Human toxicity of building materials and the application of the taxonomy principle in Green Public Procurement: the Life Cycle Assessment as a tool

ORIGINAL PAPER Received: 27 December 2024 / Accepted: 26 May 2025 © The Author(s) 2025 Extended author information available on the last page of the article Human Toxicity of Building Materials and the Application of the Taxonomy Principle in Green Public Procurement: The Life Cycle Assessment as a Tool BelénRey-Álvarez1· BenitoSánchez-Montañés1· MattRoberts2· AntonioGarcíaMartínez3 Circular Economy and Sustainability https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-025-00637-w Abstract The construction sector is a major contributor to global environmental impacts, but current sustainability assessments often overlook the human health risks posed by toxic building materials. While Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Green Public Procurement (GPP) aim to reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, the integration of material toxicity metrics remains fragmented, undermining holistic sustainability goals. Building materials release hazardous substances throughout their lifecycle, affecting indoor air quality, public health, and ecosystems. However, regulatory frameworks and LCA methodologies prioritise carbon emissions, leaving toxicity under-assessed and unregulated in most policies. Here, we show that persistent gaps in standardised toxicity data, inconsistent application of European (EU) taxonomy principles, and disparities in GPP criteria across member states hinder effective mitigation of toxicological risks. By analysing more than 150 studies and EU procurement practices, we demonstrate that only a few LCA studies integrate toxicity metrics and fewer than 10% of public projects align with the European principle of'Do not significantly harm'. Our findings reveal that harmonising toxicity thresholds in LCA databases, mandating quantitative criteria in GPP, and expanding circular economy strategies could bridge these gaps. This study establishes a direct link between material toxicity and regulatory fragmentation, advocating for policies that equally prioritise toxicity reduction and decarbonisation. These insights underscore the urgency of aligning EU sustainability frameworks with health-centric metrics, ensuring public investments foster safer, biocompatible materials. By redefining procurement standards and advancing interdisciplinary collaboration, this work provides a roadmap for transforming construction practices, safeguarding both environmental integrity and human health. Keywords Toxic materials · Sustainability policies · Construction impact assessment · LCA integration · Indoor air quality 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability Introduction The construction sector plays a critical role in the global economy, accounting for approximately 38% of global energy-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [1]. This significant contribution has led environmental assessments to prioritise the reduction of these emissions, particularly in the context of climate change mitigation, potentially overlooking other critical impacts, such as the toxicity of building materials. The toxicity of materials not only affects the environment but also has a significant impact on human health. It has become crucial to include material toxicity as an essential element in architectural design practice. According to recent studies [2, 3], toxicity should be treated as a priority issue in sustainability strategies, as its omission can compromise the health and well-being of both building occupants and communities near construction zones and along supply chains in the long term. Building materials may release hazardous substances such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), heavy metals, and other contaminants into the environment at multiple points in their life cycle [4]. These emissions are not limited to the manufacturing stage (A1-A3) but can also occur during the occupancy (B1-B7) and demolition phases (C1-C4) of a building. Over time, the degradation or transformation of materials can contribute to indoor and outdoor pollution, posing ongoing risks to both human health and ecological systems. Accurate quantification of these toxic emissions throughout the lifecycle of buildings (Fig. 1) is critical for health compliance. While Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is the primary tool for this purpose, its current limitations (e.g. fragmented toxicity data in EN 15804) require urgent resolution. Green Public Procurement (GPP) plays a crucial role in this context by leveraging public spending to promote sustainability goals. As a policy tool, GPP enables governments to prioritise environmentally and socially responsible projects, encouraging the adoption of materials and practices that minimise health risks and environmental harm. With the integration of LCA methodologies, GPP could be consolidated as an effective framework to direct public investments toward healthier and more sustainable construction Fig. 1 Life cycles defining EN-15978 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability practices. By establishing stricter criteria for material toxicity, GPP can serve as a catalyst for innovation, driving the development of safer alternatives and setting new benchmarks for the construction sector. This article aims to address the pressing need for a comprehensive assessment of material toxicity and its integration into sustainability frameworks. Building on a previously published analysis that reviewed over 150 articles on building LCA [2], this study seeks to fill critical gaps by evaluating whether significant advancements have emerged in recent years regarding the inclusion of toxicity in LCA methodologies. Furthermore, the article explores the available Green Public Procurement (GPP) tools and regulatory frameworks, such as the European Green Deal and the sustainability taxonomy, analysing their role in promoting sustainable practices in construction and material management. By explicitly bridging these fields of knowledge—LCA and GPP—this article aims to achieve three key objectives: 1. Provide an updated synthesis of recent literature to identify advancements and persistent gaps in the assessment of material toxicity through LCA. 2. Analyse how GPP tools and regulatory frameworks currently address material toxicity and identify opportunities for improvement. 3. Propose actionable recommendations to integrate toxicity considerations more effectively into LCA methodologies and GPP policies, fostering healthier and more sustainable construction practices. To achieve these objectives, the article is organised as follows: Sect. "Methodology" describes the methodology; Sect. "Results and Discussion" presents the results and their discussion; and Sect. "Conclusions" concludes with practical recommendations. Sects. "Toxic Emissions Throughout the Life Cycle of Buildings" to "Life Cycle Assessment and Toxicity in the Construction Sector", integrated into this Introduction, provide the conceptual framework, toxic emissions throughout building life cycles, the role of GPP in mitigating toxicity, and the evolving methodologies of LCA, necessary to interpret the findings in relation to the stated objectives. Toxic Emissions Throughout the Life Cycle of Buildings Addressing the toxicity of materials throughout the building lifecycle is essential to achieve truly sustainable construction practices. Toxic emissions occur at all stages and pose significant risks to both human health and the environment. To mitigate these impacts, it is crucial to integrate the control of material toxicity as a primary objective in construction guidelines and best practices. Public procurement can act as a test ground for these approaches, setting an example for the construction industry by demonstrating the feasibility and benefits of prioritising nontoxic materials. Initiatives such as the International Living Future Institute (ILFI) [5] and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification [6] already address material health by promoting the selection of non-toxic materials and encouraging transparency in material composition. These frameworks highlight the importance of prioritising human and environmental health and integrating toxicity considerations alongside other sustainability goals. LCA can play a crucial role in supporting these initiatives by evaluating a wider range 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability of impact categories beyond GWP. Within the work promoted by public authorities, Green Public Procurement (GPP) [7] emerges as a key tool to promote sustainability, particularly in this sector, where public resources can directly influence environmental quality and social well-being. By aligning the GPP with the principles of these established green building certifications and using LCA to address toxicity, public authorities can lead the way toward a healthier and more sustainable construction industry. GPP is framed in a regulatory context that promotes the adoption of more environmentally friendly practices integrating environmental criteria in the procurement process of goods, services and works. Among the most relevant frameworks that promote this approach are the European Green Deal [8] and the EU Taxonomy [9]. The European Green Deal, launched in 2019, aims to make Europe the first climate-neutral continent by 2050, promoting the reduction of carbon emissions and fostering a circular and sustainable economy in all sectors involved [8]. The EU Taxonomy, which came into force in 2022, establishes a classification system that defines which economic activities can be considered environmentally sustainable [9]. This taxonomy has specific criteria for climate change mitigation and adaptation, while also considering the protection of aquatic and marine resources, the transition to a circular economy, among others. Today, qualitative criteria have predominated in the evaluation of the sustainability of projects, especially in public procurement. These criteria include general assessments of energy efficiency, material sourcing, and environmental compliance. For example, in the evaluation of construction products, a material can be certified to come from renewable sources or to be"non-polluting"without quantifying the toxic effects it may have during its manufacture, use or disposal [2]. However, qualitative approaches, while useful, do not provide an accurate measurement of environmental impacts, limiting their ability to detect problems in the building's life cycle. We need to introduce quantitative criteria to improve the accuracy and transparency of material toxicity in the environmental impact assessment of projects, especially those that are publicly funded. Public investments should set the standard for sustainability, ensuring that funds are not allocated to projects that contribute to the creation of toxic buildings, which could pose long-term risks to public health and the environment. Incorporating the quantification of toxic emissions, in addition to GHG emissions, will allow an objective comparison between different options, facilitating more informed decision making. This will not only ensure that public investments are aligned with sustainable development goals, such as those set out in the European Green Deal and the EU Taxonomy but also ensure that projects do not cause collateral damage to the environment or public health. Toxicity within Green Public Procurement The European Union has promoted Green Public Procurement (GPP) [10] as a catalyst for the transition to a low carbon economy, driving key industrial sectors to adopt cleaner and more sustainable practices. In the construction sector, the GPP focusses not only on the reduction of carbon emissions, but also on other environmental impacts such as the use of resources and the toxicity of materials used in buildings [11]. GPP is a particularly relevant regulatory framework for promoting the control of toxicity in construction for several reasons and incentivises innovation (e.g., Environmental Product Declaration (EPD), certified materials) through market-driven demand, as demonstrated in EU case studies. 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability Taking advantage of the market influence of public procurement (14% of EU Gross Domestic Product (GDP)), the GPP incentivises suppliers to adopt environmental criteria, particularly in construction (e.g., recycled content mandates, low-toxicity material requirements).). This purchasing power, which accounts for a significant percentage of GDP in many EU countries [12], offers the ability to steer the market towards materials and processes that are more respectful of the environment and human health. By incorporating specific requirements for toxicity reduction, GPP has the potential to establish new standards in the design and construction of buildings. The GPP may be more effective than other environmental policies due to its focus on practical implementation. For example, initiatives such as the EU’s Circular Procurement [13] framework have demonstrated how GPP can drive tangible outcomes by mandating the use of recycled materials in public construction projects, reducing waste and promoting material circularity [14, 15]. Although many environmental regulations focus on direct regulation of emissions or material production. The GPP could use the purchasing power of the public sector to require low-toxic impact materials not only in the design and construction phase of projects but also during their use. This holistic approach would ensure toxicity control at all stages of the building life cycle, from material selection to final disposal. Life Cycle Assessment and Toxicity in the Construction Sector It is essential to use tools and methodologies that allow for comprehensive analysis. Taking a more holistic view can enable the optimisation of both processes and materials in the construction industry. One of the most widely used methodologies in this context is LCA. LCA has proven useful in assessing individual materials [16]; construction assemblies [17]; whole buildings [18] and has supported the development of the policy and roadmap of decarbonisation [19]. LCA makes it possible to calculate the potential impacts of a product or process throughout all phases of its life cycle, from raw material extraction (A1), production (A2), assembly (A3) and construction (A4-A5), to use (B1-B7), recycling or final disposal (C1-C4) (Fig. 1) [20]. This methodology has been standardised through international standards, such as ISO 14040/14044, and, in the field of construction, with EN 15804 standards for products and EN 15978 for buildings. LCA methodologies prioritise GHG emissions over toxicity, partly due to gaps in standardised toxicity datasets (e.g., EN 15804 voluntary human toxicity criteria, Fig. 3). Construction is responsible for a significant portion of the toxic emissions released into the environment during the life cycle of buildings [21, 22]. These toxic emissions can originate at all stages of the life cycle of a building [23] but are in the use phase of a building where the toxicity of materials to humans is of particular interest. Chemical pollutants present in building materials, such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or persistent substances, can be slowly released into the indoor air over the lifetime of the building, directly affecting the air quality and, therefore, the health of the occupants. This phenomenon is known as sick building syndrome [24]. It has been identified as a growing problem in buildings that have not been designed to consider the long-term toxicity of materials, which is still an overwhelming majority. Despite their relevance, toxicity control and evaluation in the use phase remain areas underdeveloped in evaluation protocols, as we have developed in our previous work [2]. 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability Construction continues to be a key sector in generating environmental impacts, not only due to carbon emissions or the devastation of resources but also due to the use of highly polluting and toxic materials that affect both the environment and human health. It is necessary for LCAs to integrate toxicity more effectively. Thus, allowing for a more thorough assessment of the impacts of building materials and facilitating informed decision making, both in architectural design and in GPP policies. In this sense, GPP can play a crucial role in the promotion and generalisation of the use of low-toxicity materials, incentivising companies to develop products and techniques that follow stricter environmental criteria. Just as GPP has consolidated low-carbon companies and products, it can achieve the same with lowtoxicity products, driving a shift in the market towards safer and more sustainable options. In this way, public demand can not only improve the environmental quality of publicly funded construction projects, but also establish new standards for the sector, promoting the transition to more toxicity-responsible materials. Until recently, the focus has been on zero-energy buildings. The focus of the industry has left the analysis of other ecological aspects, including human health and the toxicity of materials, to the background. This is also reflected in current legislation, where analysis of human toxicity is not a mandatory requirement, unlike other environmental impacts such as climate change or acidification [23]. Although comparisons of CO2 emissions and embodied energy are common in sustainability analyses, this is not the case with toxicity. LCA datadriven comparisons allow building materials to be prioritised and ranked according to their impact and should also include this crucial aspect to ensure that design and purchasing decisions are truly sustainable and healthy. Methodology An updated review of the existing literature and a review of Green Public Procurement (GPP) tools and regulatory frameworks has been carried out to achieve research objectives. The following subsections outline the methodology used for each axis of work presented herein. Review of the Existing Literature The literature review was structured in three systematic stages to update and extend the previous analysis on the integration of toxicity into LCA and public policy. In the first stage, the search strategy employed in the original 2022 study [2] was updated using the Scopus, Web of Science and Science Direct databases with key terms such as “toxicity”, “building materials”, “human health” and “LCA”, restricting the search to articles published between 2023 and 2025. In the second stage, inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied: 95 articles were selected after an initial selection of 657 articles for thematic relevance, eliminating those focused exclusively on greenhouse gas emissions without addressing toxicological metrics. Finally, in the third stage, a thematic analysis of the 12 selected studies was carried out, categorising the findings into: (a) methodological advances in the evaluation of LCA toxicity and (b) empirical data on toxic emissions in use, contrasting them with the results of the previous study to identify progress and persistent gaps. The final scheme of this procedure can be seen in Fig. 2. 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability Review of Green Public Procurement Tools and Regulatory Frameworks This methodological axis was divided into three phases. The first phase involved the selection of key policies: the European Green Pact, the EU Taxonomy, the EN 15804 standard and national CPV cases (Germany, Italy, Poland, Greece). In the second phase, legislative documents and public procurement databases were analysed, assessing how each framework addresses toxicity (e.g. mandatory vs. voluntary criteria). In the third phase, a cross-cutting comparative evaluation was performed, examining consistency in the implementation of toxicity thresholds, monitoring mechanisms, and the use of LCA databases across countries. Results and Discussion Human Toxicity Throughout the Building Life Cycle: Key Findings The reviewed studies highlight persistent gaps in the evaluation of health and environmental risks (Table 1), particularly the underprioritization of toxicity in LCA frameworks. For example, 78% of the analysed studies focused on greenhouse gas emissions, while only 22% integrated toxicity metrics, a disparity rooted in inconsistent methodologies [2, 25, 26]. Some studies explicitly cite the absence of reliable data on specific toxicants, such as VOCs and heavy metals, as a key reason for omitting these factors from their analyses [27]. Others highlight the complexity of modelling toxic emissions in various phases of the lifeFig. 2 Description of systematic literature review methodology 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability cycle, including the use phase (B1-B7) and end-of-life scenarios (C1-C4), where exposure pathways are less understood or harder to quantify [28]. Several studies investigated the impacts of specific building materials during the use phase [26, 29, 30]. The VOC emissions, particularly from insulation materials, significantly affect indoor air quality and human health [30]. Compounds such as formaldehyde have been associated with serious health risks, including cancers such as acute myeloid leukemia and nasopharyngeal cancer [31]. These findings underscore the urgent need to replace formaldehyde-based materials with safer alternatives and establish stringent indoor air quality controls [31, 32]. In addition to VOCs, the degradation of interior finishing materials under ultraviolet (UV) exposure contributes to microplastic generation, increasing risks through dermal contact, inhalation, and ingestion. These findings call for stricter regulations on material design and the development of UV-resistant materials to minimise microplastic generation [16]. Persistent toxicants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and phthalates, found in interior materials and furniture, exacerbate risks associated with respiratory and neurological disorders, as well as carcinogenic effects. Thus, Table 1 Results of systematic literature review Paper Main focus Key Findings Recommendations [14] Biocomposites Do not underestimate possible toxicity More studios are needed [23] Impact of insulation materials Emissions of formaldehyde Design with low-impact materials and optimize the balance [15] Formaldehyde inventories in dwellings Formaldehyde is associated with cancers Replace formaldehyde with safer alternatives [16]Effects of UV degradation UV exposure generates microplastics Implement stricter regulations [18] Health risks related to toxicants Substances such as PCBs and phthalates affect indoor air quality Implement strict regulations to reduce exposure [24] earthen constructions vs conventional constructions Earthen buildings have less environmental impact Promote normative standards for earthen constructions [19] Analysis of CDW CDW contains toxic substances such as heavy metals Implement strict regulations [25] Safe and Sustainable by Design framework Only 26% of respondents applied the framework Increase cooperation between industry, academia and governments [26] toxicity of construction materials in their different stages The extraction and use of materials contribute GHG Incorporate a holistic approach of materials from their life cycle [21] Evaluate emissions of (VOCs) using models and data Need for more accurate prediction of VOC exposure Use integrated models to optimize design choices [17] examine the toxicity and sustainability of formaldehyde-based resins Formaldehyde resins, have negative impacts on health Limit the use of formaldehyde resins [27] Integration of circularity and sustainability in LCA Bio-based materials may increase other impacts such as eutrophication Design circular strategies that consider trade-offs between environmental impacts and apply integrated approaches such as WBCI-LCA 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability further highlighting the necessity of reducing exposure to these substances and ensuring safe disposal of toxic materials in older buildings [18]. As summarised in Table 1, the key findings emphasise lifecycle toxicity disparities (eg, earthen vs. conventional materials) and data gaps in use phase impacts (B1-B7) [18]. In addition, construction and demolition waste (CDW), often containing heavy metals and other toxic substances, presents a significant challenge for sustainable management. Recycling and reusing materials can reduce these impacts, but landfill disposal remains a persistent problem [19]. European frameworks such as the Safe and Sustainable by Design initiative also show gaps in implementation, with only 26% of respondents actively applying these guidelines [33]. Strengthened collaboration between industry, academia, and government is crucial to improve the adoption and effectiveness of such frameworks [20]. Similarly, the integration of circularity and sustainability indicators in buildings has shown trade-offs, such as biobased materials that reduce the potential for global warming but increase the risks of eutrophication [25]. These findings highlight the need for integrated approaches such as the Whole Building Circularity Indicator with Life Cycle Assessment (WBCI-LCA) to balance environmental impacts [17]. Together, these findings emphasise the urgency of improving toxicity assessment methodologies, strengthening regulations, and considering the entire lifecycle of building materials to design safer and more sustainable alternatives. By adopting models that combine emissions data with lifecycle analyses, such as those used for VOCs [21], and limiting the use of harmful components like formaldehyde resins [17], the construction industry can make informed material choices that prioritize health and sustainability. Furthermore, the public health risks associated with persistent toxicants and microplastics further underscore the need for stricter material regulations and innovative design strategies that mitigate these risks. Ultimately, aligning these measures with frameworks, such as the EU's'Safe and Sustainable by Design'initiative, can facilitate the transition to a more sustainable and environmentally conscious construction model [22]. Integrating Material Toxicity into European Green Policies and Green Public Procurement The analysis of regulatory frameworks revealed critical divergences in the treatment of material toxicity in EU member states. For example, Germany includes quantitative toxicity thresholds, such as formaldehyde limits below 0.1 ppm, in approximately 40% of its public procurement procedures. On the contrary, countries such as Italy and Greece rely on qualitative descriptors such as'nontoxic materials', which lack standardised and enforceable criteria. At the EU level, nearly 80% of Environmental Product Declarations developed under EN 15804 treat human toxicity as an optional indicator, despite the clear guidance of the Do No Significant Harm (DNSH) principle within the EU Taxonomy. This fragmented implementation undermines the capacity of Green Public Procurement (GPP) to effectively mitigate systemic toxicological risks. This gap is particularly significant given the evolving regulatory landscape. While European sustainability policies, such as the European Green Deal, continue to prioritise decarbonisation, emerging frameworks such as DNSH are pushing for more comprehensive impact assessments that explicitly include human and environmental toxicity. GPP is well 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability ●Broadening the Focus: Complementing the emphasis on decarbonisation with equally prioritised goals, such as reducing toxic impacts, ensures that the DNSH principle is applied quantitatively in project evaluations. These actions will not only enhance the coherence of sustainability strategies in Europe but also ensure that public investments contribute effectively to environmental and human health. Conclusions This article underscores the critical importance of incorporating the toxicity of building materials into environmental impact assessments, particularly using a life cycle assessment. Key challenges include fragmented toxicity data and methodological inconsistencies in LCA. To advance holistic sustainability, EU policies must integrate toxicity metrics equally with GHG emissions. Addressing these issues requires fostering innovation, improving production techniques, and promoting the substitution of toxic components with safer alternatives, as well as the increased use of recycled and salvaged materials. The primary obstacles to an effective toxicity assessment are the lack of consistent information and variable criteria across tools and databases. Standardising protocols and regulatory frameworks is essential to improve the comparability and reliability of toxicity assessments. Comprehensive databases that include detailed information on building materials, supported by verified LCA-based eco-labels, are needed to enable more precise and holistic evaluations. Although efforts such as EPDs are expanding, there is a pressing need for these tools to incorporate toxicity data and extend their scope beyond the production phases(A1-A3) to include the use and disposal stages (C1-C4). This study emphasises the importance of adopting a life-cycle perspective that integrates toxicity considerations alongside carbon reduction efforts. The transition to a more sustainable construction sector must not only address carbon emissions but also prioritise the development of biocompatible materials, those that minimise toxic impacts on both the environment and human health. Advancing this holistic approach requires standardising inventory databases, refining LCA calibrations, and including data on the use phase of materials (B1-B7). Toxicity should be considered as significant as GHG emissions in protecting biodiversity and safeguarding the health of building occupants and surrounding communities. Toxic building materials, such as those that emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs), persistent toxicants, and microplastics, have been linked to serious health consequences, including respiratory diseases, endocrine disorders, neurological impacts, and even cancer. These health risks, combined with the environmental degradation caused by toxic emissions, highlight the urgency of addressing material toxicity alongside decarbonisation efforts. Therefore, environmental policies must expand their scope to include other critical factors, such as the toxicological impacts of materials and the broader environmental effects of industrial processes. Achieving meaningful change requires a comprehensive approach that encompasses all dimensions of environmental impact, from greenhouse gas emissions to natural resource consumption and the toxicological effects of materials throughout their lifecycle. 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability In the context of GPP, this article concludes that material toxicity plays a pivotal role in the transition to a more sustainable construction model. By including quantitative criteria for the assessment of toxic emissions throughout the lifecycle of the building, the GPP can facilitate more informed decision-making that aligns with public health and sustainability goals. Developing a simplified but robust methodology to quantify toxic emissions is crucial to ensure that public funds are allocated to projects that minimise health risks and environmental harm. To achieve holistic sustainability, EU policies must equally prioritise toxicity reduction and decarbonisation. The GPP dual criteria system exemplifies a practical route, incentivising safer materials through binding tenders. To adequately consider material toxicity, it is essential to: (1) develop standardised methodologies for quantifying toxic emissions throughout all stages of the life cycle, (2) expand existing databases to include detailed toxicity parameters for commonly used construction materials, and (3) establish mandatory benchmarks for toxicity in public procurement criteria. Through this holistic approach, public procurement can act as a catalyst for healthier and more sustainable construction practices, paving the way for a future that respects both human health and environmental integrity. Funding Funding for open access publishing: Universidad de Sevilla/CBUA Declarations Conflict of interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. References 1. AR6 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023 - IPCC. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / w w w . i p c c . c h / r e p o r t / s i x t h - a s s e s s m e n t - r e p o r t - c y c l e / . Accessed 09 Dec 2024 2. Rey-Álvarez B, Sánchez-Montañés B, García-Martínez A (2022) Building material toxicity and life cycle assessment: a systematic critical review. J Clean Prod 341:130838. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / J . J C L E P R O . 2 0 2 2 . 1 3 0 8 3 8 3. Rey-Álvarez B, Silvestre J, García-Martínez A, Sánchez-Montañés B (2024) A comparative approach to evaluate the toxicity of building materials through life cycle assessment. Sci Total Environ 912:168897. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / J . S C I T O T E N V . 2 0 2 3 . 1 6 8 8 9 7 4. Nakanishi EY et al (2024) A systematic review of the implications of construction materials on occupants’ physical and psychological health. Elsevier Ltd. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . b u i l d e n v . 2 0 2 4 . 1 1 1 5 2 7 5. “Living Future – A future worth living in.” [Online]. Available: https://living-future.org/. Accessed 9 Dec 2024 6. LEED rating system| U.S. Green Building Council. [Online]. Available: https://www.usgbc.org/leed. Accessed 09 Dec 2024 7. Green Public Procurement - European Commission. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / g r e e n - b u s i n e s s . e c . e u r o p a . e u / g r e e n - p u b l i c - p r o c u r e m e n t _ e n . Accessed 09 Dec 2024 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability 8. Delivering the European Green Deal - European Commission. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / c o m m i s s i o n . e u r o p a . e u / s t r a t e g y - a n d - p o l i c y / p r i o r i t i e s - 2 0 1 9 - 2 0 2 4 / e u r o p e a n - g r e e n - d e a l / d e l i v e r i n g - e u r o p e a n - g r e e n - d e a l _ e n . Accessed 09 Dec 2024 9. EU taxonomy for sustainable activities - European Commission. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / fi n a n c e . e c . e u r o p a . e u / s u s t a i n a b l e - fi n a n c e / t o o l s - a n d - s t a n d a r d s / e u - t a x o n o m y - s u s t a i n a b l e - a c t i v i t i e s _ e n . Accessed 09 Dec 2024 10. Strategic procurement - European Commission. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / s i n g l e - m a r k e t - e c o n o m y . e c . e u r o p a . e u / s i n g l e - m a r k e t / p u b l i c - p r o c u r e m e n t / s t r a t e g i c - p r o c u r e m e n t _ e n . Accessed 09 Dec 2024 11. Hacia una compra pública verde ‘en serio’ de la mano del principio DNSH: propuesta básica para su necesaria articulación jurídica y técnica| Observatorio de Contratación Pública. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / w w w . o b c p . e s / o p i n i o n e s / h a c i a - u n a - c o m p r a - p u b l i c a - v e r d e - e n - s e r i o - d e - l a - m a n o - d e l - p r i n c i p i o - d n s h - p r o p u e s t a - b a s i c a. Accessed 09 Dec 2024 12. Informe Especial 28/2023: Contratación pública en la UE| European Court of Auditors. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / w w w . e c a . e u r o p a . e u / e s / p u b l i c a t i o n s / s r - 2 0 2 3 - 2 8 . Accessed 19 Dec 2024 13. Circular public procurement: a framework for cities| European Circular Economy Stakeholder Platform. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / c i r c u l a r e c o n o m y . e u r o p a . e u / p l a t f o r m / e n / t o o l k i t s - g u i d e l i n e s / c i r c u l a r - p u b l i c - p r o c u r e m e n t - f r a m e w o r k - c i t i e s. Accessed 19 Dec 2024 14. Ababio BK, Lu W, Agyekum K, Ghansah FA (2025) Enhancing circular construction through procurement: a conceptual stakeholder-centric collaborative framework for sustainable outcomes. Environ Impact Assess Rev 112:107784. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EIAR.2024.107784 15. Rangelov M, Dylla H, Sivaneswaran N (2020) Using environmental product declarations to support pavement green public procurement. Pavement, Roadway, Bridge Life Cycle Assess 2020 111– 121.https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003092278-12 16. Ding GKC (2014) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of sustainable building materials: an overview. In: Eco-efficient construction and building materials: life cycle assessment (LCA), eco-labelling and case studies, pp 38–62. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857097729.1.38 17. Ben-Alon L, Loftness V, Harries KA, Cochran Hameen E (2021) Life cycle assessment (LCA) of natural vs conventional building assemblies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 144:110951. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / J . R S E R . 2 0 2 1 . 1 1 0 9 5 1 18. Röck M et al (2020) Embodied GHG emissions of buildings– The hidden challenge for effective climate change mitigation. Appl Energy 258:114107. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / J . A P E N E R G Y . 2 0 1 9 . 1 1 4 1 0 7 19. Röck M, Baldereschi E, Verellen E, Passer A, Sala S, Allacker K (2021) Environmental modelling of building stocks– An integrated review of life cycle-based assessment models to support EU policy making. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 151:111550. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2021.111550 20. Sharma A, Saxena A, Sethi M, Shree V, Varun (2011) Life cycle assessment of buildings: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 15(1):871–875. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2010.09.008 21. Song K et al (2023) Addressing new chemicals of emerging concern (CECs) in an indoor office. Environ Int 181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2023.108259 22. Understanding REACH - ECHA. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / e c h a . e u r o p a . e u / r e g u l a t i o n s / r e a c h / u n d e r s t a n d i n g - r e a c h. Accessed 10 Dec 2024 23. UNE-EN 15804:2012+A2:2020 Sostenibilidad en la construcción. D... (n.d.). h t t p s : / / w w w . u n e . o r g / e n c u e n t r a - t u - n o r m a / b u s c a - t u - n o r m a / n o r m a / ? c = n o r m a - u n e - e n - 1 5 8 0 4 - 2 0 1 2 - a 2 - 2 0 2 0 - n 0 0 6 3 5 0 8 24. Redlich CA, Sparer J, Cullen MR (1997) Sick-building syndrome. Lancet 349(9057):1013–1016. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / S 0 1 4 0 - 6 7 3 6 ( 9 6 ) 0 7 2 2 0 - 0 25. Prudente LT (2024) Life-cycle assessment of the environmental impact of earthen buildings versus conventional buildings on human health. In: Sustainability and toxicity of building materials. Elsevier, pp 289–306. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / B 9 7 8 - 0 - 3 2 3 - 9 8 3 3 6 - 5 . 0 0 0 1 4 - 5 26. Senapati KK (2024) Safety, toxicity, and life cycle assessments of biocomposites. In: Advances in biocomposites and their applications. Elsevier, pp 345–363. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / B 9 7 8 - 0 - 4 4 3 - 1 9 0 7 4 - 2 . 0 0 0 1 2 - 5 27. Bhoonah R, Maury-Micolier A, Jolliet O (2023) Integrated empirical and modelled determination of the human health impacts of building material VOCs. Build Environ 242. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . b u i l d e n v . 2 0 2 3 . 1 1 0 5 2 3 28. Molla AS, Sher W, Tang W, Bahar MM, Bekele DN (2024) “Composite building materials and construction and demolition waste (C&DW): ecotoxicological perspectives. In: Sustainability and Toxicity of Building Materials, pp 601–625. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / B 9 7 8 - 0 - 3 2 3 - 9 8 3 3 6 - 5 . 0 0 0 2 7 - 3 29. Petrović EK (2024) The importance of recognising the toxicity of building materials in manufacture, use and disposal stages for planetary sustainability and restoration. In: Sustainability and toxicity of building materials. Elsevier, pp 3–14. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / B 9 7 8 - 0 - 3 2 3 - 9 8 3 3 6 - 5 . 0 0 0 0 1 - 7 1 3 Circular Economy and Sustainability 30. Maury-Micolier A, Huang L, Taillandier F, Sonnemann G, Jolliet O (2023) A life cycle approach to indoor air quality in designing sustainable buildings: human health impacts of three inner and outer insulations. Build Environ 230. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . b u i l d e n v . 2 0 2 3 . 1 0 9 9 9 4 31. Mondal I, Groves M, Driver EM, Vittori W, Halden RU (2024) Carcinogenic formaldehyde in U.S. residential buildings: mass inventories, human health impacts, and associated healthcare costs. Sci Total Environ 944. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . s c i t o t e n v . 2 0 2 4 . 1 7 3 6 4 0 32. Kristina Petrović E, Thomas CA (2024) Sustainability and toxicity of formaldehyde-based resins for composite wood products like plywood, particleboard and medium density fibreboard. In: Sustainability and toxicity of building materials. Elsevier, pp 389–415. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / B 9 7 8 - 0 - 3 2 3 - 9 8 3 3 6 - 5 . 0 0 0 1 8 - 2 33. Leso V et al (2024) Safety and sustainability by design: an explorative survey on concepts’ knowledge and application. Environ Sci Policy 162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103909 34. Lee S, Chang H, Lee J (2024) Construction and demolition waste management and its impacts on the environment and human health: Moving forward sustainability enhancement. Elsevier Ltd. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . s c s . 2 0 2 4 . 1 0 5 8 5 5 35. Green Business - Biblioteca. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / c i r c a b c . e u r o p a . e u / u i / g r o u p / 4 4 2 7 8 0 9 0 - 3 f a e - 4 5 1 5 - b c c 2 - 4 4 f d 5 7 c 1 d 0 d 1 / l i b r a r y / 1 2 9 4 d 6 4 1 - 9 e 8 c - 4 8 2 d - a 8 ff - f d d e 0 5 d ff d 4 8 . Accessed 11 Dec 2024 36. Kang Y, Jo HH, Kim S (2025) Effects of UV degradation on building materials with emphasis on microplastic generation potential. J Hazard Mater 483. h t t p s : / / d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1 0 1 6 / j . j h a z m a t . 2 0 2 4 . 1 3 6 5 2 1 37. Commande publique| Ministère de l’Économie, des Finances et de l’Industrie et Ministère chargé du Budget et des Comptes publics. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / w w w . e c o n o m i e . g o u v . f r / d a j / c o m m a n d e - p u b l i q u e . Accessed 19 Dec 2024 38. Plataforma de Contratación del Sector Público. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / c o n t r a t a c i o n d e l e s t a d o . e s / w p s / p o r t a l / p l a t a f o r m a . Accessed 19 Dec 2024 39. Program - acquistinretepa. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / w w w . a c q u i s t i n r e t e p a . i t / o p e n c m s / o p e n c m s / p r o g r a m _ e n g . h t m l . Accessed 19 Dec 2024 40. Homepage - Public Procurement Office - Gov.pl website. [Online]. Available: h t t p s : / / w w w . g o v . p l / w e b / u z p - e n . Accessed 19 Dec 2024 41. HSPPA - HOME. [Online]. Available: https://www.eaadhsy.gr/index.php/en/. Accessed 19 Dec 2024 42. Joita D, Dobrotã CE, Popescu C (2023) ‘Do No Significant Harm’ Principle and current challenges for the EU taxonomy towards energy transition. Corporate Governance for Climate Transition, pp. 187–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26277-7_7 Publisher's Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Authors and Affiliations BelénRey-Álvarez1· BenitoSánchez-Montañés1· MattRoberts2· AntonioGarcíaMartínez3 Belén Rey-Álvarez [email protected] 1 HUM-1008 Research Group, E.T.S Arquitectura, Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain 2 Center for the Built Environment, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA 3 TEP-130 Research Group, Instituto Universitario de Arquitectura y Ciencias de La Construcción, IUACC, Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain 1 3