Table A1 Focus group details and...

Table A1

Focus group details and stakeholder representation

Focus group ID	Date	RaaS-FaaS*	Group	Participant ID*	Participant
FG1	20-9-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Client	CASE-5	5
			Consultant	CONS-6	6
			Client	CASE-7	7
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-13	13
			Accountant	ACC-14	14
			Social	SOC-15	15
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Financial	FIN-19	19
			University	UNI-21	21
			University	UNI-23	23
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Financial	FIN-34	34
			Client	CASE-37	37
FG2	21-10-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Financial	FIN-11	11
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Social	SOC-22	22
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Financial	FIN-31	31
			Client	CASE-37	37
			Consultant	CONS-39	39
			Financial	FIN-43	43
FG3	24-10-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Client	CASE-5	5
			Client	CASE-9	9
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-13	13
			Accountant	ACC-14	14
			Social	SOC-22	22
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Consultant	CONS-39	39
FG4	11-08-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Client	CASE-9	9
			Financial	FIN-11	11
			Client	CASE-13	13
			Accountant	ACC-14	14
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Financial	FIN-31	31
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Financial	FIN-37	37
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Financial	FIN-43	43
FG5	24-04-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Financial	FIN-4	4
			Consultant	CONS-6	6
			University	UNI-12	12
			Social	SOC-15	15
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Client	CASE-18	18
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Financial	FIN-32	32
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-36	36
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Financial	FIN-41	41
			Client	CASE-44	44
			Legal	LEG-45	45
FG6	15-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Financial	FIN-4	4
			University	UNI-12	12
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Consultant	CONS-20	20
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-40	40
			Client	CASE-42	42
FG7	19-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Client	CASE-42	42
FG8	26-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Financial	FIN-8	8
			University	UNI-12	12
			Financial	FIN-24	24
			Legal	LEG-25	25
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-30	30
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Legal	LEG-45	45
FG9	29-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Consultant	CONS-10	10
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Financial	FIN-35	35
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Financial	FIN-41	41
FG10	03-06-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Client	CASE-3	3
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-18	18
			Financial	FIN-24	24
			University	UNI-27	27
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-40	40
			Financial	FIN-41	41
			Client	CASE-42	42
			Legal	LEG-45	45
FG11	12-06-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Consulting	CONS-6	6
			University	UNI-12	12
			Social	SOC-15	15
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Consultant	CONS-20	20
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-36	36
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Client	CASE-40	40
			Financial	FIN-41	41
			Client	CASE-42	42
			Legal	LEG-45	45

Focus group ID	Date	RaaS-FaaS*	Group	Participant ID*	Participant
FG1	20-9-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Client	CASE-5	5
			Consultant	CONS-6	6
			Client	CASE-7	7
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-13	13
			Accountant	ACC-14	14
			Social	SOC-15	15
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Financial	FIN-19	19
			University	UNI-21	21
			University	UNI-23	23
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Financial	FIN-34	34
			Client	CASE-37	37
FG2	21-10-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Financial	FIN-11	11
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Social	SOC-22	22
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Financial	FIN-31	31
			Client	CASE-37	37
			Consultant	CONS-39	39
			Financial	FIN-43	43
FG3	24-10-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Client	CASE-5	5
			Client	CASE-9	9
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-13	13
			Accountant	ACC-14	14
			Social	SOC-22	22
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Consultant	CONS-39	39
FG4	11-08-2019	RaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Client	CASE-9	9
			Financial	FIN-11	11
			Client	CASE-13	13
			Accountant	ACC-14	14
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Financial	FIN-31	31
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Financial	FIN-37	37
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Financial	FIN-43	43
FG5	24-04-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Financial	FIN-4	4
			Consultant	CONS-6	6
			University	UNI-12	12
			Social	SOC-15	15
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Client	CASE-18	18
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Financial	FIN-32	32
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-36	36
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Financial	FIN-41	41
			Client	CASE-44	44
			Legal	LEG-45	45
FG6	15-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Financial	FIN-4	4
			University	UNI-12	12
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Consultant	CONS-20	20
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-40	40
			Client	CASE-42	42
FG7	19-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Client	CASE-42	42
FG8	26-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Financial	FIN-8	8
			University	UNI-12	12
			Financial	FIN-24	24
			Legal	LEG-25	25
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-30	30
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Legal	LEG-45	45
FG9	29-05-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Consultant	CONS-10	10
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Financial	FIN-35	35
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Financial	FIN-41	41
FG10	03-06-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Client	CASE-3	3
			University	UNI-12	12
			Client	CASE-18	18
			Financial	FIN-24	24
			University	UNI-27	27
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-40	40
			Financial	FIN-41	41
			Client	CASE-42	42
			Legal	LEG-45	45
FG11	12-06-2020	FaaS	Social	SOC-1	1
			Social	SOC-2	2
			Consulting	CONS-6	6
			University	UNI-12	12
			Social	SOC-15	15
			Consultant	CONS-17	17
			Consultant	CONS-20	20
			Accountant	ACC-26	26
			University	UNI-27	27
			Client	CASE-28	28
			Financial	FIN-29	29
			Accountant	ACC-33	33
			Client	CASE-36	36
			Financial	FIN-38	38
			Client	CASE-40	40
			Financial	FIN-41	41
			Client	CASE-42	42
			Legal	LEG-45	45

Note(s): *Coding: RaaS = Road-as-a-Service, FaaS = Façade-as-a-Service; ACC = accounting firm, CASE = case representative organisation, CONS = consulting firm, FIN = financial institution, UNI = University, LEG = legal firm, SOC = social enterprise

[ViewLarge]

Table A2

Case study descriptions: road-as-a-service and façade-as-a-service business models

Topic	Road-as-a-service	Façade-as-a-service
Case summary	The Road-as-a-Service pilot explores a circular business model for road construction and maintenance in the Netherlands. Instead of traditional procurement, infrastructure is delivered as a service, shifting focus from ownership of materials to long-term performance and reuse	The Façade-as-a-Service pilot explores a circular construction model where a building's façade is no longer sold as a product but delivered as a service. This shifts incentives from short-term delivery to long-term performance, maintenance, and material reuse
Key contracts	The model uses performance-based contracts, where the contractor is responsible not only for construction but also for maintenance, material recovery, and end-of-life reuse. Payment is tied to road functionality and durability over time, encouraging circular practices	The model is based on service and performance contracts. These agreements ensure that the façade provider remains responsible for the façade's functionality, energy performance, maintenance, and end-of-life recovery. Ownership of materials often stays with the supplier, enabling reuse and high residual value retention
Stakeholders	Provincial Government: Client and asset owner Contractor: responsible for road performance, maintenance, and material recovery Bank: Financial partner exploring circular financing	Façade Supplier(s): Responsible for delivery, monitoring, and maintenance Building Owner or Developer: Purchases façade service instead of asset Architect and Engineer Teams: Design for circularity and adaptability
Material flow assumptions	The model assumes high-value retention through Design for disassembly Use of recycled asphalt and modular elements Reverse logistics for end-of-life materials Monitoring road usage and wear for predictive maintenance This RaaS approach aims to reduce raw material consumption, extend asset life, and shift incentives toward sustainable infrastructure management	The façades are described as modular, demountable building envelopes that are retained by the service provider. Users lease the façades’ functionality (e.g. insulation, aesthetics) over time, while the provider remains responsible for maintenance, upgrades, and material recovery at the end of the contract. These façades are designed for reuse or repurposing in future projects, aligning with circular economy principles. This FaaS model reduces material waste, promotes modular and adaptable design, and aligns financial incentives with long-term circular value

Topic	Road-as-a-service	Façade-as-a-service
Case summary	The Road-as-a-Service pilot explores a circular business model for road construction and maintenance in the Netherlands. Instead of traditional procurement, infrastructure is delivered as a service, shifting focus from ownership of materials to long-term performance and reuse	The Façade-as-a-Service pilot explores a circular construction model where a building's façade is no longer sold as a product but delivered as a service. This shifts incentives from short-term delivery to long-term performance, maintenance, and material reuse
Key contracts	The model uses performance-based contracts, where the contractor is responsible not only for construction but also for maintenance, material recovery, and end-of-life reuse. Payment is tied to road functionality and durability over time, encouraging circular practices	The model is based on service and performance contracts. These agreements ensure that the façade provider remains responsible for the façade's functionality, energy performance, maintenance, and end-of-life recovery. Ownership of materials often stays with the supplier, enabling reuse and high residual value retention
Stakeholders	Provincial Government: Client and asset owner Contractor: responsible for road performance, maintenance, and material recovery Bank: Financial partner exploring circular financing	Façade Supplier(s): Responsible for delivery, monitoring, and maintenance Building Owner or Developer: Purchases façade service instead of asset Architect and Engineer Teams: Design for circularity and adaptability
Material flow assumptions	The model assumes high-value retention through Design for disassembly Use of recycled asphalt and modular elements Reverse logistics for end-of-life materials Monitoring road usage and wear for predictive maintenance This RaaS approach aims to reduce raw material consumption, extend asset life, and shift incentives toward sustainable infrastructure management	The façades are described as modular, demountable building envelopes that are retained by the service provider. Users lease the façades’ functionality (e.g. insulation, aesthetics) over time, while the provider remains responsible for maintenance, upgrades, and material recovery at the end of the contract. These façades are designed for reuse or repurposing in future projects, aligning with circular economy principles. This FaaS model reduces material waste, promotes modular and adaptable design, and aligns financial incentives with long-term circular value

[ViewLarge]

Table A3

Summary of focus group discussion framework

Domain	Theoretical link	Key topics explored	Case-specific applications
Accounting practices	Transition Accountability (Section 5.1)	Asset lifecycle valuation and recognition Depreciation under service models Residual value estimation Residual value estimation Residual value estimation Residual value estimation Performance measurement and KPIs Audit evidence requirements	RaaS Pavement condition indices Resurfacing intervals Reclaimed asphalt valuation Maintenance cost patterns FaaS Component degradation rates Thermal performance metrics Panel replacement cycles Weatherproofing integrity
Governance arrangements	Adaptive Governance (Section 5.2)	Rights and obligations allocation Risk-sharing mechanisms Renegotiation triggers Organizational accountability mapping Data governance protocols	RaaS Road authority oversight Traffic load variations Winter maintenance duties Defect liability periods FaaS Building access protocols Interface coordination with other trades Warranty enforcement Occupant disruption management
Financial and traceability systems	Material Stewardship (Section 5.3)	Lending horizon alignment Collateral and covenant structures Digital monitoring requirements Material passport systems Residual value realization	RaaS Availability-based payment mechanisms Pavement sensor data Maintenance logs Secondary asphalt markets FaaS Performance bonds Component tracking systems Inspection certificates Panel refurbishment pathways

Domain	Theoretical link	Key topics explored	Case-specific applications
Accounting practices	Transition Accountability (Section 5.1)	Asset lifecycle valuation and recognition Depreciation under service models Residual value estimation Residual value estimation Residual value estimation Residual value estimation Performance measurement and KPIs Audit evidence requirements	RaaS Pavement condition indices Resurfacing intervals Reclaimed asphalt valuation Maintenance cost patterns FaaS Component degradation rates Thermal performance metrics Panel replacement cycles Weatherproofing integrity
Governance arrangements	Adaptive Governance (Section 5.2)	Rights and obligations allocation Risk-sharing mechanisms Renegotiation triggers Organizational accountability mapping Data governance protocols	RaaS Road authority oversight Traffic load variations Winter maintenance duties Defect liability periods FaaS Building access protocols Interface coordination with other trades Warranty enforcement Occupant disruption management
Financial and traceability systems	Material Stewardship (Section 5.3)	Lending horizon alignment Collateral and covenant structures Digital monitoring requirements Material passport systems Residual value realization	RaaS Availability-based payment mechanisms Pavement sensor data Maintenance logs Secondary asphalt markets FaaS Performance bonds Component tracking systems Inspection certificates Panel refurbishment pathways

Note(s): *This table summarises the key thematic areas that emerged across focus group discussions. While these domains provided broad structure for the sessions, discussions remained open-ended, with participants free to introduce topics and perspectives beyond this framework. The organisation shown here reflects our analytical categorisation of discussion content rather than a predetermined interview script

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable