You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Proceedings
  • Abstract
  • Open Access

26 November 2025

Upcycling Prefabricated Building Materials to Develop Pavilions for Community Gardens in Huddersfield, UK †

,
,
,
,
and
1
Sustainable Living Research Centre, Department of Design and Architecture, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield HD1 3DH, UK
2
Department of Design and Architecture, School of Arts and Humanities, University of Huddersfield, Queensgate, Huddersfield HD1 3DH, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Presented at the 11th World Sustainability Forum (WSF11), Barcelona, Spain, 2–3 October 2025.
This article belongs to the Proceedings The 11th World Sustainability Forum (WSF11)
As average temperatures in the UK continue to rise, and the effects of climate change are felt across communities, the government has revised requirements for urban development pertaining to Biodiversity Net Gain and access to green spaces (under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Environment Act 2021). Several scholars have pointed out that urban community gardens in the UK are both a critical resource for biodiversity and social spaces that are becoming increasingly at risk ([1,2,3]), owing to several barriers including insufficient infrastructure and on-site facilities such as toilets, shelters for storage and protection from rain, harsh sunlight, and wind. Our research in different community gardens and allotments in Yorkshire, UK, confirmed that the lack of facilities is a critical issue. On the other hand, through a Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) with a local modular building manufacturer, the research team at the Sustainable Living Research Centre in the University of Huddersfield identified a key opportunity to divert on-site and factory construction waste for the development of upcycled shelters at local community gardens. It gives private companies an opportunity to improve circular value chains for materials, reduce costs, lower embodied carbon, and, most importantly, gain social value by actively participating in local community development.
By investigating a project undertaken by a multidisciplinary team where the waste materials at a local modular building factory (Actiform) were upcycled to construct pavilions in community gardens in Yorkshire, UK, the paper explored a five step process for reuse, as follows: collecting information and conducting life-cycle assessment for materials, analysing criteria for upcycling the selected components, planning for reuse and co-designing with community members, constructing the shelter, and gathering reflections from the community groups and stakeholders. The outcome of the study identifies several barriers for reuse, including the following: the absence of standards addressing the reuse of building components, challenges in tracing the original of materials, issues related to ownership of the materials and land for construction, and a prevailing perception among users that material reuse is driven more by economic rather than environmental concerns. The paper concludes by recommending strategies to enhance community garden environments through the use of recycled materials in future projects.

Author Contributions

Y.G.: conceptualization, methodology, writing—original draft preparation, investigation. Funding acquisition, writing—reviewing and editing. M.M.: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, writing—original draft preparation, project administration, T.C.F.: conceptualization, methodology. N.O.: methodology, data curation. H.G.: visualization, designing. N.C.: conceptualization, methodology, visualization. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the research fund from the Sustainable Living Research Cen-tre at the University of Huddersfield, and AHRC Impact Acceleration Account funding at the University of Huddersfield.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of University of Huddersfield (2 July 2025, protocol number: N/A).

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Egerer, M.; Karlebowski, S.; Conitz, F.; Neumann, A.E.; Schmack, J.M.; Sturm, U. In defence of urban community gardens. People Nat. 2024, 6, 367–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Irvine, S.; Johnson, L.; Peters, K. Community gardens and sustainable land use planning: A case-study of the Alex Wilson community garden. Local Environ. 1999, 4, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Raneng, J.; Howes, M.; Pickering, C.M. Current and future directions in research on community gardens. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 79, 127814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.