Speaker
Description
Introduction
Urban climate governance has become a central topic in academic and public discourse, yet its intricate relationship with structural factors, particularly spatial configurations, remains underexplored. This is especially pertinent for shrinking cities, which face unique challenges stemming from economic, demographic, institutional, and spatial decline across different scales. These cities are often confronted with fragmented climate governance frameworks and the burden of voluntary climate action, making them particularly dependent on space-sensitive approaches (Kabisch, 2015; Kuhlmann & Bouckaert, 2016; Ongaro & Van Thiel, 2018; Zimmermann, 2026; Hermans et al., 2024; Knippschild, 2021; Lehmphul, 2015; Matyushkina et al., 2024).
A critical analytical gap exists in understanding the interplay between the structural conditions of urban shrinkage and the requirements and potentials for effective urban climate governance to drive transformative change. Existing literature on urban shrinkage effectively documents mechanisms of decline and marginalization but offers limited insight into the capacity for systemic change towards sustainability goals within these contexts (Bernt, 2016; Haase et al., 2014, 2016; Herrmann et al., 2016; Khavarian-Garmsir, 2023; Küpper, 2013; Marx, 2025; Rink et al., 2014; Wiechmann & Pallagst, 2012). Climate policies risk being ineffective in shrinking contexts, potentially exacerbating existing inequalities and leading to social tensions when global climate imperatives clash with immediate local concerns like economic precarity or service provision (Bäckstrand & Lövbrand, 2019; Castán Broto & Westman, 2020; Lorenz Fontolan et al., 2026; Van der Heijden, 2019; Putkowska-Smoter, 2025).
Addressing this gap is crucial for developing place-sensitive strategies tailored to local urban spatial structural conditions, fostering more effective and equitable urban climate governance, and ultimately deriving more resilient baseline assumptions for modelling and planning of urban futures. The central research question guiding this study is: "What is the relationship and the associated effects between structural conditions of urban shrinkage and the development of transformative capacity for implementing effective urban climate governance in shrinking cities?". This question directly addresses the challenge of governing uneven spatial risks by seeking to identify how cities facing decline can not only adapt but also innovate in their climate action, ensuring that climate policies do not inadvertently deepen existing vulnerabilities.
Conceptual Framework
To systematically illuminate the relationship between urban shrinkage and urban climate governance, this paper adopts the Urban Transformative Capacity Framework (UTCF) developed by Wolfram (2016) as its conceptual foundation. Urban Transformative Capacity (UTC) refers to the capabilities of societies, institutions, and communities to initiate and manage fundamental changes towards more sustainable, equitable, and future-proof development pathways (Shahani et al., 2022; Sousa et al., 2024; Wolfram, 2016). In the urban context, UTC is vital for bringing about fundamental changes to physical, social, and ecological structures. Wolfram's conceptualization is widely recognized and has been operationalized in empirical comparative studies (Castan Broto et al., 2019; Lord et al., 2024).
The UTCF is particularly valuable due to its emphasis on the "importance of place" (Wolfram, 2016), which extends beyond mere place-sensitivity to understand spatiality as a constitutive dimension of urban transformative capacity and urban change. However, the framework has not yet been systematically applied to urban shrinking settings, meaning that context-appropriate applications and the particular requirements of shrinking cities have largely remained unaddressed. This research leverages the UTCF to explore how structural challenges may limit local autonomy and create power inequalities, while simultaneously identifying multidimensional intervention points across governance, innovation, and community engagement.
Methods
This study employs a systematic literature review with thematic synthesis to address the research question. The review process involved several stages of selection and classification to identify relevant literature.
Initially, databases such as Scopus and Web of Science were searched for publications citing Wolfram (2016), yielding a total of 284 sources. A two-round classification process was then implemented. The first round applied inclusion criteria focusing on explicit reference to the TCF in a conceptual way, an urban empirical focus (ideally with shrinkage relevance), governance capacities, and peer-reviewed quality. Exclusion criteria filtered out non-TCF/Transitions references, non-urban contexts, low relevance, and gray literature. This round resulted in 135 highly relevant sources.
The second classification round focused on spatially and thematically deeply relevant literature within these 135 sources, specifically examining how texts addressed place-specific contexts and spatial structural conditions such shrinkage factors reshaping urban transformative capacity. The systematic review identified three key literature bodies: A core shrinkage pool comprising 38 peer-reviewed publications. These works serve as the primary spatial theoretical anchor, demonstrating how spatial transformative capacity is conceptualized in contexts resembling the case under investigation. Secondly, a climate urban governance-contextual pool consisting of approximately 21 publications that are both spatially and urban-climate relevant, enriching the analytical framework with concrete mechanisms underpinning the broader spatial-conceptual TC discourse. Lastly, a background and validation framework pool of 55 articles that discuss spatiality but do not delve into the detailed interaction between space and transformative capacity.
This rigorous methodological approach ensures a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the literature, providing a robust foundation for analyzing the complex relationship between urban shrinkage and transformative capacity for climate governance.
Results
The analysis reveals that shrinking dynamics as associated uneven spatial developments are primary determinants in shaping local Urban Transformative Capacity (UTC) for urban climate governance. This highlights the profoundly spatially-contingent nature of UTC, which necessitates tailored strategies and redefines successful climate action in these unique contexts.
Shrinking urban contexts present a complex web of structural conditions that directly impede or redirect climate governance efforts, contributing to uneven risks across territories. Key Challenges and Impediments:
• In deindustrialized cities, climate governance is often constrained by the immediate urgency of socio-economic survival, leading to climate change mitigation being secondary to addressing population decline and fiscal instability (Mabon & Shih, 2018; Matern et al., 2024).
• The absence of unified metropolitan authorities results in fragmented governance, limiting legislative power and financial capacity for cross-border climate actions (Nguyen & Davidson, 2023). This is exacerbated by limited coordination across government levels and inter-ministerial disputes, trapping urban actors in distribution conflicts (Lord, 2020; Matern et al., 2024, 2025).
• Infrastructural path dependencies (e.g., car dependence) and institutional lock-ins from entrenched decision-making practices hinder climate action (Buzasi & Csizovszky, 2023). Centralized "green growth" paradigms can discourage local autonomy and systemic innovation (Wolfram, 2019).
• Under-resourced local governments and the "projectification of funding" lead to a focus on short-term, project-based support, which contradicts the long-term, systemic nature of climate transitions and at the same time shrinkage challenges, often resulting in a waste of social and financial capital transitions (Borgström, 2019; Ehnert et al., 2018; Newton et al., 2017).
• In structurally challenged cities, climate action can be met with public skepticism (Heer et al., 2021). Low-carbon urbanism may inadvertently intensify existing spatial disparities or serve as a tool for locational competitiveness, rather than fostering inclusive development.
Despite these significant challenges, the analysis also documents several unique and at the same time paradoxical potentials for UTC that can emerge from or be leveraged within these urban spatial contexts, offering pathways towards more equitable and sustainable possible futures for shrinking cities in the context of urban (climate) governance:
• Spatial conditions can create fertile ground for radical change and experimentation precisely because existing systems may be failing or less entrenched (Castan Broto et al., 2023; Glass & Addie, 2025; Jayaweera, 2023; Mabon & Shih, 2018; Novalia et al., 2020; Wanner, 2024). The urgency born from deep-seated problems can unlock a latent capacity for radical approaches, including "tactical urbanism" and "subversive potential" to challenge existing socio-technical configurations. This allows for breaking free from lock-ins and fostering deep sustainability transformations (Castán Broto et al., 2019; Jayaweera, 2023; Loorbach, 2017).
• Shrinking cities often possess underutilized physical spaces (e.g., vacant industrial sites) that can be repurposed for new, sustainable developments (Glass & Addie, 2025; Matern et al., 2024; von Wirth et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2024; Wanner, 2024). This spatial availability acts as a critical resource for "spatial entrepreneurs" and enables "smart acts" like compact city strategies, reducing the burden of maintaining outdated systems while creating opportunities to address environmental hazards and promote sustainable land use (Mabon & Shih, 2018; Newton et al., 2017).
• In areas facing decline, a strong sense of place and community can become a vital resource for transformative action (Castán Broto et al., 2023; Heer et al., 2021; Novalia et al., 2020; Peris-Blanes et al., 2022; Reiß et al., 2024; Sardão & Silva, 2025; Sekulova et al., 2023; Wanner, 2024). Community empowerment and grassroots initiatives foster collective solidarities and cultural shifts, acting as a powerful mobilizing force for bottom-up climate action, especially where formal governance is weak or distrusted. This inherent community strength can counteract weak civil society participation and foster legitimate, socially accepted climate outcomes.
• The challenging conditions often force a critical confrontation with historical trajectories and entrenched path dependencies. Cities with legacies of deindustrialization possess a valuable "collective memory" and strengthened system awareness, informing more cautious, legitimacy-focused transformation processes (Buzasi & Csizovszky, 2023; Ehnert et al., 2018; Heer et al., 2021; Loorbach, 2017; Lord et al., 2024; Matern et al., 2024, 2025). This capacity to learn from past shocks and experiences contributes to adaptive governance, fostering iterative knowledge co-production and moving from reactive to proactive socio-ecological systems thinking, thereby avoiding past mistakes and building more resilient futures.
Discussion
The results provide empirical depth to theoretical premises, demonstrating how shrinking dynamics are primary determinants in shaping local UTC. The analysis details the multi-dimensional structural conditions of urban shrinkage, such as economic vulnerability, fragmented governance, institutional lock-ins, limited resources, and socio-political distrust, that directly impede or redirect urban climate governance efforts.
The identified potentials including the impetus for radical change and experimentation, the availability of physical spaces for new development, a strong sense of place and community, and the valuable capacity to learn from past experiences are vital for governing uneven risks and shaping possible futures in these often-overlooked urban realities. These insights are particularly important for urban climate governance because they directly address the systemic realities shrinking cities face. This provides advanced understanding of robust baseline assumptions of shrinking cities to map possible pathways and trade-offs in shaping transformative urban pathways.
However, based on the analysis, we must acknowledge that this space-sensitive analysis overturns several implicit urban (climate) governance assumptions:
First, shrinking cities face significant institutional capacity challenges, including staff and budget deficits, administrative fragmentation, and distrust from past reforms, leading to low social capital. This necessitates re-evaluating how transformative change can be steered, as traditional assumptions of robust institutional frameworks are inapplicable. Second, actor configurations often lack diversity and empowerment, characterized by weak civil society, dominant traditional actors, and public skepticism towards sustainability initiatives. This contrasts sharply with assumptions of diverse actor networks, posing a critical barrier to collaborative urban climate governance. Third, local climate action cannot build on a growth-oriented paradigm, as economic priorities and path dependence frequently clash with green goals. This requires departing from conventional growth-centric models, which are unviable in contexts grappling with decline. Fourth, the temporal dynamics of urban transformation are not linear but complex and unpredictable. Legacy trauma, urgent deadlines, and funding cycles demand long-term trust-building and strategic alignment, conflicting with short-term project horizons.
Conclusion
The research demonstrates that spatial conditions are active forces profoundly reshaping the paradigms and potentials for urban transformation, and thus must be incorporated into urban climate governance and scenario planning for shrinking cities. For future research and scenario modelling, implications arise including the integration of "paradoxical potentials" into theoretical constructs and the practical exploration how decline processes can destabilize incumbent regimes. Investigating innovative governance models for activating vacant sites, implementing compact city strategies, and systematically integrating grassroots initiatives into formal governance structures are also critical avenues for shrinking cities. Finally, understanding how collective memory can inform resilient, spatially-sensitive climate governance strategies, moving from reactive to proactive socio-ecological systems thinking, will be key to building robust future visions through effective scenario mapping of uncertainties for shrinking cities. In conclusion, urban climate governance in shrinking cities is a highly complex endeavor whose success hinges on recognizing unique spatial contingencies to transform spatial challenges into opportunities for possible and sustainable urban future visions and practices.
References
Selection:
Bäckstrand, K., & Lövbrand, E. (2019). The road to Paris: Contending climate govern-ance discourses in the post-Copenhagen era. Journal of Environmental Policy & Plan-ning, 21(5), 519–532.
Banzhaf, E., Kabisch, S., Knapp, S., Rink, D., Wolff, M., & Kindler, A. (2017). Integrated research on land-use changes in the face of urban transformations–an analytic frame-work for further studies. Land use policy, 60, 403–407.
Banzhaf, E., Kindler, A., & Haase, D. (2006). Monitoring and modelling indicators for ur-ban shrinkage-The city of Leipzig, Germany. Center for Remote Sensing of Land Surfac-es, 28, 30.
Beecroft, R., Trenks, H., Rhodius, R., Benighaus, C., & Parodi, O. (2018). Reallabore als Rahmen transformativer und transdisziplinärer Forschung: Ziele und Designprinzipien. In Transdisziplinär und transformativ forschen: Eine Methodensammlung (S. 75–100). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden Wiesbaden. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/27699/1/1002307.pdf#page=70
Bernt, M. (2016). The Limits of Shrinkage: Conceptual Pitfalls and Alternatives in the Discussion of Urban Population Loss. International Journal of Urban and Regional Re-search, 40(2), 441–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12289
Borgström, S. (2019). Balancing diversity and connectivity in multi-level governance set-tings for urban transformative capacity. Ambio, 48(5), 463–477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-01142-1
Bulkeley, H., Coenen, L., Frantzeskaki, N., Hartmann, C., Kronsell, A., Mai, L., Marvin, S., McCormick, K., van Steenbergen, F., & Palgan, Y. V. (2016). Urban living labs: Govern-ing urban sustainability transitions. Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 22, 13–17.
Buzasi, A., & Csizovszky, A. (2023). Urban sustainability and resilience: What the litera-ture tells us about „lock-ins“? AMBIO, 52(3), 616–630. (WOS:000899531500002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-022-01817-w
Castan Broto, V. C., Trencher, G., Iwaszuk, E., & Westman, L. (2019). Transformative ca-pacity and local action for urban sustainability. AMBIO, 48(5), 449–462. (WOS:000464713200002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1086-z
Castan Broto, V., Westman, L., & Huang, P. (2023). For an Urban Politics of Looking Elsewhere: Climate Action in Rapidly Growing Chinese Cities. JOURNAL OF PLANNING LITERATURE, 38(3), 380–394. (WOS:000942457600001). https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122231154495
Castán Broto, V., Westman, L., & Huang, P. (2023). For an Urban Politics of Looking Elsewhere: Climate Action in Rapidly Growing Chinese Cities. Journal of Planning Litera-ture, 38(3), 380–394. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122231154495
Castán Broto, V., & Westman, L. K. (2020). Ten years after Copenhagen: Reimagining climate change governance in urban areas. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Climate Change, 11(4), e643. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.643
Castro-Arce, K., & Vanclay, F. (2020). Transformative social innovation for sustainable rural development: An analytical framework to assist community-based initiatives. Journal of Rural Studies, 74, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.11.010
DiGaetano, A., & Strom, E. (2003). Comparative Urban Governance: An Integrated Ap-proach. Urban Affairs Review, 38(3), 356–395. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087402238806
Egermann, M., Ehnert, F., Wolfram, M., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2026). Urban Sustainability Transitions Research. In A. Hendriks & J. Wesche (Hrsg.), Introduction to Sustainability Transitions Research (S. 403–423). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009437318.029
Ehnert, F., Kern, F., Borgström, S., Gorissen, L., Maschmeyer, S., & Egermann, M. (2018). Urban sustainability transitions in a context of multi-level governance: A comparison of four European states. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 26, 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.05.002
Frantzeskaki, N., Buchel, S., Spork, C., Ludwig, K., & Kok, M. T. J. (2019). The Multiple Roles of ICLEI: Intermediating to Innovate Urban Biodiversity Governance. Ecological Economics, 164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.06.005
Frantzeskaki, N., Collier, M., Hölscher, K., Gaziulusoy, I., Ossola, A., Albulescu, P., Bon-neau, M., Borgstrom, S., Connop, S., Dumitru, A., Geneletti, D., Gorissen, L., Levin-Keitel, M., MacIntyre, T., Mascinga, I., McQuaid, S., Tabory, S., von Wirth, T., Vandergert, P., … Wittmayer, J. (2025). Premises, practices and politics of co-creation for urban sus-tainability transitions. Urban Transformations, 7(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42854-025-00075-9
Geels, F. W. (2018). Disruption and low-carbon system transformation: Progress and new challenges in socio-technical transitions research and the Multi-Level Perspective. Energy Research & Social Science, 37, 224–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.010
Gissendanner, S. (2004). Mayors, Governance Coalitions, and Strategic Capacity: Draw-ing Lessons from Germany for Theories of Urban Governance. Urban Affairs Review, 40(1), 44–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087404267188
Glaas, E., Hjerpe, M., Wihlborg, E., & Storbjörk, S. (2022). Disentangling municipal ca-pacities for citizen participation in transformative climate adaptation. Environmental Policy and Governance, 32(3), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1982
Glass, M. R., & Addie, J.-P. D. (2025). Bridging ‘infrastructural solutions’ and ‘infrastruc-tures as solution’: Regional promises and urban pragmatism. Urban Studies, 62(9), 1771–1792. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980241262232
Golubchikov, O., Shahab, S., & Haupt, W. (2026). Unlikely climate pioneers? Net-zero governance and innovation in ‘left behind’ places. Applied Geography, 186, 103824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2025.103824
Grillitsch, M., Cobos-Cabral, F., & Horvat, A. (2025). Change Agency and the Capability Approach: Regional Development and Well-Being on the Edge. Economic Geography, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00130095.2025.2571094
Haase, A., Bernt, M., Großmann, K., Mykhnenko, V., & Rink, D. (2016). Varieties of shrinkage in European cities. European Urban and Regional Studies, 23(1), 86–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776413481985
Haase, A., Bontje, M., Couch, C., Marcinczak, S., Rink, D., Rumpel, P., & Wolff, M. (2021). Factors driving the regrowth of European cities and the role of local and contex-tual impacts: A contrasting analysis of regrowing and shrinking cities. Cities, 108, 102942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102942
Haase, A., Rink, D., Grossmann, K., Bernt, M., & Mykhnenko, V. (2014). Conceptualizing Urban Shrinkage. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 46(7), 1519–1534. https://doi.org/10.1068/a46269
Haupt, D. W., Eckersley, D. P. M., & Kern †, P. D. K. (2026). Deutsche Städte im Klima-wandel: Herausforderungen für Politik, Verwaltung und Gesellschaft. Nomos Verlagsge-sellschaft mbH & Co. KG. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748956006
Haupt, W., Laug, L., & Eckersley, P. (o. J.). Structure, agency and local climate govern-ance: How do individual actors exploit local contexts to shape policymaking in smaller cities and towns? Regional Studies, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2024.2354384
Heer, S., Wirth, P., Knippschild, R., & Matern, A. (2021). Guiding principles in transfor-mation processes of coal phase-out. The German case of Lusatia. Extractive Industries and Society, 8(1), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.07.005
Hermans, M., Kraker, J. de, & Scholl, C. (2024). The Shrinking City as a Testing Ground for Urban Degrowth Practices. Urban Planning, 9(0). https://doi.org/10.17645/up.8008
Herrmann, D. L., Schwarz, K., Shuster, W. D., Berland, A., Chaffin, B. C., Garmestani, A. S., & Hopton, M. E. (2016). Ecology for the Shrinking City. Bioscience, 66(11), 965–973. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw062
Hoekveld, J. J. (2012). Time-Space Relations and the Differences Between Shrinking Re-gions. Built Environment, 38(2), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.38.2.179
Hofstad, H., Vedeld, T., & Haarstad, H. (2025). Building local sustainability: Identifying critical transformative capacities. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2025.101043
Hölscher, K., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2020). Transformative Climate Governance A Capaci-ties Perspective to Systematise, Evaluate and Guide Climate Action. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49040-9
Jayaweera, R. A. (2023). Urban Sustainability Transitions in the Global South: Navigating (in)Stabilities for Transformative Change. (PQDT:87649153).
Kabisch, N. (2015). Ecosystem service implementation and governance challenges in urban green space planning—The case of Berlin, Germany. Land use policy, 42, 557–567.
Kavonic, J., & Bulkeley, H. (2023). Generating transformative capacity: ICLEI Africa’s ur-ban natural assets for Africa programme. Local Environment, 28(7), 900–917. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2023.2190349
Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R. (2023). A systematic review of shrinking cities literature: Les-sons from the past and directions for the future. International Planning Studies, 28(3–4), 219–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2023.2205030
Knippschild, R. (2021). Multi-level Governance in der „Metropolregion Mitteldeutsch-land“: Von der Suche nach passfähigen gesamtund teilräumlichen Organisationsstruk-turen. In „Metropolregion Mitteldeutschland“ aus raumwissenschaftlicher Sicht (S. 144–168). Hannover: Verlag der ARL - Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/234970
Knoop, B., & Knippschild, R. (2026). Negotiating Possibilities in Shrinking Cities: Poten-tials, Challenges, and Policy Implications. Urban Planning, 11. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.12183
Kuhlmann, S., & Bouckaert, G. (Hrsg.). (2016). Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis: National Trajectories and International Comparisons. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52548-2
Kühn, M. (2015). Peripheralization: Theoretical concepts explaining socio-spatial ine-qualities. European Planning Studies, 23(2), 367–378.
Kühn, M., & Weck, S. (2013). Peripherisierung – ein Erklärungsansatz zur Entstehung von Peripherien. In M. Bernt & H. Liebmann (Hrsg.), Peripherisierung, Stigmatisierung, Abhängigkeit? (S. 24–46). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-19130-0_2
Küpper, P. (2013). Regionale Schrumpfung gestalten: Handlungsspielräume zur langfris-tigen Sicherung gesellschaftlicher Teilhabe schaffen und nutzen. Johann Heinrich von Thünen-Institut.
Lang, T., Görmar, F., Haunstein, S., & Graffenberger, M. (2024). Left behind places and local democracy: German small towns under the conditions of peripheralisation. In Spatial Inequalities and Wellbeing (S. 33–51). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://www.elgaronline.com/edcollchap/book/9781802202632/book-part-9781802202632-7.xml
Lehmphul, K. (2015, Juli 30). Gesellschaftlicher Wandel als Mehrebenenansatz. Um-weltbundesamt. https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/gesellschaftlicher-wandel-als-mehrebenenansatz
Loorbach, N. F., Vanesa Castán Broto, Lars Coenen, Derk. (2017). Urban Sustainability Transitions: The Dynamics and Opportunities of Sustainability Transitions in Cities. In Urban Sustainability Transitions. Routledge.
Lord, F. (2020). TRANSFORMATION to SUSTAINABLE and RESILIENT URBAN FUTURES in SOUTHEAST ASIA. ISPRS Ann. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci., 6(3/W1), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-annals-VI-3-W1-2020-43-2020
Lord, F. N., Retamal, M., & Davila, F. (2024). Strengthening transformative capacities for urban sustainability: A case study of waste reform in Battambang, Cambodia. Urban Transformations, 6(1). (RC:150535984_S24). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42854-024-00065-3
Lord, F., Prior, J., & Retamal, M. (2025). Shifting from adaptive capacity to transformative capacity: A case study of how Sihanoukville can develop the capacity of urban stake-holders to enable sustainability transformation in sanitation. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 17(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463138.2025.2485063
Lorenz Fontolan, B., Jorge, S., & Gonçalves, J. (2026). Urban Climate Governance and Urban Planning: A Systematic Review of Recent Literature (2020–2025). Sustainability, 18(5), 2362. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18052362
Mabon, L., & Shih, W.-Y. (2018). Management of sustainability transitions through plan-ning in shrinking resource city contexts: An evaluation of Yubari City, Japan. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 20(4), 482–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2018.1443004
Mallach, A. (2023). Smaller Cities in a Shrinking World: Learning to Thrive Without Growth. Island Press.
Marx, R. (2026). The geography of complex shrinkage: A mixed-methods analysis of spa-tiotemporal patterns and intra-regional differentiation in the Eastern German district of Bautzen, 1990–2019. (UNPUBLISHED DOCUMENT). ACC Journal, 31(3).
Matern, A., Špaček, M., Theuner, J., Knippschild, R., & Janáček, J. (2025). Strategies for energy transition and regional development in European post-coal mining regions: Ústí Region, Czechia, and Lusatia, Germany. Territory, Politics, Governance, 13(7), 1001–1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2023.2231972
Matern, A., Theuner, J., Knippschild, R., & Barrett, T. (2024). Regional design for post-mining transformation: Insights from implementation in Lusatia. Planning Practice and Research, 39(1), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2022.2147641
Matyushkina, A., Borgne, S. L., & Matoga, A. (2024). Overcoming the limitations to co-production in shrinking cities: Insights from Latvia, France, and the Netherlands. Euro-pean Planning Studies, 32(4), 720–738. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2023.2207600
Molders, T., Doye, L., & Gailing, L. (2025). Strengthen sustainability-transformations for climate protection through regional planning. RAUMFORSCHUNG UND RAUMORD-NUNG-SPATIAL RESEARCH AND PLANNING, 83(6), 445–460. (WOS:001672558600003). https://doi.org/10.14512/rur.3092
Nakazawa, T., Satoh, K., Trencher, G., Tatsumi, T., & Hasegawa, K. (2023). Net-zero car-bon declarations by Japanese local governments: What caused the domino-like diffu-sion? Review of Policy Research, 40(6), 853–893. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12544
Newton, P., Meyer, D., & Glackin, S. (2017). Becoming urban: Exploring the transforma-tive capacity for a suburban-to-urban transition in Australia’s low-density cities. Sus-tainability (Switzerland), 9(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101718
Nguyen, T. M. P., & Davidson, K. (2023). Institutionalising 100 Resilient Cities governance experiments in cities with no metropolitan government: A case study of Living Mel-bourne (Resilient Melbourne), Australia. Cities, 141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104500
Novalia, W., Rogers, B. C., Bos, J. J., Brown, R. R., Soedjono, E. S., & Copa, V. (2020). Transformative agency in co-producing sustainable development in the urban south. Cities, 102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102747
Ongaro, E., & Van Thiel, S. (Hrsg.). (2018). The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administra-tion and Management in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55269-3
Osthorst, W. (2021). Tensions in urban transitions. Conceptualizing conflicts in local climate policy arrangements. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010078
Peris-Blanes, J., Segura-Calero, S., Sarabia, N., & Ribó-Pérez, D. (2022). The role of place in shaping urban transformative capacity. The case of València (Spain). Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 42, 124–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.12.006
Ponte, T., Teles, F., & Polido, A. (2025). Identifying and exploring ‘agency features’ in de-cision-making processes aimed at urban sustainability transformation. Urban Research and Practice, 18(5), 696–727. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2025.2483242
Putkowska-Smoter, R. (2025). Directly or by Encouraging Others? Mixed Governance Logics for Climate Change Adaptation in Six Polish Cities. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. https://doi.org/10.7366/15094995410203
Ravetz, J., Neuvonen, A., & Mäntysalo, R. (2021). The new normative: Synergistic scenar-io planning for carbon-neutral cities and regions. Regional Studies, 55(1), 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1813881
Reiß, K., Seifert, T. L., & Artmann, M. (2024). Initiating, innovating and accelerating edible cities. A case study based on two transition experiments in the city of Dresden (Germa-ny). Urban Ecosystems, 27(4), 1323–1337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-024-01525-1
Rink, D., Couch, C., Haase, A., Krzysztofik, R., Nadolu, B., & Rumpel, P. (2014). The gov-ernance of urban shrinkage in cities of post-socialist Europe: Policies, strategies and actors. Urban Research & Practice, 7(3), 258–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2014.966511
Rink, D., Haase, A., Großmann, K., Bernt, M., Couch, C., Cocks, M., Violante, A., Cor-tese, C., & Calza Bini, P. (2011). How shrinkage and local governance are interrelated across urban Europe: A comparative view. In D12 discussion paper on governance re-sponses. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig. https://www.academia.edu/download/30356057/39028_shrink_smart_wp6_d12_final.pdf
Rohracher, H., & Kordas, O. (2024). TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND EDUCATION TO INCREASE THE CAPACITY FOR GOVERNING URBAN CLIMATE TRANSITIONS. In J. Lumbreras & J. Moreno-Serna (Hrsg.), Higher Education and SDG11: Sustainable Cities and Communities (S. 9–26). Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83797-420-720241002
Roorda, C., & Wittmayer, J. (2014). Transition management in five European cities–an evaluation. DRIFT, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam.
Sardão, M., & Silva, P. G. (2025). Mapping, characterisation, and analysis of initiatives with transformative capacity: A scoping review. Ambio, 54(6), 947–964. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-025-02133-9
Sekulova, F., Anguelovski, I., & Argüelles, L. (2023). Redefining success in organizing to-wards degrowth. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 48, 100764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2023.100764
Shahani, F., Pineda-Pinto, M., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2022). Transformative low-carbon ur-ban innovations: Operationalizing transformative capacity for urban planning. Ambio, 51(5), 1179–1198. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01653-4
Sousa, A. R., Cruz, S. S., & Breda-Vázquez, I. (2024). Understanding transformative ca-pacity to boost urban climate adaptation: A Semi-Systematic Literature Review. Ambio, 53(2), 276–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-023-01940-2
Suitner, J., & Levin-Keitel, M. (2025). Putting sustainability transitions “on the ground”. Three arguments for a stronger integration of spatial planning and sustainability transi-tions scholarship. Raumforschung und Raumordnung| Spatial Research and Planning. https://rur.oekom.de/index.php/rur/article/view/3071
Vale, M., Peponi, A., Carvalho, L., Veloso, A. P., Queirós, M., & Morgado, P. (2023). Are peripheral regions in troubled waters for sustainability transitions? A systematic analy-sis of the literature. European Urban and Regional Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764231194316
Van der Heijden, J. (2019). Studying urban climate governance: Where to begin, what to look for, and how to make a meaningful contribution to scholarship and practice. Earth System Governance, 1, 100005.
von Wirth, T., Frantzeskaki, N., & Loorbach, D. (2020). Urban living labs as inter-boundary spaces for sustainability transitions? In G. de Roo, C. Yamu, & C. Zuidema (Hrsg.), Handbook on Planning and Complexity: Research Handbooks in Planning (S. 237–257). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439185.00017
Von Wirth, T., & Levin-Keitel, M. (2020). Lokale Nachhaltigkeitsexperimente als raum-wirksame Interventionen: Theoretische Grundlagen und Handlungskonzepte. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 29(2), 98–105. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.29.2.7
Wang, X., Hu, J., Zhao, S., & Hu, R. (2025). Spatial relationship between population shrinkage and land development in northeast China. Frontiers in Environmental Sci-ence, 13, 1522999.
Wang, Y., Wang, W., Shen, C., & Li, W. (2024). End of rope or phoenix nirvana? Exploring the evolutionary paths of coal resource-based cities in China. Cities, 154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105382
Wanner, M. (2024). Co-Productive City-Making As a Motor of Neighbourhood Develop-ment? A Longitudinal Constellation Analysis in Wuppertal-Mirke. Berichte Geographie und Landeskunde, 97(1–2), 103–129. https://doi.org/10.25162/bgl-2023-0021
Wiechmann, T., & Pallagst, K. M. (2012). Urban shrinkage in Germany and the USA: A Comparison of Transformation Patterns and Local Strategies. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36(2), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2011.01095.x
Wolfram, M. (2016). Conceptualizing urban transformative capacity: A framework for research and policy. Cities, 51, 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.11.011
Wolfram, M. (2019a). Assessing transformative capacity for sustainable urban regenera-tion: A comparative study of three South Korean cities. AMBIO, 48(5), 478–493. (WOS:000464713200004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1111-2
Wolfram, M. (2019b). Learning urban energy governance for system innovation: An as-sessment of transformative capacity development in three South Korean cities. JOUR-NAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY & PLANNING, 21(1), 30–45. (WOS:000457620400003). https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2018.1512051
Xing, G., Wang, D., & Cai, W. (2025). Study on multidimensional shrinkage spatial-temporal patterns and driving forces of cities in the Yellow River Basin. Scientific Re-ports, 15(1), 22934. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-06292-3
Zimmermann, K. (2026). Cities and Urban Politics in the EU. In The Routledge Handbook of European Union Politics. Routledge.
Zöllter, C., Rößler, S., & Knippschild, R. (2024). In-migration for transforming peripheral locations through a real-world experiment? Experiment insights on location decisions in the medium-sized city of Görlitz, Germany. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 33(3), 286–294. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.33.3.4