How to launch a TRIFAB pilot: a 12-month roadmap

The TRIFAB concept is simple: add a reuse centre and a fablab to the recycling centre, so that what can still serve is sorted, repaired and transformed locally. Making it real is a different matter. Buildings, staff, insurance, safety, budgets, partners and politics all have to line up.

That is why the manifesto by D. Dambreville asks for one precise first step: that every local authority responsible for waste studies, within twelve months, the feasibility of at least one TRIFAB pilot site, then decides what comes next on the basis of measured results. This guide turns that request into an operational roadmap. It is written for elected officials, waste departments, reuse and social economy organisations, fablab managers — and for the citizens who will carry the proposal to them.

Why a pilot, and why twelve months

A pilot is not a small version of the final project. It is an instrument for learning — a deliberately limited test designed to answer a handful of questions with real data:

• Which share of what arrives at the recycling centre can actually be reused or transformed here?
• Can a small team sort, prepare and store it safely?
• Will residents, schools, associations and craftspeople come — and come back?
• What does it cost per tonne diverted, and what does it save?
• Which governance works on this territory?

Twelve months is a good compromise. It leaves about three months to prepare and nine months of operation, enough to observe seasonal variation in flows and to run a first full programme of workshops. It is also short enough to keep elected officials, partners and staff mobilised. And it produces something precious: a first year of measured data that becomes the baseline for every later decision.

The golden rule of the pilot is stated plainly in the manifesto: start small, and prove that the circuit works. Not everything at once; one chain that runs.

Before month 0: the decision in principle

Nothing starts without a political decision — but that decision does not have to be a budget vote. It only needs to be an agreement to study. Four documents are usually enough:

1. The manifesto (short version) — the shared reference.
2. A two-page summary note adapted to the territory: which recycling centres, which reuse and making actors already exist, which problem the pilot would address.
3. A motion voted by one or several municipal councils, asking the waste authority to study a pilot within twelve months. A ready-to-adapt template is available on our Get involved page.
4. A map of local actors: reuse centres and charity shops, fablabs and makerspaces, vocational schools, chambers of crafts, social integration enterprises, associations, companies producing offcuts.

Tip for presenting the project: frame it as an optimisation of a competence the authority already exercises, not as a new expense. “You already sort. The next step is logical: turn this sorting into local resources rather than a disposal cost.”

Months 0–3: study and prepare

The first quarter is a feasibility study conducted at the scale of the pilot. It answers six families of questions.

1. Flows: what arrives, and what could be reused?

Start from data the authority already has — tonnages by stream and by recycling centre — and complete it with a few weeks of direct observation at one site. The goal is not precision to the kilogram, but a reasoned estimate of:

• the main families of objects and materials that arrive;
• the share that seems reusable or transformable;
• what must stay in existing streams, whatever happens.

Then choose a few families for the pilot — typically solid wood, small furniture, metal profiles and, if skills allow, small electrical appliances. Write down the list of accepted materials; everything else is refused at the reuse counter.

2. Site: where, how big, with what?

Look first at what already exists: an unused building near a recycling centre, a hall made available by a municipality, space shared with an existing reuse centre or a vocational school. A pilot needs, at minimum:

• a covered reception area for reusable items at the recycling centre;
• a sorting and quarantine zone;
• identified, dry storage;
• a workshop that can be equipped step by step;
• safe access for the public, separate from the waste-handling area.

3. Safety: the protocol before the machines

Write the safety protocol before buying the first machine. It covers the identification of accepted materials, quarantine, exclusion of dangerous materials, specific rules for electrical equipment and batteries, separate handling of chemicals and regulated flows, machine instructions, personal protective equipment, training of supervisors and users, and minimal traceability of items put back into circulation. Settle liability and insurance for objects that are repaired, transformed or redistributed.

4. Partners: who brings what?

Use the actor map to sign light commitments: a school that will run a class project, a craftsperson who will supervise a workshop, a company that will supply offcuts, an association that will organise repair cafés. Every link should be two-way — each partner both brings and receives.

5. Governance: who decides, who operates, who is accountable?

See the next section — it deserves its own decision.

6. Budget: what will it cost, and who pays?

Build the budget in three blocks — investment, operation, revenue — and keep the assumptions visible. The section on the economic model below lists the lines to fill in. Do not publish a saving you have not measured.

Deliverable at month 3: a feasibility report of a dozen pages, with the site plan, the list of accepted materials, the safety protocol, the governance choice, the budget, the indicators and — crucially — the abandonment criteria, written before anything opens.

Choosing the governance

The system must remain steerable by the local authority. The manifesto lists several possible forms; the choice depends on local skills, legal constraints, costs and responsibilities.

The set-up the manifesto recommends studying first is a combination: the local authority keeps control of the public waste service and the recycling centre; a social economy structure — preferably an existing one — runs the reuse centre and the fablab; a multi-year objectives agreement links the two, on results that are measured and published.

Whatever the form, set up a steering committee — local authority, site manager, operating structure, fablab lead, associations, schools, economic actors — that can answer five questions at any time: What comes in? What is reused? What is transformed? Who can use the resources? What results are obtained?

Building the economic model

A site that closes after two years does more harm than one that never opened. The economic model must therefore be designed for stability, on three revenue pillars:

1. Activity revenue — reuse shop, sale of materials, workshops, fablab memberships, supervised machine use, training, services (small series, furniture, spare parts, repairs).
2. A service agreement — the authority pays for a measured service: tonnes diverted from disposal, which it no longer pays to transport and treat.
3. Project funding — environment agencies, regions, reuse and repair funds, calls for projects, sponsorship — to start and to invest, not to operate.

The budget lines to fill in

Investment: fitting out the reception, sorting and storage areas; workshop equipment (hand tools first, then a few machines); safety equipment; signage; IT for inventory and measurement.

Operation: staff (coordination, sorting and preparation, workshop supervision), premises and utilities, insurance, maintenance, consumables, training, communication and events.

Revenue: expected sales and memberships (cautiously estimated), the service agreement, start-up grants, valued in-kind contributions.

Avoided costs — the method, not a promise: for each tonne diverted, the authority avoids transport and treatment costs and, where they apply, landfill or incineration taxes. Calculate them from the authority’s own contracts and rates, per stream. In France, for instance, the general tax on polluting activities (TGAP) on landfill and incineration has risen sharply since 2021. These figures are local; they must be measured, not assumed.

The levers of stability

• Diversify — aim for no single source to exceed about half of the budget over time.
• Pool premises, machines and skills with existing actors.
• Grow on evidence — each new investment is triggered by indicators reached.
• Build a reserve of a few months of running costs.
• Publish the accounts.

The target trajectory: year 1 start-up funding dominates and the agreement is signed; years 2–3 own revenue rises and the agreement is indexed on results; afterwards the three pillars balance and investment is partly self-financed. A trajectory, not a forecast.

Months 3–12: open gradually

Opening is a ramp, not a ribbon-cutting.

Months 3–5 — the circuit. Open the reuse counter at the recycling centre for the chosen families only. Train site staff to spot items. Run the sorting, quarantine and storage routine until it is smooth. Put the first objects back into circulation through a small shop or donations. Start measuring on day one.

Months 5–8 — the workshop. Open the fablab to a first circle of users — partner schools, an association, a few craftspeople — with supervised sessions. Launch a monthly repair café. Start one or two visible projects with local value: furniture for a school, fittings for a public building.

Months 8–12 — the territory. Widen opening hours and user groups. Run a first public event — a “second life” contest, a materials exchange, a soapbox race. Invite elected officials and partners to see the circuit at work. Add a material family only if the previous ones run well and storage is not saturated.

Throughout, apply the safeguard principle: a reinforcing loop — more events, more visitors, more objects — needs a regulator. Acceptance rules, planned outflows and bookings keep the system in balance.

The indicator dashboard

Measure from day one, with simple, verifiable and comparable indicators. Publish them. The first year is the baseline.

Month 12: evaluate and decide

The review compares results with the objectives and the abandonment criteria written at month 3. It covers costs, volumes, uses, incidents and improvements, and leads to one of three decisions:

• Continue and extend — new materials, new workshops, a second site, a network.
• Adjust — change the governance, the site, the materials or the opening hours, and set a new review date.
• Stop — and pass the equipment, the materials and the documented know-how on to other local actors, so that nothing is lost.

All three outcomes are legitimate. A pilot that stops on evidence has done its job; a pilot that continues without evidence has not. Before deciding, ask the outside-observer question: ignoring everything already invested, would we start this project today?

Risks and how to mitigate them

A one-page checklist

• Motion voted; feasibility study commissioned.
• Actor map drawn; steering committee formed.
• Flows diagnosed; accepted materials listed.
• Site chosen; reception, quarantine, storage and workshop areas defined.
• Safety protocol written; insurance and liability settled.
• Governance chosen; agreement drafted.
• Budget built on three pillars; avoided costs calculated from local data.
• Indicators defined; baseline measurement in place.
• Abandonment criteria written and dated.
• Gradual opening plan; first partners and events scheduled.
• Month-12 review date fixed.

Conclusion

A TRIFAB pilot is a modest object with a large ambition. It asks a local authority for a study, not a cheque; for one site, not a network; for measured results, not promises. If the circuit works, the pilot produces everything the next territory needs — specifications, material lists, protocols, governance model, budget, dashboard — and the model can spread. If it does not, it fails small, on evidence, and its equipment and know-how stay in the territory.

Ready to take the first step? Read the manifesto, adapt the template motion, and send it to your own elected representatives.

• Pilot site
• Local authorities
• Governance
• Economic model