Speaker
Description
In an era defined by converging crises—climate change, environmental degradation, social inequalities—urban planning and policy urgently need new interpretative frameworks and actionable approaches to face complex sustainability challenges. These must integrate technical-scientific insights with imaginative efforts to foster behavioural change, activate institutional innovation, and catalyse transformations across governance and spatial levels. This article presents the results of a qualitative systematic literature review exploring how urban studies understand the role of creative action in addressing sustainability challenges.
Attention towards this dimension is evident, e.g., in the increasing academic focus on the culture-sustainability nexus, in the definition of high-level policy initiatives working in this perspective (see, e.g., European Commission, 2018, 2019), and in the emergence of a wide array of place-based experimental initiatives. In their diversity, these reflective and practical endeavours view creativity as a critical leverage point for social transformation, offering pathways to accelerate transitions toward sustainability (Saleh & Brem, 2023). On the one hand, creative and culture-led practices are defined as drivers and enablers of urban transformation, able to foster institutional innovation (Kagan et al., 2018), open spaces for imagination and experimentation (Dieleman, 2012), strengthen social capital, and expand agency. On the other hand, creative methods are increasingly deployed in grassroots and policy initiatives to address complex urban sustainability challenges and localise Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Mixed-method approaches that integrate artistic, cultural, and creative resources are used to support holistic understandings of complex challenges, co-produce sustainable future scenarios, foster cooperation by creating “liminal spaces” for self-expression (Cinderby et al., 2021), favour pro-environmental behaviours at different scales and promote alternative spatial practices such as creative reuse (Barba Lata & Duineveld, 2019) and culture-based placemaking (Courage, 2017).
Despite this growing attention, knowledge about the contributions of creative action to urban sustainability remains diffuse and fragmented. Sustainability and urban studies literature often provide vague definitions and inconsistent characterisations of creative action, relying on disparate epistemological traditions and often failing to critically address risks related to its instrumental use. Furthermore, limited attention has been paid to systematising knowledge about creative action's conceptual, methodological and operative contribution to urban sustainability. To address this gap, this article presents the results of a systematic literature review. This encompasses both theoretical contributions and case studies, tackling selected urban sustainability action spheres. Using thematic textual analysis, the study uncovers how creative action is defined and recognised for its theoretical, methodological, and operational value. The review specifically focuses on (i) definitions and characterisations of creative action, (ii) its nexus with urban sustainability, (iii) its contribution to individual, collective, and institutional change, and (iv) its –positive or negative– impact on specific urban sustainability action spheres.
The findings reveal overlooked intersections and critical insights into the role of creative action in and for urban sustainability, providing a preliminary framework for understanding its contributions. The article seeks to guide scholars in further investigating the role of creative action in sustainability transitions and support practitioners in place-specific experimental paths. Complementary analyses, including grey literature, can further refine these insights. Ultimately, the article serves as a resource for advancing academic inquiry and practical applications, offering a roadmap for critically assessing the role of creative action in navigating and accelerating sustainability-oriented pathways in urban contexts.
References
Barba Lata, I., & Duineveld, M. (2019). A harbour on land: De Ceuvel’s topologies of creative reuse. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 51(8), 1758–1774. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X19860540
Cinderby, S., De Bruin, A., Cambridge, H., Muhoza, C., & Ngabirano, A. (2021). Transforming urban planning processes and outcomes through creative methods. Ambio, 50(5), 1018–1034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01436-3
Courage, C. (2017). Arts in Place: The Arts, the Urban and Social Practice (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315659299
Dieleman, H. (2012). Transdisciplinary Artful Doing in Spaces of Experimentation and Imagination. Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science, 3. https://doi.org/10.22545/2012/00028
European Commission. (2018). A New European Agenda for Culture—SWD(2018) 267 final. https://culture.ec.europa.eu/document/a-new-european-agenda-for-culture-swd2018-267-final
European Commission. (2019). New European Bauhaus Initiative. https://europa.eu/new-european-bauhaus
Kagan, S., Hauerwaas, A., Holz, V., & Wedler, P. (2018). Culture in sustainable urban development: Practices and policies for spaces of possibility and institutional innovations. City, Culture and Society, 13, 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2017.09.005
Saleh, R., & Brem, A. (2023). Creativity for sustainability: An integrative literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 388, 135848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.135848
| Keywords | urban sustainability; creative action; systematic literature review |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
