Acknowledgment to the Reviewers of Journal of Environmental & Earth Sciences in 2025
2026-02-06
Circular Retrofit Approaches: Linking Building Renovation, Resource Efficiency, and Environmental Sustainability
Authors
-
Ao Li
Water and Electricity Vocational and Technical College of Chongqing, Chongqing 402160, China
-
Pingkun Deng
Water and Electricity Vocational and Technical College of Chongqing, Chongqing 402160, China
-
Xiao Wei
Water and Electricity Vocational and Technical College of Chongqing, Chongqing 402160, China
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30564/jees.v8i8.13268Abstract
Circular retrofit practices are now being more firmly placed as a tool to reshape building renovation to be resource efficient and environmentally sustainable by adding life to assets, minimizing material throughput, and minimizing waste without compromising or impairing building performance. This report summarizes theoretical underpinnings, lifecycle plans, evaluation procedures, and implementation terms to describe the circular retrofits, as opposed to traditional energy-focused renovation. We explain the workings of circular retrofit thinking, with the focus on adaptability and reversibility, as well as value retention as internal design logic by the material, component, building, and district loop levels. Our next approach involves strategies in the pre-retrofit diagnostics, circular design and digital documentation, procurement and contracting, selective deconstruction, and operational practices that support the sustainability of performance and extend the service life of the components. The review assesses impact assessment methods, such as whole-life life cycle assessment, dynamic carbon accounting, material flow analysis, circularity indicators, and life cycle costing, which are vulnerable to system boundaries, baselines, service-life assumptions, and end-of-life allocation. Lastly, we examine barriers and enablers by policy, markets, business models, digital governance, and skills, and determine conditions for pathways that can be taken during the transition of pilot projects to mainstream practice. Future studies ought to focus on common typologies and accountability, longitudinal execution indicators, and composite evaluation systems that are unified in terms of carbon, resources, expense, and resilience.
Keywords:
Circular Retrofit; Building Renovation; Resource Efficiency; Whole-Life Carbon; Construction and Demolition WasteReferences
[1] Jackson, D.J., 2020. Addressing the Challenges of Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Construction Industry: A Multi-Perspective Approach [PhD Thesis]. The University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh, UK.
[2] Sev, A., 2009. How can the construction industry contribute to sustainable development? A conceptual framework. Sustainable Development. 17(3), 161–173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.373
[3] Morrissey, J., Dunphy, N., MacSweeney, R., et al., 2014. Energy efficiency in commercial buildings: Capturing added-value of retrofit. Journal of Property Investment & Finance. 32(4), 396–414. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JPIF-01-2014-0008
[4] Menzies, G.F., 2011. Embodied Energy Considerations for Existing Buildings. Historic Scotland: Edinburgh, UK.
[5] Cheong, C., Kabore, M., Dheeraj, A., et al., 2021. Circular Built Environment Highlights from Africa: Policies, Case Studies and UN2030 Agenda Indicators. Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI): Seoul, South Korea; United Nations One Planet Sustainable Buildings and Construction Programme: Nairobi, Kenya.
[6] Rahla, K.M., Mateus, R., Bragança, L., et al., 2021. Implementing circular economy strategies in buildings—from theory to practice. Applied System Innovation. 4(2), 26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/asi4020026
[7] Grecchi, M., 2022. Building Renovation: How to Retrofit and Reuse Existing Buildings to Save Energy and Respond to New Needs. Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89836-6
[8] Dragonetti, L., Papadaki, D., Mazzoli, C., et al., 2025. Circular deep renovation versus demolition with reconstruction: Environmental and financial evaluation to support decision making in the construction sector. Energy and Buildings. 336, 115610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2025.115610
[9] Iwuanyanwu, O., Gil-Ozoudeh, I., Okwandu, A.C., et al., 2024. Retrofitting existing buildings for sustainability: Challenges and innovations. Engineering Science & Technology Journal. 5(8), 2616–2631. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51594/estj.v5i8.1515
[10] Sáez-de-Guinoa, A., Zambrana-Vasquez, D., Fernández, V., et al., 2022. Circular economy in the European construction sector: A review of strategies for implementation in building renovation. Energies. 15(13), 4747. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en15134747
[11] Fernandes, J., Ferrão, P., 2023. A new framework for circular refurbishment of buildings to operationalize circular economy policies. Environments. 10(3), 51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10030051
[12] Hassanain, M.A., Mahroos, M.S., 2023. Remodeling as a circular approach in built facilities: An assessment of lifecycle factors towards successful delivery. Property Management. 41(1), 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/PM-04-2022-0027
[13] Dodd, N., Donatello, S., Garbarino, E., et al., 2015. Identifying Macro-Objectives for the Life Cycle Environmental Performance and Resource Efficiency of EU Buildings. European Commission: Seville, Spain.
[14] Ramilo, R., Embi, M.R.B., 2014. Critical analysis of key determinants and barriers to digital innovation adoption among architectural organizations. Frontiers of Architectural Research. 3(4), 431–451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2014.06.005
[15] Fnais, A., Rezgui, Y., Petri, I., et al., 2022. The application of life cycle assessment in buildings: Challenges, and directions for future research. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 27(5), 627–654. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02058-5
[16] Papageorgiou, A., Björklund, A., Sinha, R., et al., 2024. Coupling material and energy flow analysis with life cycle assessment to support circular strategies at the urban level. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 29(7), 1209–1228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-024-02320-y
[17] Almusaed, A., Yitmen, I., Myhren, J.A., et al., 2024. Assessing the impact of recycled building materials on environmental sustainability and energy efficiency: A comprehensive framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Buildings. 14(6), 1566. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14061566
[18] Liang, Y., Li, C., Liu, Z., et al., 2023. Decarbonization potentials of the embodied energy use and operational process in buildings: A review from the life-cycle perspective. Heliyon. 9(10), e20190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20190
[19] Oyebamiji, H.O., Adewuyi, A.Y., Halidu, A., et al., 2025. Integrating circular economy in retrofit: Global practices in sustainable construction. Journal of Management, and Development Research. 2(2), 10–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.69739/jmdr.v2i2.811
[20] Passoni, C., Palumbo, E., Pinho, R., et al., 2022. The LCT challenge: Defining new design objectives to increase the sustainability of building retrofit interventions. Sustainability. 14(14), 8860. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148860
[21] Raut, S.A., Marchi, L., Gaspari, J., et al., 2025. A system thinking approach to circular-based strategies for deep energy renovation: A systematic review. Energies. 18(10), 2494. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/en18102494
[22] Cellucci, C., 2021. Circular economy strategies for adaptive reuse of residential building. Vitruvio. 6(1), 111–121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2021.15404
[23] Pan, W., Li, K., Teng, Y., et al., 2018. Rethinking system boundaries of the life cycle carbon emissions of buildings. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 90, 379–390. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.057
[24] Askar, R., Bragança, L., Gervásio, H., et al., 2021. Adaptability of buildings: A critical review on the concept evolution. Applied Sciences. 11(10), 4483. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app11104483
[25] Schmidt, R., Eguchi, T., Austin, S., et al., 2010. What is the meaning of adaptability in the building industry? In: Chica, E., Elguezabal, A., Meno, A., et al. (Eds.). O&SB2010: Open and Sustainable Building. Labein-TECNALIA: Bilbao, Spain. pp. 233–242.
[26] Bae, J.-W., Kim, Y.-W., 2008. Sustainable value on construction projects and lean construction. Journal of Green Building. 3(1), 156–167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.3.1.156
[27] Shilwant, A., 2025. Enhancing Decision-Making and Sustainability in Building Product Selection and Circular Economy Implementation in Construction. Journal of Structural Technology. 10(1), 24–41.
[28] Ma, Z., Cooper, P., Daly, D., et al., 2012. Existing building retrofits: Methodology and state-of-the-art. Energy and Buildings. 55, 889–902. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.08.018
[29] Jaggs, M., Palmer, J., 2000. Energy performance indoor environmental quality retrofit—A European diagnosis and decision making method for building refurbishment. Energy and Buildings. 31(2), 97–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(99)00023-7
[30] Hukari, H., 2024. Trade-Offs in Building Retrofits: A Comprehensive Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach—1950s Finnish Apartment Building [Master’s Thesis]. Aalto University: Espoo, Finland.
[31] Baseer, M., 2024. Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Engineering Systems: Application for the Energy Renovation of Buildings [PhD Thesis]. Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon: Lyon, France.
[32] Geldermans, R., 2016. Design for change and circularity-accommodating circular material & product flows in construction. Energy Procedia. 96, 301–311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.153
[33] Allam, A.S., Nik-Bakht, M., 2024. Supporting circularity in construction with performance-based deconstruction. Sustainable Production and Consumption. 45, 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2023.12.021
[34] Foster, G., 2020. Circular economy strategies for adaptive reuse of cultural heritage buildings to reduce environmental impacts. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 152, 104507. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104507
[35] Purchase, C.K., Al Zulayq, D.M., Talakatoa, B., et al., 2022. Circular economy of construction and demolition waste: A literature review on lessons, challenges, and benefits. Materials. 15(1), 76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15010076
[36] Azcarate-Aguerre, J.F., Conci, M., Zils, M., et al., 2022. Building energy retrofit-as-a-service: A Total Value of Ownership assessment methodology to support whole life-cycle building circularity and decarbonisation. Construction Management and Economics. 40(9), 676–689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2022.2094434
[37] Tajadod, O.E., Ravanshadnia, M., Ghanbari, M., et al., 2025. Integrating circular economy and life cycle assessment strategies in climate-resilient buildings: An artificial intelligence approach to enhance thermal comfort and minimize CO₂ emissions in Iran. Energy. 320, 135064. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2025.135064
[38] Kamari, A., 2017. A Multi-Methodology and Sustainability-Supporting Framework for Implementation and Assessment of a Holistic Building Renovation: Implementation and Assessment of a Holistic Sustainable Building Renovation [PhD Thesis]. Aarhus University: Aarhus, Denmark.
[39] Aste, N., Del Pero, C., 2013. Energy retrofit of commercial buildings: Case study and applied methodology. Energy Efficiency. 6(2), 407–423. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-012-9168-4
[40] Gembali, V., Kumar, A., Sarma, P., et al., 2024. Analysis and influence mapping of socio-technical challenges for developing decarbonization and circular economy practices in the construction and building industry. Annals of Operations Research. 359, 1975–2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-024-05864-2
[41] Askar, R., Bragança, L., Gervásio, H., et al., 2022. Design for adaptability (DfA)—Frameworks and assessment models for enhanced circularity in buildings. Applied System Innovation. 5(1), 24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/asi5010024
[42] Pradella, F., 2021. Designing Architectural Technology for Circularity: Holistic Approach for Bio-Based Materials towards a Retrofit of the Existing Building Stock [Master’s Thesis]. Politecnico di Milano: Milan, Italy.
[43] Rahla, K.M., Mateus, R., Bragança, L., et al., 2021. Selection criteria for building materials and components in line with the circular economy principles in the built environment—A review of current trends. Infrastructures. 6(4), 49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6040049
[44] Nawari, N.O., Ravindran, S., 2019. Blockchain and building information modeling (BIM): Review and applications in post-disaster recovery. Buildings. 9(6), 149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings9060149
[45] Markou, I., Sinnott, D., Thomas, K., et al., 2025. Current methodologies of creating material passports: A systematic literature review. Case Studies in Construction Materials. 22, e04267. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2025.e04267
[46] Halling, A., Johansson, F., 2023. The Power of Procurement: How Requirements of Reuse Can Accelerate Circular Construction in Sweden [Master’s Thesis]. Chalmers University of Technology: Gothenburg, Sweden.
[47] Wetterqvist, C., 2025. Organising for Circularity in Construction: A Study of the Implementation of Reuse in Swedish Redevelopment Projects [Master’s Thesis]. Chalmers University of Technology: Gothenburg, Sweden.
[48] Charef, R., Morel, J.C., Rakhshan, K., et al., 2021. Barriers to implementing the circular economy in the construction industry: A critical review. Sustainability. 13(23), 12989. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132312989
[49] Wuni, I.Y., Abankwa, D.A., 2025. Understanding the key risks in circular construction projects: From systematic review to conceptual framework. Construction Innovation: Information Process Management. 25(4), 1085–1107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/CI-04-2023-0068
[50] Hossain, M.U., Ng, S.T., 2019. Influence of waste materials on buildings’ life cycle environmental impacts: Adopting resource recovery principle. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 142, 10–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.11.010
[51] Nahrendorf, S.H., 2025. Renovation of Residential Buildings from the 1970s: Goals, Challenges and Method for Introducing Circularity in the Construction Industry [Master’s Thesis]. KTH Royal Institute of Technology: Stockholm, Sweden.
[52] Hauashdh, A., Jailani, J., Rahman, I.A., et al., 2022. Strategic approaches towards achieving sustainable and effective building maintenance practices in maintenance-managed buildings: A combination of expert interviews and a literature review. Journal of Building Engineering. 45, 103490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.103490
[53] Rajagopalan, N., Brancart, S., De Regel, S., et al., 2021. Multi-criteria decision analysis using life cycle assessment and life cycle costing in circular building design: A case study for wall partitioning systems in the circular retrofit lab. Sustainability. 13(9), 5124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095124
[54] Escobosa Costi, A., 2025. Study of the Requirements of the Buildings as Material Banks for New Buildings [Bachelor’s Thesis]. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Barcelonatech: Barcelona, Spain.
[55] Mc Cann, S., Corona, B., Han, Q., et al., 2025. Circularity—Not so straightforward: A review of methodological choices in LCA for circular renovations of buildings. Journal of Building Engineering. 114, 114089. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2025.114089
[56] Khasreen, M.M., Banfill, P.F., Menzies, G.F., et al., 2009. Life-cycle assessment and the environmental impact of buildings: A review. Sustainability. 1(3), 674–701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su1030674
[57] Hasik, V., Escott, E., Bates, R., et al., 2019. Comparative whole-building life cycle assessment of renovation and new construction. Building and Environment. 161, 106218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106218
[58] Jayasinghe, R.S., Rameezdeen, R., Chileshe, N., et al., 2019. Exploring sustainable post-end-of-life of building operations: A systematic literature review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management. 26(4), 689–722. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-08-2017-0148
[59] Favi, C., Di Giuseppe, E., Rossi, M., et al., 2018. Building retrofit measures and design: A probabilistic approach for LCA. Sustainability. 10(10), 3655. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103655
[60] Deb, C., Schlueter, A., 2021. Review of data-driven energy modelling techniques for building retrofit. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 144, 110990. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110990
[61] Augiseau, V., Barles, S., 2017. Studying construction materials flows and stock: A review. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 123, 153–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.09.002
[62] Kytzia, S., 2004. Material flow analysis as a tool for sustainable management of the built environment. In: Koll-Schretzenmayr, M., Keiner, M., Nussbaumer, G. (Eds.). The Real and Virtual Worlds of Spatial Planning. Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany. pp. 281–298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-10398-2_19
[63] Lisco, M., 2025. Reuse Strategies in Building Design [PhD Thesis]. Lund University: Lund, Sweden.
[64] Andersen, S.C., Møller, K.L., Jørgensen, S.W., et al., 2019. Scalable and quantitative decision support for the initial building design stages of refurbishment. Journal of Green Building. 14(4), 35–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3992/1943-4618.14.4.35
[65] Bertino, G., Kisser, J., Zeilinger, J., et al., 2021. Fundamentals of building deconstruction as a circular economy strategy for the reuse of construction materials. Applied Sciences. 11(3), 939. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app11030939
[66] Cottafava, D., Ritzen, M., 2021. Circularity indicator for residential buildings: Addressing the gap between embodied impacts and design aspects. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 164, 105120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105120
[67] Russell, J.D., Nasr, N.Z., 2023. Value-retained vs. impacts avoided: The differentiated contributions of remanufacturing, refurbishment, repair, and reuse within a circular economy. Journal of Remanufacturing. 13(1), 25–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13243-022-00119-4
[68] Lopoukhine, R., 2024. Developing a Circular Building Materials System and Fostering Innovation from Construction, Demolition and Renovation (CRD) Waste: An Ontario-Focused Systemic Policy Analysis and Blueprint for Change. Circular Innovation Council: Toronto, ON, Canada.
[69] O'Donnell, C., Pranger, D., 2020. The Architecture of Waste: Design for a Circular Economy. Routledge: New York, NY, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367247478
[70] Luo, X., 2023. An integrated passive and active retrofitting approach toward minimum whole-life carbon footprint. Energy and Buildings. 295, 113337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2023.113337
[71] Jansen, B.W., van Stijn, A., Gruis, V., et al., 2020. A circular economy life cycle costing model (CE-LCC) for building components. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 161, 104857. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104857
[72] Kong, W., Luo, H., Yu, Z., et al., 2025. Economic evaluation of retrofitting existing buildings from a sustainability perspective: Global trends and bibliometric analysis. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 27(7), 17451–17467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04663-w
[73] Mirzaie, S., Thuring, M., Allacker, K., et al., 2020. End-of-life modelling of buildings to support more informed decisions towards achieving circular economy targets. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 25(11), 2122–2139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-020-01807-8
[74] Kužmarskytė, K., 2023. Relations between Life Cycle Assessment, Material Flow Analysis, and Dynamic Business Capabilities for Circular Economy Implementation in Companies [Master’s Thesis]. Vilniaus Universitetas: Vilnius, Lithuania.
[75] Baset, A., Jradi, M., 2024. Data-driven decision support for smart and efficient building energy retrofits: A review. Applied System Innovation. 8(1), 5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/asi8010005
[76] Hebel, D.E., Wisniewska, M.H., Heisel, F., 2014. Building from Waste: Recovered Materials in Architecture and Construction. Birkhäuser: Berlin, Germany; Boston, MA, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783038213758
[77] Hidalgo, D., Verdugo, F., 2025. Harnessing Secondary Resources for Sustainable and Circular Practices in the Construction Sector: A Scoping Review. Applied Sciences. 15(10), 5410. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app15105410
[78] Jensen, P.A., Maslesa, E., 2015. Value based building renovation—A tool for decision-making and evaluation. Building and Environment. 92, 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.04.008
[79] Adejumobi, A.M., 2018. Integrated life-cycle cost-benefit evaluation incorporating BIM, lean practices, and sustainability in engineering project management. International Journal of Computer Applications Technology and Research. 7(12), 500–516.
[80] Morganti, L., 2025. Lifecycle Environmental and Circular Assessment in Building Product Manufacturing: Systemic Approach for Data Optimization of Custom Prefabricated Façade Modules [PhD Thesis]. Università degli Studi di Ferrara: Ferrara, Italy.
[81] Heisel, F., Ciobanu, A., McGranahan, J., et al., 2025. Design for Disassembly (DfD) applications in the United States: Gaps and drivers towards a circular industrialized construction economy. Journal of Circular Economy. 3(3), 296–321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55845/HLGY8054
[82] Beach, T., Rana, O., Rezgui, Y., et al., 2013. Governance model for cloud computing in building information management. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing. 8(2), 314–327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TSC.2013.50
[83] Hassan, A.M., Negash, Y.T., Hanum, F., 2024. An assessment of barriers to digital transformation in circular construction: An application of stakeholder theory. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 15(7), 102787. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2024.102787
[84] D'Oca, S., Ferrante, A., Ferrer, C., et al., 2018. Technical, financial, and social barriers and challenges in deep building renovation: Integration of lessons learned from the H2020 cluster projects. Buildings. 8(12), 174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings8120174
[85] Bolboli, S., 2024. Rounding the Corner of Construction by Implementing Circular Economy: Developing a Process Model for Construction Using Reused Materials and Enhancing it with Advanced Technologies [Master’s Thesis]. Aalto University: Espoo, Finland.
[86] Hernández, H., 2025. Circular Industrialized Construction: A Perspective through Design for Manufacturing, Assembly, and Disassembly. Buildings. 15(13), 2174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15132174
[87] Ghosh, P., 2025. Embedding sustainability: A journey through the past, present, and future of retrofitting adoption. The Open Review: Journal of the South West Doctoral Training Partnership. 10(1), 65–83.
[88] Wadalkar, R., Goel, U., Raheja, L., 2025. Just Transition in the Context of Circular Economy: Developing a Comprehensive Policy Framework with an Example of the Construction Industry. SSRN. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5218413
[89] Marttila, M., 2025. Sustainable and Profitable Office Retrofits in Finland: A Developer Perspective [Master’s Thesis]. Aalto University: Espoo, Finland.
Downloads
How to Cite
Li, A., Deng, P., & Wei, X. (2026). Circular Retrofit Approaches: Linking Building Renovation, Resource Efficiency, and Environmental Sustainability. Journal of Environmental & Earth Sciences, 8(8), 958–985. https://doi.org/10.30564/jees.v8i8.13268
Issue
Article Type
Review
License
Copyright © 2026 Ao Li, Pingkun Deng, Xiao Wei
This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.
