Figure 7
The figure is a structured table with two main sections: “Stakeholder priorities” on the left and “Alignments and gaps in literature” on the right. “Stakeholder priorities” is divided into six row sections labeled “Material availability”, “Land use”, “Global versus local supply chains”, “Design”, “Environmental impacts”, and “Political and cultural shifts”. On the right, “Alignments and gaps in literature” is divided into five columns, labeled “Material”, “Product”, “Building”, “Region”, and “World”. Under “Material availability”, the question “What will be the yield and location of circular or biobased construction materials”? aligns with entries spanning the “Building” and “Region” columns: “Circular biobased building stock” and “Waste wood management”. The question “How will climate change impact the availability of [material A]”? aligns with entries in the “World” column: “Forest-product systems”, “Forest-product systems”, and “Forest-land (eco)systems”. Under “Land use”, the question “Should our land grow buildings or food”? corresponds to a red box spanning the “Building”, “Region”, and “World” columns, stating “Missing: studies on land conflicts between construction and other sectors”. The question “Will we still have wild forests if we build more with timber”? aligns with “Forest-land (eco)systems” spanning the “Building”, “Region”, and “World” columns. Under “Global versus local supply chains”, the question “What if we localize or globalize the supply chain for [bio-based product]”? corresponds to a red box spanning the “Product”, “Building”, “Region”, and “World” columns stating “Missing: environmental impact of global versus local supply chains for circular biobased construction”. The question “Should we have regional or local processing for [circular material]”? corresponds to a red box in the “Region” and “World” columns stating “Missing: centralized versus decentralized facilities”. Under “Design”, the question “How will standardization affect the environmental impact of [product x]”? corresponds to a red box spanning the “Material”, “Product”, and “Building” columns stating “Missing: environmental impact of standardized versus customized design”. The question “How will [new business model A] change the impact of [product x]”? corresponds to a red box spanning the “Material”, “Product”, and “Building” columns stating “Missing: environmental impact of business models”. The question “What will be the environmental impact of increasing [performance A]”? aligns with entries in the “Material” and “Product” columns: “Novel bio-based materials” and “Building products from bio-residues”. Under “Environmental impacts”, the question “What is the environmental impact of [product A] beyond carbon emissions”? aligns with “Novel bio-based materials” and “Building products from bio-residues” in the “Material” and “Product” columns. The question “How will life cycles (soil, plant, product, building) affect the environmental impact of [product x]”? aligns with multiple entries: “Forest-product systems” and “Forest-land (eco)systems” in the “Region” and “World” columns, “Circular biobased building stock” in the “Building” and “Region” columns, and “Temporal considerations - biogenic carbon” in the “Product” and “Building” columns. Under “Political and cultural shifts”, the question “How will [new regulation A] affect the impact of [product x]”? corresponds to a red box spanning all five columns stating “Missing: overview of regulations affecting circular biobased construction practices (policy research)”.Overview of alignments and gaps between stakeholder priorities and literature