Urban Planning – Institute for Urban Excellence https://www.institute-urbanex.org Wed, 26 Nov 2025 15:29:29 +0000 en-GB hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 https://www.institute-urbanex.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/cropped-IUE_WEB_Icon_Round-32x32.png Urban Planning – Institute for Urban Excellence https://www.institute-urbanex.org 32 32 Affordable and Sustainable: The Future of Housing in Europe https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/affordable-and-sustainable-the-future-of-housing-in-europe/ Wed, 26 Nov 2025 15:25:53 +0000 https://www.institute-urbanex.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=9947

Affordable and Sustainable: The Future of Housing in Europe

by Taliah Dommerholt, Samir Amin & Alice Jelmini

While the European Union increasingly recognises housing as both a social right and a cornerstone of its green transition, the current housing crisis exposes the tension between ambitious sustainability goals and social equity. Unless EU policy effectively addresses the balance between affordability, accessibility, and sustainability objectives, efforts to advance the Green Deal and the Just Transition risk exacerbating inequalities rather than fostering cohesion. 

Download as PDF

European Affordable Housing

In Ursula von der Leyen’s State of the Union she stated that “a home is not just four walls and a roof. It is safety, warmth, a place for family and friends. It is belonging. But for too many Europeans today, home has become a source of anxiety. It can mean debt or uncertainty. The numbers tell a painful truth. House prices are up by more than 20% since 2015. Building permits down by over 20% in five years. This is more than a housing crisis. It is a social crisis. It tears at Europe’s social fabric. It weakens our cohesion. And it also threatens our competitiveness.” 

This is not the first time the housing crisis has been mentioned at a European level. At the 2017 Gothenburg Summit, the EU announced the European Pillar of Social Rights, introducing 20 key principles to make Europe fairer and more inclusive, one of which being housing and assistance for the homeless. This includes ensuring access to social housing or housing assistance of good quality for those in need, appropriate assistance and protection against forced eviction for vulnerable people, and adequate shelter and services to promote social inclusion of unhoused people.  

More recently, in January 2025, the European Parliamentary Research Service published the briefing, A coordinated EU approach to housing, outlining the cost-of-living crisis and the need for increased collaboration on the European scale. While the EU has no direct ability to enact physical interventions when it comes to housing, there are numerous policy and funding schemes in the works that follow principles of subsidiarity, including the upcoming European Affordable Housing Plan (EAHP) and a new pan-European investment platform for affordable and sustainable housing. There are also considerations for revising state-aid rules to subsidise or provide tax incentives to housing providers, and rules for short-term rentals to tackle a shortage of affordable homes.

Photo: Allan Franca Carmo (Pexels)

Housing and the Green Transition

Another talking point on the European agenda is the green transition. Though housing and the green transition are often conceptually and operationally separated, the housing crisis may be being impacted by transition policies. The European Green Deal envisions a “green transition that leaves no one behind”, aiming to minimise socio-economic impacts on the path toward climate neutrality and drive forward the concept of the Just Transition with policy actions across the European landscape. So far, efforts to minimise socio-economic impact include a number of sectors and built environments, but is the housing sector being overlooked? In some European cases, the costs associated with energy upgrades and sustainable housing renovations are seen to disproportionately burden low-income households, in turn risking rent increases, displacement, and increased energy poverty. 

A clear example of this phenomenon, where sustainability and social equity are colliding in the housing sector, can be seen in the retrofitting movement. While retrofitting is key to reducing carbon emissions, these improvements can come at a cost. Lower-income households often reside in older, less energy-efficient homes that require significant upgrades to meet new standards. The financial burden of these renovations may lead to higher rents or housing prices, deepening affordability issues for economically vulnerable populations (von Platten et al., 2022).  

Although renovations can reduce overall energy consumption and lower utility bills, the higher short-term costs associated with retrofitting can also widen the gap between those who can adapt to the green economy and those who cannot. In some cases, landlords are accused of passing on the costs of retrofitting to their tenants, creating undue financial strain for renters and even ‘renovictions’, direct or indirect displacement resulting from the costs associated with renovations (Weber & Wolff, 2018; Busà, 2024). There is also the issue of ‘hidden energy poverty’, which occurs when households are forced to use less energy than needed to such an extent that it negatively impacts their abilities to heat, cool and power their homes (Karpinska & Śmiech, 2020). 

Photos (Pexels): left by Allan Franca Carmo, centre by Mathias Reding, right by Nathan J. Hilton

Photo: Mathias Reding (Pexels)

An additional point to consider concerns the financial support schemes that EU Member States have introduced to assist with home retrofitting, particularly under the national Recovery and Resilience Facility plans (RRP). While these programmes were initially designed to help households meet energy-efficiency targets and reduce renovation costs, several have since been scaled back as governments reintroduce austerity measures. For example, France’s MaPrimeRénov’ scheme was suspended and then reintroduced in 2025 with stricter rules; Italy’s Superbonus was progressively scaled back; Slovenia’s revised RRP, approved in 2025, reduced or removed several measures related to energy efficiency and sustainable renovation; and Poland modified its Clean Air subsidy scheme in 2025, adjusting support for renovations and heat-source replacements in single-family homes. With the European Commission again urging Member States to limit public expenditure in line with the EU Stability and Growth Pact, the continuity of such support has become uncertain. This volatility in financial assistance poses a significant challenge for individual home-owners and larger housing corporations, who may struggle to commit to costly renovations without stable and predictable aid. 

There are also challenges associated with efforts to increase housing stock. Eurostat data shows a steep drop in dwelling permits across the EU in the past three years, indicating that overall housing construction is falling. Cities increasingly employ urban densification processes to address housing shortages, reduce pressures on available land, and support decarbonisation, energy efficiency, and other green transition initiatives. These projects, which include the redevelopment of existing urban structures through subdivision, building extensions, or complete reconstruction, can increase housing supply. However, they can also drive-up land prices and rents, leading to reduced housing affordability and displacement (Götze et al., 2024).

Can we build a Fairer, Greener Future?

At this juncture, it is vital that we look at the design of future policy interventions to better address the balance between affordable and secure housing, and our larger scale sustainability objectives. The upcoming European Affordable Housing Plan will include measures to accelerate housing construction, renovate existing buildings, and end homelessness by 2030. It will also further enact controls on short-term (tourist) rentals, to improve affordability for locals. This presents an opportunity to address the deepening inequalities in Europe’s housing sector; however, it is vital that this policy is not enacted in a vacuum.

We need to make sure affordable housing policies are considering and addressing the failures of existing policy implementation and working alongside agendas like the green transition. While a unified, cohesive EU housing strategy has the potential for positive change, it will be most impactful if it places vulnerable and lower/middle income groups at the centre of new policy, while maintaining progress towards a just transition. The reality is that without place-based policy design that considers the intersection of social justice and the environment in the housing sector, a truly cohesive Europe will remain out of reach. With this in mind, the question remains as to how we can balance the competing pressures on available land, expanding housing access while also preserving nature. 

There are several points to consider here:

» Lasting solutions require adaptation to Europe’s diverse housing landscapes. Regional and municipal decision- makers, as well as local experts, are uniquely positioned to address these challenges, often demonstrating a clear understanding of their residents’ needs and the types of changes that are practical within their local contexts.
» Alternative forms of (social) housing, such as cooperatives and Community Land Trusts (community-led organisations that acquire and hold land to provide long-term affordable housing and other community benefits) should be considered within policy agendas. Such models prioritise collective and long-term interests over profit and can contribute to a just transition by increasing access to renewable energy (Lukkarinen et al., 2022).
» We need to consider what spaces exist for genuine dialogue between communities and different levels of government, and how to find cohesive narratives of change that recognise the diversity of voices around topics like housing. Concepts like active subsidiarity, futures literacy, and place-based approaches that consider the unique needs of regions, cities, and communities offer pathways to ensure people have a home and have a voice.

Photo: Nathan J. Hilton

Ultimately, addressing Europe’s housing crisis requires more than short-term fixes; it demands a structural reimagining of housing as a social right, with long-term strategies designed to work alongside other policy priorities. Agendas such as the green transition should also be reevaluated to make sure all sectors are considered and potential social impacts are minimised. In the meantime, we will continue to work towards a future where affordability, equity, and sustainability reinforce rather than undermine one another.

References

Busà, A. (2024). Renovation without renoviction: the green redevelopment of a municipal housing estate in Drewitz, Germany. Housing Studies, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2024.2342411 

Debrunner, G., Hofer, K., Wicki, M., Kauer, F., & Kaufmann, D. (2024). Housing Precarity in Six European and North American Cities: Threatened by the Loss of a Safe, Stable, and Affordable Home. Journal of the American Planning Association, 90(7), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2023.2291148 

Götze, V., Bouwmeester, J. A., & Jehling, M. (2024). For whom do we densify? Explaining income variation across densification projects in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Urban Studies, 61(7), 1273-1290. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00420980231205793 

Karpinska, L., & Śmiech, S. (2020). Invisible energy poverty? Analysing housing costs in Central and Eastern Europe. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, 101670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101670 

Lukkarinen, J. P., Laakso, S., Jari Lyytimäki, Määttä, H., & Lassi Venäläinen. (2022). The smart meets the conventional: Media storylines and societal frames on the energy action of housing cooperatives. Energy Research & Social Science, 91, 102747-102747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102747 

Moes, J., & Boreas, J. (2023). Neighbourhoods in Transition: Gentrification, Identity, and Social Inequality. In Combating Crises From Below: Social responses to polycrisis in Europe (pp. 33-124). Maastricht University Press. https://pubpub.maastrichtuniversitypress.nl/pub/neighbourhoods-in-transition-gentrification-identity-and-social-inequality/release/1 

von Platten, J., Mangold, M., Johansson, T., & Mjörnell, K. (2022). Energy efficiency at what cost? Unjust burden-sharing of rent increases in extensive energy retrofitting projects in Sweden. Energy Research & Social Science, 92, 102791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102791 

Weber, I., & Wolff, A. (2018). Energy efficiency retrofits in the residential sector – analysing tenants’ cost burden in a German field study. Energy Policy, 122, 680-688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.08.007 

COVER PHOTO: Lina Kivaka – Pexels

Busà, A. (2024). Renovation without renoviction: the green redevelopment of a municipal housing estate in Drewitz, Germany. Housing Studies, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2024.2342411 

Debrunner, G., Hofer, K., Wicki, M., Kauer, F., & Kaufmann, D. (2024). Housing Precarity in Six European and North American Cities: Threatened by the Loss of a Safe, Stable, and Affordable Home. Journal of the American Planning Association, 90(7), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2023.2291148 

Götze, V., Bouwmeester, J. A., & Jehling, M. (2024). For whom do we densify? Explaining income variation across densification projects in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Urban Studies, 61(7), 1273-1290. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00420980231205793 

Karpinska, L., & Śmiech, S. (2020). Invisible energy poverty? Analysing housing costs in Central and Eastern Europe. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, 101670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101670 

Lukkarinen, J. P., Laakso, S., Jari Lyytimäki, Määttä, H., & Lassi Venäläinen. (2022). The smart meets the conventional: Media storylines and societal frames on the energy action of housing cooperatives. Energy Research & Social Science, 91, 102747-102747.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102747 

Moes, J., & Boreas, J. (2023). Neighbourhoods in Transition: Gentrification, Identity, and Social Inequality. In Combating Crises From Below: Social responses to polycrisis in Europe (pp. 33-124). Maastricht University Press. https://pubpub.maastrichtuniversitypress.nl/pub/neighbourhoods-in-transition-gentrification-identity-and-social-inequality/release/1 

von Platten, J., Mangold, M., Johansson, T., & Mjörnell, K. (2022). Energy efficiency at what cost? Unjust burden-sharing of rent increases in extensive energy retrofitting projects in Sweden. Energy Research & Social Science, 92, 102791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102791 

Weber, I., & Wolff, A. (2018). Energy efficiency retrofits in the residential sector – analysing tenants’ cost burden in a German field study. Energy Policy, 122, 680–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.08.007 

COVER PHOTO: Lina Kivaka – Pexels

DOWNLOAD AS PDF
]]> Inclusive urban agriculture benefits children in Quito, Ecuador https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/inclusive-urban-agriculture-benefits-children-in-quito-ecuador/ Mon, 18 Aug 2025 14:01:06 +0000 https://www.institute-urbanex.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=9634

Inclusive Urban Agriculture Benefits Children in Quito, Ecuador

by Tannya Pico & The Urban Hub Team

This article was first published by the Global Alliance – Cities4Children.

Download as PDF

Introduction

In the hills and valleys of Quito, Ecuador, a quiet green revolution has been unfolding for over two decades. The Metropolitan District of Quito’s Participatory Urban Agriculture Project, also known as AGRUPAR, has significantly improved food security, nutrition, and inclusion for thousands of vulnerable children and families across the city.

Urban Growth and Inequality in Quito

With a population exceeding 2.5 million, the Metropolitan District of Quito has experienced rapid urban growth. Like many Latin American cities, Quito expanded dramatically during the 1980s and 1990s. Its population ballooned from 800,000 in 1980 to 1.4 million by 2000, driven by internal migration, regional crises, and rural-to-urban migration in search of jobs and improved living conditions.

However, the city’s rapid expansion also deepened urban inequality. Many newcomers settled in informal areas, on hillsides, in peri-urban zones, and in underserved inner-city neighbourhoods. These areas often lacked basic infrastructure and services vital to children’s health, education, and well-being.

By the late 1990s, poverty affected nearly half the population in Quito, with child malnutrition rates averaging 30%, and spiking to 47% in the poorest neighbourhoods. It was against this backdrop that the AGRUPAR program was born in 2002, as a response to rising poverty, food insecurity, and environmental degradation.

Urban Agriculture Garden Typology in Quito (AGRUPAR 2022)

WHAT IS AGRUPAR?

AGRUPAR (Participatory Urban Agriculture Project) is a city-led initiative that works with local communities, schools, and civil society to grow organic food sustainably within the urban and rural parishes of Quito. The project promotes participatory farming through thousands of urban gardens in the form of family gardens, school plots, institutional farms, and community orchards, as well as small-scale livestock initiatives.

The project supports 4,400 urban gardens producing around 1.35 million kilograms of food per year. Roughly 57% of this is consumed directly by the growers and their families, while the rest is sold by families through short supply chains and local markets to supplement household incomes.

Impacts on Families, Migrants and Children

AGRUPAR has had wide-ranging impacts on food security, child nutrition, and social inclusion in Quito. These include:

» Better access to healthy, affordable food for low-income families, including migrants, retirees, and single-parent households.
» Improved dietary diversity and healthy eating habits among participating children and families.
» Educational opportunities for children to learn about nutrition, food systems, and environmental care.
» Economic and social integration for migrant families, who gain income and community connections through urban farming.
» Environmental benefits, including reduced food miles, composting, and creation of green spaces in dense urban areas.
» A scalable model that has inspired similar programs in other cities across Ecuador and beyond.

Even after 20 years and several changes in political leadership, AGRUPAR remains a robust and highly regarded urban program. So, what’s the secret to its success? And how are time- and resource-strapped caregivers and children able to participate meaningfully?

Cities4Children spoke to Tannya Pico, who studied AGRUPAR as part of her dissertation, to better understand how the program engages low-income and migrant communities, especially children and caregivers.

Photo: Tannya Pico

Photos: Tannya Pico

ENGAGING CHILDREN IN GROWING FOOD

AGRUPAR has made a strong push to involve children, especially through school gardens and educational programming. According to Tannya, teachers who are passionate about nature-based education often lead the charge, bringing the AGRUPAR model into classrooms and schoolyards.

The program offers training, seeds, infrastructure, and guidance to participating schools. AGRUPAR staff support teachers in integrating urban agriculture into lesson plans, and help them maintain gardens over time. Currently, schools gardens make up about 6% of all urban gardens and they are thriving in several schools in low-income neighbourhoods of Quito such as Llano Chico, Toctiuco and Solanda. Children also learn about composting and waste reduction. In Solanda, two kindergarten teachers established a garden and a composting station, complete with earthworms. When the COVID-19 pandemic closed schools for 18 months, the teachers continued to maintain the garden and distributed food to students’ families.

“The children learn that plants grow from seeds, how to care for the soil, and how worm compost helps nourish the plants,” says teacher Fabiola Poveda. “They experience textures, colours, and the joy of growing something themselves. We hope this fosters a love of nature.”

Another example is the Dream Refuge Centre in Llano Chico, which serves hundreds of children each day. Many stay at the centre while their parents work. For over a decade, the children have maintained a large garden where they prepare soil, create seedbeds, transplant seedlings, and water crops daily. “We all eat what they harvest during recess. We prepare salads, and there’s usually enough left over for the kids to take home,” says Sonia Suarez, the centre’s coordinator.

For caregivers, especially women, these gardens provide more than just food. They offer safe, supportive spaces to spend time outdoors, work side by side with neighbors, and engage in shared responsibilities. The gardens strengthen community bonds while supporting both physical and mental well-being.

Photo: Tannya Pico
Photo: Tannya Pico

What makes AGRUPAR sustainable?

Many well-intentioned social programs fail to survive political and financial shifts. Yet AGRUPAR has stood the test of time. Its sustainability is driven by four key factors:

1. LOW COST AND HIGH IMPACT

With a relatively small annual budget, around US$283,000 in 2018, plus about US$27,000 from self-generated income, AGRUPAR delivers significant returns. About 90% of the budget goes toward staffing, including agricultural engineers, trainers, and community workers who provide ongoing technical support. The rest supports supplies, logistics, and advocacy.

2. STRONG PARTNERSHIPS

Since its launch, AGRUPAR has partnered with a range of local, national, and international organizations, enhancing its reach and resilience. These include:

» UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
» RUAF Foundation and global alliances like the Milan Urban Food Pact
» 100 Resilient Cities, C40 Cities, and ICLEI
» Local universities, private sector actors, farmers’ networks, and social movements

3. INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRATION

AGRUPAR is housed within ConQuito, the city’s Agency for Economic Promotion. This gives it a permanent budget and formal status within the public administration. Being embedded in ConQuito has also enabled close collaboration with departments related to health, education, entrepreneurship, and environment. Thus helping to embed urban agriculture in wider city policies and resilience plans.

4. COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP

From the beginning, AGRUPAR has tapped into existing urban farming traditions, especially among indigenous and migrant populations. It’s a bottom-up initiative that responds to local demand. Participants pay a small fee ($1–$2) for training, cover part or all of infrastructure costs, and bear 100% of organic certification costs, ensuring buy-in and accountability. The project recognizes local knowledge, builds capacity, and offers targeted technical support, reinforcing a sense of ownership and pride.

Challenges ahead

Despite its success, AGRUPAR faces significant threats from political instability. Shifting priorities and leadership changes can lead to budget cuts, delays, and reduced institutional support. Bureaucratic hurdles and corruption also remain challenges for urban farmers seeking to scale their efforts or secure land and water access.

Still, the project’s resilience lies in its deep community roots and proven impact, making it a model for other cities.

WHY AGRUPAR MATTERS

Quito’s experience shows that urban agriculture isn’t just about food. It’s about equity, inclusion, education, and community resilience. AGRUPAR teaches children to grow food, understand ecosystems, and care for the environment. It helps families stretch their incomes, strengthens social ties, and integrates marginalized communities into the fabric of city life.

By investing in similar programs, cities around the world can transform unused spaces into productive, inclusive, and nurturing environments, especially for their youngest and most vulnerable residents.

DOWNLOAD AS PDF
]]> Local Site Seismic Response in an Inter-Andean Valley: Geotechnical Characterization and Seismic Amplification Zonation of Quito https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/local-site-seismic-response-in-an-inter-andean-valley-geotechnical-characterization-and-seismic-amplification-zonation-of-quito/ Wed, 09 Jul 2025 12:52:32 +0000 https://www.institute-urbanex.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=9539

Local site seismic response in an Inter-Andean valley: Geotechnical characterization and seismic amplification zonation of the southern Quito area

by Jorge Albuja Sánchez 1

1: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador (PUCE)

This presentation was part of iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities, held in June 2025.

Download as PDF

iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities explored the vital role of soil functions in building sustainable urban and regional planning strategies. It featured experts from Latin America and Europe, who gave insights into how soil considerations are being integrated worldwide. The event was organised in collaboration with the SPADES (Spatial Planning and DEsign with Soil) project.

About the Author

Jorge Albuja Sánchez (Ecuador) is Dean of the Faculty of Habitat, Infrastructure, and Creativity at the Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador (PUCE). He holds a Ph.D. in Engineering Science from the University of Ferrara, Italy, and an MSc. in Soil Mechanics and Environmental Geotechnics from Imperial College London. His research focuses on seismic response and geotechnical challenges in urban Andean environments.

Jorge’s presentation focused on current research addressing local seismic response in the inter-Andean valley of southern Quito. It explored the geotechnical characterization of volcanic and alluvial deposits and their role in seismic amplification. Using field and lab data —including MASW, CPTu, and dynamic testing— the study proposes a zonation of seismic amplification levels to support resilient urban planning and infrastructure design in high-risk Andean regions.

VIEW PRESENTATION
]]> Soil Matters: From Global Frameworks to Local Planning https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/soil-matters-from-global-frameworks-to-local-planning/ Tue, 08 Jul 2025 15:25:12 +0000 https://www.institute-urbanex.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=9524

Soil Matters: From Global Frameworks to Local Planning

by Yoann Clouet

This presentation was part of iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities, held in June 2025.

Download as PDF

iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities explored the vital role of soil functions in building sustainable urban and regional planning strategies. It featured experts from Latin America and Europe, who gave insights into how soil considerations are being integrated worldwide. The event was organised in collaboration with the SPADES (Spatial Planning and DEsign with Soil) project.

About the Author

Yoann Clouet (France) is an executive project manager and EU regional and urban policy expert. He holds an Advanced Master in EU studies from the College of Europe, with a focus on the EU climate sustainability policy and legislation framework. Having worked in the private and public sectors, he focuses specifically now on the EU policy framework for sustainable cities, including regional and urban policy and R&I policy. He is notably developing and involved in research projects in strategic areas of interest for the urban planning practice.

VIEW PRESENTATION
]]> Urban Wetland for Sustainable Cities – Legal Protection of Urban Wetlands in Chile https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/urban-wetland-for-sustainable-cities-legal-protection-of-urban-wetlands-in-chile/ Tue, 08 Jul 2025 15:02:37 +0000 https://www.institute-urbanex.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=9513

Urban Wetland for Sustainable Cities - Legal Protection of Urban Wetlands in Chile

by Carolina Rojas Quezada 1

1: Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

This presentation was part of iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities, held in June 2025.

Download as PDF

iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities explored the vital role of soil functions in building sustainable urban and regional planning strategies. It featured experts from Latin America and Europe, who gave insights into how soil considerations are being integrated worldwide. The event was organised in collaboration with the SPADES (Spatial Planning and DEsign with Soil) project.

About the Author

Ph.D. in Geography and GIS (2008) and an M.Sc. in Geographical Information Systems (2006) from Universidad de Alcalá, Spain, and a B.Sc. in Geography (2002) from Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Chile. Carolina’s research focuses on urban sustainability and mobility, particularly the interaction between people, urbanisation, and natural ecosystems. She has studied the value of urban wetlands, accessibility to green spaces, cities’ environmental impact, and nature-based solutions for climate adaptation.

VIEW PRESENTATION
]]> Soil as a Guiding Principle in Planning and Design – Research behind the SPADES Project https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/soil-as-a-guiding-principle-in-planning-and-design/ Tue, 08 Jul 2025 14:41:24 +0000 https://www.institute-urbanex.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=9500

Soil as a Guiding Principle in Planning and Design - Research behind the SPADES Project

by Sophia Arbara 1, Laura Thomas 1 & Taliah Dommerholt 2

1: Delft University of Technology
2. Institute for Urban Excellence

This presentation was part of iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities, held in June 2025.

Download as PDF

iUE’s webinar Soil Functions and Related Ecosystem Services for Sustainable Cities explored the vital role of soil functions in building sustainable urban and regional planning strategies. It featured experts from Latin America and Europe, who gave insights into how soil considerations are being integrated worldwide. The event was organised in collaboration with the SPADES (Spatial Planning and DEsign with Soil) project.

About the Author

Sophia Arbara (Greece) is an architect, urban designer and researcher. She has a PhD from Roma Tre University. Her work explores the intersections between urban design, ecology, and cultural landscape studies, aiming to address socio-ecological challenges and unveil both familiar and untold narratives through spatial approaches. Currently, she is a post-doctoral researcher at TU Delft, and she is part of the Delta Urbanism research group and the EU-funded Horizon Europe SPADES project. Her research focuses on the role of food and soil systems as spatial agents in shaping territorial and local dynamics, particularly in environmentally vulnerable regions.

About the Project

Spatial Planning and DEsign with Soil (SPADES) strives to promote soil-inclusive planning strategies that combat soil degradation and enhance ecosystem resilience. It has 17 pilot sites in 10 EU Member States, covering different land use contexts such as urban, peri-urban and rural areas.

VIEW PRESENTATION
]]> Exploring the Forms of City-to-City Exchange https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/exploring-the-forms-of-city-to-city-exchange/ Tue, 14 Jan 2025 12:29:47 +0000 https://www.isocarp-institute.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=8645

Exploring the Forms of City-to-City Exchange

by Yoann Clouet & Marco Kjaer

With national governments failing to implement, or even disengaging from, the commitments of the Paris agreement in the late 2010s, cities became increasingly visible in international discussions on climate, and the multi-level governance of efforts against climate change. This municipal push proved again that subnational organisations are key actors in the fights against climate change. Arenas for exchange between cities have “emerged to enable cities in building capacities and formulating climate policy” (Zapata et al, 2024). Analysing these processes of exchange of knowledge between cities is an emerging field of research: understanding and evaluating how cities can learn from each other’s experiences and adopt successful strategies in different contexts is essential to promote the effectiveness and scalability of urban climate initiatives. With this paper we propose a systematic lens of analysis to describe these processes.

Download as PDF

ABOUT KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE BETWEEN CITIES AND THE STATE OF RESEARCH ON THE TOPIC

The process of exchange of knowledge between cities is a useful tool to support the large dissemination of implementation strategies and best practices for sustainable urban development among cities (Castanho, 2019). In general, it is understood as following the concept of peer-to-peer knowledge sharing, where a peer within a group learns something new and then spreads it within that group (Dieperink et al, 2023). It is a great resource to address the shared challenges of climate change and its impacts in urban environments. By exchanging knowledge, best practices, and innovative solutions, cities learn from one another to accelerate their efforts in becoming more resilient and sustainable. Such exchange allows cities to learn from each other’s successes and failures, fostering the adoption of effective policies and they can thus collectively enhance their capacity to combat climate change, improving outcomes for millions of people worldwide.

The exchange of knowledge between cities can happen in many ways, from one-on-one between two cities to entire networks of cities (Leal & Paterson, 2024): it can take different forms, notably with different learning means, objectives and outcomes and numerous variables in terms of scope, thematic, etc.

Photo by Kindel Media | Pexels

Existing academic research on the topic fails to take into account all the different forms of exchange: according to a systematic literature review performed by E.M. Enseñado (Enseñado, 2024), research on the process of knowledge exchange between cities either: doesn’t mention the learning means, (eg. what we would describe as the arena of learning) (50 % of articles reviewed), or focuses on transnational networks and partnerships and cooperation programmes (22% and 15% respectively) (Enseñado, 2024 – Table 9, Appendix 3). The fact that 50% of the reviewed literature does not distinguish between the different learning means is quite revelatory, in our opinion, of the lack of a systematic analytical approach to study these processes.

To set up successful knowledge exchange between cities it is useful to understand what has worked best so far, and why. Systematically identifying the different “forms” of knowledge exchange between cities will help to assess which one is optimal with regards to expected objectives and context. For the purpose of this research, we will be using the term ‘form’ as the concept to encompass the different ways in which the knowledge exchange of cities can happen, or in other words, the different dimensions such a process can adopt. For instance, we understand “learning means”, “scope” and “topics”, inter alia, as some of these different dimensions of knowledge exchange between cities.

KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE BETWEEN CITIES: “CITY-TO-CITY LEARNING”, “CITY-TO-CITY KNOWLEDGE SHARING” OR “CITY-TO-CITY EXCHANGE”?

“Learning” describes a specific process and outcome of exchange, which, as summed up by E.M. Enseñado (2024), “leads to improved understanding of an issue as well as to alteration or updating of behavior, strategies, thoughts, and beliefs in light of other actor’s experience or as a response to new information” (Enseñado, 2024). In this perspective, “City-to-City Learning” primarily focuses on bringing changes amongst the participants (which we will refer to as “internal changes”).

Bakket et al. (2024) use the broader concept of “City-to-City Knowledge Sharing” which better describes the different types of learning: based on the degree of involvement they identify three “overarching categories of knowledge sharing” (Bakker et al, 2024):

» knowledge transfer
» knowledge exchange
» knowledge co-creation

However, they still understand it as processes whereby the outcomes are mainly applicable within the participants of the process.

In our opinion, the two concepts exclude peer-to-peer processes whereby the knowledge shared brings about direct or indirect changes, or outcomes, that are external to the participants (for instance changes brought about in the national policy framework thanks to recommendations formulated by the participants of such an exchange that is focused on policy cooperation and common advocacy) (Enseñado, 2024).

For the purpose of this research we therefore propose to use the term of ‘City to City Exchange’ as encompassing any forms of peer-to-peer dialogues between cities, regardless of its output and finality. In our view, the concept of City-to-City Exchange thus better captures all the different forms of exchange between cities, and their varying dimensions.

Photo by Fauxels | Pexels

A NEW ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK TO UNDERSTAND CITY-TO-CITY EXCHANGE

In our opinion, existing research on the topic either:

» lacks a comprehensive perspective on city-to-city exchange, and fails to cover all different its forms, or
» covers most forms city-to-city exchange without providing a clear set of parameters to categorise them and delineate experiences that are common / exclusive to specific forms of city-to-city exchange

As indicated in the previous section, research on City-to-City Exchange often only focuses on established forms of cooperation (notably transnational networks of cities). In their research, Arango et. al appropriately propose to expand the scope of research to distinguish between transnational, national and regional processes (Zapata et al, 2024). However, focusing research to City-to-City Exchange happening with a certain degree of institutionalisation (e.g. through formalised networks) only, is limiting. It fails to capture experiences happening within what we would define as “project-based” City-to-City Exchange, especially when the scope of the project is not explicitly City-to-City exchange. We would argue, for instance, that any projects that involves several cities can be considered as City-to-City Exchange, even if it is not formalised as such, since city participants participate and discuss together the implementation of related activities, thereby learning from one another.

The “heterogeneity” of these processes is well-described in Cortes et al. (2022), but there again, their object of analysis is limited to what they describe as “climate city networks”, eg. “formalised subnational governance that have climate change as their focus” (Cortes et al, 2022) which omits City-to-City Exchange processes that are less formalised as such (project-based processes, for instance) or do not present themselves as climate change focused.

Our proposed framework compiles a number of dimensions to systematically describe the different forms of City-to-City exchanges, to reflect their heterogeneity on holistic perspective.

ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK: THE DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS OF CITY-TO-CITY EXCHANGE

With this research, our aim is to propose a new analytical framework to better understand the different forms of City-to-City Exchange. This framework has the potential to support research in:

» systematically categorising the different forms of City-to-City Exchange
» inferring commonalities / differences based on certain parameters / dimensions
» identifying what forms of City-to-City Exchange work best depending on selected parameters.

It could be expanded to also include:

» the type(s) of learning process: informal meeting, site visits, staff exchange, etc.
» typologies of cities and their traditions
» the level of impact(s) resulting from the exchange: high with concrete changes on the ground impacting X residents or low, with limited changes to residents; as Arango notes, most studies in the field have a very limited focus on “actual implementation and related local issues, such as citizen participation, co-creation or co-production” (Zapata et al, 2024).

These dimensions would however need to be further research to define relevant parameters. This framework will serve as backbone for how we organise future City-to-City Exchange processes within our activities, and to systematically evaluate their results.

Ultimately, our ambition is to define forms of City-to-City Exchange that take into account that each city has its own unique social fabric, values and cultural and working traditions. Understanding what forms of exchange work in a given cultural and historical context is crucial to respect and integrated these nuances. For instance, strategies that work in a city with a strong tradition of centralized governance may not be as effective in a city where decision-making is more decentralized and community-driven. Furthermore, historical experiences, such as colonialism past, environmental events or socio-political movements, also shape how a city perceives and prioritizes learning processes. By respecting and integrating these cultural and historical nuances, cities can adapt shared practices to fit their specific contexts, fostering more successful and locally appropriate outcomes.

References

Bakker, J., Scholten, P., Fransen, J., Minkman, E. (2024). A typology of urban knowledge sharing: from a systematic literature review to an integrated model. Science and Public Policy, Volume 51, Issue 4, August 2024, Pages 707–720, https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae008

Castanho, R. A. (2019). Identifying Processes of Smart Planning, Governance and Management in European Border Cities. Learning from City-to-City Cooperation (C2C). Sustainability 2019, Vol. 11,
Page 5476, 11(19), 5476. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11195476

Dieperink, C., Koop, S. H. A., Witjes, M., Van Leeuwen, K., & Driessen, P. P. J. (2023). City-to-city learning to enhance urban water management: The contribution of the City Blueprint Approach. Cities, 135, 104216. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CITIES.2023.104216

Enseñado, E. M. (2024). City-to-city learning: a synthesis and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 26(1), 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2023.2281426

Haupt, W., Chelleri, L., van Herk, S., & Zevenbergen, C. (2019). City-to-city learning within climate city networks: definition, significance, and challenges from a global perspective. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 12(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463138.2019.1691007

Leal, J. M., & Paterson, M. (2024). Transnational city networks, global political economy, and climate governance: C40 in Mexico and Lima. Review of International Political Economy, 31(1), 26–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2023.2167849

Sayel Cortes, Jeroen van der Heijden, Ingrid Boas, Simon Bush (2022). Unpacking the heterogeneity of climate city networks. Cities, Volume 121, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103512

Zapata Arango, M., Hoppe, T., Itten, A. et al. (2024). The role of City Climate Networks in Promoting Citizen Participation in Municipalities: A Critical Multi-Case Analysis. Energ Sustain Soc 14, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-023-00438-9

Bakker, J., Scholten, P., Fransen, J., Minkman, E. (2024). A typology of urban knowledge sharing: from a systematic literature review to an integrated model. Science and Public Policy, Volume 51, Issue 4, August 2024, Pages 707–720, https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae008

Castanho, R. A. (2019). Identifying Processes of Smart Planning, Governance and Management in European Border Cities. Learning from City-to-City Cooperation (C2C). Sustainability 2019, Vol. 11,
Page 5476, 11(19), 5476. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11195476

Dieperink, C., Koop, S. H. A., Witjes, M., Van Leeuwen, K., & Driessen, P. P. J. (2023). City-to-city learning to enhance urban water management: The contribution of the City Blueprint Approach. Cities, 135, 104216. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CITIES.2023.104216

Enseñado, E. M. (2024). City-to-city learning: a synthesis and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 26(1), 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2023.2281426

Haupt, W., Chelleri, L., van Herk, S., & Zevenbergen, C. (2019). City-to-city learning within climate city networks: definition, significance, and challenges from a global perspective. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 12(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463138.2019.1691007

Leal, J. M., & Paterson, M. (2024). Transnational city networks, global political economy, and climate governance: C40 in Mexico and Lima. Review of International Political Economy, 31(1), 26–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2023.2167849

Sayel Cortes, Jeroen van der Heijden, Ingrid Boas, Simon Bush (2022). Unpacking the heterogeneity of climate city networks. Cities, Volume 121, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103512

Zapata Arango, M., Hoppe, T., Itten, A. et al. (2024). The role of City Climate Networks in Promoting Citizen Participation in Municipalities: A Critical Multi-Case Analysis. Energ Sustain Soc 14, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-023-00438-9

DOWNLOAD AS PDF
]]> VARCITIES Policy Brief: Digital Twins for Greener, Healthier Cities https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/varcities-policy-brief-digital-twins-greener-healthier-cities/ Mon, 09 Dec 2024 14:50:32 +0000 https://www.isocarp-institute.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=8618

VARCITIES Project Policy Brief: Digital Twins for Greener, Healthier Cities

Download as PDF

Through its activities, the VARCITIES project has explored a number of key topics linked with the improvement of health & well-being in urban areas, identifying existing shortcomings, knowledge gaps and the opportunities available for policy stakeholders to address them. In its series of policy and technical briefs, VARCITIES presents critical recommendations. This policy brief on Digital Twins for Greener, Healthier Cities was prepared by the ISOCARP Institute together with IES, another VARCITIES’ project partner. It provides policy stakeholders interested in the question key recommendations on the topic.

Urban Digital Twins

WHAT IS A DIGITAL TWIN?

Since its introduction in 2022, the concept of Digital Twins, a virtual replica of a physical asset, has gained traction across diverse sectors as these virtual models allow for real-time monitoring, analysis, and optimization based on continuous data updates from their physical counterparts [Gupta. 2024]. Initially conceived for product life-cycle management, their applications have expanded through advancements in data analytics, machine learning, and the Internet of Things (IoT) to now provide accurate simulations, predict outcomes, and optimize performance across various industries [Gupta. 2024].

The application of digital twins to urban planning and development is currently being discussed and researched at length. Such ‘urban digital twins’ have gained prominence for their potential to transform how cities work, as they have been deployed in use cases to manage physical built environment assets such as buildings and infrastructure, focusing primarily on monitoring and optimizing energy consumption, where they offer direct return on investment through energy efficiency and cost savings.

WHAT CAN THEY OFFER TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT?

By combining different forms of urban data from sources such as sensors and satellites, urban digital twins are now able to offer a comprehensive replica of the urban environment, reflecting the properties, conditions and behaviour of complex urban systems (mobility, waste and water management, economic flux, ecosystems services, heating and cooling networks, irrigation systems, etc.). They have the potential to provide municipalities with a new lens to explore and envision future scenarios, facilitating responsive urban initiatives and informing decision-making processes [Wolters, B. M. (2023)].

VARCITIES Health & Well-Being Platform is a notable example, with the digital twins of seven pilot sites offering real-time data on a number of health and well-being parameters.

Interested? Read the full version in the link below.

DOWNLOAD AS PDF
]]> Soil Matters: Integrating Soil into the Planning Practice https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/soil-matters-integrating-soil-into-the-planning-practice/ Tue, 08 Oct 2024 09:48:46 +0000 https://www.isocarp-institute.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=7823

Soil matters: integrating soil into the Planning Practice

by Yoann Clouet

Download as PDF

In the last decade, soil, its functions and the beneficial ecosystem services it can provide, have been getting more and more interest for their potential in the development of sustainable cities. But for decades the soil resource has been under the significant pressure of urbanisation and is now heavily impacted by the consequences of climate change, with direct changes to its physical, chemical, and biological properties. In the early 80s already (FAO & ITPS, 2015), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) adopted the World Soil Charter (FAO, 1981) and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) published the World Soils Policy (UNEP, 1982), recognising the importance of soils for sustainable development, calling for policies and practices that mitigate soil erosion, pollution, and loss of fertility. The principles and definitions provided useful guidance for national governments to help them design policy and pursue actions on sustainable soil management, and increased awareness on soil benefits. Yet, concrete strategies to enhance soil health and quality in the urban environment remain limited. This paper presents in further details the main benefits that can be derived from soil, why soil inclusive spatial planning is important, and the current state of the planning practice on the topic.

THE BENEFITS OF SOIL FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENTS: SOIL FUNCTIONS AND RELATED ECOSYSTEM SERVICES FOR SUSTAINABLE CITIES

In the past 40 years, the planning practice has slowly veered from focusing on urban functions and urban features to acknowledging the role of environmental performances in the urban environment, and their integration in planning. Soil is specifically crucial for urban development as it offers numerous benefits and functions (soil performances). The FAO describes eleven soil functions (FAO, 2015): 

Soil Functions | Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

However, in order to provide soil performances, the soil resource must be healthy, both in terms of quality (eg. its physical, chemical, and biological properties and quantity (eg. in sufficient volumes). Urban development and climate change negatively impact soil properties as they contribute directly or indirectly to the following pressures (Maes, 2016): 

SOIL SEALING: soil is covered by impermeable surfaces such as roads, buildings, and parking lots. 

SOIL COMPACTION: soil particles are pressed together, reducing pore space, air circulation, and water infiltration.

SOIL CONTAMINATION: pollutants such as heavy metals, chemicals, and waste released into the soil can accumulate over time, making the soil toxic for plants, animals, and humans.

SOIL EROSION AND LAND-SLIDES: soil, especially topsoil, exposed to wind and water erosion because of loss of vegetation coverage is more vulnerable to being washed-away and cut-and-fill activities can weaken soil structure, leading to more frequent landslides.

LOSS OF ORGANIC MATTER: reduced green spaces, vegetation cut-offs and lack of aeration (due to compaction) limit inputs of organic matter from plant litter feeding the soil, while higher temperatures speed up the decomposition of organic matter, causing it to be broken down faster than it can be replenished.

SOIL SALINITY: build up of salt due to improper drainage, rising sea levels and in increase droughts that affects soil chemical properties.

SOIL ACIDIFICATION: more acid rainfall due to industrial activities and fertilisers lower the soil pH.

LOSS IN BIODIVERSITY: urban development leads to the fragmentation of green space and shifting climate zones result in biodiversity loss.

Considering the impact of urban activities and climate change on soil properties, it is therefore essential for urban planning to consider this finite resource. Urban planning needs to take account of the relationship between the different soil properties and their role into urban socio-ecological system in order to propose planning strategies that maintain or optimize soil health and its related ecosystem services, and contribute to mitigate or adapt to the pressures it faces.

SOIL IN THE CURRENT PLANNING PRACTICE

A number of policies emerged in the last few decades championing soil health, but despite growing recognition of the importance of soil health, in the 2015 the FAO noted that the actual adoption of sustainable soil management practices remains limited (FAO & ITPS, 2015). In 2017, the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), identified in its Global Land Outlook (2017) a disconnect between policies aimed at land and soil restoration and their practical execution in land-use planning and management. It noted that many sustainable practices remain inadequately implemented due to lack of incentives, awareness, and integration into broader land management strategies.

Furthermore, a majority of them focus on agricultural land and agricultural practices, and disregard the specific of the pressures faced by the soil resource in the urban environment. A few examples are nevertheless to be noted: 

In the US, the Green Infrastructure Policy initially adopted in 2000 and its subsequent updates promotes the use of green infrastructure in urban planning to manage stormwater, reduce erosion, and increase soil permeability. 

In the UK, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) introduced in 2012 and its subsequent updates promotes sustainable development in urban areas and includes provisions for protecting and enhancing soil resources (reuse of previously developed land (brownfields) and limiting soil sealing) and encourages local planning authorities to prioritize soil conservation in urban planning.

In the European Union, a Research and Innovation mission, titled “A Soil Deal for Europe”, was launched in 2021. It focuses on achieving healthy soils in Europe by 2030 and seeks to combat soil degradation, erosion, and contamination and specifically looks into the development of soil inclusive planning and supports research on soil health in the urban context. 

From the urban planning perspective, recent research suggests that, although soil is recognised as a key resource, urban planning still fails to integrate indicators to measure or monitor soil-related functions (Teixeira da Silva et al., 2018).

From the one hand, urban planning needs to become more engaged with soils, but soil science should also ensure data and knowledge on soil performance in the urban environment is well understood. This means adapting and making use of tools and methods for soil assessment to understand and monitor soil-related ecosystem services. From the other hand, urban planners need to develop planning strategies and concepts that integrate soil and its functions. Minimal practical guidelines exist on the topic*, yet they remain fragmented or insufficient, focusing often on either soil quantity, quality or performances separately.

It is high time that planners develop soil inclusive urban planning approaches to ensure the regeneration of the urban soil resource and promote its functions to ensure it continues to provide its key ecosystem services for sustainable cities. This can only happen with sufficient guidance and the adequate policy framework. 

*Interestingly, a lot of it comes from the Netherlands.

Photo by Tom Fisk | Pexels

Photos by Tom Misk (left) and Pok Rie (right) | Pexels

References

FAO and ITPS, Status of the World’s Soil Resources (Chapter 8 Governance and policy responses to soil change); 2015, p.225. Accessible online: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/7ad71507-1b95-433f-a781-c0833295a4d9/content  

FAO, World Soil Charter; 1981.

FAO, Soil Infographics, Global Soil Partnership; 2015. Accessible online: https://www.fao.org/global-soil-partnership/resources/news/presentations-gsb23/en/c/284443/ 

Maes J., Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES): Highlights and uncertainties of a science-policy interface on biodiversity and ecosystem services, Ekonomia i Środowisko; Fundacja Ekonomistów Środowiska i Zasobów Naturalnych; 2016. pp. 52-64. Accessible online: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC103434  

Teixeira da Silva, R., Fleskens, L., van Delden, H. et al., Incorporating soil ecosystem services into urban planning: status, challenges and opportunities, Landscape Ecol 33, pp: 1087–1102 (2018). Accessible online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-018-0652-x 

UNEP, World Soil Policy; 1982.

FAO and ITPS, Status of the World’s Soil Resources (Chapter 8 Governance and policy responses to soil change); 2015, p.225. Accessible online: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/7ad71507-1b95-433f-a781-c0833295a4d9/content  

FAO, World Soil Charter; 1981.

FAO, Soil Infographics, Global Soil Partnership; 2015. Accessible online: https://www.fao.org/global-soil-partnership/resources/news/presentations-gsb23/en/c/284443/  

Maes J., Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES): Highlights and uncertainties of a science-policy interface on biodiversity and ecosystem services, Ekonomia i Środowisko; Fundacja Ekonomistów Środowiska i Zasobów Naturalnych; 2016. pp. 52-64. Accessible online: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC103434  

Teixeira da Silva, R., Fleskens, L., van Delden, H. et al., Incorporating soil ecosystem services into urban planning: status, challenges and opportunities, Landscape Ecol 33, pp: 1087–1102 (2018). Accessible online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-018-0652-x 

UNEP, World Soil Policy; 1982.

DOWNLOAD AS PDF
]]> WAVE (Water Areas Vision for Europe) Final Report: Reflection in Action https://www.institute-urbanex.org/portfolio/wave-water-areas-vision-for-europe-final-report-reflection-in-action/ Thu, 01 Aug 2024 14:13:31 +0000 https://www.isocarp-institute.org/?post_type=portfolio&p=7689

WAVE (Water Areas Vision for Europe) Final Report: Reflection in Action

Download the Final Report

WAVE (Water Areas Vision for Europe) was an educational initiative aimed at addressing the sustainable development of water areas and floodplains within urban and peri-urban environments across Europe. This project, which ran from 2021 to 2023, was funded by the ERASMUS+ programme (grant no. 2020-1-RO01-KA203-080122) and brought together a diverse group of geographers, architects, urban planners, and landscape architects. By synthesizing interdisciplinary knowledge and actively involving local communities through a Living Lab approach, WAVE sought to bridge the gap between policy and practice in the sustainable management of water landscapes​.

The project was a collaborative effort involving several universities and their local communities, each setting up a Living Lab around a place-specific challenge related to water landscapes. These Living Labs served as interactive platforms where public and local stakeholders could engage in the knowledge creation and visioning process. WAVE included a transnational online course with synchronous weekly sessions, on-site intensive study programs, and ongoing Living Lab activities, allowing for a constant evolution and adaptation of the project’s goals and methods. 

Despite the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, which affected nearly half of the project’s duration, WAVE successfully integrated digital and local approaches. The online seminars were implemented twice, in 2021 and 2022, combining digital learning with fieldwork and local community engagement. The project’s participants included international students, professors, local government officials, ecologists, historians, and various community members, all contributing to a holistic understanding and innovative solutions for the sustainable development of water areas and floodplains​. 

WAVE final output ‘REFLECTION IN ACTION – The WAVE Learning Model’ offers a number of reflections on the place of water in city-making and the Living Lab Approach.

PLACE OF WATER IN CITY-MAKING

MULTIFUNCTIONAL ROLE: Water landscapes serve numerous functions beyond aesthetics, including transport, cooling (housing, industry, energy), drinking water supply, irrigation, biodiversity, and food production. 

LACK OF PUBLIC AWARENESS: The public often perceives water landscapes primarily as recreational spaces, overlooking their broader ecological and functional roles. 

URBAN PRESSURE: In metropolitan areas, urban development and intensive land use diminish the visibility and perceived value of water-shaped landscapes. 

REACTIVE ATTENTION: Water issues typically only gain attention from authorities and residents when immediate problems such as flooding, pollution, or access issues arise. 

SYSTEMS UNDERSTANDING: It’s crucial for planners, politicians, and community members to grasp the comprehensive functioning of water systems, including watersheds and the interrelations between land use, run-off water, surface water, and groundwater.

LIVING LAB APPROACH

BRIDGING THEORY AND PRACTICE: Living labs help close the gap between theoretical research and practical application, emphasizing the valorization of research results. 

COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE INTEGRATION: Successful living labs incorporate the local knowledge of community members, fostering collaboration and capacity building.

EXTENDED LIFESPAN: The living lab process spans beyond typical course durations, requiring phased organization and integration with educational activities. 

DIVERSE ACTIVITIES: Labs should include a variety of activities such as planning, design, participatory walks, hands-on work, and community events to engage stakeholders. 

EDUCATIONAL COLLABORATION: Connecting living labs with local schools enhances awareness and future engagement with water-related issues. 

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Linking living labs to broader contexts and institutional frameworks supports a holistic approach to landscape challenges. 

LONG-TERM COMMITMENT: Sustaining living labs necessitates a long-term commitment from universities or other organizations, along with a curator and organized collaboration with local authorities and NGOs. 

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION: Using multiple communication methods, both digital and analogue, and leveraging existing channels can effectively engage the community. 

DIRECT INVITATIONS: Actively inviting people to events based on power mapping ensures inclusivity and broader participation. 

PLACE-BASED ENGAGEMENT: Providing community spaces near water bodies helps residents connect with and appreciate water landscapes and their challenges. 

ACADEMIC COMPETENCE DEVELOPMENT: Participation in living labs enhances academics’ understanding of systems approaches, collaborative organization, inclusive event facilitation, and the shift from research-driven projects to community support roles.

Download the report
Visit WAVE website
]]>