills (SYSTEMIQ 2022, 35). A landfill ban for separately collected waste will be imposed by 2030 (Plastics Europe 2024, 22) Considering the current low rate of separate collection of C&D plastic waste (SYSTEMIQ 2022, 28), and the lacking implementation and enforcement of the current legislation (Plastics Europe 2024, 25), the amount of positive impact of the ban for C&D waste recycling remains to be seen
National legislation of some EU Member States has been recognized to have some challenging aspects concerning C&D waste and its management. For example, the environmental legislation of Finland has been identified to have some preventative, overlapping features to C&D waste recycling (Deloitte 2014, 36). Country-specific issues vary, but e.g. a lack of specificity, and the extent of the relevant legislation have been identified as problems in some Member States (Williams et al. 2020, 29).
Environmental permit requirements for waste treatment can be used as an example of environmental legislation being a potential barrier for advancements in C&D plastic recycling in Finland. The issue has been recognized at least for plastic pipe waste. Even if the collection of plastic pipes waste would be successful, the need for the actor arranging the pretreatment to obtain an environmental permit for their operation might not allow for the material to advance in the process chain of recycling. (Karppinen et al. 2025, 111.)
To increase plastic circularity in Europe, minimum landfill and incineration taxes and raises to taxes over time has been demanded (Plastics Europe 2024, 25). High landfill taxes have been effective at diverting waste from landfills and encourage recycling. However, the diversion doesn’t automatically guarantee
that wastes would be used for high-quality recycling and additional measures or instuments could be needed to complement the raise of taxes. (Cristóbal García et al. 2024, 4.)
Incineration has been the fastest growing C&D plastic waste management practice in EU27+3 (Plastics Europe 2024, 86) and it has been suggested that the current average incineration tax in the EU Member States doesn’t encourage recycling enough (Caro et al. 2024, 11). Energy recovery from plastics generate superior revenue and recycling plastics like PVC and EPS is economically not as attractive. In the market, recycled materials and products have the cost of recycling as a burden. (Cristóbal García et al. 2024, 68, 75–76.) Taxing incineration isn’t, however, a sure-fire method to increase recycling rates cost-effectively as in Sweden, the tax was abandoned just a few years after its introduction (Salminen et al. 2025, 72).
As of now, waste incineration plants are not included in the EU Emissions Trading System (Salminen et al. 2025, 71) and they have been introduced to be covered by the system voluntarily only in a few Member States (Schmitz et al. 2024, 44–45). Finland is not a part of this group as it has included waste incinerating co-incineration plants in the system but not waste incineration plants Utilizing the emissions trading system more widely has been suggested as a possible measure to decrease the amount of recyclable plastic waste ending up in energy recovery. (Salminen et al. 2025, 70–71.)
Generally, there is a lack of incentive for business activities around secondary raw plastic materials. The prices of primary plastic material are disproportional to their environmental costs which creates an unbalanced equation. One measure to tackle this could be taxation on primary plastic materials to diminish their economic advantages (Eckermann et al. 2015, 79) and consequently, further encourage the sorting and recycling of plastic – including those non-hazardous fractions within C&D waste. Alternatively, value added tax reduction for products containing secondary plastics could be introduced. (EEA 2022, 50.)
To increase the amount of material recovery from C&D waste, selective demolition is promoted as a preferred option in place of traditional demolition in the EU, and the EU Construction & Demolition Waste Management Protocol lays out detailed steps for properly executing the process (Oberender et al 2024, 31). However, Member States have liberty in the implementation of the practice (Caro et al. 2024, 11). Given the lack of strictness in the policies, it could take a rather long time before selective demolition is the norm in European demolition projects.
Even though preparation is in progress (Salminen et al. 2025, 52), currently, there is no consistent EUwide legal framework regarding EoW criteria of plastic waste. This creates uncertainty around the use and trade of plastics as a secondary raw material and undermines the urgency to pay attention to harmful chemicals and substances of concern across the plastic value chain. (Pierri et. al 2024, 17–18.) A lack of clarity and consistency risks unity between national classifications, possibly negatively affecting interest among potential investors. Diversity in classification of EoW between Member States might also result in logistical challenges related to storing and shipping. (EEA 2022, 39).
All national EoW criteria for plastic waste issued in EU Member States are bounded to mechanical recycling only. JRC (Joint Research Centre) has published their proposal for potential EU-wide criteria (Pierri et al. 2024), but neither does it consider other recycling technologies (e.g. chemical recycling) fully in its scope. There were arguments for and against the exploration of other recycling technologies. Some stakeholders had a view that the inclusion of other technologies in the scope would e.g. promote innovation and provide equality in the field of plastic recycling. However, lack of proof for the ability to remove substances of concern, many technologies still being in the development stage, and the mix of intermediates (e g. pyrolysis oil) and outputs was used as arguments against the inclusion of chemical recycling (Pierri et al. 2024, 71–73.)
The current recycling targets in the EU (or the lack there of) have received questioning. As the recycling targets emphasize quantity, the quality of recycling can naturally be left with smaller attention. Carefully planned EoW regulation in the EU and Finland is needed to guarantee sufficiency of quality. Plastic
recycling targets are currently focused on plastic packaging and overall, weight-based recycling targets are favouring the recycling of bulky materials, disincentivising plastic recycling Additionally, comparing recycling rates between EU Member States may not be comparable due to insufficiencies regarding the verification of calculations Furthermore, the EU Plastic tax have brought an additional burden for the taxpayers of Finland, and the economic punishment isn’t properly laid on the polluter. The situation could be alleviated by disincentivizing incineration and incentivizing plastic separation (Salminen et al. 2025, 88–89)
The Finnish green deal of construction plastics was agreed almost five years ago, but measuring progress relative to the aims of the deal has proven to be challenging. Information on the share of recycled content in new film plastics and quantitative goals for e.g. separate collection is not available, and any data would have to be collected from individual companies in the deal. Regarding the utilization potential of C&D plastics excluding films, there has been only one study, the RAMPO-project (see chapter 3.2). (Karppinen et al. 2025, 106.)
Also, many circularity measures in the green deal have seen no commitments from companies. Due to the voluntary nature of the deal and the hesitancy of companies to provide information among other reasons, it has been recognized that the green deal by itself won’t be enough to evaluate the development of relative film plastic consumption in Finland. (Karppinen et al. 2025, 43, 67, 94, 107–108.)
The newly updated Construction Product Regulation (2024/3110) aligns with the circular economy action plan (European Commission 2020) in supporting circular plastic use but currently, there are still no binding recycled content requirements for plastic construction materials in the EU. (ReBuilt 2024.) However, as the introduction of binding requirements for recycled content is potentially looming (ReBuilt 2024), any coordinative issues regarding waste, product and chemical legislation would have to be considered (zu Castell-Rüdenhausen et al. 2021, 20). In addition, most studies using recycled waste in B&C products – which is still a limited field – have not focused on using the waste material in the products it generated from originally but rather as aggregates (Santos et al. 2024, 505). This might make it more challenging to determine suitable recycled content requirements for B&C products.
The European Union is pushing to make plastic recycling more attractive, and the recycling industry in Europe has seen significant growth in the past few years (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2022). Despite some progress in the C&D plastic waste management chain, there are still persistent challenges and barriers relating to the logistics of plastic recycling.
Generally, across the EU Member States, the practice of C&D plastic collection follows the same principles and is implemented by private waste management companies with some cases of municipality involvement. C&D plastic waste is typically collected as unsorted waste within mixed C&D waste, separated waste on site for incineration, and/or separated on site as recyclable plastics or multiple plastic fractions. (Pierri et al. 2024, 33.)
Separate collection of plastics has generally proven to be very effective in boosting recycling as plastics collected separately have 13 times higher recycling rate than those collected from mixed waste (Plastics Europe 2024, 20). The practice is especially important for C&D plastic waste, as plastics constitute only a small fraction in the total C&D waste flow. Mandatory separation of C&D plastics is already in place in several EU countries, including Finland, but in general, the enforcement of the mandate is lacking. (Gardner 2020, 14–15.)
Identification of plastics is an essential step in the process of separate collection. The step has proven to be challenging one, but with the gradual integration of advanced technology in waste management processes, analysing plastics found in the C&D debris is getting easier. This has been seen with the introduction of portable pistol tools – already utilized in Finland – which are used as identifying tools in working sites. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 30.)
C&D plastic waste (excluding film waste) in Finland is generally collected as combustible or mixed waste and incinerated with energy recovery (Ministry of the Environment 2020, 21; Lehtonen 2019, 74). Most plastics are directed to energy recovery (Plastics Europe 2024, 87; Lehtonen 2019, 74) even though possibilities for material recovery exist for some polymers (Lehtonen 2019, 74).
Typically, in Europe, B&C wrapping film waste is separated on site. After separation, the films are then collected either separately or together with commercial and industrial film waste by waste management companies. The methodology of collection depends on logistical and operational factors. Film plastic that is used for other purposes than material wrapping – such as protective cover – is usually mixed with other debris stream and collected as mixed waste. (Plastic Recyclers Europe & ICIS 2023, 23.)
Film plastic waste streams from B&C are still not well measured or managed, but the set of advantageous properties of film waste provide optimism for improvements regarding the efficiency of their collection, sorting and recycling. The European B&C sector has significant demand for circular film plastics as in
2020, 10 % of all Europe’s plastic film recyclates were used for B&C films. (Plastic Recyclers Europe & ICIS 2023, 23, 29.)
In 2022, 2.3 Mt of post-consumer B&C plastic waste was collected in the EU27+3 with collection having increased 53 % in four years (Plastics Europe 2024, 82). One practice making C&D plastic collection less challenging is selective demolition: a demolition method that enhances the probability of C&D waste being eventually turned into secondary raw materials that are safe to use in new construction products (zu Castell-Rüdenhausen et al. 2021, 36). Additionally, a conducted and reported pre-demolition audit facilitates the securing of high-quality materials (zu Castell-Rüdenhausen et al. 2021, 36) and is seen as an essential for implementing selective demolition (Oberender et al. 2024, 31). Selective demolition and waste audits are expected to get more common in the future (zu Castell-Rüdenhausen et al. 2021, 36).
Considering different plastic products, PVC window frame collection has been particularly efficient in Europe with decades of closed loop recycling experience. Reasons for high demand from recyclers are easy identifiability of PVC window waste which lowers the risk for contamination and the quality of the waste type. (Gardner 2020, 12.) Within the framework of VinylPlus – the sustainability project of Europe’s PVC industry – 391 kt (of which 153 kt was post-consumer waste) of PVC profiles were recycled in EU27+3 in 2023, which is 53 % of the total amount of PVC recycled (VinylPlus 2024, 7, 47). PVC windows are quite popular in some European countries, but Finland has a lesser demand of them (Souder et. al. 2024).
Regardless of high recycled volumes, window frames can be relatively expensive to recycle as the PVC must be separated from other materials such as glass which must also be managed (Damgaard et al. 2022, 97). On site dismantling is important as keeping materials separate is increasingly difficult with possible damage or contamination during transportation (Oberender et al. 2024, 33).
During preliminary storing before collection, C&D waste can be stored in many kinds of waste containers such as construction containers, Big Bag sacks and pallets among others (Sagan & Mach 2025, 9). Sack holders are practical for the initial gathering of film plastics as the purity of collected waste is easy to monitor. They also don’t tend to tear in a waste press, a preferred option for the storing of film plastics. Baling the gathered film plastics is also an alternative, but a lack of space in the site might be a restricting factor. (Ramboll 2020, 9.)
C&D waste on-site collection is done typically by either reactive or scheduled collection. With reactive collection, the collection of a given waste fraction is done reactively, i.e. when collection is deemed necessary. This method is practical with fractions that are generated in large amounts, e.g. inert C&D waste Scheduled collection is more suitable for those fractions that are generated constantly and in a lesser volume, some plastics for example. (Gálvez-Martos et al. 2018, 172.)
In Finland, demolition wastes are usually transported on covered or open skips. The waste must be packaged tightly or into an enclosed vehicle unless it can be ensured that waste won’t create a safety hazard or spread into the environment. (Lehtonen et al. 2019, 60.) For light waste material such as film plastics, traditional waste skips aren’t the best option (Ramboll 2020, 9). Usually, C&D waste in general is transported directly to treatment facilities from the place of origin in Europe (zu Castell-Rüdenhausen et al. 2021, 36).
If source separation is not implemented for plastics, and they exit the site in a mixed waste fraction, separation of plastics is done at a waste transfer station. A mechanical grab will be used to sort out the most identifiable plastic objects from other mixed waste. The remaining mixed waste is directed into a trommel to get rid of dirt and other similar matter in the waste stream and further down onto a sorting belt to separate metals. Manual sorting by hand is still common with C&D sorting. (Pierri et al. 2024, 38.)
Plastic waste sorting can be done in a multitude of ways, including manual, mechanical, sensor-based and gravity-based processes with also new sorting technologies on the way (Lange 2021, 15723–15724).
Automatic sensor-based technologies to sort e.g. plastic waste separated from other C&D debris include near infrared (NIR), visual spectrometry, x-ray fluorescene, x-ray transmission, high-speed laser spectroscopy and teraherz spectroscopy (Pierri et al. 2024, 36, 38). In Finnish plastic processing facilities, NIR technology is a norm (Ministry of the Environment 2020, 15), but in the European construction waste sector, utilization of advanced technology is lacking (Gardner 2020, 15). In Finland, C&D waste sorting via robotics and intelligent technology has also been introduced (Laitinen et al. 2022, 38).
Generally, plastic recycling can be divided into two main categories: physical and chemical recycling In physical recycling, the chemical structure of a polymer remains the same during processing whereas in chemical treatment, polymers are broken down into monomers via a chemical process. (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2022, 38–39.)
Physical recycling includes mechanical recycling – the most widely established and used recycling technology – and solvent-based purification. Mechanical recycling is carried out through a multi-stage process, where plastic waste usually goes through grinding, washing, drying, extruding, re-granulating and finally, manufacturing to products (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2022, 38.) Solvent-based purification is implemented by creating a polymer solution followed by a loop of purification, precipitation and heating (Schlummer et al. 2020, 35)
Chemical recycling still has a minor share in total plastic recycling in the EU (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2022, 38). In chemical treatment, necessary pre-treatment steps are followed by either chemical depolymerisation or thermochemical recycling via pyrolysis or gasification (Ragaert et al. 2023, 4; Plastic Recyclers Europe 2022, 39) Chemical depolymerisation can be done by a variety of methods such as solvolysis or catalytic depolymerisation (Beghetto et al. 2021). In pyrolysis, polymers are broken down into shorter hydrocarbons in oxygen-free conditions (Dai et al. 2022) while also producing char and gas. Eventually, pyrolysis oil is produced which can be used as a raw material for plastic industry. (Ragaert et al. 2023.) With gasification, in turn, thermal decomposition of plastic waste is done in oxygen-rich conditions to produce syngas and energy (Madanikashani et al. 2022).
Different chemical recycling projects have amassed more than 8 billion euros in investments from Plastics Europe’s member companies. These investments could secure annual extra production of 2.8 Mt of chemically recycled plastics by 2030. (Plastics Europe 2024, 69.) However, issues related to e.g. energy efficiency and raw material availability are still hampering the competitiveness of chemical recycling (Salminen et al. 2025, 77).
Within EU, mechanical recycling capacity is sufficient for some C&D plastic products, and chemical recycling options are also studied (Circular Plastics Alliance 2021, 14). In 2023, the total installed input capacity for plastic recycling was 13.2 Mt in EU 27+3 with the capacity having grown 0.7 Mt from 2022 and having doubled in five years (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2023, 2–3, 6). For comparison, a total of 12.4 Mt of plastics were manufactured for the B&C sector from which 3.7 Mt were recycled plastics in 2022 (Plastics Europe 2024, 54) In 2025, there are a total of eleven plastic waste processing facilities in Finland with nine of them utilizing physical recycling (eight utilize mechanical recycling) and two chemical recycling. Capacity to produce recycled plastics is at least 72 kt with further capacity additions on the way. (Salminen et al. 2025, 38.)
In early 2025, a circular economy company Syklo was granted an environmental permit to build the biggest plastic recycling facility in Finland which is going to add 50 kilotonnes to Finland’s plastic recycling capacity. The recycling facility will be built in the town of Hyvinkää and is set to be completed in early 2026. Technologies used in the facility will enable exceptional sorting efficiency from mixed plastic waste
streams and the production of high-quality plastic pellets. Recycling plastic waste from construction is among the list of priorities for the company. (Syklo 2025; 2024.)
The increase in capacity provided by the new facility will alleviate Finland’s monetary burden with EU Plastic tax, creating annual savings of up to 25 million euros (Syklo 2025; 2024.) Finland’s plastic recycling capacity per inhabitant has been low compared to many other European countries (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2023, 5) and in 2023, Finland had to pay 89 million euros for its non-recycled plastic packaging material amount (Ministry of Finance 2024) The bill grew with 29 million euros from 60 million in only a year (Ministry of Finance 2023).
Different forms of PVC constitute most of C&D plastic waste in Europe (Plastics Europe & Conversio 2018) The polymer is produced out of carcinogenic vinyl chlorine, and it can release toxic (if inhaled) chlorine gas when produced and disposed. PVC can also contain e.g. lead, phthalates, cadmium and mercury. (Pierri et al. 2024, 65). This, however, doesn’t prevent the circular use of the material: its essential properties can endure several life cycles, and furthermore, many PVC applications have been determined to have excellent performance in eco-efficiency. (VinylPlus 2024, 65.)
In 2018, the management of post-consumer PVC waste from B&C was divided somewhat evenly with energy recovery (41% share of waste), mechanical recycling (34%) and landfill disposal (25%) in EU 28+2 (Plastics Europe & Conversio 2018). Positions on PVC incineration are still varied with no consensus reached on its the effects. Generally, very limited amounts of sorted PVC are received for incineration in countries with loads of waste incineration capacity (Damgaard et al. 2022, 9.)
Total installed capacity for PVC recycling in EU27+3 is estimated to be over 1.1 Mt per year with 70% of the capacity being for rigid type of PVC and 30% for flexible PVC. Capacity-wise, Germany is leading the way in Europe, with the United Kingdom, Benelux-countries and France next behind. (Plastic Recyclers Europe 2023, 4.) A total of 738 kt of PVC waste were recycled in EU27+3 in 2023 within the VinylPlus framework (VinylPlus 2024, 47).
Historically, PVC products have not been recycled in Finland (Laitinen et al. 2022, 20), but since 2022 PVC packaging has been allowed to be placed into plastic recycling (Sumi Oy 2022) and today, PVC pipes can be recycled as several recycling companies are receiving pipe waste around the country (Pipelife n.d.) PVC is suitable for material recovery, and recycled plastics from pipes can be used for example in non-pressurized pipe applications (Zhu et al. 2022, 34).
If PVC is recycled, the methodology depends on the features of the polymer (Pierri et al. 2024, 29) Soft PVC can be challenging to recycle due to possible high additive content A recycling company in the EU, Van Werven, has specialised in recycling hard PVC pipes with secondary focus being on wall profiles. Other PVC waste is not received due to challenging additive contents and for economic reasons. The company’s methodology for hard PVC waste processing includes impurity removal, shredding, washing, drying, grounding, and removal of dust and metals, eventually producing PVC granulates of different sizes. Recycled hard PVC can be used in the core layer of pipes which can boost their recycled content up to 70%. (Damgaard et al 2022, 97.)
A company in the Netherlands, PolyStyreneLoop, has demonstrated a successful closed-loop recycling process for a legacy flame retardant contaminated demolition EPS. The company has managed to produce recyclates fulfilling relevant legal criteria. Through further processing, the recyclates have been turned into raw material and eventually, new recycled EPS insulation boards. The recycling plant uses a solventbased technology which, after demonstrating a successful recycling process, is technically proven for commercial use. (PSLoop 2024.)
After recycling, typical secondary raw material types derived from B&C products are mixed plastics, recycled monopolymer flakes, regranulates and regrinds, monomers and pyrolysis oil (EEA 2022, 20) Plastic products identified commonly having recycled material include pipes, dimple sheets and different
types of boards, windows, flooring and road construction products B&C applications have been estimated to consume almost half of all plastic recyclates in EU28+2 (Plastics Europe 2019, 20–21 )
Theoretically, C&D plastic waste has potential for being utilized in circular cycles at high rates, but the recyclability of polymers emerging from C&D activities differ. Generally, wastes produced in the construction phase are easier to sort and recycle compared to the demolition phase wastes. Construction activities produce a substantial amount of easily recyclable plastic packaging while in demolition, virtually no plastic packaging waste is generated as most of the produced plastics derive from the structures facing demolition. (Santos et al 2024, 481.)
An ideal demolition is executed efficiently with pace which creates a problem with contamination of plastic materials (Santos et al. 2024, 481) Contamination can leave plastics with undesired stains or smells, or adverse chemicals which may prevent further circular use (Material Economics 2018, 83) Scalability of existing decontamination technologies are lacking and the level of information on technologies for and usability of severely contaminated plastics are insufficient. Generally, management of contaminated C&D plastics have not yet received sufficient attention (Santos et al. 2024, 504–505.) In addition to contamination issues, plastic recycling industry must deal with additives, which are challenging to trace and remove. Addition of substances such as stabilisers and flame retardants contribute to additive content in plastics. (Material Economics 2018, 83.)
The list of substances hampering C&D plastic recycling efforts include also the category of legacy substances. These substances have earlier been determined safe according to the chemical legislation and used in construction but with the change of legislation, have faced restrictions. Legacy substances affect the recyclability of some plastic construction products with long life cycles and bring trouble into collection, sorting and recycling processes. (SYSTEMIQ 2022, 29; Gardner 2020, 7.) Overall, the tracing of harmful substances in plastic products is currently not possible or at the very least challenging in the EU (Salminen et al. 2025, 90).
To go back to the topic of demolition, traditional demolition methods and a lack of sorting tend to lead to distortion or inaccuracy in waste statistics. In Europe, a lot of waste from C&D sites may be registered as a mix of non-hazardous, non-inert waste which contributes to mixed C&D waste statistics. (Damgaard et al. 2022, 16.) This problem could be alleviated with selective demolition, which is being promoted as a preferred practice for demolition activities in the EU due to its environmental and safety benefits (Oberender et al. 2024, 31).
However, wider adoption of selective demolition has some barriers As the practice is a relatively new phenomenon, the buildings and structures facing demolition today weren’t designed for it which now creates challenges. If practices promoting better circularity are not instantly profitable, they may not be implemented in the hopes of retaining sufficient margins. In addition, space availability, lack of skilled labour or time constraints might make arranging selective demolition not feasible in some cases. (Pantini & Rigamonti 2020, 169.)
The Finnish National Waste Plan proposes several needs for C&D waste management. These include the need
• for reuse stations and sorting plants,
• to increase source separation,
• for innovations for management of fractions containing organic material,
• to identify and manage fractions containing hazardous substances, and
• for additional pretreatment capacity. (Ministry of the Environment 2022, 17.)
In Finland, undeveloped value chain of plastic recycling and high price of source separation (Laitinen et al. 2022, 19) combined with constraints in the resources of public authorities are among the factors hampering recycling efforts of C&D plastics. Due to the lack of resources, monitoring needed for the enforcement of separate collection can’t be implemented at a sufficient level. (Ministry of the Environment 2020, 31–33). Value chain issues stem particularly from the latter parts of the chain as demand and number of use applications for recycled plastics from C&D is too low. Alleviation of these issues could lead to better plastic separation rates from demolition wastes. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 29.)
Generally, transparency issues regarding logistics and the economics of the chain of management processes of C&D plastic waste remain a great challenge (Santos et al. 2024, 504–505). Still, it is known that compared to construction waste plastics, the management chain is considerably lengthier for plastics generated from demolition and therefore, more expenses are accumulated. In Finland, the cost-competitiveness of recycled demolition plastics is undermined especially by the vast amount of consumed water required for washing the plastics. Additional burden is placed by the cost of separate collection, transportation and granulation. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 29.)
Plastic or polymer-specific separation from demolition waste most often is impractical and economically not viable in Finland due to, among others, a lack of space in working sites. Furthermore, plastic waste on demolition sites can be dirty, and it contains several (possibly hard-to-identify) polymers yet isn’t usually generated in high volumes. (Lehtonen 2019, 74 ) Separate arrangements, challenges in identifying recyclable plastics and low motivation are other factors making separate collection not an attractive alternative. Also, the demolishing party might receive no monetary return for separated demolition plastic, and in fact after collection fees, the party may have had to pay for its separating efforts. (Laitinen et al. 2022, 30.) Cleanness of collected plastics is an important factor when determining the amount of compensation for separate collection (Ramboll 2020, 7), a challenge for demolition plastics.
Typically, in Finland, the receiver of demolition waste is sourced by the demolishing party with the cheapest offer often being selected. However, recycling companies receiving individual demolition waste fractions are very few in Finland which can result in lengthy transport distances. (Zhu et al. 2022, 39.) To retain the economic and environmental viability of waste logistics to its maximum, sorting and recycling plants should ideally be in the proximity of the source of waste. The bulk density of light C&D waste should ideally be increased via compacting before transport. (Oberender et al. 2024, 41 )
If long transport is combined with poor spatial utilization, viability of recycling is hit hard. For example, the mass to volume ratio of insulation waste, often containing plastics, is low and unless compacted, they occupy a lot of space during transportation. The combination of high-cost logistics and virgin materials being both inexpensive and widely available is pushing demolition waste to energy recovery or even landfills. (Zhu et al. 2022, 37, 39.)
Only 56% of the Finnish plastic recycling capacity was utilized in 2022, while thousands of tonnes of plastics are sent abroad to be processed (Salminen et al. 2025, 38, 85). For plastic packaging, travelled distance can reach thousands of kilometres before they are sorted for recycling. The current recycling rate of plastics in Finland is so low that maintaining plastic recycling facilities is generally not feasible. (Nyyssönen 2025.)
Plastic recycling capacity is mainly located in Southern Finland with the regional distribution of waste management facilities mainly driven by investment availability and need for management capacity, and the proximity principle (Ministry of the Environment 2022, 16, 23) Plastic waste flows are often low in volume and scattered around Finland (Salminen et al. 2025, 69). New facilities are being planned although at first, they will need foreign material in addition to domestic supply to maintain operation (Nyyssönen 2025).
On top of the issue with regional scattering of waste flows, the data of Finnish plastic flows is scattered and incomplete. This kind of statistical insufficiency creates challenges on forming an accurate picture of the state of plastic recycling in Finland. Information gaps span across a multitude of waste sources with C&D being one of the main areas of concern. There is a lack of awareness on the availability and utilization of national plastic flows, and the costs of logistics and collection. The situation creates uncertainty around investment availability and complicates the allocation and monitoring of incentives for recycling. (Salminen et al. 2025, 85.)
To enhance the circularity of plastics in the construction sector, knowledge of the building stock is key (Laitinen et al. 2022, 19). However, as information on material and product usage in construction have not been collected in Finland, currently it is still not possible to estimate which building facing renovation would contain plastics that could be easily recyclable (Ryhti n.d.b.) The new built environment information system (see chapter 4.2) will make a change to this in the future, but the as of today, the problem persists. (Ryhti n.d.b.)
Data issues are a challenge not only in Finland but also in the EU. In the Union, data on C&D waste treatment is generally incomplete with insufficient record keeping and traceability mechanisms contributing to the problem. A wider adoption of electronic registries in the Member States would provide progress on the matter. (Oberender et al. 2024, 41.) Furthermore, there is a need for additional recycling and treatment capacity of C&D waste in general in the EU (Williams et al. 2020, 29–30).
It has also been estimated that 40% of all plastics sent to recycling won’t go through the recycling process because of contamination and the mixed nature of plastic waste streams (Material Economics 2018, 83). For PVC, an abundant polymer in construction products, 30 to 50% of prepared material is deemed unsuitable during recycling processes and consequently sent to be landfilled or incinerated (Cristóbal García et al. 2024, 40). The gap left by lost materials will have to filled with virgin plastic material. The recycling yield issue is particularly challenging with chemical recycling where innovative solutions are needed to improve process effectiveness. (Material Economics 2018, 92.)
Recycling C&D plastic waste is generally no easy feat: plastics sorted from C&D sites may already be contaminated by other polymers or other materials, they may not be economically competitive compared to virgin materials in the market, and many of them contain substances potentially dangerous to humans. All this creates a challenging situation, that public authorities and organizations are trying to solve little by little.
Even though recycling is on the rise, landfilling and especially incineration are often more attractive management options for C&D plastic waste. The current legislative framework in EU isn’t yet sufficient to steer the markets to properly embrace recycled plastics and consequently boost the collection, sorting and recycling of plastics from the construction sector.
The chain of C&D plastic management with recycling in mind is often snapped already in the C&D sites. Contamination and dirtiness plague many demolition plastics, and for some plastic applications buried in other construction materials, dismantling becomes unattainable. In fact, demolition plastics may not even be recognized in the wastes. Given
• the prevailing demolition methods that neglect the importance of separation of waste fractions,
• the general lack of awareness of plastic placement and amount in the building stock facing demolition,
• the increased use of glues and composite materials in construction (Oberender et al. 2024, 33),
• the amount of plastic reinforcements and binders in buildings, and
• the low motivation for source separation,
inevitably, a considerable amount of plastic is left unidentified and not recovered from the demolition debris. Utilization of advanced technology that helps in the identification process of plastics has been adopted to a degree, providing progress in the matter.
Finland, many other EU countries alike, currently relies on its capacity to thermally recover energy from plastics. In the past few years, there has been momentum towards more circular practices regarding C&D plastics, but overall, development has been slow. Also, the national focus has been heavily directed to film plastics which neglects a major part of generated C&D plastics. New capacity for C&D plastic processing is underway, but there is a reluctancy to invest as the logistic, economic and legislative issues persist. To make matters more twisted, masses of plastics are sent abroad for processing while barely over a half of the total Finnish plastic recycling capacity is utilized.
Altogether, the logistical challenges of recycling C&D make the situation hard to solve. The challenges can be seen in locate plastics in buildings, separate and sorting difficulties, lack of treatment stations, long transport distances and the general lack of awareness of the costs of the whole plastic waste management chain
Increased transparency and better tracing are needed throughout the C&D plastic value chain. Further research efforts are needed to provide accurate, scientifically proven information for the national and EUlevel decision-making. Legislation should provide a landscape where circularity of plastics can fully be perceived as a priority in the C&D sites, innovation in the plastic recycling field is cherished and recycling rates can be maximized to a degree where the health and safety of people and the environment are not compromised.
Agarwal, S. & Gupta, R.K. 2017. 29 – Plastics in Buildings and Construction. Applied Plastics Engineering Handbook, 2nd Edition. 635–649. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-39040-8.00030-4
APPRICOD. 2006. Guide: Towards Sustainable Plastic Construction and Demolition Waste Management in Europe. [Online] Available at: https://www.acrplus.org/global/gene/link.php?doc_id=30&fg=1 [Accessed 28 Aug. 2025].
Beghetto, V., Sole, R., Buranello, C., Al-Abkal, M., & Facchin, M. 2021 Recent Advancements in Plastic Packaging Recycling: A Mini-Review. Materials 14(17): 4782. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14174782
Caro, D., Lodato, C., Damgaard, A., Cristóbal, J., Foster, G., Flachenecker, F., & Tonini, D. 2024 Environmental and socio-economic effects of construction and demolition waste recycling in the European Union. The Science of the Total Environment 908: 168295. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168295
Cha, G.-W., Moon, H. J., Kim, Y.-C., Hong, W.-H., Jeon, G.-Y., Yoon, Y. R., Hwang, C., & Hwang, J.-H. 2020 Evaluating recycling potential of demolition waste considering building structure types: A study in South Korea. Journal of cleaner production 256: 120385 doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120385
Chauhan, K., Peltokorpi, A., & Seppänen, O. 2023. Analysing Film Plastic Waste in Residential Construction Project. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. 509–520. doi: https://doi.org/10.24928/2023/0220
Circular Plastics Alliance. 2021 Design for Recycling Work Plan. Updated Final Draft – Version Sept. 2021. [Online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/47334 [Accessed 13 June 2025].
City of Espoo. n.d Closed Plastic Circle – from Pilots into Practice. [Online] Available at: https://www.espoo.fi/en/sustainable-development/closed-plastic-circle-pilots-practice#public-procurement 52291 [Accessed 28 July 2025].
Construction Act (unofficial English name for the Finnish Act “rakentamislaki”) 751/2023. Finlex. [Online] https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/saadoskokoelma/2023/751#Lidm46263583086816 [Accessed 30 Aug. 2025] (in Finnish)
Cristóbal García, J., Caro, D., Foster, G., Pristerà, G., Gallo, F., Tonini, D. 2024 Techno-economic and environmental assessment of construction and demolition waste management in the European Union – Status quo and prospective potential. Publications Office of the European Union, 2023. doi: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/721895
Dai, L., Zhou, N., Lv, Y., Cheng, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Cobb, K., Chen, P., Lei, H., & Ruan, R. 2022 Pyrolysis technology for plastic waste recycling: A state-of-the-art review. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 93: 101021 doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2022.101021
Damgaard, A., Lodato, C., Butera, S., Kamps, M., Corbin, L., Astrup, T. F., Fruergaard, T. A., Tonini, D. 2022. Background data collection and life cycle assessment for construction and demolition waste (CDW) management. Publications Office of the European Union. doi: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/772724
de Souza, F. M., Kahol, P. K., Gupta, R. K. 2021. 1 – Introduction to Polyurethane Chemistry. Polyurethane Chemistry: Renewable Polyols and Isocyanates. ACS Symposium Series (1380): 1–24. doi: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2021-1380.ch001
Deloitte. 2014. Construction and Demolition Waste Management in Finland V3 – December 2015. [Online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/pdf/waste/studies/deliverables/CDW_Finland_Factsheet_Final.pdf
Deshmukh, D., Kulkarni, H., Darbha Sai Srivats, Suraj Bhanushali and More, A.P. 2024. Recycling of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS): a review. Polymer Bulletin 81(13): 1–38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00289-024-05269-y
Directive 2008/98. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (Text with EEA relevance). Official Journal of the European Union 22.11.2008. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32008L0098 [Accessed 21 May 2025].
Eckermann, F., Golde, M., Herczeg, M., Mazzanti, M., Zoboli, R., Speck, S. 2015. Material resource taxation – an analysis for selected material resources. European Environment Agency. [Online] Available at: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjljsTahrWPAxXG cfEDHeEpOrUQFnoECA8QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eionet.europa.eu%2Fetcs%2Fetcwmge%2Fproducts%2Fetc-wmge-reports%2Fmaterial-resource-taxation-2013-an-analysis-for-selectedmaterial-resources%2F%40%40download%2Ffile%2Fetc-working-paper-material-resourcetaxation_final.pdf&usg=AOvVaw31AP4G0cEhkFSAnO0z44YG&opi=89978449 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025].
ECVM. 2024. PVC Applications. [Online] Available at: https://pvc.org/pvc-applications/ [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025].
EEA. 2022. Investigating Europe′s secondary raw material markets. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. [Online] Available at: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/bfba9727-adac11ed-8912-01aa75ed71a1/language-en [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025].
environment.fi. 2025. Purkumateriaalin ja rakennusjätteen selvitystietojärjestelmä. [Online] Available at: https://www.ymparisto.fi/fi/luvat-ja-velvoitteet/jatteiden-kerays-kuljetus-ja-valitys-suomensisalla/purkumateriaalin-ja-rakennusjatteen-selvitystietojarjestelma [Accessed 10 June 2025]. (in Finnish)
environment.fi. 2024. Transfer document – report the information to the SIIRTO register. [Online] Available at: https://www.ymparisto.fi/en/permits-and-obligations/collection-transport-and-brokerage-waste-withinfinland/transfer-document#which-waste-should-transfer-document-be-drawn [Accessed 7 July 2025].
Environmental Protection Act (unofficial English name for the Finnish Act “ympäristönsuojelulaki”) 527/2014. Finlex [Online]. Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/2014/527 [Accessed 30 Aug. 2025] (in Finnish)
European Commission. 2025a. Proposal for a Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union and repealing Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053. COM/2025/574 final. European Commission 16.7.2025. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0574&qid=1753797262498 [Accessed 22 Aug. 2025].
European Commission. 2025b. Zero waste, zero excuses: What the EU is doing to manage waste better. European Commission 31.3.2025. [Online] Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/news-and-media/news/zerowaste-zero-excuses-what-eu-doing-manage-waste-better-2025-03-31_en [Accessed 17 June 2025].
European Commission. 2020. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A new Circular Economy Action Plan For a cleaner and more competitive Europe. COM/2020/98 final. European Commission 11.3.2020. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52020DC0098 [Accessed 29 Aug. 2025].
European Commission. 2019 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: The European Green Deal. COM/2019/640 final. European Commission 11.12.2019. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52019DC0640 [Accessed 27 May 2025].
European Commission. n.d.a. Circular economy action plan. [Online] Available at: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/circular-economy-action-plan_en [Accessed 15 May 2025].
European Commission. n.d.b Plastics Strategy. [Online] Available at: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/plastics-strategy_en [Accessed 15 June 2025].
European Commission. n.d.c. Construction and demolition waste. [Online] Available at: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/construction-and-demolitionwaste_en#publications [Accessed 22 May 2025].
European Commission. n.d.d. Implementation of the Waste Framework Directive. [Online] Available at: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/implementation-waste-framework-directive_en [Accessed 22 May 2025].
European Commission. n.d.e Packaging waste. [Online] Available at: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/packaging-waste_en [Accessed 1 July 2025].
European Commission. n.d.f Plastic waste shipments. [Online] Available at: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/waste-and-recycling/waste-shipments/plastic-waste-shipments_en [Accessed 25 July 2025].
European Commission. n.d.g. REACH Regulation. [Online] Available at: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/chemicals/reach-regulation_en [Accessed 9 June 2025].
European Parliament. 2025 Strategy for a Sustainable Built Environment In “A European Green Deal”. Legislative Train Schedule. [Online]. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-aeuropean-green-deal/file-strategy-for-a-sustainable-built-environment?sid=9301 [Accessed 24 July 2025].
European Union. n.d. Waste hierarchy. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:waste_hierarchy [Accessed 26 May 2025]
Finnish Environment Institute. 2025. Kierrätyksen edistäminen kestävyysmurroksen ajurina: Suomen muovivirtojen mallintaminen (STAR). [Online] Available at: https://www.syke.fi/fi/projektit/kierratyksenedistaminen-kestavyysmurroksen-ajurina-suomen-muovivirtojen-mallintaminen-star [Accessed 13 Aug. 2025]. (in Finnish)
Fukuoka, S., Fukawa, I., Adachi, T., Fujita, H., Sugiyama, N., & Sawa, T. 2019. Industrialization and Expansion of Green Sustainable Chemical Process: A Review of Non-phosgene Polycarbonate from CO2. Organic Process Research & Development, 23(2): 145–169. doi: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.oprd.8b00391
Gálvez-Martos, J.-L., Styles, D., Schoenberger, H., & Zeschmar-Lahl, B. 2018. Construction and demolition waste best management practice in Europe. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 136: 166–178. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.04.016 [Accessed 29 Aug. 2025].
Gardner, J. 2020 Circular Plastics Alliance – State of Play for Collected and Sorted Plastic Waste from Construction. [Online] Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/43694 [Accessed 22 May 2025].
Government Decree on the Recovery of Certain Wastes in Earth Construction (unofficial English name for the Finnish Decree “Valtioneuvoston asetus eräiden jätteiden hyödyntämisestä maarakentamisessa”) 843/2017. [Online] Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/saadoskokoelma/2017/843 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025] (in Finnish)
Government Decree on End-of-Waste (EoW) criteria of mechanically recycled plastic raw material (unofficial English name for the Finnish Decree “Valtioneuvoston asetus mekaanisesti kierrätetyn uusiomuoviraakaaineen jätteeksi luokittelun päättymisen arviointiperusteista“) 270/2024. Finlex. [Online] Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/saadoskokoelma/2024/270 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025] (in Finnish)
Government Decree on Environmental Protection (unofficial English name for the Finnish Decree “Valtioneuvoston asetus ympäristönsuojelusta”) 713/2014. Finlex. [Online]. Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/2014/713 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025] (in Finnish)
Government Decree on Landfills (unofficial English name for the Finnish Decree “Valtioneuvoston asetus kaatopaikoista”) 331/2013. Finlex. [Online] Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/en/legislation/2013/331 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025]. (In Finnish)
Government Decree on Waste (unofficial English name for the Finnish Decree “Valtioneuvoston asetus jätteistä”) 978/2021. Finlex. [Online] Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/saadoskokoelma/2021/978 [Accessed 30 Aug. 2025]. (In Finnish)
Haahti, J. 2025. Personal communication. Data analyst, Finnish Environment Institute. Email, 4 Aug. 2025.
Häkkinen, T, Kuittinen, M. and Vares, S. 2019. Plastics in buildings. A study of Finnish blocks of flats and daycare centres. Ministry of the Environment. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/documents/1410903/122689634/Plastics+in+buildings.+A+study+of+Finnish+blocks+of+flats+ and+daycare+centres.pdf/9bf6e496-fd8f-1a84-f12ab19fbcbc906e/Plastics+in+buildings.+A+study+of+Finnish+blocks+of+flats+and+daycare+centres.pdf?t=16 87434923078 [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025].
Karppinen, T. K. M., Johansson, A., Rinne, P., Kauppi, S., & Sorvari, J. 2025 Muovitiekartan mittarit. Suomen ympäristökeskuksen raportteja 2 | 2025. [Online]. Available at: https://helda.helsinki.fi/items/e81c17bb6e9e-4543-a684-c5eba3f6a9ba [Accessed 28 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Kiertotalousratkaisuja. 2025 About the PlastLIFE project. [Online]. Available at: https://kiertotalousratkaisuja.syke.fi/en/plastlife/about-the-plastlife-project/ [Accessed 9 July 2025].
Kiviranta, K. & Hakala, J. 2021. Laskennallinen tarkastelu rakennusten purkumuovien hyödyntämismahdollisuuksista – loppuraportti. VTT. [Online] Available at: https://admin.espoo.fi/sites/default/files/202303/Laskennallinen%20tarkastelu%20purkumuovien%20hyo%CC%88dynta%CC%88mismahdollisuuksista_l oppuraportti%20VTT_0.pdf [Accessed 14 May 2025]. (in Finnish)
Kleemann, F., Lehner, H., Szczypińska, A., Lederer, J., & Fellner, J. 2017 Using change detection data to assess amount and composition of demolition waste from buildings in Vienna. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 123: 37–46. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.06.010
Kleemann, F., Lederer, J., Aschenbrenner, P., Rechberger, H., & Fellner, J. 2016 A method for determining buildings’ material composition prior to demolition. Building Research and Information : The International Journal of Research, Development and Demonstration 44(1): 51–62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.979029
Koivusalo, S. 2023 Muovitiekarttaan liittyvät green deal -sopimukset. Slideshow. Ministry of the Environment.
Kolehmainen, M. 2025. Personal communication. Senior officer, Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment. Email, 31 July 2025.
Kriteeripankki. n.d. Talonrakentaminen. [Online] Available at: https://kriteeripankki.fi/t/46?sustainability=%5b%22Green%20deal%22%5d&searchbox=%22muovi%22 [Accessed 28 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Kujansuu, M. 2025. Personal communication. Senior statistician, Statistics Finland. Email, 25 and 28 July 2025.
Lahtela, V., Hyvärinen, M., & Kärki, T. 2019 Composition of Plastic Fractions in Waste Streams: Toward More Efficient Recycling and Utilization. Polymers 11(1): 69. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/polym11010069
Laitinen, T., Riihimäki, M., Puustelli, J., & Mäkelä, S. 2022 Purkumuovien mallintaminen julkisissa palvelurakennuksissa. Muovitiekartta Suomelle. Forecon Oy. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/documents/1410903/42733297/Purkumuovien+mallintaminen+julkisissa+palvelurakennuksissa. pdf/e298cc47-9ac0-5efc-2a662de3884fc24c/Purkumuovien+mallintaminen+julkisissa+palvelurakennuksissa.pdf?t=1681811891528 [Accessed 7 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Lamba, P., Kaur, D. P., Raj, S., & Sorout, J. 2022 Recycling/reuse of plastic waste as construction material for sustainable development: a review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International 29(57): 86156–86179. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16980-y
Lange, J.-P. 2021 Managing Plastic Waste – Sorting, Recycling, Disposal, and Product Redesign. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering 9(47): 15722–15738. doi: https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.1c05013
Lehtonen, K. 2019 Purkutyöt – opas tekijöille ja teettäjille. Ympäristöministeriön julkaisuja 2019:29. [Online] Available at: https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/161884/YM_2019_29.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed =y [Accessed: 6 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Liikanen, M., Helppi, O., Havukainen, J., & Horttanainen, M. 2018 Rakennusjätteen koostumus – Etelä-Karjala. LUT Scientific and Expertise Publications, Tutkimusraportit – Research Reports 82. Available at: https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-335-228-5 (in Finnish)
Madanikashani, S., Vandewalle, L. A., De Meester, S., De Wilde, J., & Van Geem, K. M. 2022 Multi-Scale Modeling of Plastic Waste Gasification: Opportunities and Challenges. Materials 15(12): 4215. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15124215
Material Economics. 2018. The Circular Economy – a Powerful Force for Climate Mitigation, Transformative innovation for prosperous and low-carbon industry. [Online] Available at: https://materialeconomics.com/node/14 [Accessed 15 June 2025]
McKeen, L. W. 2023 The Effects of Temperature, Humidity, and other Factors on the Properties of Polyolefins and Acrylics In Effect of Temperature and other Factors on Plastics and Elastomers, 4th Edition: 1–1. Elsevier.
Ministry of Finance. 2024. EU-jäsenyys maksoi viime vuonna Suomelle 150 euroa asukasta kohden. Ministry of Finance 16.9.2024. [Online] Available at: https://vm.fi/-/eu-jasenyys-maksoi-viime-vuonna-suomelle-150euroa-asukasta-kohden [Accessed 24 June 2025]. (in Finnish)
Ministry of Finance. 2023 EU-jäsenyys maksoi viime vuonna Suomelle 144 euroa asukasta kohden. Ministry of Finance 15.9.2023. [Online] Available at: https://vm.fi/-/eu-jasenyys-maksoi-viime-vuonna-suomelle-144euroa-asukasta-kohden [Accessed 24 June 2025]. (in Finnish)
Ministry of the Environment. 2022 Kierrätyksestä kiertotalouteen – Valtakunnallinen jätesuunnitelma vuoteen 2027. [Online] Available at: https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/163978/YM_2022_13.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed =y [Accessed 2 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Ministry of the Environment. 2021. Government resolution on the Strategic Programme for Circluar Economy. [Online] Available at:
https://ym.fi/documents/1410903/42733297/Government+resolution+on+the+Strategic+Programme+for+Cir cular+Economy+8.4.2021.pdf/309aa929-a36f-d565-99f8fa565050e22e/Government+resolution+on+the+Strategic+Programme+for+Circular+Economy+8.4.2021.pd f?t=1619432219261 [Accessed 15 May 2025].
Ministry of the Environment. 2020. Rakentamisen muovit. [Online] Available at: ym.fi/documents/1410903/40549091/rakentamisen_muovit_A4_v3.pdf/ [Accessed 12 Jun 2025]. (in Finnish)
Ministry of the Environment. n.d.a. Rakentamisen muovit green deal -sopimus. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/documents/1410903/33891761/Rakentamisen+muovit.+Green+deal+-sopimus.pdf/85d862420d7a-c7d1-c75f-2e1cdb903b0b/Rakentamisen+muovit.+Green+deal+-sopimus.pdf?t=1607340538947 [Accessed 17 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Ministry of the Environment. n.d.b. Jätelaki ja asetukset – mikä muuttui, miten toimin? [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/jatteet/jatelaki. [Accessed 9 June 2025]. (in Finnish)
Ministry of the Environment. n.d.c Strategic programme to promote a circular economy. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/en/strategic-programme-to-promote-a-circular-economy [Accessed 3 Aug. 2025].
Ministry of the Environment. n.d.d Green deal -sopimukset. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/green-dealsopimukset [Accessed 30 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Ministry of the Environment. n.d.e. Circular Economy Act. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/en/circulareconomy-act. [Accessed 17 June 2025].
Ministry of the Environment Decree on Reporting on Construction and Demolition Material Waste (unofficial English name for the Finnish Decree “Ympäristöministeriön asetus purkumateriaali- ja rakennusjäteselvityksestä”) 1089/2024. Finlex. [Online]. Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/en/legislation/collection/2024/1089 [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025] (in Finnish)
Mohammed, M.A., Menkabo, M.M. and Budaiwi, I. 2023. Assessment of polycarbonate material as a sustainable substitute for glazing in hot climates. International Journal of Sustainable Energy 42(1): 954–974. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2023.2246092
Moretti, E., Zinzi, M., Merli, F., & Buratti, C. 2018 Optical, thermal, and energy performance of advanced polycarbonate systems with granular aerogel. Energy and Buildings 166: 407–417. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.01.057
Nyyssönen, T. 2025 Kierrätysmuovia rahdataan Suomesta tuhansien kilometrien päähän, ja siihen on yllättävä syy. Yle 22.1.2025. [Online] Available at: https://yle.fi/a/74-20137141 [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025]. (in Finnish)
Oberender, A., Fruergaard Astrup, T., Frydkjær Witte, S., Camboni, M., Chiabrando, F., Hayleck, M., Akelytė, R., & European Commission: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. 2024 EU construction & demolition waste management protocol including guidelines for pre-demolition and pre-renovation audits of construction works – Updated edition 2024. Publications Office of the European Union. doi: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2873/77980
Pantini, S. & Rigamonti, L. 2020 Is selective demolition always a sustainable choice? Waste Management 103: 169–176. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.12.033
Pericot, N. G., Saez, P. V., Del Rio Merino, M., & Carrasco, O. L. 2014 Production patterns of packaging waste categories generated at typical Mediterranean residential building worksites. Waste Management 34(11): 1932–1938. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.06.020
Phillips, R., Whelton, A. J., & Eckelman, M. J. 2021 Incorporating use phase chemical leaching and water quality testing for life cycle toxicity assessment of cross-linked polyethylene (PEX) piping. The Science of the Total Environment 782: 146374. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146374
Pierri, E., Egle, L., Milios, L., & Saveyn, H. 2024 EU-wide end-of-waste criteria for plastic waste. Publications Office of the European Union. Luxembourg. [Online] doi: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/9234350
Pimentel Real, L.E. 2022 Recycled Materials for Construction Applications: Plastic Products and Composites, 1st Edition. Springer International Publishing AG. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14872-9
Pipelife. n.d. Muoviputkien keräys ja kierrätys. Muoviteollisuus ry:n putkijaosto, julkaisu nr. 43. [Online] Available at: https://www.pipelife.fi/content/dam/pipelife/finland/marketing/general/stakeholderpublications/brochures/Muoviputkien%20kierr%C3%A4tys%20-%20Muoviteollisuus%20Ry.pdf [Accessed 7 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Plastic Recyclers Europe. 2023 Plastic Recycling Industry Figures 2023: Mapping of Installed Capacities. [Online] Available at: https://www.plasticsrecyclers.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Plastics-Recycling-Industry-Figures_2023.pdf [Accessed 18 June 2025].
Plastic Recyclers Europe. 2022 25 Years of Making Plastics Circular. [Online] Available at: https://www.plasticsrecyclers.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/25-years-of-making-plastics-circular.pdf [Accessed 11 June 2025].
Plastic Recyclers Europe & ICIS. 2023 2023 Flexible Films Market in Europe: State of Play – Production, Collection and Recycling Data. [Online] Available at: https://www.plasticsrecyclers.eu/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/2023-Flexible-state-of-play-Snapshot-update-June.pdf [Accessed 18 June 2025].
Plastics Europe 2024 The Circular Economy for Plastics A European Analysis. [Online] Available at: https://plasticseurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/Circular_Economy_report_Digital_light_FINAL.pdf. [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025].
Plastics Europe 2019 The Circular Economy for Plastics – An European Overview. [Online]. Available at: https://plasticseurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/20191206-Circular-Economy-Study.pdf [Accessed 3 Aug. 2025].
Plastics Europe. n.d. Polyolefins. [Online] Available at: https://plasticseurope.org/plastics-explained/a-largefamily/polyolefins-2/ [Accessed 15 July 2024].
Plastics Europe & Conversio. 2018. Overview plastic waste from building & construction by polymer type and by recycling, energy recovery and disposal – 1. [Online] Available at: https://plasticseurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/BC_Table.pdf [Accessed 14 June 2025].
PSLoop. 2024 Recycling Technology for Expanded Polystyrene containing legislated HBCD proven to be successful. PSLoop 29.3.2024. [Online] Available at: https://www.psloop.eu/news/project_completion/ [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025].
Ragaert, K., Ragot, C., Van Geem, K. M., Kersten, S., Shiran, Y., & De Meester, S. 2023 Clarifying European terminology in plastics recycling. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry 44: 100871. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2023.100871
Ramboll. 2020. Kalvomuovien erilliskeräyksen työmaaopas. Muovitiekartta Suomelle. Ministry of the Environment. [Online] Available at: https://www.motiva.fi/files/17682/Kalvomuovien_erilliskerayksen_tyomaaopas.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug. 2025]. (in Finnish)
Rayjadhav, S. B., Kubade, P. R., Kumar, M., Palani, I. A., & Lazar, P. 2024. Polyamide: Comprehensive Insights into Types, Chemical Foundations, Blending Techniques and Versatile Applications In High-Performance Sustainable Materials and Structures: 407–425. Springer. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-72527-2_30
ReBuilt. 2024. European regulation on construction materials. Interreg Central Europe. 16.12.2024. [Online] Available at: https://www.interreg-central.eu/news/european-regulation-on-construction-materials/ [Accessed 29 May 2025].
Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006. Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on shipments of waste. Official Journal of the European Union 12.7.2006. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1013/oj/eng [Accessed 29 Aug. 2025].
Regulation (EU) 2025/40. Regulation (EU) 2025/40 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 on packaging and packaging waste, amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and Directive (EU) 2019/904, and repealing Directive 94/62/EC (Text with EEA relevance) Official Journal of the European Union 22.1.2025. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L_202500040&pk_campaign=todays_OJ&pk_source=EURLex&pk_medium=X&pk_content=Environment&pk_keyword=Regulation [Accessed 17 June 2025].
Regulation (EU) 2024/1781 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for sustainable products, amending Directive (EU) 2020/1828 and Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 and repealing Directive 2009/125/EC (Text with EEA
relevance). 28.6.2024. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R1781 [Accessed 30 Aug. 2025].
Regulation (EU) (2024/1157). Regulation (EU) 2024/1157 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 on shipments of waste, amending Regulations (EU) No 1257/2013 and (EU) 2020/1056 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 (Text with EEA relevance). Official Journal of the European Union 30.4.2024. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1157/oj/eng [Accessed 29 Aug. 2025].
Regulation (EU) 2024/3110 Regulation (EU) 2024/3110 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 laying down harmonised rules for the marketing of construction products and repealing Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 (Text with EEA relevance) Official Journal of the European Union 18.12.2024. [Online] Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3110/oj/eng [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025].
Ryhti. n.d.a About the system. [Online] Available at: https://ryhti.syke.fi/en/about-the-system/ [Accessed 30 July 2025].
Ryhti. n.d.b Rakentamisen kiertotalous edistyy. [Online] Available at: https://ryhti.syke.fi/esimerkkeja-jatoteutuksia/esimerkkeja-muutoksesta/rakentamisen-kiertotalous-edistyy/ [Accessed 30 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Saarnilehto, M. 2025. Plastics Roadmap for Finland – five years on the road. Slideshow. Ministry of the Environment.
Sagan, J. & Mach, A. 2025 Construction waste management: Impact on society and strategies for reduction. Journal of Cleaner Production 486: 144363. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.144363
Salminen, J., Rinne, P., Valve, H., Johansson, A., Turunen, T., Räisänen, M., Fjäder, P., Kautto, P., & FraserVatto, A. 2025. Muovinkierrätyksen avainkysymykset. Valtioneuvoston selvitys- ja tutkimustoiminnan julkaisusarja 2025:3. [Online] Available at: https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/handle/10024/166239 [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025].
Salminen, J., Turunen, T., & Fjäder, P. 2020 Muistio kansallisten EoW-menettelyjen mahdollisuuksista mekaanisen muovikierrätyksen edistämisessä. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/documents/1410903/38439968/Muovien-mekaaninen-kierratys-Suomessa_muistio_12062002863024_3DA1_4EE0_9C5E_D066AC0EA49C-161191.pdf/b92b8565-179c-7071-8c19ffa2ce811765/Muovien-mekaaninen-kierratys-Suomessa_muistio_12062002863024_3DA1_4EE0_9C5E_D066AC0EA49C-161191.pdf?t=1603260901131 [Accessed 28 June 2025] (in Finnish)
Santos, G., Esmizadeh, E., & Riahinezhad, M. 2024. Recycling Construction, Renovation, and Demolition Plastic Waste: Review of the Status Quo, Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Polymers and the Environment 32(2): 479–509. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-023-02982-z
Satterthwaite, K. 2017. Plastics Based on Styrene. In Brydson’s Plastics Materials, 8th Edition: 311–328. Elsevier Ltd. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-35824-8.00012-8
Schiavoni, S., D׳Alessandro F., Bianchi, F., & Asdrubali, F. 2016. Insulation materials for the building sector: A review and comparative analysis. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews 62: 988–1011. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.045
Schlummer, M., Fell, T., Mäurer, A., & Altnau, G. 2020. The Role of Chemistry in Plastics Recycling – A Comparison of Physical and Chemical Plastics Recycling Kunststoffe Int 5/2020: 34–37.
Schmidt, S., Verni, X-F., Gibon, T., & Laner, D. 2025a. Plastics in the German building and infrastructure sector: A high-resolution dataset on historical flows, stocks, and legacy substance contamination. Data in Brief 60: 111654. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2025.111654
Schmidt, S., Verni, X-F., Gibon, T., & Laner, D. 2025b. IMMEC_dMFA_historic: Dataset and code for “Plastics in the German building and infrastructure sector: A high-resolution dataset on historical flows, stocks, and legacy substance contamination”. Zenodo. doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15487093
Schmitz, M., Heyne, S., Gentile, V., Hoffmann, P., Hippinen, I., Lintilä, A., & Rikberg, E. 2024. Waste incineration in the Nordic Countries. [Online]. Available at: https://pub.norden.org/temanord2024-524/temanord2024-524.pdf [Accessed 31 July 2025].
Sitoumus 2050. n.d. Rakentamisen muovit green deal -sopimus. [Online] Available at: https://www.sitoumus2050.fi/fi_FI/web/sitoumus2050/rakentamisen-muovit#/ [Accessed 10 June 2025]. (in Finnish)
Soares, J. B. P. & McKenna, T. F. L. 2012 Chapter 1 – Introduction to Polyolefins. Polyolefin reaction engineering, 1st Edition: 20–29. Wiley-VCH.
Souder, J., Kennedy, E., Xu, C., Gruber, B., Paes, C., Hu, R., Vazquez Bustelo, J., Kamps, M., Sierra Garcia, M., Björk, C., & Amadei, A.M. 2024 Plastic Product Mass Flow Model (Excel format). Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2024. Available at: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC135901/JRC135901_02.xlsx [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025].
Statistics Finland. 2024a. Volume of waste generated in 2023 returned to the level of 2021 – due to an increase in the amount of waste from mining and quarrying and construction. [Online] Available at: https://stat.fi/en/publication/cm1htqu3a3rjj07w5tidiyjuz [Accessed 24 June 2025].
Statistics Finland. 2024b Waste generation by industry, 2017–2023. [Online] Available at: https://pxdata.stat.fi/PXWeb/pxweb/en/StatFin/StatFin__jate/statfin_jate_pxt_12qw.px [Accessed 24 June 2025].
Styrenics. n.d.a About Styrenics. [Online]. Available at: https://www.styrenics.info/about-styrenics/ [Accessed 12 July 2025].
Styrenics. n.d.b Polystyrene Foams. [Online]. Available at: https://www.styrenics.info/about-styrenics/polystyrene-foams/ [Accessed 12 July 2025].
Styrenics. n.d.c. Construction. [Online]. Available at: https://www.styrenics.info/applications/construction/ [Accessed 21 July 2025].
Sumi Oy. 2022 PVC-muovipakkaukset saa lajitella muovipakkausten keräykseen kesästä alkaen. [Online] Available at: https://sumi.fi/2022/06/01/pvc-muovipakkaukset-saa-lajitella-muovipakkausten-keraykseen/ [Accessed 7 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
Suomi.fi. 2025 rakennus- ja purkujäte. [Online] Available at: https://sanastot.suomi.fi/terminology/jate/concept/concept-12 [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025]. (in Finnish)
Syklo. 2025. Syklo’s Hyvinkää circular economy hub receives environmental permit. Syklo 23.01.2025. [Online] Available at: https://syklo.com/syklos-hyvinkaa-circular-economy-hub-receives-environmental-permit/ [Accessed 16 June 2025].
Syklo. 2024. Syklo Partners with Impact Recycling (UK) to Build a Plastic Recycling Plant Utilising GroundBreaking Technology. Syklo 20.02.2024. [Online] Available at: https://syklo.com/syklo-partners-with-impact-recycling-uk-to-build-a-plastic-recycling-plant-utilising-ground-breaking-technology/ [Accessed 16 June 2025].
SYSTEMIQ. 2022 ReShaping Plastics: Pathways to a Circular, Climate Neutral Plastics System in Europe. [Online] Available at: https://plasticseurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/SYSTEMIQ-ReShapingPlastics-April2022.pdf [Accessed 5 Aug. 2025].
Tamošaitienė, J., Parham, S., Sarvari, H., Chan, D. W. M., & Edwards D. J. 2024. A Review of the Application of Synthetic and Natural Polymers as Construction and Building Materials for Achieving Sustainable Construction. Buildings (Basel), 14(8), 2569. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14082569
UNEP. 2023 Technical guidelines on the environmentally sound management of plastic wastes. Conference of the Parties to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal Sixteenth meeting. Draft updated version of 6 April 2023.
VinylPlus. 2024. 2024 Progress Report – Reporting on 2023 Activities. [Online] Available at: https://www.vinylplus.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/VinylPlus-Progress-Report-2024-web.pdf [Accessed 10 July 2024].
Wahlström, M., Bergmans, J., Teittinen, T., Bachér, J., Smeets, A., & Paduart, A. 2020 Construction and Demolition Waste: challenges and opportunities in a circular economy. European Topic Centre on Waste and Materials in a Green Economy. [Online] Available at: https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-wmge/products/etc-wmge-reports/construction-and-demolition-waste-challenges-and-opportunities-in-a-circular-economy [Accessed 15 June 2025].
Waste Act (unofficial English name for the Finnish Act “jätelaki”) 646/2011. Finlex. [Online]. Available at: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/lainsaadanto/2011/646 [Accessed 30 Aug. 2025]. (in Finnish)
Williams, R., Artola, I., Beznea, A., & Nicholls, G. 2020. Emerging Challenges of Waste Management in Europe – Limits of Recycling, Final Report. Trinomics B.V., Rotterdam. [Online]. Available at: https://trinomics.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Trinomics-2020-Limits-of-Recycling.pdf [Accessed 4 Aug. 2025].
Ylä-Mononen, L. & Alkio, J. 2022. Reduce and Refuse, Recycle and Replace – a Plastics Roadmap for Finland 2.0. [Online] Available at: https://ym.fi/documents/1410903/42733297/Reduce+and+refuse,+recycle+and+replace.+A+plastics+roadma p+for+Finland+2.0.pdf/fc0948a7-5414-96fa-07a0703302fb239c/Reduce+and+refuse,+recycle+and+replace.+A+plastics+roadmap+for+Finland+2.0.pdf?t=16 81805736722 [Accessed 16 May 2025].
Zheng, B., Zhang, S., Shu, G., Sun, Z., Wang, Y., & Xie, J. 2023. Experimental investigation and modeling of the mechanical properties of construction PMMA at different temperatures. Structures (Oxford) 57: 105091. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2023.105091
Zhu, Y., Lonka, H., Tähtinen, K., Anttonen, M., Isokääntä, P., Knuutila, A., Lahdensivu, J., Mahiout, S., Mäntylä, A-M., Raimovaara, M., Rantio, T., Santonen, T., & Teittinen, T. 2022 Purkumateriaalien kelpoisuus eri käyttökohteisiin turvallisuuden ja terveellisyyden näkökulmasta. Valtioneuvoston kanslia, Helsinki. [Online] Available at: https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/163832/VN_Teas_2022_15.pdf?sequence=1&isAl lowed=y [Accessed 6 July 2025]. (in Finnish)
zu Castell-Rüdenhausen, M. 2025. Material flow analysis and modelling of the feedstock potential for recycling polystyrene. Circular Economy 4(1): 100127. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cec.2025.100127
zu Castell-Rüdenhausen, M., Tenhunen-Lunkka, A., Taveau, M., Vincenti, N., Marttila, T., & Wahlström, M. 2021 Review of the European Legislative and Policy Framework Affecting the Recycling of Hazardous Plastics from ELV, WEEE and C&DW. VTT Technology 399 VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. doi: https://doi.org/10.32040/2242-122X.2021.T399
Zurawska, W. & Blanco de Tord, I. 2025 Plastic Taxation in Europe – 2025. WTS Global. [Online] Available at: https://wts.com/wts.com/publications/climate-protection-green-tax-energy/2025/20250612-plastic-taxationin-europe-2025.pdf [Accessed 31 Aug. 2025].
Report of the PlastLIFE project coordinated by the Finnish Environment Institute: Challengesoflogisticsand legislationintherecyclingof constructionanddemolition plasticwaste
ISBN 978-952-11-5821-6 (pdf)
Finnish Environment Institute, 2026.