Climate action at neighborhood scale: examples from the Resilient Cities Network

Neighborhood planning instruments and approaches that tailor and implement city-level strategies have become a key focus in cities around the world. While nations pledge and cities deliver action on climate, local implementation and impact are dependent on and most tangible at the neighborhood scale. Some cities have these approaches embedded in their planning and governance model, while others use themes like nature or livability as an entry point to build robust neighborhoods. This article aims to highlight the current trends in neighborhood planning and the diverse entry points and concludes with seven propositions based on analysis of seven examples predominantly from the UP2030 program and additional examples from city programs in the Resilient Cities Network. Propositions cover a wide range of approaches to mainstream neighborhood planning in cities, from frameworks to physical infrastructure for continuous stakeholder engagement and from tailored neighborhood plans that mirror city level policy to localizing globally adopted planning approaches. The aim is to provide guidance and inspiration to cities seeking to learn from the examples of their peers.

1 Introduction

City residents experience their urban environments in a mostly place-specific manner, related to the qualities of the neighborhood that they traverse through on a day-to-day basis (Drozdzewski and Webster, 2021). With rapid transformation across social, economic, and environmental factors, these changes are most tangible at the neighborhood scale. Not all neighborhoods experience such transformations in the same form. Some neighborhoods may experience the impacts of rising temperatures, economic stress or gentrification most disproportionately than other due to underlying physical and socio-economic characteristics (Parsons et al., 2024). There is consensus that the neighborhood scale is essential to the planning and implementation of city-wide climate action plans, as they are important sites for the testing of solutions as well as where the impacts of climate change and social inequalities are most apparent (Atkinson, 2008; Baffoe, 2019; Chyn and Katz, 2021; Moulaert et al., 2010). Place specific impact is unlocked at this scale, thereby addressing aspects of contextuality and equity more meaningfully.

Neighborhoods play a key role in local governance. As an essential spatial unit considered in the district planning approach, local participation, community engagement and local level decision making processes are operationalized at the scale of the neighborhood (Atkinson, 2008). From the spatial perspective, neighborhoods are zones within the city fabric which often harbor unique physical, environmental, and social identities. Based on this contextuality, city level policies are then tailored to the scale of the neighborhoods for implementation (Baffoe, 2019). It is also at the neighborhood scale that place-based investment strategies are also targeted, whether this is with market-based transformation or with public investment aimed to address disparities (Gelfond and Looney, 2018).

This relevance of the neighborhood scale underpins the EU funded UP2030 program which is the starting point of this perspective. In UP2030, 11 cities explore innovative and multi-dimensional instruments for actioning climate neutral, resilience and just neighborhoods using the 5UP approach, a systemic methodology with 5 dimensions: needs, policies, and instruments (UPDATE), capacity building (UPSKILL), prototyping and piloting (UPGRADE), replicating, rolling out, or transferring success (UPSCALING) and engagement, communication, and dissemination (UPTAKE) (UP2030, 2023). Of the seven case studies analyzed and elaborated in this perspective paper, four find their origins in the UP2030 project and demonstrate the most common thematic entry points and typology of instruments across the 11 project cities. The selection of all case studies captures diversities in geography (Europe and North America), thematic focus (energy, mobility, public space and climate resilience) and areas of intervention (planning and policy, physical and social). Each case study has been structured to provide a summary, elaborate on the challenges faced and thereafter provide learnings for replication in other contexts. Based on these learnings, the article concludes by providing propositions and practical guidance on operationalizing place-based interventions at the neighborhood scale. While the paper attempts to capture diversity in both cases and findings, it is also limited to the programs analyzed. Therefore, the guidance provided in this paper is non-exhaustive in nature.

2 Neighborhood and city planning concepts

On the neighborhood scale, there are several concepts that have gained traction in the last decade. For example, the 15-min city concept entails planning every neighborhood with equal access to core services and opportunities, with all activities within walking or biking distance (C40 Cities and Arup, 2021). It aims to build equitable neighborhoods where residents have access public spaces, livable built environment and a thriving local community regardless of its socio-economic demographic. Additionally, planning approaches that focus on building sustainable neighborhoods, also identify 3 key concepts for neighborhoods namely: compact, connected and integrated (UN-Habitat, 2018).

Cities have historically used the neighborhood and district scale to design and implement a variety of strategic plans, cross-sectoral projects, and community initiatives. A few countries have policies which mandate the development of neighborhood climate action plans which compliment city level climate planning instruments. For example, the Government of the UK has developed guidance on the Neighborhood Planning system outlining the principles, considerations and stages (Government of UK, 2014). In Rotterdam, the “Wijk Aan Zet” translating to a district governance system outlines tangible building blocks to create an activated local community through neighborhood hubs, local decision-making councils, agreements and stronger collaboration (Erasmus University Rotterdam, 2022).

3 Examples from city programs at the resilient cities network

3.1 Net zero framework as a neighborhood planning tool in Belfast

In Belfast, the city council has been placing increasing focus on carbon reduction plans and initiatives, for example the Net Zero Carbon Roadmap and the One Million Trees program (Resilient Belfast, 2020a, 2020b). There is a need to build knowledge and operational capacity for adapting these city level plans to local contexts in the form of Local Area Energy Plans (LAEP) and provide a framework on how wider policies can be adapted for implementation in local communities. Through UP2030, and in consultation with diverse stakeholders, a framework for a net zero neighborhood covering three thematic areas namely active travel, greening, and retrofit aims to guide local implementation. These 3 themes align both climate and political priorities, helping mobilize support and resources for projects that have an impact on emission reduction. The framework provides a structured approach for translating high-level climate policy into actionable, place-based strategies at the neighborhood scale and breaking policy down into possible best practices (UP2030, 2023). Case studies per theme demonstrate opportunities for carbon reduction and help build an evidence base for scaling successful approaches, enhancing local knowledge and capacity. The framework is designed to support integrated decision-making and planning, and is specifically targeted at senior urban planners, city partners, decision-makers, and community leaders, offering them tools to guide local climate action while strengthening cross-sector collaboration and long-term impact. While the framework attempts to increase informed decision-making capacity, a key challenge has been building a minimum level of knowledge and consensus on the priority themes. There is recognition for a need for ‘climate conversations’ to take place at every level of the municipal organization, to position the framework more effectively. These climate conversations also improve the ability of the teams to effectively explain and engage with local stakeholders who are key to successfully implementing the actions identified in the framework. This emphasizes the need for internal learning and capacity building to ensure agreement on climate topics and priorities.

3.2 Knowledge center on healthy streets to empower healthy neighborhoods

Budapest aims to upscale the “Healthy Streets” (HS) approach to all municipalities operating within its jurisdiction. Through the HS approach, the city seeks to leverage street interventions to unlock several co-benefits to climate neutrality and resilience. A key goal is to establish a ‘Healthy Streets’ Knowledge Center, a platform that consolidates guidance, tools, resources, and methodologies, empowering urban practitioners to effectively implement this approach at a neighborhood scale (UP2030, 2023). To promote local ownership and advocacy, a Steering Committee (SC) has been set up, with representation from city and district level stakeholders having expertise in urban planning and design, sustainability, and community involvement. By creating links with multiple levels of governance, the Knowledge Centre builds knowledge and support for shared goals. This is a practical example of the ‘Learning and Action Alliance’ concept, where a group of stakeholders co-create essential policy and capacity building interventions through shared learning and action (Dudley et al., 2013). The SC also undertakes efforts to secure future funding for its operations and partnerships to ensure its integration into local planning and practice through continuous knowledge sharing, training programs, consultancy, and practical support tailored to urban planners and district municipalities. The emphasis on the governance and implementation of the Knowledge Centre allows for greater ownership and sustainability of the approach in the long term. However, a key challenge remains the mandate of this knowledge center. Given its nature as a self-initiated knowledge hub for a global approach, alignment with local policy, goals and leadership is essential. As a response, the city also seeks to build the center’s responsibilities into SC member’s employee contacts, thereby ensuring further accountability and allocation of resources to the development, maintenance and dissemination of the platform. A robust governance model which finds foundation in existing program budgets and personnel would be essential to ensure that knowledge is taken up and advocated for.

3.3 The first resilient neighborhood in Rotterdam

Rotterdam’s Bospolder-Tussendijken (BoTu) district is pioneering a unique approach to neighborhood planning through its Resilient BoTu 2028 program, using community and social resilience as the building block to achieve wider climate and energy transitions (Resilient Cities Network, 2020). The goal is to create Rotterdam’s first resilient district by leveraging energy transition and climate adaptation programs to build social cohesion, community capacity and a higher quality of life. This approach provides as alternative route to approaching climate action in cities, putting communities, their strengths and existing local governance network at the center. A key building block is the Asset Based Community Development approach, which focuses on community led transformation and identifies resources, or assets, that already exist within the neighborhood. Assets may vary from people’s skills, talents, relationships and networks that can be leveraged to drive bottom-up change (Harrison et al., 2019). In the first phase of this program, community-led initiatives, resident networks and several formats of neighborhood governance through councils, steering groups, cooperatives and informal groups have been identified and strengthened. Through the UP2030 project, it has received funding to develop a ‘Resilient Districts Toolkit’, designed for municipal practitioners and stakeholders, consolidating case studies, methods, and interventions that have been applied in BoTu (UP2030, 2023). The toolkit acts as an inspiration to planners, urban geographers and other neighborhoods to leverage climate action for broader socio-economic co-benefits. By making the lessons accessible, the toolkit seeks to educate practitioners in Rotterdam and beyond in their own neighborhood planning processes. While such learning kits are highly inspirational in nature, their uptake and real integration in local implementation is a challenge. Siloed nature of working of various city departments is also seen as a barrier. To address this and build an open learning and exploration culture at the municipal level, a ‘Transition Academy’ has been created to organize a meaningful learning trajectory for all personnel. In association with this transition academy, the toolkit will create a broader program of training and events which increase the uptake of the learning and increases the integration of its lessons in everyday practice.

3.4 District climate action plan as a way to connect with Climate City Contracts

With the launch of the EU Mission for Climate Neutral and Smart Cities, the European Commission put urban areas at the center of the EU Green Deal and called on cities’ ambitions to become climate neutral by 2030. As essential step is the development of a Climate City Contract consisting of a Commitment, Action Plan and Investment Plan. Upon completing its CCC and being awarded the Mission Label for its holistic plan, the city of Thessaloniki has extended this planning logic to the neighborhood scale. This allows for a tailored approach to implementing city level policy, and ensures that aspects of contextuality, place specific trends or challenges and local stakeholder and ownership may be addressed. Developing a District Climate Action Plan (DCAP), with funding through the UP2030 project, the city is guiding both policymakers and citizens with concrete strategies on achieving the city’s climate neutrality goals (UP2030, 2023). This DCAP has analyzed city and local priorities through spatial and climate assessments to compile a portfolio of projects at the district level aligned with city level climate neutrality and resilience goals. The DCAP demonstrates a model for climate-resilient, inclusive and affordable urban transformation in the neighborhood of Dioikitirion, which faces challenges such as urban shrinkage, ageing population and infrastructure among others. Through co-creation workshops and mapping sessions with local stakeholders such as residents, shop owners, and civil society stakeholders, the city has selected local interventions and shaped the strategic approach for the neighborhood transformation. The focus was to uncover aspirations, vision and local knowledge of the neighborhood while simultaneously building awareness on the risks and scenarios analyzed in the spatial assessments. Overlaying quantitative and qualitative aspects, the result is a people-centered plan that reflects community priorities and builds collective ownership of climate transition. In the next phase of implementing this DCAP, stakeholders will be engaged again to identify next steps. However, this is expected to be challenging, since a larger stakeholder mix and consensus would need to be achieved.

3.5 Child friendly streets and neighborhoods in Milan

In many cities, unlocking particular benefits of resilience planning has often been used as the entry point to neighborhood planning. Similar to the “Healthy Streets” approach in Budapest, Milan is placing significant focus on “Child-friendly cities” as a means to build resilient neighborhoods. By defining a clear goal and target group, it leverages child-friendly open and public spaces as a lever to address other climate issues at neighborhood scale. Programs like “Strengthening urban resilience through play” funded by the Real Play Coalition are supporting cities in identifying strategies and best practices on how to use play areas as a means to create co-benefits for schools, families, children and the elderly (Resilient Cities Network et al., 2022). In Milan, a key priority is creating more spaces in the city dedicated to playing and to children. Play Streets thus became an integral part of the city’s adaptation strategy and recovery after the covid-19 pandemic. Since schools were closed for a long time in Italy, the project focused on providing spaces where children can play and interact with their peers. In collaboration with Arup, the city of Milan developed a plan for a specific district, to analyze how play is considered within the neighborhood scale and how this approach can be mainstreamed across districts. Using tactical urbanism, which uses short-term, pop style urban interventions, the city gave back the streets to children and their families and worked with them through co-design activities to better understand and imagine the city of the future. By integrating nature as an essential design element, the interventions also demonstrate the impact of Nature Based Solutions that not only provide shade, relief and sensory stimulation but also help alleviate stresses such as heat, flooding and improve biodiversity. A key challenge has been securing longevity of such community centric initiatives and actions. By building local support and showcasing the possible impacts, the city seeks to build awareness among policy makers and users, in turn leading to an increase in acceptance and consensus on mainstreaming these actions in the future.

3.6 Drawing on the power of local community organizations

Heat has emerged as one of the primary challenges facing Boston’s Chinatown, a predominantly Asian American neighborhood located in the city’s center. In response, the city of Boston put the neighborhood forward as one of the candidates for our Resilience for Communities Program (R4C) which evaluates and strategically responds to gaps in community resilience to extreme heat and flood events (Resilient Cities Network et al., 2024). With the impacts of heat often felt more severely in some groups than others, the implementation approach called for effective strategies that are accessible for all groups in the local context. At the same time, outreach to all local communities and trust in institutions remains an operational challenge. The city hence relied on the organizational reach and expertise of Chinatown Main Streets, a local nonprofit which works to support local businesses and community members through beautification efforts, community engagement and strengthening neighborhood infrastructure. The Chinatown Main Street organized the Cool Down Chinatown working group with the goal of creating a neighborhood-level heat action plan. Members from the group include civic society organizations, local resident groups and representatives from city agencies including the Office of Emergency Management, the Office of Climate Resilience and Municipal Office of New Urban Mechanics and others. During their monthly meetings, group members have worked to consolidate existing information and resources for heat adaptation specific to the Chinatown neighborhood, identified priority areas for the creation of local cooling centers and started developing a multi-lingual extreme heat communications plan for local residents. By transferring the coordinating efforts of Chinatown Main Street, this initiative has been instrumental to bringing together the expertise of these disparate groups and creating enhanced channels of communications with city-level decisions makers and the representatives of the community who are directly impacted.

3.7 Climate communication at the district scale

As cities grapple with rising temperatures and more frequent extreme heat events, communicating climate risks and solutions at the district and neighborhood level becomes essential. Large-scale climate strategies often fail to resonate with people’s everyday experiences. Yet it is precisely at the local scale—on the street where someone walks to work, or the park where children play—that climate impacts are most directly felt, and where opportunities for meaningful action emerge. In the REACHOUT project, story maps as a storytelling technique was developed for a central district of Athens (Climate Adaptation Services et al., 2023), designed to bridge the gap between complex climate data and the daily lives of residents. These tools were used to show what residents can do during heatwaves to stay safe and cool, and to illustrate how city-led interventions—like increasing tree cover, installing shade structures, or improving building design—can transform local environments and improve well-being. It is noted that the story was developed in both Greek and English to maximize accessibility. Storytelling at the neighborhood scale does more than convey information; it fosters a sense of agency (Sundin et al., 2018; Vanderlinden et al., 2020). When residents see familiar streets and landmarks in climate narratives, they begin to understand the risks and opportunities around them in a more personal way. This localized communication can also open a dialogue between communities and city authorities, enabling co-creation of solutions that are contextually relevant and socially accepted. Such dialogue can also be leveraged for citizen science methods and extraction of local knowledge in the form of place-based stories or feedback on the qualitative aspects of a neighborhoods, which are difficult to measure without extensive engagement and communication. Digital platforms can be key in unlocking wider dialogue and exchange (Anthony, 2024). With better access to data and knowledge, local communities are able to participate more effectively, hence improving the overall quality of engagement and co-creation. At the same time, digital literacy and access remains a challenge to overcome, especially in vulnerable groups that may not have easy access or skills. Pairing digital solutions with physical presence and human interactions increases the outreach and effectiveness of such measures.

4 Practical guidance and propositions

Valuable reflections and insights have emerged from the active involvement in the above-mentioned neighborhood-scale projects over the past decade. These are distilled below into propositions to guide future city programs seeking to engage effectively at this urban spatial scale:

1. Contextualizing knowledge on a local level is essential: Communities possess local knowledge and capacity that can be leveraged for action. Rotterdam through its Asset Based Community Development method and Belfast through its net zero neighborhood framework have ensured that local capabilities are harnessed for a bottom-up, community led transformation. At the same time, the processes are designed to train and build capacity by facilitating exchange of skills and knowledge. However, it is important to note that creating an open and intentional learning environment is key to ensure the lessons are taken up and applied. There is also a need to set up a robust knowledge base and consensus on topics.

2. Connecting neighborhood plans with city level policy: Most policy ambitions are defined at the city level and thereafter tailored to the neighborhood scale for implementation. By ensuring a neighborhood equivalent for policy and governance instruments, there is direct feedback that can be established across scales. In Thessaloniki, translating city level action plans into district climate action plans through co-creation with local stakeholders ensures that responses are tailored to local needs and opportunities. However, engagement of stakeholders throughout the process, and preferably continuous engagement of certain groups, remains a priority to anticipate or avoid roadblocks.

3. Using aspects like play and nature as an entry point to build neighborhood resilience: By placing focus on co-benefits and resilience qualities as the ‘goal’, cities can build consensus and support with their local stakeholders and target audiences. In Milan, play streets were used as a lever to inspire the reduction in car usage and air pollution. Similarly, Budapest leverages the global concept of Healthy streets to build local momentum.

4. Using Learning Action Alliances for co-creation: LAAs establish strong stakeholder networks where knowledge & learning instruments can be peer reviews and co-created together. This builds capacity throughout the process with the engagement of the government and non-governmental stakeholders and can be effective in creating further learning opportunities in municipal ecosystems. Budapest leverages its Knowledge Centre to provide tools to its neighborhoods to action the Healthy Streets approach. However, mandate and governance of such alliances remain crucial factors for success.

5. Layering of quantitative and qualitative aspects: Urban planning and design explores interconnections in time and space. To do so, it requires diverse data to inform multi-dimensional KPIs. In the examples from Thessaloniki, Athens and Belfast, it is observed that at the neighborhood level, it is important to overlay quantitative data on emissions, social, financial, mobility, energy and hydrology targets with qualitative aspects of aesthetics, aspirations and accessibility to diverse set of user groups. Stakeholder fatigue, representing the usual suspects and losing stakeholders along the way remain key risks.

6. Importance of neighborhood specific data-based communication campaigns: Ultimately, effective climate communication at the neighborhood level is not just about raising awareness, it’s about empowering people to act, advocate, and participate in shaping the future of their city. By rooting messages in the realities of daily life, Athens is transforming climate adaptation from a distant policy issue into a collective local journey. Digital tools and platforms can offer innovative solutions in our increasingly smart world. However, ensuring equal access would be essential to ensure diverse reach.

7. Amplifying the reach of community-based partners: Community based organizations and resident groups have a pivotal role to plan in climate action, ensuring both the representation of those most impacted and bringing neighborhood-specific local knowledge to the table in planning and organizing processes. Chinatown Main Street has been instrumental in creating outreach and engagement materials that speak to Chinatown Boston’s specific neighborhood character and linguistic needs. The agreement of roles and responsibility of municipalities and CBOs is crucial for trusted community relationships.

5 Conclusion and discussion

This perspective paper sets out to analyze the selection of case studies from cities and provide practical guidance in the form of seven propositions. Building upon the experience of the UP2030 project, seven case studies have been elaborated to showcase a diversity of neighborhood planning approaches such as learning instruments as illustrated in the examples of Budapest’s Healthy Streets Knowledge Centre and Rotterdam’s Resilient Districts Toolkit, planning frameworks as illustrated in the examples of Belfast’s Net-Zero neighborhood framework and Thessaloniki’s District Climate Action Plan, global thematic entry points such as Healthy Streets and Child-friendly cities, and stakeholder engagement focused methods as illustrated in the examples of Boston’s Community Based Organization approach and Athens’ climate story maps. Together, these examples inform the propositions proposed in this paper. The propositions offer lessons on how to approach neighborhood planning approaches and the added value created through them. With the significance of the neighborhood scale in translating and translating city policy to the local context, propositions encourage practitioners to leverage local community organizations, their knowledge and other alliances that help tailor solutions. Finally, it is noted that both case studies and propositions are limited to the UP2030 program and other examples available in city programs of the Resilient Cities Network. Future research may build upon including other examples and also compare them both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

NT: Visualization, Methodology, Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing, Investigation. LK: Methodology, Supervision, Conceptualization, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. AR: Writing – original draft.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article.

Acknowledgments

This paper showcases city cases from the EU funded and other global programs that the Resilient Cities Network is supporting. Special thanks to the city teams from Athens, Belfast, Boston, Budapest, Milan, Rotterdam and Thessaloniki whose inspiring projects have been captured as case studies. Lastly, special thanks for Catalina Diaz, co-coordinator of the UP2030 project on behalf of the Fraunhofer Institute for Industrial Engineering IAO, for reviewing this article. Special thanks to the programs that have been reviewed in the writing of this article namely, UP2030 (Grant Agreement number 101096405), REACHOUT (Grant Agreement number 101036599) and Resilience for Communities (R4C).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

Anthony, B. (2024). The role of community engagement in urban innovation towards the co-creation of smart sustainable cities. J. Knowl. Econ. 15, 1592–1624. doi: 10.1007/s13132-023-01176-1

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Atkinson, R. (2008). European urban policies and the neighbourhood: an overview. Proc. Inst. Civil Eng. Urban Design Planning 161, 115–122. doi: 10.1680/udap.2008.161.3.115

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Baffoe, G. (2019). Understanding the neighbourhood concept and its evolution: a review. Environ. Urban. ASIA 10, 393–402. doi: 10.1177/0975425319859115

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

C40 Cities and Arup. (2021). Green and Thriving Neighbourhoods Guidebook. Available online at: https://www.c40knowledgehub.org/s/article/Green-and-Thriving-Neighbourhoods-A-pathway-to-net-zero-featuring-the-15-minute-city?language=en_US (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Chyn, E., and Katz, L. F. (2021). Neighborhoods matter: assessing the evidence for place effects. J. Econ. Perspect. 35, 197–222. doi: 10.1257/jep.35.4.197

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Climate Adaptation ServicesNorwegian Geotechnical InstituteResilient Cities Network, and City of Athens. (2023). “A cooler Dawn for Athens in 2030.” A Cooler Dawn for Athens in 2030. Available online at: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/7acf6f6c84b1467190b4b19206f217e7 (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Drozdzewski, D., and Webster, N. A. (2021). (re)visiting the neighbourhood. Geogr. Compass 15:e12597. doi: 10.1111/gec3.12597

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Dudley, Elizabeth, Ashley, Richard, Manojlovic, Natasa, van Herk, Sebastiaan, and Blanksby, John. (2013). Learning and action alliances for innovation and active learning in a European context.

Google Scholar

Erasmus University Rotterdam. (2022). “Rotterdamse experimenten lokale democratie leiden beperkt tot een versterking.” University. Rotterdamse experimenten lokale democratie leiden beperkt tot een versterking, February 16. Available online at: https://www.eur.nl/nieuws/rotterdamse-experimenten-lokale-democratie-leiden-beperkt-tot-een-versterking (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Gelfond, Hilary, and Looney, Adam. (2018). Learning from opportunity zones: How to improve place-based policies. October 1.

Google Scholar

Government of UK. (2014). “Guidance: neighbourhood planning.” Gov.Uk, March 6. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/neighbourhood-planning--2 (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Harrison, R., Blickem, C., Lamb, J., Kirk, S., and Vassilev, I. (2019). Asset-based community development: narratives, practice, and conditions of possibility—a qualitative study with community practitioners. SAGE Open 9:2158244018823081. doi: 10.1177/2158244018823081

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Swyngedouw, E., and González, S. (2010). Can neighbourhoods save the City? London: Routledge.

Google Scholar

Parsons, E. S., Jowell, A., Veidis, E., Barry, M., and Israni, S. T. (2024). Climate change and inequality. Pediatr. Res. doi: 10.1038/s41390-024-03153-z

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Resilient Belfast (2020a). Net-zero carbon roadmap for Belfast. Nairobi, Kenya: Belfast City Council.

Google Scholar

Resilient Belfast (2020b). One million trees. Belfast: Belfast City Council.

Google Scholar

Resilient Cities Network. (2020). Making Rotterdam’s first resilient Neighborhood through social cohesion. September 30. Available online at: https://resilientcitiesnetwork.org/rotterdam-social-cohesion/ (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Resilient Cities NetworkArupThe Lego Foundation. (2022). Strengthening Urban Resilience through Play. Research report. Available online at: https://www.arup.com/globalassets/downloads/insights/strengthening-urban-resilience-through-play.pdf (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Resilient Cities NetworkZ Zurich FoundationZ Zurich. (2024). Building urban resilience with communities: A guide to community selection with insights from the resilience for communities program. Guide. Available online at: https://resilientcitiesnetwork.org/downloadable_resources/Programs/R4C_CommunitySelectionGuide.pdf (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Sundin, A., Andersson, K., and Watt, R. (2018). Rethinking communication: integrating storytelling for increased stakeholder engagement in environmental evidence synthesis. Environ. Evid. 7:6. doi: 10.1186/s13750-018-0116-4

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

UN-Habitat (2018). A new strategy of sustainable neighbourhood planning: Five principles - urban planning. Nairobi, Kenya: UN-Habitat.

Google Scholar

UP2030. (2023). “Urban Planning and Design Ready for 2030.” Project website. UP2030. Available online at: https://up2030-he.eu/ (Accesssed September 18, 2025).

Google Scholar

Vanderlinden, J.-P., Baztan, J., Chouinard, O., Cordier, M., Cunha, C. D., Huctin, J. M., et al. (2020). Meaning in the face of changing climate risks: connecting agency, Sensemaking and narratives of change through transdisciplinary research. Clim. Risk Manag. 29:100224. doi: 10.1016/j.crm.2020.100224

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar