The human-centred city : opportunities for citizens through research and innovation.
Date: 2019-12-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Subjects: citizen science, innovation, political representation, report, research and development, sustainable development, town, town planning, urban community, urban problem, vision of Europe

THE HUMAN- 
CENTRED 
CITY

Opportunities for 
citizens through 
research and 
innovation

Independent 
Expert 
Report

Research and 
Innovation

The Human-Centred City: Opportunities for citizens through research and innovation

European Commission
Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Directorate D – Clean Planet
Unit D.2 – Future Urban & Mobility Systems

Contact  
Email  

Jean-François Aguinaga
RTD-INNOVATING-CITIES@ec.europa.eu 
RTD-PUBLICATIONS@ec.europa.eu

European Commission
B-1049 Brussels

Printed by the Publications Office of the European Union in Luxembourg

Manuscript completed in July 2019.

The European Commission is not liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse of this publication.

The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the 
European Commission.

More information on the European Union is available on the internet (http://europa.eu).

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019

Print

PDF

ISBN 978-92-76-03323-3

doi:10.2777/489486

ISBN 978-92-76-03324-0

doi:10.2777/859158

KI-04-19-400-EN-C

KI-04-19-400-EN-N

©  European Union, 2019
Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. The reuse policy of European Commission documents is regulated by 
Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39).

For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not under the copyright of the European Union, permission must be 
sought directly from the copyright holders.

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION

THE HUMAN-CENTRED CITY
Opportunities for citizens through  
research and innovation

Report of the High-Level Expert Group on Innovating Cities

2019

Directorate-General for Research and Innovation

The High-Level Expert Group members 

Charles Landry, chair
Riccardo Crescenzi, rapporteur
Ana Bartolo 
Catherine Cullen
Maria del Mar Delgado-Serrano
Sigrun Kabisch
Lina Liakou
Marton Matko
Ania Rok
Marleen Stikker
Paul Cartuyvels

Observers 
Francoise Guaspare
Nathalie Guri

This report reflects the unanimous views of the entire expert group.
Various  experts  took  special  responsibilities  for  and  leadership  in  drafting  specific  chap-
ters and the corresponding research and innovation (R&I) actions: Maria del Mar Delgado-
Serrano for People in collaboration with Charles Landry and Sigrun Kabisch; Ana Bartolo for 
Place in collaboration with Charles Landry; Riccardo Crescenzi for Prosperity and Measuring 
Innovative Cities; Lina Liakou with Maria del Mar Delgado-Serrano for Resilience; Maria del 
Mar Delgado-Serrano for Governance. Overall editing was by Charles Landry in collabor-
ation with Riccardo Crescenzi. 

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD  

6

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS  .....................................................................................................9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................13

SETTING THE SCENE ..................................................................................................................17
18
18
20
21
23
25

Introduction 
The bigger context  
The role of cities 
What is an innovative city? 
Our response 
Structure of the report 

FORCES SHAPING URBAN CHANGE ...................................................................................27

PEOPLE..............................................................................................................................................33
34
35
36
36
37
38
40
41

Why are we dealing with this issue? 
Logic of the intervention  
Making the most of diversity 
Priorities and R&I actions for people  
Building community and social bonding  
An inclusive city that averts inequalities 
The dilemmas of demography  
Well-being for all 

PLACE .................................................................................................................................................45
46
53
53
53
57
59

Why we are dealing with this issue? 
Logic of the intervention  
Decarbonisation and limiting global warming limit to 1.5ºC 
Priorities and R&I actions for place 
Circularity 
Planning for a better built environment   

PROSPERITY  ..................................................................................................................................63
65
66
69

Why are we dealing with this issue?  
Logic of the intervention  
Priorities and R&I actions for prosperity 
Innovative cities, creativity, culture, skills and the unequal distribution  
of opportunities 
Urbanisation economies and diseconomies, mixity and diversity 
Urban innovation systems, institutions and economic governance 

70
71
73

TABLE OF CONTENTS   

5

Globally connected cities 
74
Public policies (1): Financing public services, affordable housing and urban policies   75
76
Public policies (2): Urban Innovation Policies that Work 

RESILIENCE .....................................................................................................................................79
80
81
83
83
86
87

Why are we dealing with this issue? 
Logic of the intervention 
Addressing major risks in cities 
Priorities and R&I actions for resilience 
Future-proofing our city systems  
Foundations for building resilience 

CROSS-CUTTING PRIORITY: GOVERNANCE ....................................................................89
90
93
93
93
95
96

Why are we dealing with this issue? 
Defining urban governance 
The complexities of urban governance 
Priorities and R&I actions for governance 
Governing the cities of the future 
Citizen engagement 

CROSS-CUTTING DIMENSION: MEASURING INNOVATIVE CITIES .......................99
101
102
105
105
106
106

Why are we dealing with this issue? 
Logic of the intervention  
Data collection and quali-quanti integration 
Priorities and R&I actions for measurement 
Modelling, benchmarking and evaluating 
Education, training and culture of measurement and evaluation for citizens 

SUCCESSFUL CITIES: LEARNING FROM THE BEST ..................................................107
108
108
109
110
112
113

What is success?  
How do successful cities operate? 
People  
Place 
Prosperity 
Resilience  

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS .....................................................................................115

6

Jean-Eric Paquet,  
Director-General  

for Research and Innovation

FOREWORD 

Today,  more  than  half  of  the 
world’s  population  lives  in  urban 
areas  and  this  is  expected  to  rise 
to  just  over  80  %  by  2050  ( 1).  In 
addition  to  demographic  growth, 
cities  and  metropolitan  regions  are 
centres  of  economic  activities  and 
increased  resource  consumption.  A 
global  ‘business-as-usual’  scenario 
will  drive  up  demand  for  resources 
(water,  energy,  food)  by  30-50  % 
by  the  year  2030.  Simultaneously,  a 
doubling of the world’s urban popula-
tion is projected to result in a tripling 
of land consumption ( 2). 

Cities  are  also  the  home  of  complex, 
interlinked  challenges  related  to  cli-
mate  change,  pollution,  energy  effi-
ciency,  urban  mobility,  water,  waste, 
food  and  resource  efficiency,  health 
and  well-being  and  social 
innov-
ation.  Cities  are  key  actors  for  meeting 
the  targets  set  out  by  international 
frameworks.

The  battle  for  a  greener  future  can  be 
won in our cities by mobilising all urban 
stakeholders  and  citizens  to  accelerate 
the transition to inclusive, resilient, safe, 
climate-proof and resource-efficient eco-
systems. This is at the core of the debate 
on a European Green Deal and on making 

1 

2 

Source: United Nations (World Urbanisation  
Prospects) and Eurostat.
Source: ICLEI and GIZ – Deutsche Gesellschaft  
für Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH.

 
 
 
FOREWORD   

7

networks across all types of cities and re-
gions as central to innovation.

This  is  why  it  is  strategic  to  promote 
an  integrated  vision  towards  innovative 
urban  planning  and  design  that  relies 
on  co-creation  and  co-implementation 
among different policy areas, urban sec-
tors  and  stakeholders  and  fully  engage 
citizens as ‘city makers’  and actors of in-
novation in participatory governance and 
policymaking  in a city for all. 

This systemic approach calls for synergies 
between  vital  subsystems  (e.g.  climate, 
technologies,  health 
energy,  mobility, 
and  well-being,  social  innovation,  circular 
econo my), leaves behind silo thinking, miti-
gates trade-offs and guides success, sim-
ply by evidencing the benefits and impacts 
of truly integrated urban ecosystems.

Europe  the  first  climate-neutral  contin-
ent  by  2050,  by  building  on  the  strategy 
proposed  in  the  Communication  ‘A  Clean 
Planet  for  all’.  Decarbonisation  requires 
research, innovation and investment. 

For 30 years, Europe has been investing in 
transnational  EU  research  and  innov ation 
on  urban-systems-related  issues,  by  pro-
viding financing from the FP5, FP6 and FP7 
Framework Programmes, of EUR 2.8 billion 
and even in Horizon 2020: EUR 3.1 billion. 
Horizon Europe plans to continue similarly 
to invest in these issues. For this we need 
to  take  stock  of  where  we  are  and  what 
options we have for the future. 

This  visionary  report  drafted  by  the 
High-Level  independent  Expert  Group  on 
Innovating Cities provides a very compre-
hensive and detailed analysis on a policy 
research  &  innovation  framework  that 
broadens  the  perspective  towards  more 
holistic  approaches.  It  enables  coordin-
ation and synergies among actions under-
taken  at  EU,  national,  regional  and  local 
levels  and  will  contribute  to  a  broader 
debate in the Horizon Europe Mission on 
Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities. It pro-
motes human-centred cities of tomorrow 
through  research  and  innovation  to  the 
benefit and well-being of all citizens. The 
report  spreads  expertise  across  Europe 
and  paves  the  way  for  future  European 
cities to be climate neutral and smart as 
well as more resilient, healthy, inclusive, 
prosperous,  safe  and  sustainable.  It  rec-
ognises  that  cities  are  nodes  of  global 
networks  of  skills,  knowledge,  capital, 
public and private value. It acknowledges 
the need for connectivity and collaborative 

MAIN 
RECOMMENDATIONS 

10

A series of recommendations can be drawn from the report ‘The 
human-centred city: Opportunities for citizens through research and 
innovation’. These are central and should guide integrated research 
and innovation (R&I) actions.

The first set of 
recommendations concerns 
a new approach to 
R&I actions:

The second set of 
recommendations concerns 
the key summary input 
for R&I actions:

ąą

R&I actions based on this report should 
be truly integrated and cut across two 
or more of the dimensions presented in 
the report while keeping measurement 
and governance as key principles.

ąą

ąą Citizens should always be at the centre 
of any R&I action in terms of concepts, 
design, execution and dissemination.

Think, plan and act in city-making 
from a 360º perspective. This lens 
helps the needs and priorities of 
differing groups – the young, the old, 
women, men, differing ethnicities and 
origins, abilities and lifestyles – to be 
seen. This has impacts for how places 
are shaped, what people’s economic 
prospects are and as result, how 
resilient the city can become.

ąą

ąą

R&I actions can generate innovations 
that are opportunity-enhancing for 
citizens, creating prosperity, well-
being and high-quality jobs in all cities 
of Europe.

Sustainability is central and shapes 
conceptualising all other urban 
outcomes, from growth and jobs 
(prosperity), the built environment 
(place) and governance to how places 
are made and function.

ąą Measurement and evaluation are 

leading accountability principles for 
R&I actions.

ąą

The approach to R&I actions proposed 
in this report should remain an open 
framework flexible enough to deal with 
unknown developments and challenges 
for cities.

ąą Put issues of affordability centre 

stage. This implies inclusiveness and 
implementing strategies that focus on 
disadvantage and inequalities. It affects 
spatial and physical planning as well as 
income distribution issues and fostering 
affordable technologies.

ąą Understand the psychological 

manifestations of absorbing deep-
seated changes that are underway 
and their consequences, such as 
climate change, and assess the best 
routes for individuals to be willing to 
change behaviours towards more 
sustainable lifestyles. 

   MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS 

11

ąą

ąą

Embed circular thinking in how places 
are physically put together and how 
our economic system can work as a 
means of creating more sustainable 
development pathways.

Ensure technology developments, 
especially digitisation processes, are 
human-centred and not technology-
driven and support low-cost 
technologies to meet global challenges 
such as climate targets.

ąą Shift to place-based thinking, which 
implies an integrated approach to 
city development as it considers both 
urban hardware infrastructure and its 
diverse activities, from the social to 
the economic. These activites are the 
software aspect.

ąą Recouple social, economic and 

environmental agendas. This implies 
rethinking the criteria for what makes 
a prosperous place and how to achieve 
inclusive prosperity and jobs within 
planetary boundaries. 

ąą

Focus on good-quality affordable 
housing as central for cities to address 
their core challenges, including: tackling 
inequalities and social division, bringing 
skills to the places where they are 
needed, maintaining mixity and 
diversity, and ensuring a fair and 
creative urban society.

ąą Recognise that cities are nodes of 

global networks of skills, knowledge, 
capital and ultimately (public and 
private) value. Building physical 
and non-physical connectivity and 
collaborative networks across all 
types of cities and regions is central 

to innovation. This also makes places 
more resilient and is a key objective for 
human-centred sustainable cities.   

ąą Be aware that cities are the places 
where skills are often created, 
matched and combined. It is in cities 
that preparing for the future of work 
will take place and so can steer how 
skills are adapted to establish more 
cohesive urban environments.  

ąą Acknowledge that a human-

centred city involves a fundamental 
behavioural change, not only by 
civil society but also by firms and 
governments at all levels. 

ąą Absorb how digitisation, artificial 

intelligence and sensing technology 
are fundamentally changing the way 
we think about city and urban life and 
how these will be organised in the next 
decade. R&I opportunities and threats 
should be explored from different 
dimensions, as well as measuring 
outcomes and identifying appropriate 
governance arrangements.

ąą

Establish governance arrangements 
focused on a quadruple-helix approach 
to visioning and implementation, 
whereby the city administration, the 
private sector, knowledge institutes and 
citizens determine strategy and how 
places should develop. 

Create measurement tools to 
consider the city as an integrated 
ecosystem, with people, place, 
prosperity and resilience at 
its core.

EXECUTIVE 
SUMMARY

14

‘The Human-centred city: 
Opportunities for citizens 
through research and innovation’ 
outlines how R&I policy can 
focus its activities, how Horizon 
Europe funding can deliver 
on the United Nations (UN) 
Sustainable Development 
Goals (SDG) – in particular the 
11th of its 17 goals: ‘To make 
cities inclusive, safe, resilient 
and sustainable’ – and how 
cities have a decisive role in 
accelerating society’s transition 
to reach the other 16 SDG. That 
11th goal and other major global 
agreements frame our report 
and its recommendations.

The  world  faces  an  urgent  requirement  to 
act  dramatically.  To  manage  the  transition 
is a systemic challenge. It cannot be tackled 
piece by piece. It can only be addressed in 
an integrated way. This is the task to which 
Horizon Europe, and within that its innova-
tive  cities  initiatives  and  its  research  and 
innovation actions, must respond, encapsu-
lated in the EU’s ‘Climate-neutral and Smart 
Cities’ mission (3). 

to 

the 

The  scale  of  what  we  need  to  do  is  clear. 
Intergovernmental 
According 
Panel  on  Climate  Change  (IPCC),  we  have 
12  years  to  a  climate  catastrophe  unless 
the 1.5°C temperature-rise limit is achieved 
by emissions reductions and more. The an-
nihilation, furthermore, of wildlife is now an 
emergency  that  threatens  biodiversity  and 
civilisation.  Our  global  food  system  needs 

to shift as it is unsustainable, unhealthy and 
destabilising. Linked to this is that globally, 
populations  are  rising  while  our  ability  to 
sustain life on Earth is shrinking.

Cities  are  major  consumers  of  global  re-
sources and energy. They intensify climate 
change,  water,  food  security  and  resource 
shortages.  Air  pollution,  congestion  and 
noise  are  responsible  for  growing  rates  of 
premature deaths and related diseases.

This  systemic  challenge  focuses  on  four 
interconnected questions that cluster in cit-
ies. These questions are the risk nexus, the 
combination  of  escalating  problems  inter-
acting  with  each  other  and  agglomerating 
our  problems  into  one:  the  inability  of  the 
current economic order, which is ‘material-
ly  expansive,  socially  divisive  and  environ-
mentally hostile’ (4), to provide the equality 
and  stability  citizens  increasingly  demand. 
To avoid crisis turning into collapse, a fun-
damental  rethink  of  the  structure  and 
operation  of  the  current  economic  sys-
tem is necessary. This will affect lifestyles. 
Another  pattern  of  growth  is  required  that 
both  ensures  that  we  operate  within  plan-
etary  boundaries  as  well  as  provides  the 
ability  to  create  wealth  and  innovations. 
Guiding  a  digitising  age  and  the  technol-
ogies associated with it is vital to guarantee 
that  the  evolving  fourth  industrial  revolu-
tion is progressed in a human-centred way. 
Digitisation,  designed  and  used  well,  can 
help  create  a  fourth  industrial  revolution 
that  is  lean,  clean  and  green.  Yet  threats 
of  algorithmic  control  remain.  Our  task  is 
to redesign the world and all its systems – 

3  Mazzucato, Mariana, Mission-oriented research & innovation in the European Union: A problem-solving approach 

4 

to fuel innovation-led growth, 2018 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/mazzucato_report_2018.pdf
European Commission, Final report of the High-Level Panel of the European Decarbonisation Pathways Initiative, 
2018 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/research_and_innovation/research_by_area/documents/ec_rtd_
decarbonisation-report_112018.pdf

  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

15

ethically,  politically,  economically,  socially, 
technologically and culturally.

Cities  are  complex  metabolisms 
that 
attract people, economic activity, resources, 
opportunity  and  innovation.  To  function 
well,  they  rely  on  systems  and  networks, 
from transport to energy, food, water, waste 
management and security as well as human 
tangible  and  intangible  culture.  There  are 
the 
increasing  vulnerabilities, 
disruptive  impacts  of  shocks,  especially 
those driven by climate change or pollution. 
The recent financial crisis has exacerbated 
stresses and social conflict. It has increased 
the  polarisation  of  society.  Psychologically 
overwhelmed people are unclear what their 
role is in averting the impending crisis.

including 

Cities  are  the  laboratories  of  solving  the 
problems of their own making. This includes 
addressing  energy  and  resource  efficiency, 
climate  change  and  pollution,  connected 
urban  mobility,  water,  waste,  sustainable 
food systems and cultural diversity, estab-
lishing  emotionally  sustaining,  physically 
attractive  and  aesthetically  gratifying  en-
vironments  built  on  strong  cultural  iden-
tities  as  well  as  cities’  overall  health  and 
well-being. 

Within  the  range  of  seemingly  intractable 
problems,  there  are  substantial  opportun-
ities. These can be harnessed in innovative 
cities,  which  identify,  nurture,  support  and 
promote  skills,  expertise  and  talent  and 
open mindedness. They include people and 
organisations  and  foster  widespread  par-
ticipation  to  tap  into  the  widest  reservoir 
of potential. They have enabling conditions, 
such  as  a  regulations  and  incentives  re-
gime,  that  are  shaped  and  encouraged  by 
the  political  and  public  framework,  includ-
ing the public administrations.

The priority for creative thinking, action and 
targets  for  innovation  in  cities  today  is  to 
address  global  challenges.  Cities  are  ac-
celerators  of  opportunity.  Their  proximities 
force-feed  interaction,  exchange  and  in-
novation.  Cities  are  containers  where  high 
skills,  expertise,  strategic  knowledge,  artis-
tic talent, research, ambition and entrepre-
neurship  coalesce.  The  more  the  collective 
intelligence, energy and focus the diversity 
of  actors  in  cities  bring  together,  the  more 
creative and innovative they are. Within this, 
public procurement can play a major role as 
it is one of the greatest levers to help guide 
innovation processes.

16

The  most  innovative  cities  have  a  physical 
setting that is well-assembled, where there 
is  history,  character,  distinctiveness,  diver-
sity and vitality, with high levels of liveability 
and all the necessary support facilities, from 
health  and  education  to  culture  and  public 
spaces. All of these generate a rich civic life.

Our  guiding  principle  is  that  cities  should 
be  more  human-centred.  This  is  not  just 
a  right,  but  also  involves  responsibilities, 
obligations and duties. To be a city for citi-
zens  where  citizens  become  city-makers 
and  shapers,  makers  and  co-creators  of 
their evolving urban development is not an 
entitlement.  It  means  being  an  active  citi-
zen concerned with the local and European 
context and with the urgency of the global 
context.

Complex problems can only be unscrambled 
and dealt with systemically using both expert 
knowledge and that of citizens, as well as by 
breaking silos and assessing problems in an 
integrated way. The overall dynamic of cities 
and their potential is shaped, too, by a vortex 
effect that strengthens some cities and weak-
ens others We address four big themes that 
must be seen in an integrated way. They are 
‘people’, ‘place’, ‘prosperity’ and ‘resilience’.

The  people  dimension  looks  at  making  the 
most of diversity and social inclusion, building 
community  and  social  bonding,  creating  an 

inclusive city for all to avert inequalities and 
spatial segregation and engaging citizens. The 
place  dimension  focuses  on  planning  within 
planetary  boundaries,  with  renewables  and 
energy efficiency at its core. It includes decar-
bonising all our systems, rethinking food sys-
tems, adaptive reuse, shared and smart mo-
bility services, fostering the circular economy 
and  embedding  cradle-to-cradle  business 
models, and creating a built environment that 
works for people and emotionally fully meet-
ing needs. The prosperity dimension looks at 
the  genesis,  diffusion  and  absorption  of  in-
novation  in  a  systemic  way.  It  highlights  an 
inclusive model of city level innovation by ad-
dressing skills and the unequal distribution of 
opportunities. It stresses the need to achieve 
full economic returns from mixity and diver-
sity and models able to finance public services 
and urban policies. The resilience dimension 
establishes how foundations for building re-
silience can be created, based on vulnerability 
profiles with mechanisms to avert shocks and 
risks including building institutional capacity.

Two cross-cutting dimensions complete the 
loop: governance fit for purpose for our age 
– adapted and aligned to the aims of global 
priorities  and  agendas  –  and  measure-
ment  with  benchmarks  that  are  driven  by 
the indicator set established by SDG 11 as 
well as a method to evaluate an integrated 
innovative urban ecosystem.

SETTING 
THE SCENE

18

Introduction

The zeitgeist, or spirit of the times, is one of 
rising anxiety. There is fear that our escal-
ating problems cannot be solved without a 
shift in thinking, planning and action. A busi-
ness-as-usual approach, many feel, will not 
get  us  to  where  we  need  and  want  to  be, 
which is, as UN SDG 11 states: ‘To make cit-
ies inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’.

That goal frames our report and the recom-
mendations proposed, as does the EU’s mis-
sion  to  aim  for  ‘Climate-neutral  and  Smart 
Cities’  and  the  recommendations  proposed 
by Professor Mariana Mazzucato (5) for how 
to implement and govern a mission-oriented 
process, which is a problem-solving approach 
to fuelling innovation-led growth.

That goal frames our report and the recom-
mendations proposed, as does the EU’s mis-
sion to aim for ‘Climate-neutral and Smart 
Cities’ as well as other major global agree-
ments, such as the Paris Agreement on cli-
mate  change  from  COP  21,  UN-Habitat’s 
New  Urban  Agenda,  the  Global  Covenant 
of  Mayors,  the  Urban  Agenda  for  the  EU, 
and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk 
Reduction 2015-2030. Additionally import-
ant are: the World Urban Forum Declaration 
on  Cities  2030,  with  its  focus  on  tackling 
all inequalities and especially ‘encouraging 
the  sharing  of  creative  solutions  and  in-
novative  practices  which  enable  a  shift  in 
mindset  necessary  to  drive  change’;  the 
Global  Solutions  Summit,  which  provides 
policy advice to the G20 and which has fo-
cused on the need for systemic change and 
a paradigm shift, especially recoupling so-
cial and economic agendas; and finally, the 

global discussion on cities, which is increas-
ingly  focused  on  being  human  centred,  as 
with the work of the United Cities and Local 
Governments (UCLG).

The  main  objective  of  this  advisory  docu-
ment is to outline how research and innov-
ation policy in the European Union (EU) can 
focus  its  activities  on  cities,  how  Horizon 
Europe  funding  can  deliver  on  SDG  11 
through innovation and how innovative cit-
ies can have a central and decisive role in 
accelerating society’s transition to reach the 
other 16 SDG. 

The document focuses specifically on gaps 
in research and innovation. Readers should 
not expect to see proposals related to tech-
nical questions, for instance on smart cities 
or  mobility  developments  such  as  autono-
mous  vehicles,  that  various  Directorate 
Generals  (DG)  and  Horizon  2020  (H2020) 
funding  have  extensively  covered  else-
where.  However,  sensing  systems  will  be 
ubiquitous and are involved in all the issues 
addressed as a basic infrastructure. This is 
because they involve big data, which is used 
to manage assets and resources more effi-
ciently. Our focus instead is to highlight how 
human beings are put at the centre of de-
velopment and how they adapt and become 
active citizens in addressing global concerns. 

The bigger context 

Cities  are  interconnected  systems  that  at-
tract  people,  economic  activity,  resources, 
opportunity  and  innovation.  To  function 
well,  they  rely  on  complex  systems  and 
networks – from transport to energy, food, 

5  Mazzucato, Mariana, Governing Missions in the European Union, 2019 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/

research_and_innovation/contact/documents/ec_rtd_mazzucato-report-issue2_072019.pdf

  SETTING THE SCENE

19

water,  waste  management,  institu-
tions and security – that ensure their 
health and well-being. Yet cities suffer 
from increasing vulnerabilities and the 
disruptive impacts of single or multiple 
shocks,  from  climate  change  to  pollu-
tion, from economic recessions to mass 
migrations  that  expose  cities  to  long-
term stresses. 

The  recent  financial  and  economic  crisis 
and the uneven patterns of recovery have 
exacerbated  the  polarisation  of  society. 
The  high-quality  jobs  available  for  the 
highly  skilled  contrasted  with  an  increas-
ingly precarious situation for most citizens 
aggravates and intensifies tension, challen-
ging the well-being of citizens.

The scale of the challenge becomes clear-
er when assessed against the backdrop of 
the 12-year limit hypothesised by the IPCC. 
They argue that a climate catastrophe will 
become inevitable unless we limit the tem-
perature rise of the climate to 1.5°C through 
emissions  reductions  and  more.  Another 
challenge is how we address increasing so-
cial  conflict  and  rising  income  and  wealth 
disparities, exacerbated by our labour mar-
ket. Furthermore, our biodiversity and nat-
ural  resources  depletion  challenge  is  vast 
as  since  1970,  humanity  has  wiped  out 
60 % of mammals, birds, fish and reptiles. 
This annihilation of wildlife is now an emer-
gency that might threaten civilisation.

The link here is that globally, too, our popu-
lation  is  rising  while  our  ability  to  sustain 
life  on  Earth  is  shrinking.  Western  produc-
tion and consumption patterns only acceler-
ate this process. This highlights both demo-
graphic questions and the need to move to a 
more sustainable economy and society. 

20

Urban  environments  also  amplify  global 
threats  as  they  are  the  major  consumers 
of global resources and energy. Projections 
suggest this trend will continue growing in 
the next 20-30 years.

It is the combination of escalating challen-
ges  interacting  upon  each  other  and  the 
need  to  act  with  urgency  –  the  risk  nexus 
–  that  shapes  our  biggest  challenge  as  it 
agglomerates all societal and environment-
al challenges into one massive one. This is a 
substantial, strategic governance dilemma. 

Overriding  everything  is  digitisation  and 
impending  artificial  intelligence  and  its 
potential role in helping to create a fourth 
industrial revolution that is lean, clean and 
green.  There  are  strong  opportunities,  yet 
there are threats of unsustainable inequal-
ity,  algorithmic  control  and  people’s  sense 
of feeling disempowered.

 economic  order  is  seen  as  ‘materially  ex-
pansive, socially divisive and environment-
ally hostile’ (6).

In sum, this sets us a task to redesign the 
world and all its systems – ethically, polit-
ically, economically, socially, technologically 
and culturally. 

The role of cities

The fight on climate change and achieving 
carbon neutrality, sustainable development 
and a circular economy will be won or lost 
in cities. Whilst national governments have 
the  authority  to  define  the  overall  regula-
tions and policy landscape, cities often have 
greater  legitimacy  thanks  to  their  closer 
proximity to citizens and their needs. They 
are the catalysts to enable the transform-
ation  as  they  are  more  closely  connect-
ed  to  citizens,  and  so  can  accelerate  that 
 transition of society.

People  are  psychologically  overwhelmed 
and  do  not  know  what  their  role  is  in 
averting  the  impending  crisis.  There  is 
a  systemic  crisis,  especially  when  our 

Cities are complex organisms with inextric-
ably  inter-linked  challenges,  yet  they  are 
also  the  laboratories  of  solving  the  prob-
lems  of  their  own  making.  This  includes 

6 

European Commission, Final report of the High-Level Panel of the European Decarbonisation Pathways Initiative, 
2018 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/research_and_innovation/research_by_area/documents/ec_rtd_
decarbonisation-report_112018.pdf

  SETTING THE SCENE

21

 generating new economic and social oppor-
tunities  for  all  citizens  while  addressing 
energy  and  resource  efficiency,  climate 
change  and  pollution,  connected  urban 
mobility,  water,  waste,  sustainable  food 
production  systems  and  issues  of  cultural 
diversity.  It  includes  establishing  emotion-
ally  sustaining,  physically  attractive  and 
aesthetically  gratifying  environments  built 
on strong identities as well as cities’ overall 
health, resilience and well-being. 

Cities  contribute  to  climate  change,  water, 
food  security  and  resource  shortages,  and 
air pollution, traffic congestion and noise in 
cities  contributes  to  an  increasing  number 
of premature deaths and related diseases.

Overall,  this  threatens  the  capacity  of  in-
dividuals,  communities,  institutions,  busi-
nesses  and  systems  within  a  city  to  sur-
vive,  adapt,  and  grow,  as  chronic  kinds  of 
 stresses proliferate.

Separately  and  linked  is  the  evolving 
dynamics of cities where there is a posi-
tive  relationship  between  urban  density, 
product ivity, innovation and prosperity. Its 
flipside is that a growing number of cities 
are being left behind or shrinking.

Cities,  crucially,  are  the  places  through 
which  the  European  Commission  can  ac-
celerate society’s transition by funding R&I 
projects that pilot investments for the future 
(7). R&I actions have a key role as acceler-
ators that help cities tackle their challenges 
in new and innovative ways, generating new 
opportunities for all citizens in rich and poor 
areas of the EU.

What is an innovative city?

Cities  are  living  organisms  and  metabol-
isms  –  combinations  of  built  physical  fab-
ric,  human  creativity  and  activities,  trans-
actions,  the  in-  and  outflows  of  resources, 
products and people. What happens in a city 
is both tangible and intangible. People and 
their cultures define place and place shapes 
its people. 

Within  the  challenges  addressed  are  in-
numerable  opportunities  to  develop  innov-
ations,  especially  when  the  creativity  re-
quired has a purpose, such as the mission 
to create ‘Climate-neutral and Smart Cities’. 
That  goal  provides  creativity’s  lifeblood. 
Innovations  today  should  be  focused  on 
sustainable solutions that allow us to move 
towards resilience. People’s motivation, will 
and capacities can unleash that innovative 
potential,  which  all  cities  have,  to  address 
not only their own challenges but also those 
of the world.

Innovative  cities  identify,  nurture,  support 
and  promote  skills,  expertise  and  talent. 
include  people  and  organisations 
They 
and  foster  widespread  participation  to  tap 
into the widest reservoir of potential. They 
have  enabling  conditions  that  are  shaped 
and  encouraged  by  the  institutional  and 
political  framework,  including  the  public 
administration.

The  priorities  for  creative  thinking,  action 
and targets for innovation in a city depend 
on  context.  Today,  this  means  addressing 
the  global  challenges  noted.  Cities  are  ac-
celerators  of  opportunity.  Their  proximities 

7 

European Commission, Investing in European success: Innovating cities in Europe and worldwide; European 
Commission, EU Research and Innovation (R&I) actions for and with cities, a yearly mapping report that provides 
an overview of the main EU R&I actions funded under H2020 and past Framework Programmes FP5, FP6 and 
FP7.

22

force-feed interaction, exchange and innov-
ation where the right ecosystem conditions 
are  in  place.  Cities  are  containers  where 
high  skills,  expertise,  creativity,  strategic 
knowledge,  research,  ambition  and  entre-
preneurship can coalesce. The more collect-
ive intelligence, energy and strategic focus 
the diversity of actors in cities can bring to-
gether,  combine  and  recombine,  the  more 
innovative they can become. A key role here 
is  to  connect  public  and  private  organisa-
tions, civic interests and learning institutions 
in a fully functional urban ecosystem. 

Innovative  cities  have  hard  and  soft  infra-
structures, both physical institutions, such as 
strong public and private research entities, as 
well as financial resources. All these are ne-
cessary to generate, develop, prototype and 
follow through on innovations. Not all innov-
ations are technical as many are concerned 
with policy or social and cultural innovation. 
Additionally, innovative cities display an open 
mindset and attitude that helps cultivate ex-
change  and  networking.  This  establishes  a 
culture of creativity and innovation.

The public sector has the potential to provide 
overall  guidance  and  to  offer  clarity  in  its 
perspective,  purpose,  direction.  Innovative 
cities  have  leaderships  with  ambition  and 
vision. They are strategic and create a regu-
latory  and  incentives  regime  to  match  ur-
gent tasks and priorities. These set strategic 
policy  principles  that  are  non-negotiable 
yet,  when  implementing  these,  innovative 
places  are  alert  and  tactically  flexible  to 
be  responsive  to  changing  circumstances. 
Within this strategic agility, they are profes-
sional in that they deliver on what they say. 
Furthermore, they have an integrated vision 
of  policymaking  and  strive  to  break  down 
the traditional silo system, keeping the best 
of its vertical knowledge.

Industry and learning institutions are innova-
tive,  with  a  strong  focus  on  new  trends, 
emerging  technologies  and  fledgling  sec-
tors,  such  as  green  economy,  the  creative 
industries  or  how  to  use  digital  possibil-
ities.  Their  commitment  to  research  and 
development  is  well  above  average  and 
cross-fertilisation the norm.

Such  cities  exploit  and  harness  their 
innovation  potential.  This  involves  strong 
communication  and  connectivity  across 
divisions  or  silos  as  well  as  intense 
networking  internally  and  with  the  wider 
world. Such places foster entrepreneurship 
and  have  incentives  to  match,  whether 
these are focused on business opportunities 
or social, cultural and environmental aims. 
That entrepreneurial attitude is embedded 
across  city  institutions.  Finally,  the  most 
innovative  cities  have  a  physical  setting 
that  is  well-assembled.  There  is  history, 
character,  distinctiveness,  diversity  and 
vitality,  with  high  levels  of  liveability  and 
all the necessary support facilities – from 
health,  to  culture  to  public  spaces  –  that 
generate a rich civic life. 

There  are  innumerable  examples  of  in-
novative  projects  in  cities.  One  thinks  here 
of  Bilbao’s  public  space  management, 
Copenhagen’s  progress  in  driving  sustain-
ability, Helsinki’s use of inclusive and partici-
pative  data-sharing  initiatives,  Eindhoven’s 
leadership  in  generating  a  quadruple-helix 
its  development,  Reggio-
approach  to 
Emilia’s 
self-directed 
and  experientially  driven  educational  phil-
osophy,  Barcelona’s  approach  to  pushing 
intercultural  approaches  to  city-making 
and much more. The task for all cities is to 
become comprehensibly innovative. That is 
the challenge that this report sets. 

student-centred, 

  SETTING THE SCENE

23

A major driver to generate urban innovation 
is  procurement  –  a  strong  power  of  local 
government. To harness supplier innovation 
through procurement, the public sector can 
be  more  demanding  customers  by  setting 
innovation criteria. It can move away from 
the ‘race to the bottom’ by determining that 
the lowest price is not the main criterion in 
awarding contracts (8,9).

 human-centred.  This  is  a  right,  but  also 
involves  responsibilities,  obligations  and 
duties.  To  be  a  city  for  citizens  where 
citizens become city-makers and shapers, 
makers  and  co-creators  of  their  evolving 
urban  development  is  not  an  entitlement. 
It  means  being  an  active  citizen  concerned 
both with the local context and the urgency 
of addressing the global context.

Our response

Our  guiding  principle  is  that  cities  should 
leverage  the  opportunities  offered  by 
in  order  to  become  more 
innov ation 

Our  approach  is  systemic  as  only  then  can 
complex  problems  be  unscrambled  and  ap-
propriately dealt with. This means recognising 
expert  knowledge  as  well  as  that  of  citizens, 
but also breaking silos and assessing problems 
in an integrated manner from which it is easier 

Citizens as city-makers                              R
People                                    
Systemic approach                  
                                 Prosperity                                  
ernance                            Measureme
n-making and planning                                   long-term partn

Human-Centred city 
Rights and 
responsibilities

e
c
n
e
i
l
i
s
e
R

P
l
a
c
e

G
o
v

s
nt

cisio

e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
d
e

s
e
i
t
i
c
h
t
i

w
s
p
hi
s
er

Figure 1.  Integrated approach to human-centred cities

8 
9 

Landry, C., The Creative City: A Toolkit for Urban Innovators, Earthscan, 2000.
Hyams, J. and Landry, C., The Creative City Index: Measuring the Pulse of the City, Comedia, Gloucestershire, 2012.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
24

to find solutions and opportunities. The innov-
ation  arena  then  expands  to  a  variety  of 
well-connected and communicating actors – 
public, private, civic. 

We  acknowledge,  too,  that  generating 
knowledge  about  cities  involves  a  close 
partnership  between  citizens,  cities  and 
learning institutions. Therefore, the research 
agendas need to be jointly framed with cit-
ies as they do not want to be merely case 
studies; they want more direct involvement 
in shaping and implementing research agen-
das. There are already numerous examples 
of such deeper collaborations, such as the 
Amsterdam Smart City initiative where the 
city  explores  interdisciplinary  metropolitan 
solutions  in  close  collaboration  with  both 
public  and  private  partners  and  citizens.  It 
seeks to add value to research in practice, 
using the city of Amsterdam as a living lab. 
Another  is  the  Helsinki  Urban  Academy, 
where the city’s research department works 
with  the  University  of  Helsinki  and  Aalto 

University  to  identify  issues  and  help 
implement  solutions.  Indeed,  many  of 
Europe’s  larger  cities  have  well-funded 
research  entities  that  are  beginning  to 
operate in similar ways. 

We  highlight,  too,  that  the  city  is  our  joint 
commons  and  therefore  the  powerful  role 
civil  society  and  public  engagement  can 
play  in  helping  achieve  the  EU  mission 
for  cities.  That  implies  finding  means  for 
citizens  to  be  involved  in  the  creation,  re-
search  and  implementation  of  R&I  actions 
and  giving  citizen  science  a  higher  profile. 
The recent urban activism and new formats 
for  learning  and  sharing  that  are  evolving 
are all witness to this changing landscape.

Embedded,  therefore,  is  a  policy-learning 
loop  whereby  the  assessment  and  evalu-
ation of progress in making cities innovative 
leads  to  learning  that  fosters  further 
policy innovation.

  SETTING THE SCENE

25

The place dimension focuses on 
planning within planetary boundaries, 
with renewables and energy efficiency 
at its core. This includes decarbonising 
all our systems, rethinking food cycles, 
adaptive reuse, shared and smart 
mobility services, fostering the circular 
economy and embedding cradle-to-
cradle business models and creating 
a built environment that works for 
people in day-to-day terms as well as 
emotionally.

The prosperity dimension includes 
looking at the genesis, diffusion and 
absorption of innovation in a systemic 
way for cities to generate economic 
opportunities, jobs and development. It 
highlights an inclusive model of city-
level innovation by addressing skills and 
the unequal distribution of economic 
and employment opportunities. It looks 
at how disruptive new technologies 
can be harnessed to global agendas. 
It stresses the need to achieve full 
economic returns from mixity and 
diversity and models that are able 
to finance public services and urban 
policies. 

ąą

The resilience dimension establishes 
how the foundations for building 
resilience can be created based on 
vulnerability profiles, with mechanisms 
to avert shocks and stresses and that 
include building institutional capacity.

Structure of the report

ąą

This report first highlights three issues that 
cut  across  and  shape  the  overall  dynam-
ic  landscape  of  cities  and  their  potential 
futures:

ąą

ąą

ąą

the risk nexus and its dangers, which 
creates immense uncertainty;

the vortex effect, which strengthens 
some cities, and its obverse, shrinking 
cities or regions, and the urban dynamic 
with its local/global linkages;

ąą

the digitising world and technologies 
associated with it, especially artificial 
intelligence and its manifestations on 
everything, including ensuring digital 
rights and sovereignty of both citizens 
and cities.

Four main dimensions highlight big themes 
that  determine  the  urban  metabolism. 
These  must  be  seen  in  an  integrated  way. 
They are ‘people’, ‘place’, ‘prosperity’ and 
addressing those well makes achieving the 
fourth, ‘resilience’, easier. 

ąą

The people dimension looks at making 
the most of cultural diversity, building 
community and social bonding, 
creating an inclusive city for all to avert 
inequalities and spatial segregation, 
addressing demographic dynamics 
and fostering good living conditions 
and accessibility to services.  At the 
same time, it recognises the real and 
symbolic significance of tangible and 
intangible cultural heritage and the 
importance of individual and collective 
memory for the life of the city.

26

The world faces an urgent need to transition 
dramatically.  To  manage  the  transition  is 
a systemic challenge. It cannot be tackled 
piece by piece. It can only be addressed in 
an integrated way. This is the task to which 
Horizon Europe and within that, its innova-
tive cities initiatives, must respond.

Finally, two cross-cutting dimensions com-
plete the loop. They are:

ąą

governance fit for purpose for our age 
and that is adapted and aligned to the 
aims of global priorities and agendas; 

ąą measurement that proposes 

benchmarks driven both by the indicator 
set established through SDG 11 and by 
looking at how an integrated innovative 
urban ecosystem can be evaluated. It 
stresses the power of big data that can 
monitor both the ongoing dynamics 
of urban systems but also the need 
to understand and assess trends as 
well as how the trade-offs in moving 
towards the transition can be judged. 

FORCES 
SHAPING 
URBAN 
CHANGE

28

Three forces both shape and threaten cities’ 
potential  to  become  and  be  innovative  to 
reach  their  wider  aim  of  being  inclusively 
sustainable.  They  affect  all  other  issues 
addressed  in  ‘The  human-centred  city’. 
These forces are: the risk nexus; the shifting 
dynamics  between  large  and  smaller  cities 
and  between  those  globally  connected 
and  those  more  adrift;  and  lastly,  the  all-
pervasive  impact  of  a  digitising  world  and 
the technologies related to and enabled by it.

The risk nexus creates deep uncertainties. 
It  is  a  profound  problem  as  inextricably 
interwoven crises interact with the need to 
respond with urgency. Big isolated problems 
become a massive, fragile one as we try to 
navigate its complexities and to counteract 
its  vulnerabilities.  Within  this,  uncertainty 
has  grown  dramatically,  and  traditional 
planning  models  focused  on  ‘predict  and 
provide’ are showing their weakness.

It is tempting to think that today’s cities are 
too big, and too clever, to fail. Cities possess 
immense  capacity  to  adapt.  Just  as  they 

have always done in the past, they are con-
stantly evolving to meet the rapidly expand-
ing  opportunities  of  a  globalised  economy. 
However, such is the scope, scale and pace 
of  change  in  a  world  of  7.7  billion  people 
that it now threatens to exceed the capacity 
of even the best-managed cities to adapt to 
the extent of the forces we have unleashed.

These  are  not  unmanageable  stresses. 
Essential  knowledge,  technologies  and  ap-
propriate engineering skills already exist or 
are within reach. There is also no fundamen-
tal economic barrier to managing them. Yet 
there  are  substantial  barriers  to  allocating 
the  necessary  capital  to  the  right  socially 
driven objectives in an effective and timely 
way. It is the complex and dynamic nature 
of the relationship between the components 
of this risk nexus that is not yet well under-
stood.  This  presents  increasing  difficulties 
for  governments.  Managing  these  inter-
actions well requires that governments at all 
levels, from the local to the global, achieve 
a transformation in their policy coherence.

  FORCES SHAPING URBAN CHANGE

29

The  institutional  structures  governments 
currently have in place tend to tackle each 
problem  area  separately.  Typically,  energy, 
water,  food,  climate,  poverty  and  diversity 
are  each  dealt  with  by  different  a  govern-
ment  department  or  agency.  Each  has  a 
separate constellation of supporting profes-
sionals  and  cluster  of  related  businesses. 
This significantly increases the risk of policy 
cannibalism as the solutions to one problem 
serve simply to add to the difficulties of an-
other. Governance structures have not kept 
up to date (10).

The  main  R&I  required  is  to  understand 
these  interacting  dynamic  forces  and  their 
complex  structures  and  how  policy-driven 
pathways can be created and implemented. 
Complexity  itself  is  a  problem  of  major 
proportions.

The  landscape  of  cities  shows  there  are 
18 EU cities of over one million inhabitants, 
with  strong  impacts  on  their  hinterlands. 
Increasingly  they  are  metro-regions.  An 
additional  43  cities  have  over  500 000  in-
habitants,  with  85  between  250 000  and 
500 000  inhabitants.  Significantly,  nearly 
700  cities  have  under  250 000  and  over 
50 000  inhabitants.  This  makes  the  EU  a 
place  of  smaller  cities  within  which  a  few 
cities  dominate  as  transactional  hubs  that 
contribute  to  shaping  the  strategic  global 
economic,  political  and  cultural  agendas. 
They  are  intensely  connected  into  the 
global system.

The  right  blend  of  influence  and  power 
makes  these  few  European  cities  suck  in 
opportunity,  resources,  expertise  and  tal-
ent as well as deep global connections. Their 
centrality generates a vortex effect, making 

them  attractive  and  desirable  to  differing 
audiences  by  drawing  in  power  brokers, 
industrialists,  shoppers,  tour-
investors, 
ists, property developers, thought leaders, 
strategists,  artists  and  ordinary  people. 
This creates a self-reinforcing resonance. 

The  innovative  potential  and  prosperity  of 
cities depends increasingly on their capacity 
to  be  part  of  global  networks  of  capital, 
skills,  knowledge  and  trade  (of  goods  and 
services). Local success depends on global 
connectivity. Unavoidably, every city region 
of real ambition wants to move up the value 
chain  and  capture  centrality  for  them-
selves.  This  is  why  they  are  continuously 
searching for global niche opportunities as 
well as linking to the centres of significance. 
Within this force field, many cities struggle, 
especially  those  with  weaker  governance 
systems, institutions and strategic capabil-
ities. They are mostly shrinking and ageing 
as their previous roles in a less-globalised 
world disappear.  

R&I  actions  include:  first,  to  explore  how 
the  overall  drawing  power  of  cities  oper-
ates,  which  is  an  accumulation  of  inter-
active movements of talent attraction and 
retention, accrual and leakage of resources 
and  power  as  well  as  the  qualities  of  at-
tractiveness and the drivers of value chain 
upgrading  and  linkage  creation;  second,  to 
investigate  the  scope  for  smaller  places  to 
reposition themselves, especially as quality-
of-life  issues  move  more  strongly  to  the 
fore. This repositioning creates new poten-
tial for second-, third- and fourth-tier cities, 
as  larger  metro  areas  become  more  dys-
functional and digitisation allows people to 
be easily connected.

10  Burke, T. and Landry, C., The Fragile City & the Risk Nexus, Comedia, Gloucestershire, 2014.

30

The digitised city is already with us, but it 
needs  a  jointly  created  vision  of  where  to 
go  next.  Digitisation  represents  a  tectonic 
shift  of  an  immense  force.  Its  devices  are 
changing  society  and  social  life,  culture, 
levels  of  connectivity  and  the  economy 
as  well  as  cities.  They  are  both  liberating 
and potentially invasive, with unpredictable 
effects  on  different  social,  ethnic  and 
economic groups and our sovereignty.

Steadily and then suddenly, as if in the blink 
of an eye, the ‘anytime, anyplace, anywhere’ 
phenomenon – enabled by digitisation – is 
now changing how we interact with space, 
place  and  time  and  whose  deeper  effects 
have  only  just  begun.  There  is  excitement 
and concern in equal measure. 

The  impacts  and  influence  of  the  digital 
age are vastly stronger than some tinkering 
on  top  of  business  as  usual.  They  will  be 
as  powerful  as  the  climactic  changes  that 
swept through our world with the industrial 
revolution  200  years  ago.  This  movement 
concerns us all, and the open data agenda, 
smart  city  ideas  or  evolving  collaborative 
governance models are just some responses 
to this bigger dynamic unfolding. 

Undeniably,  untold  promises  and  opportun-
ities  to  improve  our  quality  of  life  are  pos-
sible  by  making  life  more  citizen-centric, 
more  local,  more  convenient  or  more  effi-
cient  and  by  creating  smart  solutions  to 
curtail  energy  over-use  or  crafting  ingen-
ious ways to enable seamless connectivity. 
Filling the city with self-regulating sensors 
brings  real-time  feedback  loops  into  their 
own.  Yet  the  ecological  footprint  of  digital 
technologies,  the  combination  of  big  data, 

sensors,  and  5G  mobile  infrastructure  will 
have  a  major  impact  on  the  energy  con-
sumption of cities.  

The  positives  mesh,  as  with  all  new  tech-
nologies, with dangers encapsulated in the 
phrase  ‘surveillance  capitalism’  (11).  Here, 
being  controlled  by  algorithms  or  the  ever 
watchful  eye  of  surveillance  and  facial 
recognition,  suffering  overload  of  constant 
data cascading over us and unemployment 
created  by  the  power  of  intelligent  robots 
are  the  most  pressing  dangers.  A  crucial 
question is also who owns the robot as it is 
the latter that are taking jobs.  

The  sophisticated  merging  of  computing 
power and vast archives of data will enable 
robots  to  perform  any  job  that  has  a  rou-
tine  component  and  will  increasingly  hol-
low  out  middle-income  employment  –  im-
pacting a group that so far has been largely 
unscathed. 

Digitisation  has  reduced  the  cost  of  shar-
ing  information  and  coordinating  activities 
across  large  distances.  In  response  to  this 
change,  some  economic  activities  in  ad-
vanced economies have been relocated to-
wards low-cost locations initially inside and 
now increasingly more outside the EU. This 
has  involved  a  profound  re-organisation 
of  economic  activities  along  global  value 
chains, changing the global economic land-
scape and the relative position of all cities. 

The current phase of the process of digitisation 
coupled with increased robotisation is moving 
to a completely new level, with the separation 
of  labour  from  labour  services.  Workers  do 
not need to be physically located in the same 

11  Zuboff, Shoshana, The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of 

Power, PublicAffairs, 2019.

  FORCES SHAPING URBAN CHANGE

31

place where their services are being offered, 
creating  new  patterns  of  spatial  disconnect 
between production and consumption.

Technology is not an end in itself or a rigid 
force with a predetermined direction. What 
shape  it  takes  depends  on  how  we  design 
technology based on positive social object-
ives  so  that  digital  technologies  facilitate 
an equitable and democratic society, where 
basic  liberties  and  rights  are  protected, 
where strong public institutions function in 
the  public  interest  and  where  people  have 
a  say  in  how  things  work.  Issues  of  con-
cern are a lack of control of (personal) data 
and the absence of privacy as a result of: a 
digital space increasingly being governed by 
a handful of platform providers; a misguid-
ed perception that the digital space is only 
a marketplace, so marginalising the role of 
public  institutions  and  other  non-market 
actors;  the  monopolisation  of  the  internet 
by large and primarily non-EU corporations, 
leading to loss of sovereign oversight of our 
digital space and economy; the deterioration 
of online public debate due to the increase 
in misinformation and the reinforcement of 
filter bubbles; a lack of democratic oversight 

over the digital space, leading to mistrust 
in  the  democratic  process  overall;  and 
finally a lack of EU-based digital develop-
ment and service delivery, leading to a loss 
of  innovation  and  opportunities  for  social 
and  economic  development  in  line  with 
European values.

R&I actions required include understanding 
the  social,  economic,  political  and  public 
policy impacts of digitisation (and robotics) 
on  the  existence,  rise  and  decline  of  cities 
and  their  sustainable  future.  Second,  they 
require  exploring  alternatives  to  the  dom-
inant technological and business models – 
alternatives that are open and collaborative 
rather  than  closed  and  competitive.  Here, 
digital social innovation (DSI) and the work 
of the Commons Network present a radical 
alternative, focused on using open and col-
laborative technologies to put people at the 
heart  of  how  modern  cities  develop.  Last, 
they require understanding what impact in-
novation can have in both involving citizens 
in decision-making as well as fostering be-
haviour  change  to  address  sustainability 
goals in this new context. 

PEOPLE

34

‘What is the city but the 
people?’ (12) A city is a blend of 
people with all their cultures, 
complexities and differences, 
their hopes and fears and 
psychological make up. A city 
without people is an empty shell. 
A people focus looks at the city 
from within a 360º perspective. 
This lens helps seeing the needs 
and priorities of differing groups 
– the young, the old, women, 
men, differing ethnicities and 
origins, abilities and lifestyles. 
Only when these are aligned do 
cities work well. 

Why are we dealing 
with this issue?

There has been a dramatic shift towards the 
human perspective in cities, with a renewed 
stress on the lived experience of people in 
place  and  their  sense  of  belonging,  iden-
tity  and  civic  pride  as  well  as  their  desire 
to  be  more  active  participants  in  shaping, 
making  and  co-creating  their  evolving  city. 
A human-centred city is concerned with the 
emotional,  mental,  physical  and  economic 
well-being of its citizens. It is a place where 
people feel they belong and so invite others 
to make things happen, be creative, be so-
cial  and  move  towards  good  health,  and 
where  the  landscape  has  been  designed 

at a  human scale so as to be experienced 
through the main five human senses 

This refocus on the human being responds 
to the sense that people have been lost in 
planning, designing and making cities, where 
largely  there  was  a  focus  on  the  physical 
infrastructure,  on  the  car,  on  technologies. 
This has left us with a legacy of cities that 
are too often soulless, ugly and difficult to 
navigate and that lack human scale. The re-
sponse has been varied. It includes: the New 
Urban  Agenda  (UN2016)  and  its  European 
complement  the  Pact  of  Amsterdam  (EU 
2016),  UNESCO’s  Quito  contribution  the 
Culture:  Urban  Future  report,  Creative 
Europe’s  ‘Human  Cities’  initiative  (13),  the 
United Kingdom innovation agency NESTA’s 
programme  (14),  a  wide  variety  of  city  vi-
sions or plans with ‘human’ in the title (15, 
16, 17), the shift in design to human-centred 
thinking and academic work such as that at 
Aalto  in  Helsinki  (18)  and  publications  such 
as Cities for people (19) or Seeing Like a City 
(20). The human-centred notion is becoming 
all-pervasive. Its time has come.

The  human-centred  notion  is  implied  in 
H2020’s  2018-2020  work  programme 
‘Europe  in  a  changing  world:  Inclusive,  in-
novative  and  reflective  societies’  but  not 
explicitly expressed. This report aims to go 
beyond simply introducing this priority and 
places it at the core of Horizon Europe pro-
gramme for cities.

12  Shakespeare, Coriolanus.
13  http://humancities.eu/ 
14  https://www.nesta.org.uk/feature/10-people-centred-smart-city-initiatives/
15  https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2016/10/unesco-report-a-human-centred-city-is-a-culture-

centred-space/

16  https://www.greeninstitute.org.au/events/making-canberra-human-centred/
17  https://www.ideo.org/approach
18  https://www.aalto.fi/aalto-living-platform
19  Gehl, J., Cities for people, Island Press, 2013.
20  Amin, A. and Thrift, Nigel, Seeing like a City, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2016.

  PEOPLE

35

Cities  are  places  where  difference  meets 
and that diversity often has countless divi-
dends. But they are also competitive arenas, 
where  social  and  spatial  segregation,  div-
isions of rich and poor, social exclusion and 
tensions can erupt. Social, cultural and eco-
nomic  capital  are  unevenly  distributed  as 
are affordable housing and services, access 
to  green  infrastructure,  health  and  educa-
tional facilities or the cultural offer. The rise 
of the precariat has moved apace and with 
it,  restricted  opportunities  to  be  employed 
so exacerbating the unequal exposure and 
access  to  urban  amenities.  Individualism, 
segregated diversity and inequality emerge 
as  embedded,  inherent  features  of  the 
urban landscape.

Logic of the intervention 

People  want  a  combination  of  qualities 
from their city: anchorage, a sense of the 
familiar, the more constant, shared cultural 
heritage and tradition; possibility, the abil-
ity to have choices, options and a ‘can do’ 

environment;  connections,  which  are  links 
to  their  family  networks,  more  extensive 
groups  and  the  wider  world;  conditions  to 
flourish  so  that  they  can  become  the  best 
they  can  be;  and  finally  the  occasional  in-
spiration, which can range from spiritual to 
cultural experiences (21).

To  achieve  the  above  aims  and  to  cope 
with  the  emerging  world  means  providing 
the conditions for people to be and become 
capable,  competent  active  citizens  alert  to 
the dangers and potentials of the evolving 
world. A major pre-condition involves over-
coming many obstacles to ensure that par-
ticipation  and  engagement  is  possible  for 
all, especially when easily accessible lifelong 
learning opportunities are present and with-
in that a strong focus on digital literacy. R&I 
actions  need  to  explore  what  has  worked 
and under what conditions, and within which 
areas innovative approaches are necessary 
and what they might look like.

21  Landry, C., The Civic City in a Nomadic World, nai020, Rotterdam, 2017.

36

Priorities and R&I actions 
for people 

Several  major  challenges  demand 
urgent  R&I  actions  to  create  human-
centred  cities  and  are  highlighted  as 
the following five R&I priorities:

1.  making the most of cultural 

diversity

2.  building community and 

social bonding and avoiding 
fragmentation
creating an inclusive city for all so 
as to avert inequalities

3. 

4.  addressing demographic 

5. 

dynamics, 
fostering good living conditions 
and accessible services.

Making the most of diversity

Cities  are  becoming  increasingly  multi-
cultural and ethnically diverse. People from 
different  origins  and  backgrounds  concen-
trate  in  cities,  creating  a  mix  of  cultures, 
race and origins. Diversity and intercultural 

urbanity are praised and thrive in some cit-
ies.  However,  they  do  not  in  many,  where 
that  mixture  is  failing  to  produce  social 
cohesion and cultural interchange. A sense 
of  community  and  belonging  barely  exist. 
Interethnic  intolerance  and  conflicts  shape 
the  life  of  many  places,  driving  to  terror-
ism as its most extreme manifestation. The 
result in cities is that enclaves, as distinct-
ive and interesting as they can be, remain 
strong and are growing. 

Top-down prescriptions will not work in ad-
dressing these issues. An intercultural lens 
provides a means to explore differences and 
re-assess policy, strategies and plans, from 
physical design to service provision to cul-
tural programming. A policy shift is required 
that  acknowledges  the  multicultural  per-
spective  and  differences,  bringing  differing 
communities together and focusing on what 
they can jointly do. This is the intercultural 
approach that goes beyond equal opportun-
ities and respect for existing cultural differ-
ences  to  pluralist  transformations  of  civic 
culture, institutions and public space.

  PEOPLE

37

R&I  actions  are  needed  to  understand  the 
bonds that make cohesive communities out 
of our differences, identifying the drivers of 
integration,  investigating  how  prejudice  in-
fluences behaviour and how mutual under-
standing  between  different  groups  can  be 
fostered. The impact of intercultural projects 
aiming  to  improve  social  cohesion  needs 
to  be  assessed  and  better  disseminated. 
Second, innovative zones of encounter need 
to  be  created.  These  can  be  both  physical 
places  and  activity  programmes  such  as 
those using art or drama, as well as enablers 
of  participation  across  decision-making 
structures and all walks of life, from work to 
education and to free time. Third, research 
needs  to  identify  methods  to  enhance  the 
diversity  dividend  that  highlight  the  poten-
tial power of intercultural exchange, sharing, 
mixing  and  reciprocal  understanding  and 
provide  information  on  how  hybridity  and 
ethnic  or  cultural  differences  might  boost 
urban creativity and innovation.

Cities  are  the  principal  destination  for  mi-
grant settlement. The recent refugee crisis 
has  exacerbated  tensions  in  Europe.  The 
dilemmas  and  reactions  to  increased  mi-
gration  flows  are  well-rehearsed  and  re-
searched, as are the conditions of first and 
second-generation and recent incomers’ ex-
periences. Immigrants tend to be worse off 
than the native-born in most fields, such as 
access to the labour market or opportunity, 
educational  achievement,  material  living 
conditions, cultural rights or being stigma-
tised. Children lack supporting environments 
at home and parents lack skills, time or re-
sources  to  support  children  through  their 
educational  experiences,  resulting  in  per-
sistent disadvantage. Especially worrying is 

the fact that in the EU, youth unemployment 
among  native-born  immigrant  offspring 
is  almost  50 %  higher,  and  in  some  coun-
tries three times higher, than among young 
people with native-born parents (22). Those 
employed are twice as likely as native-born 
peers to live below the poverty line. 

R&I  actions  should  focus  on  exploring  the 
educational needs of migrants and creating 
learning environments where they can make 
the  most  of  their  potential.  They  should 
them  aim  to  understand  the  perceptions 
of different ethnic communities and create 
pathways to integrate their approaches and 
values as integration is not simply accepting 
other  (predominantly  white)  cultures.  This 
approach  includes  tailoring  learning  strat-
egies  toward  the  needs  of  different  popu-
lations,  rather  than  importing  educational 
or cultural models that only work for some. 
Lastly, actions should identify ways to foster 
intercultural  and  multilingual  learning,  so 
creating opportunities to meet aspirations. 

Building community 
and social bonding 

Rapid urbanisation has fractured traditional 
bonds of community. This is not helped by 
built environments full of cars and concrete. 
Loneliness is a rising crisis in the middle of 
this multitude of people, leading to anxiety, 
depression  and  other  mental  distress.  The 
desire for and necessity of community has 
not  changed,  but  how  it  is  expressed  has. 
The  digital  world  makes  it  less  bound  to 
fixed  physical  spaces  of  traditional  com-
munity  limited  to  family  and  a  few  out-
siders.  The  digital  sphere  can  recreate 

22  https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264234024-3-en.

pdf?expires=1558870372&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=82A1543CCE98C35BD1B8830FA2CD7315

38

some of the social bonds, connections and 
interactions across distance and at a more 
local  level.  Yet  communication  in  the  flesh 
gives us touch, feel, tone of voice, body lan-
guage,  facial  expression  and  visual  cues. 
Our social and our tribal nature and our in-
group and out-group instincts are in tension 
when our world continues to shrink and our 
cities  become  more  mixed,  more  nomad-
ic  and  more  diverse.  Uncertainty  makes 
people  and  places  cradle  themselves  back 
into their tribal instincts and sharp distinc-
tions between a ‘them’ and an ‘us’ emerge. 
Fear is triggered by the fractured sense of 
belonging and community. People feel over-
whelmed  and  insecure  by  the  disruptions 
and speed of change. 

Much  has  been  researched  on  community 
life, social innovations and creating physical 
and social senses of place, but the problems 
noted continue to shape city life. R&I actions 
need  to  put  more  emphasis  on  experi-
menting  with  further  methods  to  enhance 
the collective urban experience to reconnect 
fragmented  communication  and  nurture 
common events such as festivals, cul tural, 
sporting  and  spectacular  events  where 
citizens  can  share  experiences  together. 
Further  actions  should  catalogue  and  ad-
dress the crisis of loneliness in cities across 
all age groups and find ways to counteract 
their negative consequences. Crucially, they 
should explore how enhancing living condi-
tions can avoid gentrification. 

The  social  bonding  experience  and  social 
needs in cities differ according to the spa-
tial  setting  and  throughout  people’s  life 
cycle,  as  well  as  according  to  age,  class 
and income factors. The inner-city rings are 
often in transition, a mix of decay, changing 
uses and gentrification and a cosmopolitan 
atmosphere,  which  is  perhaps  their  main 
strength. The outer urban areas are mostly 
residential, which determines how social life 
unfolds as does the experience of edge-of-
town living. Blending people and places for 
gathering  are  increasingly  crucial  to  build 
the  exchanges  that  ultimately  shape  civic 
life, whether with friends, professional net-
works or outsiders. 

Technologies  can  also  help  to  strength-
en  citizenship.  Movements  like  DSI,  Smart 
Citizens  and  citizen  science  create  oppor-
tunities for people to organise themselves, 
create  common  value  and  participate  in 
city-making. Co-creation, makerspaces and 
urban  labs  combine  real  interactions  and 
the development of 21st century skills.

An inclusive city that averts 
inequalities

Inclusive  cities  inspire  their  citizens  to  be 
not just a resident but an actor, a stakehold-
er – to be empowered. Only then can their 
motivations be triggered and their right to 
the  city  blended  with  taking  responsibil-
ities.  However,  the  socio-economic  divide 
is  complex  and  structurally  anchored  and 
deep. It affects cities’ ability to build an in-
clusive society. In Europe, divides have been 
rising  in  the  past  decades.  The  long-term 
trend  of  increasing  income  inequality  is  at 
its  highest  ever  and  not  shifting  with  eco-
nomic  recovery.  Inequalities  differ  across 
the  countries  of  Europe,  as  do  unemploy-
ment  rates.  The  global  financial  crisis  has 
exacerbated  these  trends.  There  are  close 
links between socio-economic backgrounds, 
achieved  income,  wealth  distribution,  edu-
cational  performance,  cultural  skills  and 
health outcomes.

  PEOPLE

39

Education can drive social mobility but also 
reproduce and reinforce existing social div-
ides: more educated people are more like-
ly to self-improve. The less educated have 
more temporary, part-time, lower-paid and 
routine jobs, as do migrants or women, and 
these jobs are more likely to be automated. 
This strengthens the low-skills trap as low-
er  middle-class  people  have  fewer  assets 
to invest in themselves and proportionately 
more  debt,  which  lead  to  fewer  opportun-
ities to develop a career. Disconnected low-
skilled  youth  are  at  risk  of  being  perman-
ently  left  behind.  Work  is  the  precondition 
to make more of oneself and to avoid social 
exclusion. However, it is not equally access-
ible, so gender, ethnic and origin imbalances 
continue and high levels of unemployment 
persist,  which  are  both  personally  and  so-
cially damaging. This all wastes capacities 
and does not tap into the hidden reservoir 
of potential and talent in society.

Huge  R&I  efforts  are  needed  to  bridge 
educational  and  income  gaps.  Much  has 
already  been 
in  addressing 
invested 
these  issues,  but  inequality  and  social 

traps  persist.  Inter-disciplinary  and  multi-
dimensional R&I actions that combine spa-
tial, economic and social interventions and 
cultural  understanding  are  most  urgently 
needed. Imaginative methods and actions 
have to be explored and assessed to cre-
ate  jobs  and  give  marginalised  residents 
the  opportunity  to  enjoy  the  benefits  of 
economic  growth.  These  would  combine 
preventive and curative solutions to escape 
low-skill traps, including developing the soft 
and  transferable  capacities  necessary  to 
help the less favoured as well as proposing 
how to scale up solutions that have worked 
in some places. Part of this research is to re-
view  both  the  role  of  ‘champions’  that  can 
act as changemakers in deprived neighbour-
hoods and the impact of inter-generational 
methods of integration. Finally, efforts are 
needed to assess how decentralising de-
cision-making  and  power  and  giving  voice 
to  traditionally  excluded  groups  and  their 
community  initiatives  strengthens  cap-
acities at local level and whether this helps 
people climb up social and economic 
ladders.

40

The dilemmas 
of demography 

Cities  need  a  good  balance  between  age 
cohorts to replenish the work force, there-
by providing the conditions for productivity, 
economic  health  and  overall  well-being. 
There is a link between age and productivity 
as without human capital, economic vigour 
is stunted. Projections for 2050 are worrying 
and at times referred to as the ‘demograph-
ic suicide’ (23). The EU-28 could stagnate by 
then at 500 million people, with a dramatic 
loss in the 20-64 age bracket (49 million) 
and  substantial  gains  among  those  over 
65. Those active workers will agglomerate 
more in hub cities, leaving swathes of de-
clining cities with older age profiles. The pic-
ture changes dramatically in other parts of 
the world. In India, that younger cohort will 
grow  by  around  350  million  while  Africa’s 
population will grow by one billion, of which 
130  million  are  from  North  Africa.  This 
demographic time bomb will exert immense 
pressures on climate and force migrations. 
At  the  same  time,  European  ageing  popu-
lations will demand younger active people. 
Migration  will  be  less  contentious  in  host 
countries,  especially  when  the  economy 

can absorb people. However, tensions might 
escalate  when  economies  stop  growing. 
Denial is not an option so radically different 
policy approaches are needed. 

Europe’s  population  is  on  the  move.  The 
search  for  jobs  and  the  famous  ‘war  for 
talent’  shapes  movements  across  Europe. 
leaving  Southern 
Younger  people  are 
Europe, especially its rural areas, in search 
of  work  in  urban  areas  of  the  north  west 
– a possible omen of extended, continuing 
decline. Capital and strong secondary cities 
are more likely to have a younger popula-
tion than their country, while Europe’s rural 
areas tend to have older populations as do 
poorer economies. These factors interrelate, 
as people choose to have fewer children for 
economic reasons and those of child-bearing 
age have left declining areas. 

R&I  actions  need  to 
investigate  and 
provide solutions to the impacts of ageing 
on  wealth  creation  and  how  they  can  be 
mitigated.  Additionally,  the 
influence 
of  and  on  Europe  of  its  global  position 

23  https://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/european-issues/0462-europe-2050-demographic-suicide

  PEOPLE

41

when  addressing  climate,  refugees  and 
demographic  issues  in  an  integrated  way 
is  poorly  analysed.  Finally,  research  and 
policies  are  needed  to  understand  and 
address  the  precise  dynamics  of  who 
and  where  people  are  over-  or  under-
represented  in  the  workforce  in  different 
countries, as well as population differences 
between urban and rural areas. 

Well-being for all

Well-being is an integrated concept covering 
economic, social, environmental, democratic, 
emotional and personal dimensions such as 
mental  health.  It  involves  self-acceptance, 
personal  growth,  purpose  in  life,  mastery 
over  one’s  environment,  individual  auton-
omy and positive relations with others. The 
urban  setting  creates  the  conditions  within 
which  well-being  emerges  or  suffers.  Here 
the  natural  environment,  living  conditions, 
the planning, availability and accessibility of 
facilities – from parks to retailing and culture 
to care services for all ages – are important. 
Additionally,  having  one’s  voice  heard  and 
feeling one is part of making and shaping the 
city is crucial as is trusting those who make 
decisions, whether in the public or private 
sphere.  Together,  these  are  the  precon-
ditions  for  having  higher  life  satisfaction, 
feeling well and being happier. 

Several  factors  affect  well-being  in  cities. 
Unequal distribution of resources engenders 
negative downstream effects, from crime to 
lack of care for the environment or disruptive 
attitudes or behaviours. Mental health issues 
are  rising,  especially  in  cities,  and  conver-
ging evidence reveals that growing up in the 
city doubles the risk of developing health 

problems  beyond  those  from  the  environ-
mental causes of noise or pollution later in 
life. Bad eating habits are also both a cause 
and an effect of stresses on well-being as 
the ingredients of junk food are addictive. 

The  embedded  and  increasing  inequalities 
in provision and uneven access to housing, 
healthcare,  social  services,  care  facilities 
or  cultural  activities  within  cities  remains 
a  contentious  issue  as  they  create  dif-
ferences  in  people’s  living  conditions  and 
their  health  prospects  across  and  within 
population groups.

Housing  and  its  affordability  play  a  cru-
cial  role  in  people’s  sense  of  well-being. 
Here,  new  models  of  ownership,  finan-
cing,  organising  and  managing  are  grow-
ing  apace  to  shape  market  forces  so  that 
they  improve  opportunities  for  cities  to  be 
better balanced. 

There are two under-acknowledged issues. 
First  is  the  dramatic  cultural  shift  in 
changing knowledge transmission patterns. 
For the first time in history, new technology 
means that the young are teaching the old 
rather than the reverse. Historically, young 
and old connected naturally but current life-
styles are breaking these links. Generational 
fractures  are  exacerbating  with  more  no-
madic  lifestyles  as  family  and  friends  live 
further  apart,  creating  less  opportunity  for 
mixing across the ages. This requires psych-
ological  adjustment  on  the  part  of  older 
people. 

Second, there is a deep, overall psychologic-
al  impact  on  people  of  the  vast  changes 
happening in the world at escalating speed. 
Periods  of  history  involving  mass  trans-

42

formation, such as the Industrial Revolution 
or the technological revolution of the past 
fifty  years,  can  produce  confusion.  Partly, 
there  is  a  sense  of  liberation  given  the 
possibilities, yet it is combined with a feel-
ing  of  being  swept  along  by  events  and 
feeling out of control, especially given the 
impending climate change crisis. Absorbing 
the  implications  of  this  requires  psycho-
logical  adjustment.  It  makes  people  feel 
insecure  and  uncertain  about  what  to  do 
and  how  their  individual  actions  can  help 
avert the growing problems (24).

R&I  actions  should  explore 
integrated 
methods  and  examples  to  develop  well-
being agendas cutting across departments 
responsible  for  housing,  physical  planning, 
education,  culture,  economic  development 
and  social  protection,  aside  from  those 
involved  with  health.  Within  this,  research 

is  needed on how to deal with psychological 
stressors  of  urban  and  global  change 
and  the  factors  that  reduce  it.  Cities 
are  planned  and  made  within  a  limited 
perspective,  mostly  that  of  middle-aged 
men.  Further  actions  are  needed  to 
understand  well-being  needs  across  age 
groups,  backgrounds  and  lifestyles  and 
how  to  design  cities  through  different 
lenses,  such  as  cities  seen  through  the 
eyes  of  women,  children  or  older  people. 
That  research  needs  to  see  whether  this 
approach  harnesses  communities’  creative 
potential  and  capacities  to  enhance  well-
being.  It  also  needs  to  investigate  the 
psychological 
reassessing 
impacts  of 
intergenerational  connections  and  what 
means  can  achieve  better  community 
cohesion  and  quality  of  life  for  all  ages, 
including  what 
initiatives  can  create 
senses  of  community  or  belonging  and 
decrease the costs of socialising. 

24 

https://www.urbanpsyche.org/

  PEOPLE

43

Culture  has  also  a  major  role  to  play 
in  the  envisioning  and  the  creation 
of  the  future  of  cities.  Co-creation, 
design  of  human-centred  technologies 
and  applications,  critical  making  and 
fostering  interdisciplinary  collaboration 
are necessities for being able to deal with 
the  complex  transformation  with  which 
cities are confronted.  

R&I  actions 
involving  multidimension-
al  teams  should  assess  how  to  develop 
affordable  healthy  lifestyles.  This  involves 
exploring how the urban form and physical 
structure  of  cities  shape  health  outcomes 
and  what  physical  environments,  such  as 
particular forms of public space and activ-
ities  within  them,  foster  a  feeling  of  ease, 
a  sense  of  seamless  connectivity  or  being 
closer  to  nature  as  so  promote  healthier 
places.  Research  should  explore  Europe’s 
ageing  population  from  a  perspective  of 
their potential and examine relevant social 
innovations.  Simultaneously,  in  an  innova-
tive  way,  it  should  look  at  specific  needs, 
from urban planning to new forms of hous-
ing  to  transport  or  forms  of  healthcare, 
including  assessing  the  impact  of  cultural 
activities on healthcare or possibilities from 
artificial intelligence.

A final coda: culture can play a good role in 
all the issues covered by this people section. 
The  best  cultural  policies,  strategies  and 
actions  combine  a  focus  on  enlightenment, 
empowerment,  entertainment,  employability 
and  creating  economic  impact.  More  people, 
more organisations, more towns, cities, regions 
and  countries  for  more  reasons  are  finding 
that culture and its associated creativity have 
something for them, especially in the context 
of creating a sense of belonging and place, in 
helping to trigger renewal, in providing work, 
in breaking down prejudice, in engaging hard-
to-reach and vulnerable people. Participation 
in  culture  in  particular  has  vast  impacts  on 
people’s sense of self and confidence.

PLACE

46

The place dimension refers 
to the physical city and all 
the processes whereby cities 
marshal, consume and process 
resources. Cities and their peri-
urban areas are a combination 
of hard and soft infrastructures. 
They are a metabolism and 
a system of systems. They 
both are man-made physical 
infrastructures and blend with 
natural elements as well as the 
activities that give them life 
or act as its nervous system. 
Such activities can be inflows of 
construction materials, water, 
food products and fuels, as 
well as the outflows of finished 
products, emissions and waste, 
discharged into the water, the 
air or the soil. 

Spaces  become  places  when  they  are  im-
bued  with  meaning  by  their  citizens,  by 
their  history,  their  culture  and  purpose  or 
an ambition of what decision-makers want 
them  to  be  in  the  future.  That  ambition 
today  must  include  becoming  carbon  neu-
tral.  Places  are  planned  in  multiple  ways 
in  terms  of  functions,  practicalities,  space, 

design  and  aesthetics.  It  is  the  ambition 
and  strategic  vision  that  guides  their  tra-
jectory.  Traditionally,  planning  for  cities 
was  seen  largely  as  land-use  planning  fo-
cused mostly on technical aspects, such as 
where   functions,  from  housing  to  retailing 
to  waste  facilities,  were  to  be  located  or 
the heights of buildings or widths of roads. 
This determined how the various planning 
elements fitted together.

Why we are dealing 
with this issue?

The planning paradigm is in the process of 
dramatic  change  as  the  notion  of  place-
based  planning  and  placemaking  has 
emerged. The future shape of cities is de-
termined by concentrating on the look and 
feel of places, their form and their charac-
ter instead of focusing only on conventional 
categories of land use. This new approach 
focuses on how all aspects of planning and 
their associated needs and priorities can be 
embedded into places and fit together in an 
integrated and systematic way. 

  PLACE

47

Three  issues  now  drive  and  frame  overall 
planning  and  design  and  include  new  lan-
guage.  The  first  is  sustainability  and  re-
silience.  Here  rethinking  resource  use  and 
cradle-to-cradle thinking are examples, as is 
the  attempt  to  move  towards  carbon  neu-
trality. The second is the liveability, quality of 
life, well-being and happiness agenda. This 
is  planning  for  better  places  to  live,  whose 
criteria  include  environmental  quality,  re-
duced levels of crime and increased safety, 
walkability, increasing and improving public 
space and encouraging greater public trans-
port use to reduce the dominance of the car, 
along with health provision, access to shops 
and services, recreational facilities and cul-
tural activities. It is the human-centred ap-
proach.  Finally,  the  equity  agenda  focuses 
on averting spatial segregation, using plan-
ning regimes to foster affordability or avoid 
gentrification pressures and to promote so-
cial inclusion, including through innovations.

These priorities increasingly shape the look, 
feel  and  operations  of  the  city,  from  the 
micro  to  the  macro.  Green  roofs  are  one 
small  building  block  towards  sustainable 
urban  development  as  the  vegetation  con-
verts CO2 into oxygen and filters particulate 
matter from the air. The planning of walkable 
connected places through urban design both 
helps sustainability goals and encourages a 
healthier lifestyle. The dramatic rise in third 
places – other than home or the office – from 
cafes to co-working spaces has substantially 
reduced  office  space  provision  in  cities  and 
therefore the appearance of cities.

Decisions  on  place,  thus,  influence  all  the 
other dimensions addressed, such as what 
the  city  feels  like  for  people  emotionally, 
how  it  performs  economically  and  how 
it  affects  cities’  clean,  green  and  circular 
performance,  liveability  and  sustainability. 

The day-to-day experience of cities for people 
is  affected  mostly  by  how  the  collective 
decision-making  processes  have  put  the  city 
together – the pattern of urban quarters, the 
layout of streets and the location of functions, 
from transport nodes to the var ious clusters of 
retailing or entertainment to health facilities or 
community centres.

This is why cities, too, are increasingly being 
planned  with  greater  emphasis  on  design 
quality  and  aesthetics,  with  a  balance  be-
tween occasionally extraordinary structures 
and  the  mass  of  ordinary  buildings.  There 
is  also  more  focus  on  an  enhanced  public 
realm.  Successful  city-making  is  most-
ly  anchored  around  vital  public  spaces,  be 
they  a  civic  square,  a  crossroads  junction, 
a main street, third places, a public market, 
a library, a rail station or a campus. Those 
public places are most dynamic and resili-
ent  when  they  reflect  and  boost  a  com-
munity’s  distinctive  public  life,  economy, 
and  culture.  When  the  people  using  them 
are involved in their creation and continual 
re-creation,  management  and  governance, 
they  generate  civic  pride  and  are  increas-
ingly loved, as leading urbanists from Jane 
Jacobs and William H. Whyte onwards have 
stressed. Such placemaking requires place-
led  governance,  which  requires  all  discip-
lines, hard and soft, to work together in an 
interdisciplinary  way.  Often  this  involves 
acknowledging the importance of social in-
novations rather than technical solutions in 
making  city  life.  That  place  capital  in  turn 
helps achieve other goals more efficient-
ly, so contributing to building community 
capacity, equity and prosperity. 

Progressive mobility thinking plays a crucial 
part  in  both  placemaking  and  helping  sus-
tainability, leading to the emphasis on con-
venient  public  transport  systems,   shifting 

48

mobility modes away from the car towards 
walking  and  cycling.  Combining  and  inte-
grating all transport modes and city services 
and  establishing  interaction  between  them 
can  deliver  the  greatest  added  value.  This 
integration of transport modes needs to be 
supported  by  robust  systems  to  anticipate 
system  breakdowns,  optimise  material  re-
sources or the flow of passenger and goods, 
prepare  for  planned  events  and  respond  to 
unexpected  ones.  Collaboration  with  all  the 
major stakeholders is key, including local au-
thorities to embrace the era of intermodality. 

Within  this  quality  of  life  focus,  the  issue 
of  affordability  is  rising  dramatically  up 
the  agenda.  Housing  availability  at  differ-
ing  price  points  is  crucial  and  especially 
social housing to avoid social tensions. The 
question  is  where  it  is  to  be  located.  It  is 
especially  a  problem  in  more  successful 
cities,  where  gentrification  pressures  are 
immense and often lead to a dramatic de-
cline  in  locally  distinctive  shops  as  global 
chains  take  over  the  retailing  system.  This 
loss of character has driven movements to 
value heritage, both tangible and intangible. 
Heritage protection is increasingly urgent as 
it helps anchor a sense of belonging.

Orchestration  is  the  watchword  and  with-
in  that  an  understanding  of  the  impacts 
of  deep  trends,  which  include  how  inter-
net  platforms  such  as  AirBnB  can  threat-
en  housing  availability,  especially  in  suc-
cessful  cities,  or  how  internet  shopping  is 
transforming  the  high  street,  new  working 
patterns  are  changing  office  supply  and 
over-tourism  is  threatening  the  identity  of 
many cities. A further challenge on the hori-
zon  is  how  autonomous  data  systems  are 

25  https://fab.city/

https://fab.city/uploads/Manifesto.pdf

seeking to build cities with less human in-
volvement and intervention using  predictive 
analytics  to  determine  how  cities  are 
formed, so reducing our free will to shape 
the  future.  The  contrast  here  is  with  new 
emerging  networks,  such  as  the  Fab  City 
Global  Initiative,  whose  manifesto  chimes 
with all the themes of this report (25).

Crucially, it is the global threats that affect 
people’s experience of their city, as breath-
ing becomes more difficult or smell or noise 
make urban life unpleasant. All these move-
ments  have  changed  our  expectations  of 
place.  This  change  involves  a  culture  shift 
for  those  responsible  for  decision-making 
and  planning  as  well  as  rethinking  their 
education,  training  and  professional  de-
velopment.  Additionally,  it  implies  creating 
legal  frameworks  to  meet  new  priorities 
and future needs of cities, within which R&I 
can help.

Urban environments amplify global threats 
such  as  climate  change,  water  and  food 
insecurity,  mobility  issues  and  resource 
shortages.  Simultaneously,  they  can  pro-
vide  a  holistic  framework  to  address  such 
threats, especially through the urban strat-
egies  and  plans  adopted.  This  framework 
includes  healthy  blue  and  green  infra-
structures  and  the  social  and  spatial  dy-
namics encouraged in and around the city, 
mobility  planning,  the  development  of 
sustainable  physical  infrastructures,  how 
sustainable  consumption  and  production 
are  incentivised  or  how  natural  resources, 
food  and  waste  are  managed.  Addressed 
well,  this  approach  can  support  the  needs 
of present and future generations in a sus-
tainable way. 

 
  PLACE

49

Cities  mirror  other  ecosystems  in  terms 
of scale. Their uniqueness is that they are 
planned,  designed,  constructed  and  con-
trolled  by  humans  supported  by  technol-
ogies.  The  city  is  an  urban  metabolism 
where  all  the  physical  and  biological  pro-
cess of the city system transforms resource 
inflows  into  useful,  finished  products  and 
services. At the same time, those processes, 
essential to the functioning of cities, gener-
ate waste and emissions, traffic congestion 
and  noise  and  severe  problems  from  soil, 
water and air pollution – including poor in-
door  air  quality.  These  are  responsible  for 
premature deaths and related diseases [ ]. 
According  to  UN-Habitat,  cities  worldwide 
currently  consume  over  two-thirds  of  the 
world’s  energy  and  generate  more  than 
70 %  of  CO2  emissions,  while  waste  is  a 
further problem (26).

The  United  Nations  projects  an  urban 
population  growth  of  2.5  billion  by  2050. 
Currently,  75 %  of  Europeans  live  in  cities. 
This proportion is projected to rise to up to 
85 %  by  2050.  An  increase  of  36  million 

people living in cities offers some of the best 
opportunities to decarbonise. Cities contain 
the  highest  emitters,  such  as  buildings, 
transport  systems  and  waste,  and  so  pro-
vide the greatest potential to have a positive 
environmental impact in terms of increasing 
air quality, reducing noise, improving energy 
efficiency or capturing CO2. 

Cities  need  a  long-term  integrated  urban 
planning  and  design  and  spatial  develop-
ment vision for their built, green and blue 
infrastructures or nature-based solutions. 
If such high-performing infrastructures and 
spaces  that  balance  built  and  natural  en-
vironments  are  put  in  place,  they  can  in 
principle  provide  ecological,  environmental 
and  social  benefits  while  improving  resili-
ence to climate change and fostering eco-
nomic growth. 

In  2016,  the  world  generated  2.01  billion 
tonnes (267 kg per capita) of municipal solid 
waste annually. This number is expected to 

26  Commission communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social 

Committee and the Committee of the Regions ‘A Europe that protects: Clean air for all’ https://eur-lex.europa.eu/
legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0330&from=FR

50

increase by 70 % from 2016 levels to 3.40 
billion tonnes in 2050. At least 33 % is not 
managed in an environmentally safe man-
ner,  and  without  improvements  emissions 
will increase by up to 2.6 billion tonnes of 
CO2-equivalent by 2050 (27). In 2017, in the 
EU-28,  the  total  municipal  waste  generat-
ed amounted to 248 million tonnes (487 kg 
per capita), with only 29 % recycled (28).

allowing  immediate  just-in-time  feedback 
loops and responsiveness. 

The  aims  and  targets  formulated  here  are 
in  response  to  the  global  challenges,  such 
as  climate  adaptation,  environment  qual-
ity,  technological  innovations,  population 
growth  and  urbanisation,  and  are  aligned 
with international agreements. 

The  thinking  about  urban  systems  must 
shift away from linear systems that receive 
inputs and produce outputs. Instead, design 
should  be  circular  using  business  models 
that  replace  the  ‘end-of-life’  concept  with 
the reduce,  reuse  and  recycle and cradle 
to cradle concepts  – a continuous cycle of 
preserving value and optimising resources. 

A sustainable city should feed itself, with a 
sustainable reliance on its peri-urban areas 
and its surrounding countryside to reduce its 
food miles and ecological footprint. Ensuring 
healthy,  sustainable,  equitable  and  afford-
able  food  availability  means  rethinking  the 
food  system  and  eating  habits  and  promo-
ting sustainable safe local food production.

Any  urban  strategy,  its  planning  and  ap-
proach to its socio-spatial dynamics with-
in  and  around  cities  needs  to  address  all 
these  issues.  Here,  digitisation  is  a  re-
source,  with  its  data  gathering  possibil-
ities, its ability to automate processes and 
its  capacity  to  add  sensors  to  the  city  so 

Changes  in  the  energy  landscape  in  the 
EU  have  been  partly  driven  from  the  top 
down  but  also  from  bottom-up  decisions 
(29,  30).  The  EU  has  performed  important 
work  on  energy  issues  with  legislation  re-
garding the built environment. This has led 
Member  States  to  develop  concrete  action 
plans  with  high-impact  potential  (31).  The 
EU  Framework  Programmes  for  Research 
and  Technological  Development,  FP7  and 
H2020, have given a major boost to these 
plans  with  their  Energy-efficient  Buildings 
Public  Private  Partnership  (EeB  PPP)  initia-
tive.  This  dual  approach  covers  both  new 
buildings  and  the  deep  energy  retrofitting 
of  existing  buildings.  It  was  identified  as 
one of the most strategic programmes for 
reducing  CO2  worldwide.  The  interaction 
between  buildings  and  mobility  solutions 
for renewable  energy production and stor-
age  has  become  a  key  issue.  In  2018,  in 
response to the EU’s plan for decarbonisa-
tion by 2050, the Commission presented its 
strategic long-term vision for a prosperous 
climate-neutral economy by 2050.

27  Kaza, Silpa; Yao, Lisa C.; Bhada-Tata, Perinaz; Van Woerden, Frank, What a waste 2.0: A global snapshot of 

solid waste management to 2050, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank, 
Washington, DC, 2018 https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/30317/9781464813290.
pdf

28  Eurostat https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Municipal_waste_statistics
29  EU 2020-2030 Climate and Energy Plans.
30  Clean Energy for All Europeans Package, 2018
31  EUR-Lex, Directive (EU) 2018/844 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending 
Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance of buildings and Directive2012/27/EU on energy efficiency, 
2018 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2018.156.01.0075.01.ENG

  PLACE

51

The  Commission  formulated  ambitious 
urban  mobility  policy  objectives  (32)  based 
on  the  established  need  to  cut  transport 
GHG emissions by 60 % compared to 1990. 
These  include  the  full  phasing  out  of  con-
ventionally  fuelled  vehicles  in  city  centres 
by 2050 and close-to-zero-emission logis-
tics  in  cities  by  2030.  Mobility  service  in-
novations  can  contribute  to  transport  de-
carbonisation  levers  by  shifting  demand, 
rethinking  land  use  management,  encour-
aging modal shifts or fuel substitution and 
making  the  fuel/energy  nexus  more  effi-
cient. The importance of speeding up decar-
bonisation efforts post COP21 is reflected in 
a Commission Communication (33). 

The  Commission  defined  an  agenda  (34) 
built on and integrating seven transport re-
search  areas:  smart  mobility  and  services; 

transport  infrastructure;  transport  electrifi-
cation;  vehicle  design  and  manufacturing; 
cooperative,  connected  and  automated 
transport;  network  and  traffic  manage-
ment  systems;  and  low-emission  alterna-
tive  energy  for  transport.  The  Transport 
Research  and  Innovation  Monitoring  and 
Information System (TRIMIS) is a tool to es-
tablish  and  implement  that  agenda  and  is 
the  Commission’s  instrument  for  mapping 
technology trends and research and innov-
ation capacities in the transport field. 

Cities  can  drive  the  circular  economy  agen-
da  forward  as  major  engines  for  economic 
growth, so unlocking economic, environmental, 
and social benefits (35). The SDG for 2030 en-
courage nations and leading cities to innovate 
with  circular  ideas.  Cities  have  opportunities 
to improve their efficiency and environmental 

32  European Commission transport white paper, 2011.
33  European Commission communication on low-emission Mobility, 2016.
34  European Commission, Strategic Transport Research and Innovation Agenda (STRIA) Roadmap Factsheets, 2017.

35  https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/our-work/activities/

circular-economy-in-cities

Driverless shuttle, EU project AVENUE – 
city of Luxembourg

52

impact  by  embedding  circularity  principles 
in urban infrastructures and services, from 
mobility to energy and healthcare. 

The  Commission  has  defined  a  plan  with 
a set of measures with step-up actions to 
mobilise stakeholders on the circular econ-
omy (36). This plan aims to adopt a circular 
economy strategy on plastics, along with EU 
legislation relating to waste, food and feed 
as well as encouraging and ensuring the re-
covery of critical raw materials and valuable 
resources or adequate waste management 
in the construction and demolition sector. 

‘By 2020, ecosystems and their services are 
maintained  and  enhanced  by  establishing 
green  infrastructure  and  restoring  at  least 
15 %  of  degraded  ecosystems’  (37).  The  EU 
R&I policy agenda on Nature-Based Solutions 
and Re-Naturing Cities, implemented through 
H2020, seeks to enhance the awareness and 
engagement of end-users, stir market uptake 

and develop an EU-wide knowledge base on 
nature-based solutions.

The  EU  aims  to  tackle  food  and  nutrition 
security with R&I policies designed to future-  
proof  our  food  systems  to  make  them 
inclusive 
sustainable, 
and  competitive  for  the  benefit  of  society, 
adopting a systemic approach (38).

resilient,  diverse, 

To  manage  water,  the  EU  has  adopted  a 
comprehensive  policy  framework  (39)  to 
achieve the objective of restoring EU waters 
to good status and ensuring their sustainable 
use, as well as identifying and dealing with 
flood  risk.  Water  management  needs  to  be 
taken account of in spatial planning policies, 
in building-design codes and in regeneration 
programmes aimed at ensuring liveable cit-
ies.  Restoring  forgotten  urban  rivers  back 
to  cities  can  be  a  catalyst  for  reconnecting 
citizens with nature, as happened in Munich 
with the Isar restoration and the restoration 
of the Emscher river in the Ruhr area. 

36  Closing the loop – EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy.
37  The EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, target 2 https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/strategy/

index_en.htm

38  European Commission, FOOD 2030: Future-Proofing our Food Systems through Research and Innovation, 2017.
39  Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community 

action in the field of water policy

  PLACE

53

Logic of the intervention 

The  EU  has  recognised  sustainable  urban-
isation  as  a  global  challenge.  In  line  with 
the objectives of Horizon 2020 (40), aims to 
mobilise and help cities to address complex 
and cross-cutting challenges by developing 
integrated,  innovative  solutions  within  the 
concept of the ‘city as an ecosystem’.

EU  R&I  policies  in,  for  and  with  cities  can 
provide significant contributions to the sus-
tainable transition towards a liveable plan-
et. This includes creating more liveable and 
human-scale  physical  environments,  mov-
ing  towards  carbon  neutrality,  establishing 
clean and connected mobility, fostering re-
source and energy efficiency, improving in-
door and outdoor air quality, incentivising a 
circular economy, highlighting the potential 
of the creative economy and fostering new 
social  practices  or  innovations  that  meet 
social and global purposes. It needs better- 
than-existing solutions. The overall intention 
is  to  enhance  the  well-being  of  citizens 
whilst simultaneously creating the conditions 
to adapt to climate changes. 

Priorities and R&I actions 
for place

The  proposed  R&I  actions  have  been 
gathered  around  three  main  issues, 
considered 
in 
enabling the transition:

the  most  catalytic 

1.  decarbonisation and the target of 

limiting global warming to 1.5ºC 
circularity

2. 
3.  planning for a better built 

environment. 

These affect how cities are planned and 
managed.  The  more  precise  details  of 
the  R&I  actions  are  elaborated  in  the 
appendices.

Decarbonisation and limiting 
global warming limit to 1.5ºC

Many  European  cities  are  facing  serious 
challenges  regarding  demographic  change, 
the  need  for  energy  efficiency,  effective 
land-use,  coping  with  diversity  and  inte-
gration, including all population groups, the 
burden of municipal liabilities, the need to 
protect environments and establishing and 
promoting  sustainable  urban 
lifestyles. 
Some EU cities are recognised as pioneer-
ing references and good practice, many of 
them thanks to EU R&I support through the 
FP5, FP6, FP7 and H2020 programmes (41). 
Yet  most  EU  cities  are  still  on  a  pathway 
towards  sustainable  growth.  Global  cities 
partnerships have brought valuable expert-
ise  and  know-how  to  mutual  learning  and 
cooperation (42).

R&I actions are needed to assess what fac-
tors, such as regulations, funding, or tech-
nical  capacity  stemming  from  the  local, 

40  European Commission, Investing in European Success – Innovating cities in Europe and worldwide, 2019  

https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/research_and_innovation/research_by_area/documents/ec_rtd_investing-
in-european-success_032019.pdf 

41  European Commission, EU research & innovation for and with cities – Yearly mapping report, 2017.
42  The Sino-German project, The learning city: An innovative approach for mutual learning of sustainable 

urbanization between China and Germany https://wupperinst.org/fa/redaktion/downloads/projects/Learning_City_
Approach_ML.pdf

54

regional, national or EU levels, best trigger 
the necessary strategic planning that helps 
implement local climate change mitigation 
and  decarbonisation.  Within  that,  they  can 
assess  what  level  needs  to  be  reinforced 
and by which actor. Here, social and techno-
innovations  should  complement 
logical 
each  other.  Knowledge  gaps  remain  about 
the contribution of lifestyle and behavioural 
change  in  helping  decarbonisation.  Saved 
CO2 emissions due to social innovation ini-
tiatives should be evaluated, including past 
and present projects.

The  EU  has  become  a  leader  in  develop-
ing renewable and low-carbon approaches. 
There  are  three  key  areas  of  technologic-
al  R&I:  energy  efficiency,  smart  grids  and 
integration  of  renewables  into  the  energy 
 system (43).

Despite  the  impact  of  technology  has  in 
addressing  environmental  issues,  the  most 
immediate  actions  may  be  to  regulate  and 
modernise  physical  infrastructure  such  as 
those  in  the  building,  transportation  and 
waste  sectors.  R&I  actions  are  needed  to 
improve  the  energy  efficiency  of  existing 
building  stocks  at  district 
level.  These 
include policies, innovative technologies, new 
materials  and  financing  instruments  across 
all EU building typologies to reduce emissions 
and  energy  consumption  (44).  R&I  actions 
are  needed  to  lower  emissions  by  reducing 
energy  consumption  in  heating,  cooling  (45) 
and  lighting  of  buildings  and  by  integrating 
solutions  for  renewable  energy  production 

and  storage  for  buildings  and  mobility. 
Building design and additional insulation will 
also require additional R&I on mater ials that 
are  more  compact,  more  affordable,  more 
circular  and  easier  to  install:  the  ‘solar-skin’, 
where  every  component  of  a  building  can 
contribute to generating renewable electricity, 
combined with innovative design features for 
climate adaptation.

including  people’s 

include  people 
Energy  transition  must 
who  have  first-hand  knowledge  of  energy 
poverty,  to  find  solutions.  Energy  poverty 
has  both  economic  and  social  causes  and 
implications, 
lack  of 
sufficient  income  to  meet  rising  energy 
bills,  while  energy-inefficient  housing  locks 
people  into  poor  living  conditions  that  can 
be  detrimental  to  their  well-being.  The 
better  use  of  renewable  energy  systems 
integration (smart grids) is crucial to enable 
‘prosumer’  participation  and  to  incentivise 
demand  flexibly  to  help  use  energy  more 
efficiently. Energy poverty is very dependent 
on  energy  prices  in  each  Member  State 
so  developing  smart  metering  systems, 
accurate  monitoring  and  dynamic  pricing 
approaches  is  vital.  Governance  models 
are  needed  to  support  energy-efficient 
interventions  without  leaving  behind  low-
income  householders  (46).  Self-generation 
or community energy schemes can help to 
overcome poverty. How the energy transition 
can address poverty and inequality requires 
research 
that  maps  socio-demographic 
groups  at  risk  of  energy  poverty.  For 
example, energy cafés in the UK are a new 

43  European Strategic Energy Technology (SET) Plan https://ec.europa.eu/research/energy/index.

cfm?pg=policy&policyname=set

44  European Commission, EU Buildings Factsheets, 2018b https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/eubuildings-factsheets
45  European Commission, Heating and Cooling, 2018c https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-efficiency/

heating-and-cooling

46  Pye, S., and Dobbins, A., Energy Poverty and Vulnerable Consumers in the Energy Sector across the EU: Analysis 

of Policies and Measures, 2015 https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/INSIGHT_E_Energy Poverty 
- Main Report_FINAL.pdf

  PLACE

55

to 
format  for  community  organisations 
engage with energy locally to combat energy 
poverty.  Rotterdam  is  working  on  this  issue 
to  understand  how  to  maximise  inclusive 
energy transition investments (47). It is equally 
paramount to improve cities’ knowledge about 
the relationship between energy poverty and 
health at a district scale. Here, the Barcelona 
climate plan is a model (48).

Nature and nature-based infrastructure are 
being recognised as critical to liveable cit-
ies. They can be win-win solutions as they 
meet  both  specific  service  targets,  such 
as for water supply or flood management, 
and  have  many  spillover  benefits,  such  as 
creating  new  parks,  advancing  equity  and 
health for underserved neighbourhoods (49). 
Environmentally  friendly  planning  and  de-
sign,  including  of  the  built,  blue  and  green 
infrastructures  and  bioclimatic  architecture, 

Innovative  strategies 

improve  adaptation  and  resilience  to  cli-
mate  change  through  carbon  sequestra-
tion  and  passively  modulating  the  urban 
micro-climate. 
to 
reduce  the  urban  heat-island  effect  are 
needed  that  promote  and  develop  bio-
climatic  architecture  solutions  as  well  as 
developing  biomaterials  for  construction 
and  retrofitting.  Permeable  urban  surfaces 
to reduce soil sealing through nature-based 
solutions are essential, as are linked urban 
forestry strategies.

Blue  and  green  infrastructures  and  nature- 
based  solutions  are  a  major  business 
opportunity  for  mainstream  companies  as 
well as start-ups and so can attract invest-
ment and new businesses, often with novel 
business models, whilst simultaneously re-
ducing  resource  consumption.  This  invest-
ment could help to save the costs resulting 
from  negative  environmental  effects  and 
bring health benefits. 

47  Rotterdam Resilience Strategy Consultation Document https://100resilientcities.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/

strategy-resilient-rotterdam.pdf

48  City of Barcelona, Barcelona’s Commitment to the Climate, 2012 http://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/ecologiaurbana/

sites/default/files/Barcelona Commitment to Climate.pdf

49  Ratti, C., The Future of Cities. Roberts, S., Communal spaces for great sustainability. Harper, C., Urban farming. 

Freeing agriculture from Climate Slavery. Pictet Report Issue 22, Winter 2018.

56

R&I  is  needed  on  how  to  maximise  the 
potential  of  built,  blue  and  green  infra-
structures  to  both  improve  the  health  and 
well-being  of  citizens  and  mitigate  cli-
mate  change.  Indoor  and  outdoor  air  pol-
lution  above  health  limits  poses  a  major 
challenge  to  urban  populations.  Policy 
measures are needed to address both  de-
carbonisation  and  air  quality  targets  in 
an  integrated  way.  Research  and  data  are 
needed  on  particles,  microbes,  volatile  or-
ganic  compounds  from  products,  building 
dampness,  levels  of  exposure  and  effects 
on vulnerable populations. 

Urban mobility is vital to European society 
in providing access to services for passen-
gers  and  goods  in  order  to  support  eco-
nomic prosperity. To manage the increasing 
demand for mobility, a wide range of com-
plementary  mobility  solutions  and  future 
mobility projects will have to solve a host of 
complex issues, including congestion, pollu-
tion, access and gridlock. Research is need-
ed to assess the comparative effectiveness 
of  differing  solutions.  Transport  safety  is 
equally important as 40 % of road fatalities 
happen  in  cities  in  Europe  (c.  11 000  per 
year). Research is needed on how to reduce 
accident  rates,  fatalities  and  casualties 
within each mode. 

Mobility  provision  needs  coordination 
and  should  encourage  shared  modes, 
including  low-energy  and  autonomous 
vehicles.  New  urban  systems,  services, 
urban  data-management  platforms  and 
multimodal  travel  are  gradually  emer-
ging. Their economics and how they are 
governed  are  key  issues.  Authorities 
need new skills to assume their role in 
this changing environment, including as 
mediators  and  interfaces  between  dif-
ferent urban stakeholders, as  designers 

  PLACE

57

of  platforms  to  acquire  and  store  urban 
data,  and  as  managers  of  the  community 
and public space in the public interest. 

The  ecological  emergency  will  require  cre-
at ivity, collaboration and knowledge to find 
innovations  suited  for  local  situations  and 
policy goals. Breaking silos between energy, 
climate  and  transport  areas  is  crucial  to 
build sustainable low emission places.

Circularity

Circularity must become the essence of any 
economic  development  and  management 
of daily city life. Awareness and cooperation 
among key actors – businesses, consumers, 
NGOs  and  government  –  are  needed  for 
cities  to  make  the  circular  future  a  real ity 
through  systematic  distribution,  communi-
cation and the promotion of circular practi-
ces and addressing barriers such as finance, 
institutional,  social  and  technical  issues. 
The circular economy is also closely linked 
to the sharing-economy idea. This is linked 
to the idea that owning is increasingly less 
relevant and access to facilities and resour-
ces is more important. This has led to ideas 
such as mobility as a service. Here, the cul-
ture of consumption changes towards see-
ing products as a service, so ensuring they 
are used most efficiently. 

Greater rates of urbanisation are expected, 
so  significant  infrastructure  investments 
will  be  made  in  cities  (50).  ‘Cities  could  be 
uniquely positioned to drive a global transi-
tion towards a circular economy, with their 
high  concentration  of  resources,  capital, 
data,  and  talent  over  a  small  geographic 
territory, and could greatly benefit from the 
outcomes of such a transition’ (51).

Cities  are  the  place  where  most  materials 
are used and wasted, and where buildings, 
vehicles  and  products  are  under-used.  In 
the urban context there is significant struc-
tural waste in key sectors such as mobility, 
food  and  the  built  environment.  In  Europe, 
mobility  captures  13 %  (52)  of  an  average 
European  household  budget,  and  cars  are 
particularly inefficient: cars are parked 92 % 
of the time, and when used, fewer than two 
of  five  seats  are  occupied  on  average  (53). 
Shifts  towards  car-sharing  options  or  al-
ternative means of mobility are picking up 
speed  as  citizens  change  behaviours  and 
cities invest in infrastructure that offers al-
ternative  choices.  Around  31 %  of  food  is 
wasted along the value chain, and the aver-
age office is used only 35-50 % of the time, 
even during working hours (54).

It is well-documented that 75 % of natural 
resource consumption occurs in cities, which 
at  the  same  time  produce  50 %  of  global 
waste  and  60-80 %  of  greenhouse-gas 
emissions, due in part to the adoption of the 

50  World Bank, Urban Development Overview, March 2017 http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/urbandevelopment/

overview

51  https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Cities-in-the-CE_An-Initial-Exploration.

pdf

52  Ellen McArthur Foundation, Growth within a Circular Economy Vision for a competitive Europe https://www.

ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/circular-economy/Growth-Within-Report.pdf

53  European Commission, EU Transport in figures – Statistical pocketbook 2018.
54  Ellen MacArthur Foundation, SUN and McKinsey Center for Business and Environment, Growth Within: a circular 

economy vision for a competitive Europe, 2015.

58

‘take, make, dispose’ linear economic model 
(55). The negative impacts of this practice in 
cities include air, water and noise pollution 
and  greenhouse-gas  emissions.  The  types 
of  challenges  cities  are  facing  in  a  linear 
economy, suggest the need for a shift to a 
‘circular city’. Cities, to be innovative, need 
to attract people, businesses and economic 
activity. R&I is needed on how cities should 
be  planned  and  designed  and  financed  to 
become  carbon  neutral,  zero  waste  and 
smart,  keeping  materials  and  products  in 
use. The substitution of products with ser-
vices provided to customers and of purchase 
transactions  with  more  sustainable  use 
forms  will  be  crucial.  Regarding  materials, 
Research  can  also  help  develop  economic 
incentives  for  producers  to  make  products 
that can be easily recycled or reused. New 
regulation is needed to reduce resource use 
and  waste  generation  in  production  pro-
cesses and to support industrial symbiosis. 
Better product design is needed. Innovative 
product design will lead to products that are 
more durable and efficient. 

Local  governments  are  in  a  unique  pos-
ition  to  plan,  design  and  finance  their  cit-
ies and systems with a circular vision. Here, 
research on how to plan and design infra-
structures, vehicles, buildings and products 
that  are  durable,  adaptable,  modular  and 
easy to maintain and repurpose should be 
a priority. R&I is needed on how to integrate 
waste  management  with  manufacturing 
processes  and  consumption  so  that  both 
products  are  fit  for  reuse  and  recycling  at 
affordable costs.

The  construction  sector  can  substantially 
contribute  to  using  resources  responsibly 

within  a  circular  economy  model.  A  spin-
off is that it can foster social equity, given 
the vast amount of material and energy re-
sources  required  to  produce  and  maintain 
built  environments  and  the  emissions  and 
waste they generate. Sustainable construc-
tion needs R&I on the design and manage-
ment  of  built  structures  as  well  as  on  the 
behaviour  of  materials  throughout  their 
use-cycles.

Sensitive  restoration,  reuse  or  remodelling 
of  building stock must be a target for city 
makers. Adaptive reuse of existing buildings 
and  infrastructures  should  be  prioritised 
over new construction. R&I is needed on how 
digitalisation  can  help  optimise  solutions, 
including biomaterials and other bio-based 
solutions if they have a lower environment-
al footprint and a higher potential for circu-
larity  than  currently  used  materials.  New 
strategies are needed to engage architects 
and  engineers  to  become  active  agents 
of  sustainable  design  by  incorporating  in 
buildings different innovative materials that 
can be obtained from recycled waste.

In cities, the construction waste from reno-
vating buildings and transport infrastructure 
should  be  managed  upstream  with  digital 
tools that help and promote deconstruction 
planning rather than demolition. Innovative 
models  for  waste  management  are  need-
ed  to  help  cities  rethink  traditional  collec-
tion and disposal infrastructures. Managing 
waste  to  minimise  emissions  should  be  a 
priority for cities. The existing legal frame-
works  for  domestic  and  industrial  waste 
are not yet fully application in all Member 
States.  R&I  is  paramount  to  create  im-
proved and affordable solutions. 

55  UNEP, Resource Efficiency as Key Issue in the New Urban Agenda, http://www.unep.org/ietc/sites/unep.org.ietc/

files/Key%20messages%20RE%20Habitat%20III_en.pdf

  PLACE

59

In line with the other priorities of this report, 
local  policymakers  and  their  co-created 
urban  food  policy  frameworks  have  a  key 
role in convening, connecting and supporting 
food system actors and citizens to build and 
deliver  solutions  based  on  sound  science, 
research and innovation. This would go be-
yond existing fragmented initiatives limited 
solely to production and consumption. 

Within this overall discussion on circularity 
and reducing emissions, more efficient food 
systems  that  reduce  food  waste  and  new 
bioeconomy  approaches  that  turn  waste 
into value and replace fossil fuels through 
renewable  biological  resources  can  signifi-
cantly contribute to climate mitigation (56).

Alternative  urban  food  strategies,  includ-
ing  those  focused  on  reducing  food  miles 
and  urban  agriculture  are  needed  as  well 
as  smart  reserve-food  storage  and  the 
management  of  proximity  production  in 
neighbouring  rural  areas  to  limit  transport 
and  consequently  reduce  CO2  emissions. 
Regarding  food-packaging, 
is 
needed  on  alternative  new  bio-degradable 
materials.  Food  waste  should  be  reduced, 
and adopting smart labels could be a solu-
tion to disrupt traditional expiration dates.

research 

It is agreed that circular economy prin ciples 
applied  to  city  systems  can  bring  many 
benefits. However, R&I is needed to under-
stand  at  what  scale  these  principles  can 
help  policymakers  to  generate  economic 
development and reduce carbon footprints, 
primary-material  consumption  and  conse-
quent  costs  with  waste  management.  In 
terms of mobility related to food systems, 
and the built environment sectors, it is im-
portant to get detailed evidence on how the 
cost of products and services is reduced, the 
value  of  spending  less  time  in  congestion 
and  the  improvement  of  indoor  air  quality 
and reduction of air pollution.

Planning for a better 
built environment  

The task is to see the built city and the ac-
tivity  programmes  as  a  communications 
device to help meet the objectives of the re-
search and innovation agenda for sustain-
able  cities.  In  other  words,  how  a  city  can 
visibly  communicate  its  intent  to  be  more 
sustainable.

56  European Commission, updated Bio-economy Strategy and its Action Plan, 2018.

60

The cities we have mostly disappoint. More 
of them are ugly rather than beautiful. Few 
reflect  truly  the  diversities  that  make  up 
most urban populations. Most are unsustain-
able.  Most  look  the  same  with  their  bland 
business  districts,  similar  shopping  experi-
ences  or  overwhelming  tower  blocks,  often 
with suburbs sprawling endlessly into the far 
horizon. Most urban environments are stand-
ardised. There is too much traffic and noise, 
with  cars  having  dominated  development 
over the past decades. Few places delight.

The  built  environment  communicates  the 
collective intent, ethos and culture of those 
who have planned and designed their city. It 
reflects the ambition and priorities of all the 
stakeholders – public, private and civic – and 
the extent to which the common good can be 
experienced. Cities are more balanced when 
they acknowledge and plan by going with the 
grain of their distinctiveness, their genius loci 
and  when  they  value  their  heritage.  Dense 
and  mixed-use  historic  centres,  with  their 
adaptive  reuse  and  relative  intimacy,  are 
often  the  form  planners  are  attempting 
re-create today to inspire sustainable plan-
ning patterns and processes, including at the 
wider  territorial  scale.  This  recognition,  in 

addition,  fosters  the  civic  pride  that  in  turn 
generates the commitment, motivation and 
will to care. R&I actions include cross-disci-
plinary  assessment  of  which  place-based 
urban development patterns generate great-
er  social  and  economic  success  and  con-
sequently resilience.

The  way  the  built  environment  is  put 
together  needs  to  reflect  and  visibly  com-
municate the spirit and ambition to be sus-
tainable and inclusive. To see bike-, car- and 
van-sharing  stations  sends  a  message,  as 
does installing green facades or living walls 
that can benefit the environment, buildings 
and human welfare. They help air purifica-
tion,  dust  suppression,  noise  and  heat  re-
duction  and  biodiversity  and  can  protect 
buildings.  Aesthetically,  they  are  pleasing. 
To experience walkable districts that seam-
lessly  connect  via  public  transport  or  Wi-Fi 
reminds  us  how  individual  car  use  can 
eventually become unnecessary. Reclaiming 
the  hard  urban  infrastructures  from  roads 
as  shared  public  space  allows  citizens  to 
slow down, interact and create community 
and a sense of place can begin to emerge. 
Interactive  video  screens  that  explain  the 
flows,  energy  use  and  state  of  the  city 
have become important in effecting aware-
ness  and  behaviour  change.  R&I  actions 
include  assessing  the  relative  impacts  of 

  PLACE

61

Place-based planning

rethinking 
resource use

environmental 
quality

education and 
health provision

safety

cradle-to-cradle 
thinking

Clean and 
integrated 
urban mobility

access to shops, 
services and 
housing

planning regimes to: 
foster aﬀordability
avoid gentriﬁcation
pressure facilities

Sustainabilty 
Resilience

Liveability

Equity

Figure 2.  Place-based planning: an integrated and systemic way

the  approaches noted above in encouraging 
inclusiveness  and  becoming  more  sustain-
able. R&I is needed on new forms of what 
George Monbiot calls ‘public luxury and pri-
vate sufficiency’ by strengthening the qual-
ity  and  availability  of  shared  goods,  ser-
vices and networks, reducing duplication of 
resources across individual households, and 
strengthening community involvement and 
collective responsibility (57).

Equally, a well-designed public realm com-
municates  generosity  and  accessibility, 
and  that  generosity  tends  to  trigger  fur-
ther generosity from citizens in a reciprocal 
way.  The  opportunity  for  differing  parts  of 
the  city  to  come  together  in  a  more  neu-
tral territory fosters chance encounters, and 
those  threads  of  small  meetings  are  what 

ultimately  create  civic  life  and  community. 
They make people feel they are important. 
The design of place then affects behaviour 
and  our  psychological  sense  of  feeling  at 
ease as interactively the city affects us and 
we affect the city. People will then be more 
likely to invest themselves in a sustainable, 
aesthetically  conscious  and  emotionally 
aware  city.  R&I  actions  include  reviewing 
the extent to which and how these psycho-
logical  insights  can  contribute  to  a  better 
understanding of place that encourages the 
overall objectives of this report.

The dynamics of European cities highlights a 
series of dilemmas that planning policy can 
help.  The  most  important  are  affordability 
and  especially  the  pressures  of  gentrifica-
tion and the role of social housing, as well as 

57  European Commission, Europe’s Sustainability Puzzle https://ec.europa.eu/epsc/sites/epsc/files/epsc_

sustainability-puzzle.pdf

62

Energy-efficient 
long-term  solutions  for 
affordable  housing  or  addressing  energy 
poverty are needed, as is long-term invest-
ment in partnerships with cities to produce 
affordable housing of good quality in cities 
in the EU. In vortex cities, where gentrifica-
tion  pressures  are  immense,  a  responsible 
construction  sector  is  needed  to  provide 
affordable housing using affordable mater-
ials and eco-materials. R&I action needs to 
explore  which  legislation,  incentives  or  fi-
nancing  models  have  been  most  effective 
to  establish  new  standards  on  affordable 
housing  solutions  that  equally  combine 
renovation and energy efficiency.

how disruptive technologies such as AirBnB 
can  reduce  local  housing  stock,  especially 
in more successful cities. Here Fairbnb is a 
new initiative that aims to counteract such 
negative consequences. The lack of afford-
a ble and quality housing is a critical matter 
everywhere and many cities are addressing 
the issue as it exacerbates social tension in 
cities dramatically. The Housing Partnership, 
a  pilot  partnership  established  within  the 
framework of the Urban Agenda for the EU, 
has as its main objective ‘to have affordable 
housing of good quality’. This initiative, fo-
cused on affordable public housing, state aid 
rules and general housing policy, developed 
an  action  plan  in  December  2018  (58).  The 
R&I  actions  proposed  are  to  establish  an 
overview of the effectiveness and impact of 
real  schemes  that  have  been  enacted  that 
chime  with  their  recommendations,  such 
as the regulations and incentives regime to 
protect  vulnerable  groups,  mechanisms  to 
curtail speculation, and the extent to which 
co-ownership and co-management can sta-
bilise  housing  developments,  help  tenancy 
security and achieve rent stabilisation.

58  European Commission, Housing Partnership Action Plan 2018, Urban Agenda for the EU https://ec.europa.eu/

futurium/en/system/files/ged/final_action_plan_euua_housing_partnership_december_2018_1.pdf

PROSPERITY 

64

In order to ‘make cities and 
human settlements inclusive, 
safe, resilient and sustainable’ 
(SDG 11), human, technological, 
economic and financial resources 
need to be mobilised in new and 
innovative ways in all cities and 
regions of Europe. Innovation 
is fundamental in order to 
maintain and sustain European 
prosperity and well-being 
within planetary boundaries. 
Innovative urban ecosystems 
with their constellation of local 
stakeholders are central to 
this process.

Innovative  cities  contribute  to  the  genesis 
and  co-creation  of  ‘new  sustainable  com-
binations’  in  terms  of  new  products,  new 
processes, markets, sources of inputs, sup-
pliers  or  value  chains  as  well  as  new  or-
ganisations, social arrangements or policies 
that will shape a sustainable economic fu-
ture. In so doing, cities have the potential to 
act as human-centred sustainable engines 
of economic development, job creation and 
prosperity  for  Europe,  its  Member  States 
and beyond. 

This  dimension  aims  to  support  cities  in 
enhancing  their  innovation  capacity  and 
addressing  new  urban  challenges  within  a 
systemic, inclusive and cross-sectorial urban 
ecosystem  framework.  R&I  actions  with-
in  this  dimension  aim  to  advance  existing 
knowledge on innovative urban ecosystems 
by fostering the co-creation of new insights and 
solutions  to  address  the  socio-economic  and 
financial  challenges  to  cities  within  planet-
ary boundaries. R&I actions aim to advance 
our  understanding  of  how  the  economy  in-
fluences  sustainable  urban  development 
and  generates  public  value,  to  explore  new 
and  alternative  ways  to  complement  mar-
ket-based  solutions  with  new  innovative 
solutions, and to identify policy instruments 
suitable  for  building  prosperous  and  resili-
ent  local  economies  in  both  developed  and 
less-developed regions of Europe. This con-
tributes to accomplishing the overall mission 
of  SDG  11  and  in  particular  SDG  11.A  by 
‘support[ing]  positive  economic,  social  and 
environmental  links  between  urban,  peri-
urban and rural areas by strengthening na-
tional and regional development planning’.

  PROSPERITY 

65

Why are we dealing with 
this issue? 

The economic importance of cities is increas-
ing. ‘They account for 60 % of national GDP, 
have  higher  rates  of  firm  creation’  (59)  and 
have  been  growing  50 %  faster  than  other 
areas  over  the  2000s  (JRC  Data  Platform). 
Economic  opportunities  and  jobs  created  in 
cities attract an increasing number of people 
to  them,  with  the  population  living  in  OECD 
cities  growing  by  0.75 %  per  year  over  the 
past  two  decades.  However,  cities  provide 
economic  opportunities  in  ways  that  are 
highly  selective  and  uneven  across  groups, 
based  on  skills,  ethnicity,  gender,  age,  etc. 
Inequalities in cities have been growing over 
time, with the wage premium for low-skilled 
workers constantly shrinking as revealed by 
recent research (60). In addition, the prosper-
ity generated by cities is often coupled with 
environmental  degradation,  traffic  conges-
tion  and  inadequate  urban  infrastructure, 
making  the  environmental  footprints  of  cit-
ies  a  key  challenge  for  policy  makers  at  all 
levels in Europe and beyond. The well-being 
and  prosperity  of  European  cities  and  their 
communities and inhabitants might be jeop-
ardised  by  the  de-prioritisation  of  invest-
ments  in  critical  infrastructure  and  public 
services  or  by  weakening  environmental 
targets  to  levels  that  will  fall  short  of  ful-
filling the obligations in the Paris Agreement. 
However,  ‘the  adoption  of  Agenda  2030  for 
Sustainable Development recognised for the 
first  time  in  the  history  of  development  the 
transformative  power  of  urbanisation  as  a 

tool  for  economic  development  as  reflected 
in  Sustainable  Development  Goal  11’  (61). 
Reflecting this major policy shift, The Urban 
Agenda for the EU (62) has stated the EU-wide 
objective to stimulate growth, liveability and 
innovation in EU cities by establishing a new 
working method to ‘ensure maximum utilisa-
tion  of  the  growth  potential  of  cities  and 
successfully tackle the social challenges (…)’ 
by ensuring that ‘the European Commission, 
Member  States  and  cities  will  work  to-
gether to ensure that the urban dimension is 
strengthened in (all) EU policies’ (63).

In  light  of  these  high-level  policy  debates, 
maintaining and spreading prosperity across 
the entire urban system while creating sus-
tainable  liveable  inclusive  cities  for  all  is 
the biggest urban challenge Europe is cur-
rently facing. The nature of the social and 
economic  challenges  to  cities  outlined  in 
the ‘Setting the scene’ section of this report 
makes it clear that ‘business as usual’ is not 
possible.  To  address  current  challenges  to 
sustainable and inclusive prosperity in  cit-
ies, the EU needs to foster the co-creation 
of new insights and solutions applicable to 
both developed and less-developed regions 
of Europe.

How  can  cities  remain  or  become  innova-
tive? How can they contribute to economic 
development  in  Europe  by  developing  new 
creative  insights  for  a  sustainable  future? 
How can urban development remain inclu-
sive and territorially cohesive? To success-
fully address the challenges outlined above, 

59  Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Regions and Cities at a Glance 2018,  

https://www.oecd.org/cfe/2-pager_RAG-final.pdf

60  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/upshot/big-cities-low-skilled-workers-wages.html
61  United Nations Human Settlements Programme, Economic Foundations for Sustainable Urbanization, Nairobi, 

2017, p. 8 https://unhabitat.org/books/economic-foundations-for-sustainable-urbanization-a-study-on-three-
pronged-approach-planned-city-extensions-legal-framework-and-municipal-finance/

62  https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/urban-agenda
63  European Commission, The State of European Cities 2016, Luxembourg, 2016, p. 15, doi:10.2776/770065.

66

R&I  actions  for  innovative  cities  should 
take a fully systemic approach to the gen-
esis, diffusion and absorption of innovation. 
Innovation  itself  cannot  be  understood  as 
a  purely  technological  process.  Innovation 
is  rather  the  multi-dimensional  outcome 
of  the  operation  of  an  ‘innovation  system’ 
of  the  city,  where  people,  organisations 
and  competences  take  centre  stage.  This 
urban  innovation  ecosystem  embraces  the 
city-level network of actors and institutions 
in  the  public  and  private  sector  whose  ac-
tivities  and  interactions  generate,  import, 
modify  and  diffuse  new  knowledge  and 
ideas within and outside the city and across 
the whole urban hierarchy.

Logic of the intervention 

R&I  actions  targeting  the  prosperity  of  in-
novative urban ecosystems need to embed 
their  objectives  within  the  broader  frame-
work of the Commission’s overarching eco-
nomic policy objectives, including the Europe 
2020  agenda  for  growth  and  jobs  as  well 
as the key expenditure principles underlying 
the EU budget. In addition, all actions need 
to be evidence-based, supported by careful 
small-scale experimentation and evaluation 
of existing evidence on ‘what works’ in prac-
tice  in  different  national  and  regional  con-
texts of the EU. 

R&I actions within this dimension shall aim 
to  produce  an  impact  in  all  Member  States 
and  regions  of  Europe,  acknowledging  the 
large  heterogeneity  in  terms  of  socio-eco-
nomic  conditions,  technological  capabilities, 
innovation  potential,  absorptive  capacity, 
skill intensity and competences, institutional 
quality,  prosperity  and  wealth  of  the  cities 
and regions of Europe. Solutions to the global 
challenges  to  cities  identified  by  these  R&I 

actions  cannot  be  relevant  and  applicable 
only to ‘leader’ Member States, cities where 
various types of innovation are already flour-
ishing  or  where  innovative  ecosystems  are 
well-functioning  already.  An  inclusive  and 
cohesive model of city-level innovation and 
prosperity takes centre stage in this priority.

(through 

R&I actions within this priority are grounded 
on  solid  well-tested  concepts  that  can  be 
easily  recognised  by  all  potential  users  of 
Horizon  Europe.  Special  attention  will  be 
devoted  to  facilitating  the  participation  of 
cities  themselves  as  key  actors  in  Horizon 
Europe  actions.  Cities 
their 
representative  and  administrative  bodies) 
should  be  encouraged  and  supported  to 
take  an  active  role  in  mobilising  other 
stake holders  to  participate  in  the  proposed 
R&I  actions.  Given 
the  heterogeneity 
of  EU  regions  and  cities  in  terms  of  their 
institutional  and  administrative  capacity 
(as well as in terms of their familiarity with 
R&I  action  application  and  management 
procedures), special attention and resources 
will  be  targeted  towards  capacity-building 
actions  in  order  to  offer  all  EU  cities  equal 
opportunities for participation.

In addition, to mobilise the private sector (be-
yond  publicly  subsidised  niche  initiatives)  in 
the  co-creation  of  innovative  solutions,  R&I 
actions are based on a clear economic ration-
ale and offer opportunities for market-driven 
economically  viable  solutions  as  well  as  for 
alternative non-market-orientated models of 
delivery where feasible. Horizon Europe should 
facilitate  the  identification  of  market-based 
solutions,  address  information  asymmetries 
and other forms of market failure as well as 
generate public goods. At the same time, non-
market-based solutions should be explored to 
design and develop new and innovative ways 
to  address the needs of citizens.

  PROSPERITY 

67

Five main pillars (Fig. 1) can be identified 
behind  urban  (and  regional)  economic 
development,  job  creation  and  prosper-
ity  (64):  innovation  and  human  capital; 
localised knowledge flows, agglomeration 
and  urban isation  economies;  global  net-
works  and  value  chains;  national,  region-
al,  and  local  public  policies;  and  regional 
systems  of  innovation  and  institutions.  A 
coherent  approach  to  welfare-enhancing 
urban  innovation  should  take  into  account 
simultaneously  all  these  axes,  their  inter-
actions  and  their  synergies  in  an  integrat-
ed  manner.  Investments  in  innovation  and 
skills  are  two  fundamental  elements  for 
urban and regional economic development 
and  prosperity  (65).  However,  this  relation-
ship it is not linear: investing more resour-
ces in research and development does not 
automatically  produce  more  local  innova-
tion,  more  and  better  jobs  or  local  wealth 
(66).  The  relationship  between  investment 
in R&D, human capital and the generation 

of innovation is extremely complex and in-
fluenced  by  the  interdependence  of  other 
factors:  exposure  to  localised  knowledge 
flows and internal urbanisation economies, 
the nature and quality of ‘urban’ innovation 
systems and global connectivity. 

Urbanisation and agglomeration economies 
can  facilitate  the  combination  and  recom-
b ination  of  knowledge  and  skills,  making 
cities places where ‘local buzz’ can flourish 
and  boost  the  return  to  innovation  efforts. 
However, urbanisation and density can also 
generate  congestion  and  cognitive  lock-in. 
The ultimate balance depends on the inter-
action with the other two factors. 

The  capability  of  the  urban  environment  to 
generate innovation (and translate it into de-
velopment,  jobs  and  prosperity)  depends  on 
the  functioning  and  quality  of  its  innovation 

64  Crescenzi, R. and Rodríguez-Pose, A., Innovation and Regional Growth in the European Union, Springer, Berlin, 

Heidelberg and New York, 2011.

65  Glaeser, E., Triumph of the city: How our greatest invention makes us richer, smarter, greener, healthier, and 

happier, Penguin Books, New York, 2014.

66  Moretti, E., The new geography of jobs, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, 2012.

68

system  and  their  governance.  The  ways  in 
which urban actors act as a system, how they 
make it easier for new ‘entrants’ to connect 
to it and how easy are their interactions be-
come  of  primary  relevance.  The  quality  of 
urban  and  regional  governance  is  also  cen-
tral  in  this  context:  an  open  system  needs 
supportive  institutions  and   organisations, 
appropriate and flexible ‘rules of the game’ 
with  timely  enforcement  as  well  as  the 
capacity  to  manage  institutional  change, 
learning and adaptation (67).

Urban  ecosystems  are  key  hubs  of  inter-
nationalisation  processes,  inter-  and  intra-
firm  global  networks,  offshoring  and  inter-
national  outsourcing  (68).  These  forms  of 
‘global networks and connectivity’ are the key 
factors  shaping  the  functional  link  between 
local innovation efforts and the upgrading of 
local  technological  competence  across  sec-
tors and activities. Global value chains form 
complex networks of production, and innova-
tive activities pursued along the value chain 
represent  the  strategic  integration  of  geo-
graphically distinct paths of innovation (69).

Urban innovation ecosystem
(Intervention Logic)

Innovation human 
capital and skills

Urban system 
of innovation 
organisations and 
institutions

PROSPEROUS 
CITY

Localised knowledge 
ﬂows, agglomeration 
economies, and 
urbanisation

National, regional, 
and local policies

Global networks, 
value chains, and 
investment ﬂows

Figure 3.  Integrated approach to prosperity in sustainable innovative 

urban eco-system
Adapted from: Crescenzi and Rodriguez-Pose (2011)

67  Storper, M., Keys to the City. How Economics, Institutions, Social Interaction, and Politics Shape Development, 

Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 2013.

68  Sassen, S., Cities in a World Economy, SAGE Publications, New York, 2011.
69  Crescenzi, R. and Harman, O., Move On Up! Building, Embedding and Reshaping Global Value Chains Through 

Investment Flows. Insights for regional innovation policies, OECD Working Paper, 2019.

  PROSPERITY 

69

The  connectivity  of  a  city,  its  exposure  to 
knowledge flows coming from and going to-
wards other regions of the world, is crucial 
for  its  innovative  trajectory.  However,  how 
these  forces  can  be  effectively  balanced 
within a suitable framework remains a fun-
damental  area  of  investigation  that  this 
priority aims to address.

Finally, public policies at all levels may play 
a fundamental role in shaping local techno-
logical trajectories (as well as in jeopardis-
ing them where they fail to deliver or pursue 
misleading  or  over-ambitious  objectives). 
Innovation policies for cities call for a care-
ful  theory-driven  and  evidence-based  ap-
proach  to  facilitate  and  nurture  regional 
and urban innovation systems. 

Priorities and R&I actions 
for prosperity

The intervention logic discussed above 
 offers  the  foundations  for  the  iden-
tification  of  the  R&I  actions  to  be  pri-
oritised  for  Horizon  Europe  to  support 
innovative urban ecosystems in Europe. 

To  reflect  the  ‘integrated  approach  to 
prosperity 
innovative 
in  sustainable 
urban eco-systems’, R&I actions are or-
ganised around five key priority areas: 

1. 

innovative cities, creativity, 
culture, skills and the unequal 
distribution of opportunities
2.  urbanisation economies and 

eiseconomies, mixity and diversity

3.  urban innovation systems, 
institutions and economic 
governance

4.  globally connected cities
5.  public policies:

-  financing public services, 

affordable housing 
and urban policies
-  urban policies that 
work (Figure 2).

70

Research and 
Innovation actions

Innovative cities, 
creativity, culture, 
skills and the 
unequal distribution 
of opportrunities

Urban innovation 
systems, institutions 
and economic 
governance

Innovation 
human capital 
and skills

Urbanisation 
economies and 
diseconomies, mixity 
and diversity

Urban system 
of innovation 
organisations and 
institutions

PROSPEROUS 
CITY

Localised 
knowledge ﬂows, 
agglomeration 
economies, and 
urbanisation

National, 
regional, and 
local policies

Global networks, 
value chains, 
and investment 
ﬂows

Financing public 
services and 
urban policies

‘Globally 
connected cities 
& value chains

Urban policies 
that work

Figure 4.  Integrated approach to prosperity in sustainable innovative 

urban eco-system: R&I Actions

Adapted from: Crescenzi and Rodriguez-Pose (2011)

Innovative cities, creativity, 
culture, skills and the 
unequal distribution 
of opportunities

This  priority  will  investigate  the  nature 
and  impacts  of  new  forms  of  urban-level 
innovation  beyond  technological  processes 
(including  social  innovation  and  innovation 

in services and their provision as well as the 
role of creative industries). It will also explore 
the  links  between  urban  socio-economic 
needs  and  how  city-level  innovation  can 
respond  to  these  needs  over  and  above 
the  adaptation  of  ‘standardised’  solutions. 
Research  on  the  link  between  needs  and 
innovative (market-driven and non-market-
driven)  solutions  will  also  shed  new  light 

  PROSPERITY 

71

on how to decouple urban prosperity from 
resource  use  and  how  this  decoupling 
impacts community cohesion. 

The  capacity  of  cities  to  deal  with  new 
technological  challenges  also  depends 
on  new  insights  on  the  city-level  impacts 
of:  robotisation  and  artificial  intelligence; 
global economic integration and disintegra-
tion; economic and financial shocks; and the 
emergence of sharing, creative and circular 
economies.  These  major  shifts  need  to  be 
understood with reference to: the quantity, 
nature  and  composition  and  evolution  of 
the  workforce  of  EU  cities  (innovative  and 
non-innovative);  the  future  of  the  location 
of  innovative  activities  in  cities;  income 
and wealth inequalities; and the formation 
of  populistic  and  anti-system  movements. 
An  in-depth  understanding  of  these  phe-
nomena  will  make  it  possible  to  develop 
economic monitoring systems for EU cities 
based  on  statistical  as  well  as  real-time 
data  to  assess  the  degree  of  adaptation 
and resilience to these changes as well as 
to identify and address skill shortages and 
skill mismatch in cities and prepare for the 
future of work.

Cultural  and  creative  industries  have  the 
potential  to  act  as  drivers  of  the  capabil-
ity of cities to build a prosperous, sustain-
able  and  resilient  economic  future.  R&I  is 
therefore needed to explore their impact on 
urban economic growth, development, jobs 
and  well-being  in  cities  of  varying  condi-
tions to clarify the economic nexus between 
these  concepts  in  terms  of  causality  and 
policy  guidance.  Do  ‘strong’  cities  attract 
creative and cultural activities or, vice versa, 
do culture and creativity generate new eco-
nomic opportunities in cities? Can all cities 
be creative or would urban policies target-
ing  creativity  foster  territorial  competition 

and  a  zero-sum  game?  What  is  the  role 
of cultural and creative sectors as a driver 
for innovation and resilience? What are the 
spillovers into the rest of the economy? Do 
creative and cultural industries require new 
skills and business models to function prop-
erly  (with  special  reference  to  the  ‘sharing 
economy’)?  What  can  cities  and  other 
local stakeholders do to facilitate this? R&I 
actions  will  address  these  fundamental 
(still unanswered) questions, going beyond 
best practices and individual case studies in 
order to explore the extent to which cultural 
and creative industries can practically con-
tribute to the economic future of EU cities 
and  to  sustainable  economic  development 
in line with SDG 11.

The  R&I  actions  discussed  above  will  be 
coupled with actions aimed at understand-
ing the potential conflicts between environ-
mental, economic and social objectives, de-
veloping  new  metrics  and  tools  to  identify 
and measure these potential trade-offs and 
identifying new ways to achieve more just 
innovative solutions on the ground. Special 
attention  will  be  devoted  to  the  evalua-
tion – through research and demonstration 
actions – of ‘circular’ and ‘shared’ solutions. 
(Do  they  work  in  practice?  Under  what 
conditions? In what types of cities?)

Urbanisation economies 
and diseconomies, 
mixity and diversity

The  emergence  of  new  disruptive  technol-
ogies  and  the  evolving  demand  for  skills 
constantly shapes and reshapes the global 
urban economic landscape. In this context, 
Europe needs to better understand the eco-
nomic  impacts  of  the  rise,  expansion  and 
decline  of  cities  and  the  associated  policy 

72

options in terms of innovative technologic-
al  and  policy  sustainable  solutions.  R&I 
actions need to shed new light on how city 
size and density impact the economic per-
formance of firms and workers and their lo-
cation choices. R&I action will also explore 
the  economic  linkages  between  cities,  the 
urban  hierarchy  and  peri-urban  and  rural 
areas, shedding new light on the evolution 
of these linkages over time and in response 
to technological change and economic inte-
gration or specialisation.

In  addition,  R&I  actions  will  explore  the 
city-level  economic  impact  of  immigra-
tion,  depopulation  and  ageing  and  will  in-
vestigate  the  provision  of  services  in  spa-
tially  interconnected  regional  functional 
 environments.  Research  will  be  needed  to 
fully  capture  the  economic  returns  from 
mixity and diversity in cities. How do mixity 

and  diversity  shape  innovation  and  eco-
nomic activity in innovative cities? Is there 
an optimal level of ‘diversity’ in innovative 
cities? How does this impact sustainability?

R&I actions of different forms will also ex-
plore the wider economic and non-economic 
impacts of different types of intra-city and 
inter-city  infrastructural  connectivity,  with 
special reference to the new mobility needs 
fostered by changes in the spatial division 
of labour within and across cities, and new 
forms  of  sustainable  urban  mobility.  This 
will  be  coupled  with  research  and  small-
scale  experimentation  of  new  models  of 
public  finance  for  investment  for  renewing 
and  upgrading  transport  systems  and  city 
infrastructure to match the new and emer-
ging needs identified in the complementary 
R&I actions discussed above, within planet-
ary boundaries. 

  PROSPERITY 

73

Urban innovation systems, 
institutions and economic 
governance

The capability of cities to respond with innova-
tive  solutions  to  the  challenges  explored 
above  crucially  depends  on  their  capacity 
to  act  as  a  well-coordinated  ‘urban  innov-
ation  system’.  More  in-depth  knowledge  is 
therefore  needed  to  identify  (and  experi-
ment with) new models of urban economic 
governance and regulation and assess their 
implications for urban prosperity in different 
types of regions (more- or less-developed, 
weaker or stronger institutional conditions). 
R&I  actions  in  this  priority  area  will  cover: 
research and experimentation of new forms 
of economic governance of cities, with spe-
cial  reference  to  the  framework  and  regu-
latory  conditions  to  support  innovation  in 
all economic sectors; prosperity implication 
and regulation of urban transport systems, 
with special reference to the sharing econ-
omy, self-driving cars and digital platforms; 
new  flexible  forms  of  participatory  urban 
planning regulation; prosperity implications 
of  new  forms  of  governance  for  environ-
mentally  sustainable  economic  and  com-
mercial  activities  in  cities;  and  impacts  on 
prosperity  and  possible  trade-offs  of  new 
forms of urban governance for the sharing 
and circular economies. The analysis of the 
circular economy of cities will deserve spe-
cial attention, exploring new ways to recon-
cile circularity and prosperity.

The investigation and experimentation of these 
new forms of governance of urban innova tion 
systems will be coupled with R&I actions ex-
ploring the socio-economic and sustainability 
impacts of different types of urban-level in-
stitutions and their quality. This will involve 
the  definition  of  appropriate  metrics  and 

typologies  to  classify  city-level  institution-
al arrangement in different Member States 
and  link  them  to  different  types  and  qual-
ities of innovative urban ecosystems.

Furthermore,  R&I  actions  will  explore  the 
role of trust, cooperation and social and re-
lational capital at the city level to explore to 
what extent relations can replace and com-
plement  transactions  in  urban  economies, 
as  well  as  experiment  how  ‘sharing’  can 
replace ‘ownership’ of key assets (including 
housing) and the practical viability of circu-
lar  economy  solutions.  At  the  same  time, 
the impact of crime, corruption and distrust 
will  also  be  explored  with  reference  to  its 
economic and sustainability implications.

Finally,  within  this  priority,  R&I  actions  will 
devote special attention to urban commons 
as motors for new sustainable opportunities 
for  urban  prosperity.  R&I  actions  will  ad-
dress fundamental questions: how to allow 
urban commons (if at all possible) to involve 
progressively  more  sophisticated  activ-
ities,  e.g.  from  gardening  to  housing,  from 
traditional  activities  to  innovation;  how  to 
reduce barriers to entry to broaden partici-
pation  in  urban  commons  to  new  categor-
ies of individuals beyond limited groups of 
highly motivated local stakeholders; how to 
mobilise  economic  and  financial  resources 
within tight (public) budget constraints and 
by  mobilising  private  investment;  how  to 
reconcile with existing economic incentives, 
constraints and trade-offs the time and re-
sources needed for urban commons to ex-
pand  and  prosper;  what  type  of  systemic 
adjustments  will  be  needed,  at  what  cost 
and with what types of impacts on inequal-
ities; what policies work in low-trust low-so-
cial-capital (often) low-income cities to pro-
mote  urban  commons.  R&I  actions  in  this 

74

area will need to move beyond case-studies 
of niche elite experiences (often directly or 
indirectly  subsidised  by  the  public  sector) 
to address these issues from a systematic 
cross-sectional  perspective  with  implica-
tions for the entire EU.

Globally connected cities

Acknowledging  that  innovative  urban  eco-
systems can only thrive as part of a global 
network of inter-connected cities paves the 
way to a set of R&I actions aimed at under-
standing  the  drivers  and  consequences  of 
the global connectivity of cities. In particu-
lar, R&I action will be needed in order to ex-
plore  how  and  on  what  grounds  cities  are 
included  or  excluded  from:  a)  knowledge 
and  innovation  networks;  b)  global  value 
chains and global investment and corporate 
networks,  with  special  reference  to  innov-
ation-intensive firms (globalisation of R&D); 
c)  networks  of  highly  skilled  individuals 
and  migration  (city-level  drivers  of  brain-
drain and brain gain); and d) touristic flows 
and networks.

R&I  actions  will  also  explore  urban-level 
impacts  of  sustainable  global  connectivity 
(understood as in points a, b, c and d above) 
on cities of different types. They will explore 
how these impacts depend on socio-econom-
ic  conditions,  technological  capabilities  and 
skills endowment as well as physical connec-
tivity and position in urban hierarchy and EU 
core-periphery  patterns.  The  same  actions 
will also shed new light on the sustainability 
and  environmental  implications  of  different 
forms of global connectivity  between cities.

Furthermore,  new  research  and  experi-
mentation  is  needed  on  the  link  between 
urban  policies  and  planning  and  corporate 
behaviour.  How  do  firms  react  and  adapt 
their  strategies  in  response  to  different 
urban policies and qualities of public deci-
sions?  How  do  they  keep  the  balancing  of 
their  respective  priorities  within  planetary 
boundaries? How can cities negotiate ‘deals’ 
that work for local citizens and the economy 
with major global corporate actors and plat-
forms (e.g. AirBnB)? How can they  reinforce 
their institutional capacity?

R&I actions within this priority will also ex-
plore  the  potential  impacts  and  possible 
active-management solutions for data col-
lected and stored by private companies as 
part of the provision of services to citizens 
(for  example  with  reference  to  trip  data 
collected  by  personal  mobility  providers  or 
access  data  collected  by  internet  service 
providers  through  Wi-Fi  services  in  public 
spaces,  etc.).  New  models  of  cooperation 
and  data  ownership  and  analytics  will  be 
explored and tested.

Finally,  special  attention  will  be  devoted  to 
the  connectivity  of  cities  through  local,  na-
tional  and  global  touristic  networks.  R&I 
actions  will  explore:  the  factors    that  allow 
cities to link to global touristic networks; the 
factors that shape the impacts of this con-
nectivity on local prosperity as well as on the 
local  environment  and  on  the  preservation 
of  local  cultural  heritage;  the  role  of  plat-
forms, tour operators and other private ac-
tors in shaping flows and impacts in different 
types  of  cities.  R&I  will  link  with  themes  in 
the place dimension of this report to explore 
the  socio-economic,  equity,  redistribution 
and  financial  (public  and  private)  impacts 

  PROSPERITY 

75

of touristic flows (including the existence of 
threshold effects) as well as the impacts of 
policies  aimed  at  fostering  these  flows  to 
promote local prosperity. R&I will look in par-
ticular at the distribution of negative exter-
nalities and benefits among different groups 
of  citizens  and  firms,  linking  this  with  CO2 
implications, de-carbonisation, etc. 

Public policies (1): Financing 
public services, affordable 
housing and urban policies 

R&I  actions  discussed  in  all  priorities  out-
lined above will offer new insights into the 
functioning of innovative urban ecosystems 
and their economies and will propose new 
and  innovative  solutions  to  existing  and 
emerging  challenges  and  opportunities, 
within planetary boundaries. However, cities 
will need economic and financial resources 
to  implement  new  prosperity-enhancing 
innovative  solutions  and  achieve  the  ob-
jective  of  SDG  11.  Therefore  R&I  actions 
are needed to identify new approaches and 
innovative  funding  models  for  sustainable 

urban services, development and innovation 
policies and affordable housing, with special 
reference  to  public-private  partnerships, 
crowdfunding, new finance technologies, al-
ternative models of ownership and the use 
of green bonds.

New R&I actions will also look into the role 
of cities as intermediaries in facilitating ac-
cess  to  credit  for  innovation  and  start-ups 
to  support  entrepreneurship  in  areas  of 
special  (social  and  environmental)  interest 
or need. R&I actions will also assess: exist-
ing  and  new  models  of  municipal  service 
provision;  the  development,  upgrading  and 
maintenance of local infrastructure as well 
as  the  upgrading  of  the  built  environment 
(e.g.  retro-fitting  of  buildings);  and  afford-
able  housing  as  well  as  the  associated  fi-
nance bottlenecks and alternative solutions 
(including  alternative  ownership  models). 
How can the best social and environment-
al outcomes be delivered while being eco-
nomically  viable?  How  can  this  be  meas-
ured? What kind of procurement procedures 
are needed to ensure this? What models of 
partnership between business, government 
and  community  actors  are  needed?  What 
are the impacts of the privatisation of mu-
nicipal  service  provision  or  infrastructure? 

76

What alternative models exist and how do 
they perform across different European ci t-
ies and types of services and infrastructure 
(e.g. water, energy, waste, affordable hous-
ing,  mobility)?  How  can  these  ‘new  mod-
els’  be  financed,  with  special  reference  to 
less  economically  advanced  cities?  How 
can  the  capacity  of  cities  be  reinforced  in 
less-developed (often low-trust, institution-
ally  weak)  regions  and  countries  to  deal 
with  the  challenges  of  innovative  finance? 
Both  research  and  demonstration  actions 
will be needed to address these questions 
in a convergent manner.

Capacity-building at the city level will form 
a fundamental part of this priority. The use 
of innovative green finance requires the de-
velopment  of  appropriate  capacity  among 
urban administrators and leaders.

Public policies (2): Urban 
Innovation Policies that Work

All R&I actions outlined above will respond 
to the call for evidence-based policies in all 
areas of EU funding. Consequently, a dedi-
cated cross-cutting R&I action will consist 
of  an  ongoing  evaluation  programme  on 
‘Urban Innovation Policies that Work’. The 
objective  of  the  proposed  R&I  action  will 
be to: develop a systematic review of dif-
ferent  types  of  innovation  and  sustain-
ability  policies  implemented  in  different 
realms,  from  ‘traditional’  R&D  subsidies 
to  co-working  spaces  and  training  pro-
grammes; collect beneficiary-level infor-
mation for the largest programmes that 
show  the  most  significant  potential  for 
replication in other contexts and imple-
ment full counterfactual impact analy-
sis;  research  the  factors  conditioning 
the  sustainability  success  and  failure 

of  the  various  policies  in  order  to  provide 
insights  into  how  to  improve  existing  and 
new policies; implement small-scale experi-
ments, with suitable parallel and controlled 
counterfactual testing, to evaluate the im-
pact of changes to the structure of existing 
and future policies and programmes.

R&I actions in this area will also involve the 
organisation of training sessions and dem-
onstration sessions to diffuse the culture of 
policy  evaluation  in  urban  administrations 
and  co-create  new  practical  policy  options 
and solutions based on solid evidence from 
evaluation and experimentation.

In addition, R&I actions in this area will in-
volve:  demonstration  and  information  ses-
sions open to citizens on the benefits of vari-
ous Horizon-Europe-funded programmes in 
the field of environmental sustainability to 
increase awareness and direct participation; 
and analysis of the most appropriate incen-
tives to facilitate the active participation of 
citizens throughout their lifetime, following 
the evolution of their needs and interests.

Finally, a dedicated set of R&I actions in this 
priority will explore the economic viability of 
technological  solutions  and  public  policies 
that work in the best-performing cities and 
explore  through  research,  demonstration 
and  living  labs  how  and  under  what  con-
ditions  these  can  be  transferred  into  other 
cities in the EU.

RESILIENCE

80

The disruptive impacts of 
single or multiple shocks, such 
as climate change, loss of 
biodiversity, air pollution or 
natural risks, create problems, 
expose cities to vulnerabilities 
and might create additional 
long-term stresses. Modern 
society has become remarkably 
skilled at understanding how to 
mitigate conventional risks that 
can be relatively easily isolated 
and managed. However, there is 
still poor understanding of the 
complex stresses and shocks 
created in the interconnected 
systems of a city, which 
traditional forecasting and 
prevention find hard to predict. 

In  complex  and  interconnected  systems 
such as cities, feedback loops (mutual caus-
al interactions between different systems), 
threshold effects (sudden and radical chan-
ges which occur after surpassing a certain 
limit)  and  cascading  disruptions  (impacts 
that  generate  a  sequence  of  impacts  in 
other  systems,  creating  wider  disruptions) 
can  lead  to  sudden  and  dramatic  break-
downs. These situations have recently been 
becoming  more  likely,  and  many  of  these 
complex risks are now shaping a ‘new nor-
mal’ that in turn might create its own dis-
ruptions and spillovers in the years ahead.

Urban  resilience  has  many  definitions, 
most of which take into account the ability 
to  manage  the  wide  range  of  shocks  and 
stresses  that  may  occur  in  a  city.  There  is 
no  standard  definition.  However,  this  re-
port adopts a multidisciplinary and holistic 

 definition  of  resilience.  It  is  defined  as  the 
capacity  of  individuals,  communities,  insti-
tutions,  businesses  and  systems  within  a 
city  to  survive,  adapt  and  grow,  no  matter 
what  kinds  of  chronic  stresses  and  acute 
shocks they experience (70).

A resilient city assesses, plans and acts to 
prepare  for  and  respond  to  all  shocks  and 
stresses, whether expected and unexpected, 
natural or human made. Building urban re-
silience requires looking at a city holistically 
– understanding the systems that make up 
the city and the interdependencies and risks 
they may face. By strengthening the under-
lying fabric of a city and better understand-
ing potential shocks and stresses, a city can 
improve its development trajectory and the 
health and well-being of its citizens. 

Why are we dealing with 
this issue?

Urban  resilience  has  been  gaining  mo-
mentum  in  the  last  decade  in  the  polit-
ical agenda. It has emerged as one of the 
core  principles  of  sustainable  urban  de-
velopment  and  features  as  an  important 
theme  across  five  major  global  agendas: 
the  Sendai  Framework  for  Disaster  Risk 
Reduction  2015-2030,  the  UN  SDG,  the 
Paris  Agreement  on  climate  change,  the 
IPPCC Summary for Policymakers on global 
warming of 1.5°C, the Habitat III New Urban 
Agenda  and  the  Urban  Agenda  for  the  EU. 
In addition to the explicit mention of resili-
ence  as  one  of  the  priorities  established 
in  SDG  11  ‘Make  cities  and  human  settle-
ments inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustain-
able’, other relevant international initiatives 

70  100 Resilient Cities http://www.100resilientcities.org/resources/

  RESILIENCE
  RESILIENCE

81

are  currently  tackling  urban  resilience  (71). 
Moreover,  the  urban  resilience  movement 
that  was  spearheaded  by  non-profit  and 
multi-lateral  organisations  almost  a  dec-
ade  ago  now  has  an  ever  growing  num-
ber of global and city actors committed to 
strengthening  its  aims  around  the  world, 
with  climate  change  adaptation,  disaster 
risk reduction, resource efficiency and com-
munity development the main entry points 
to the resilience field. 

At  an  EU  level,  urban  resilience  is  present 
in  several  flagship  documents  such  as  the 
EU Adaptation Strategy for climate change, 
which  encourages  national,  regional  and 
local adaptation actions  to  contribute to  a 
climate-resilient Europe, the Urban Agenda 
for the EU, where resilience is also related 
to  climate-resilience  through  the  Climate 
Adaptation  priority  and  the  EU  Sendai 
Action Plan for disaster risk reduction that 
translates  the  Sendai  priorities  into  EU 
policies.  Furthermore,  resilience  in  urban 
environments  has  been  addressed  from 

several  perspectives  in  H2020  societal 
challenges  (SCs)  (SC2,  SC5,  SC6,  SC7), 
mobilising  important  EU  R&I  resources. 
Especially,  ecosystem-based  approaches 
have  been  developed  by  a  wide  range 
of  DGs  (DG  Environment,  DG  European 
Civil  Protection  and  Humanitarian  Aid 
Operations,  DG  International  Cooperation 
and  Development),  and 
through  key 
Europe-wide initiatives such as the creation 
of  the  Covenant  of  Mayors  for  the  EU 
and  the  platform  for  climate  adaptation, 
Climate-ADAPT. 

Logic of the intervention

Research, policy decisions and actions are 
needed  to  address  urban  resilience  in  a 
focused,  comprehensive  and  systemic 
way.  The  typologies  of  R&I  actions 
span  the  development  of  new  tools  and 
mechanisms  and  the  assessment  of 

71  UNISDR Making Cities Resilient campaign; 100 Resilient Cities, pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation; UN-
Habitat City Resilience Profiling Tool; ICLEI Resilient Cities; OECD Resilient Cities research project; World Bank 
Cities Resilience Program.

82

impacts  and  knowledge  transfer  as  well  as 
experimenting  with  new  solutions  on  the 
ground  and  a  deeper  understanding  of  the 
root causes of resilience. The selection of R&I 
policy issues and actions  should contribute 
to  global  and  European  agreements,  to 
current  city  resilience  commitments  and 
to  tackling  the  top  risks  and  future  urban 
trends.  In  all  these  R&I  priorities,  citizens 
and  cities  are  at  the  core,  both  as  active 
producers  of  knowledge  and  as  spaces  for 
exploration  and  research  by  the  academic 
and innovation communities. However, cities 
are not only understood as isolated systems; 
our  systemic  approach  means  considering 
them as embedded in spatial systems. With 
this approach, the resilience of cities is part 
of the resilience of their hinterlands, national 
resilience and even EU-wide resilience.

Since  the  resilience  concept  is  relatively 
new, apart from R&I actions, the policy land-
scape needs to catch up to set the following 
pre-conditions  to  build  the  foundations  for 
resilience. 

1.  Capacity building: New methods, 
tools and processes need to be 
developed to advance and embed 
resilience understanding at different 
city scales, from individual to 
organisational resilience within cities. 
Substantial efforts are needed by 
the municipalities to strengthen the 
resilience capacity of both city staff 
and citizens. For example, cities can:
a.  foster exchanges of urban 

solutions and mutual learning by 
developing a European network of 
municipal advisers or officers that 
work on innovation, science and 
resilience (e.g. the Chief Resilience 
Officers in city administrations 
from 100 Resilient Cities); 

b.  design decision-support 

systems that help cities build 
internal capacity, such as 
toolkits focused on developing 
individual and organisational 
resilience within the city;

  RESILIENCE

83

c.  engage citizens in addressing 
resilience: innovative methods 
are needed to engage citizens 
in understanding risks and 
vulnerabilities and to support 
them in taking actions to 
increase their resilience.

2.  Strategies and plans: Support cities in 

developing innovative roadmaps to build 
their urban resilience through inclusive, 
data driven approaches such as:
a.  developing and testing products 
to facilitate the preparation and 
implementation of strategies 
for adaptation and resilience;
b.  defining and developing different 
city (or district) vulnerability 
profiles, which depend on economic, 
social, geographic, demographic, 
cultural, institutional, governance 
and environmental factors.

3.  Financial mechanisms: Incorporate 
innovative financial mechanisms 
to address the lack of money and 
financial capacity of most cities 
(especially small and medium-
size cities) to adapt buildings and 
infrastructures to be sustainable, 
smart and energy efficient.

Above all, urban resilience policies need to be 
flexible, inclusive, reflective and robust, with 
policies  that  work  across  sectors  and  scales, 
empower other actors, develop new processes 
and strengthen institutional capacity. 

Priorities and R&I actions 
for resilience

R&I priority actions should give answers 
to the following challenges:

1.  advance resilience understanding 
and the institutional and social 
capacity of cities and citizens to 
implement resilience
futureproof and enhance the 
performance of the most 
vulnerable city systems

2. 

3.  address the major risks faced by 

European cities such as climate 
change, cyber dependency, social 
conflicts and social inclusion, 
economic volatility, public health 
safety and well-being. 

Addressing major risks 
in cities

Resilience  of  cities  to  climate  change  will 
require  R&I  actions  to:  map  the  econom-
ic  costs  and  social  implications  of  climate 
change  impacts;  support  knowledge  trans-
fer to further develop and disseminate ex-
isting  technologies  and  pilots;  integrate  in-
novative and affordable adaptation solutions 
in urban planning; map social vulnerability to 
climate  change;  further  develop  bio-climatic 
solutions/materials  and  spread  their  ap-
plication  on  the  ground;  develop  tools  and 
methods  to  make  cities  adapted  to  higher 
frequency of extreme weather events.

84

Cyber dependency increases the vulnerabil-
ity of cities to cyberattacks. Offensive cyber 
capabilities  are  developing  more  rapidly 
than  cybersecurity.  R&I  actions  are  needed 
to:  develop  mechanisms  to  test  the  cyber 
defences  on  cities’  critical  and  strategic 
infrastructure  (public  transport,  hos pitals, 
energy,  water  and  wastewater,  nuclear 
power);  create  tools  to  block  cyberattacks 
and  prevent  ransomware  attacks  and  data 
fraud and theft; identify fake news and pre-
vent their spread in society; detect security 
breaches and associated technological risks. 
Advances in cybersecurity governance mech-
anisms and technology need to be provided 
to mitigate the risk of disruptive attacks.

The functioning of cities is heavily depend-
ent on energy supply. Energy ensures vital 
services  in  cities:  mobility,  (tele)communi-
cations,  healthcare,  heating  and  cooling 
and  lighting.  R&I  actions  are  necessary 
to:  address  potential  blackouts  or  power 
shortages;  develop  protocols  for  when 
minimum  energy  is  available;  generate  al-
ternative  sources  of  production,  storage 
and   distribution;  develop  higher  perform-
lower  CO2-emitting  systems; 
ance  and 
support  the  development  of  strategies  to 
prevent  power  outages  and  infrastructure 
breakdown;  understand  changes  in  the 
way  energy  is  produced  and  the  likelihood 
of  these  changes  triggering  large-scale 
labour-market disruptions.

Water  and  food  are  essential  goods  for 
life  that  are  normally  not  produced  in  cit-
ies.  Since  both  goods  rely  heavily  on  the 
logistics  and  distribution  systems,  short-
ages and disruptions might have devastat-
ing  effects  in  city  life.  Water  management 
remains  heavily  dominated  by  traditional, 
human-built (i.e. ‘grey’) infrastructure, while 
the  enormous  potential  for  nature-based 

solutions  remains  under-used.  Moreover, 
water infrastructures need to be adapted to 
rising demand by increasing their efficiency, 
performance  and  circularity. 
Innovative 
urban  food-production  systems  need  be 
explored (vertical and roof farming, indoor 
agriculture), along with methods to prevent 
food  waste  and  boost  circular  approaches 
and mechanisms to tackle risks of malnutri-
tion  and  unhealthy  diets,  especially  in  dis-
advantaged people or through contingency 
plans for food crises (food shortages or em-
bargos, shocks in commodity prices).

A  lack  of  infrastructure  resilience  mani-
fests itself in adverse impacts, such as loss 
of power supplies or sewer flooding. Such an 
impact is felt in specific places and commun-
ities and therefore infrastructure resilience is 
context  specific.  A  new  generation  of  infra-
structure  projects  is  necessary  to  achieve 
development goals, including water security, 
disaster  risk  reduction  and  resilience  to  cli-
mate change. R&I actions should increase the 
resilience  of  key  urban  infrastructures  (mo-
bility,  energy,  water  and  sewage,  waste)  by 
developing new methods of planning and in-
vestment that reinforce the capacity of cities 
to  survive,  adapt  and  grow  no  matter  what 
chronic stresses and acute shocks they face. 

The recent financial and migration crises have 
exacerbated  social  conflicts  and  increased 
the polarisation of society. Rising income and 
wealth disparities together with a labour mar-
ket characterised by high-quality jobs  for  (a 
few)  highly  skilled  people  and  an  increas-
ingly precarious situation for most citizens 
are  creating  profound  social  instability. 
Socially resilient cities need R&I actions to 
better  understand  and  address  social  con-
flicts,  foster  inclusion,  create  employment 
and integration opportunities, stop the rise 
of populisms and terrorism attacks derived 

  RESILIENCE

85

from  social  fracture  and  create  oppor-
tunities  for  the  most  vulnerable  groups. 
Understanding  how  inequalities  in  cities 
create  vulnerabilities  and  additional  risks 
is  crucial  along  with  identifying  interven-
tions  that  could  serve  multiple  resilience 
purposes,  from  disaster  risk  reduction  to 
improvements in basic services.

Cities  host  key  value-added  activities  de-
veloped by public and private investments. 
Economic unrest and increasing economic 
and geopolitical tensions create substantial 
risks.  Political  and  economic  crises  cause 
widespread  fear  and  might  have  devas-
tating  spillover  effects.  R&I  actions  should 
advance  knowledge  about  buffer  mechan-
isms  and  adaptation  measures  to  address 
potential market crashes that lead to short-
ages of essential goods and services, cities 
shrinking  due  to  the  withdrawal  of  large 
companies or the decline of economic sec-
tors. R&I actions should also address early- 
warning detection systems and mitigation 
measures for economic shocks.

The  concentration  of  people  in  cities 
 increases  vulnerability  to  public  health 
risks. Human pandemics in cities and the 
increase  in  chronic  and  mental  diseases 
due to current lifestyles, ageing and lone-
liness are hot issues in the management 
of  cities.  R&I  actions  should  develop 
mechanisms  to  prevent  human  pan-
demics  and  protect  cities  from  the  in-
tentional (terrorist attacks) and uninten-
tional  (anti-vaccination  groups)  spread 
of  infectious  diseases  and  to  address 
food-related  health  risks,  such  as:  re-
sistance  to  antibiotics  transmitted  by 
meat  consumption;  pesticides,  metal, 
contaminants and bio-plastic accumu-
lation  in  food;  and  risks  associated 
with ultra-processed foodstuffs.

86

Future-proofing our 
city systems 

To  increase  the  resilience  of  key  urban 
infrastructures (mobility, energy, water and 
sewage, waste) R&I actions are essential, 
such as: developing integrated approaches 
to  incorporate  analytics  to  measure  the 
resilience  of  infrastructure  systems;  new 
methods of planning and investment that 
reinforce cities’ capacity to survive, adapt 
and grow no matter what chronic stresses 
and acute shocks they face; and emergency 
systems in case of shortages or disruptions. 
Better  knowledge  is  also  needed  on  the 
methods  and  potentialities  of  integrating 
grey,  green  and  blue  infrastructures  to 
tackle  city  risks,  i.e.,  support  cities  and 
service providers in creating new ways to 
assess their water- and sanitation-related 
risks  and  demonstrate  how  nature-based 
solutions can increase resilience to water-
related  hazards  while  simultaneously 
delivering  additional  benefits.  In  addition, 
R&I should further investigate mechanisms 
to  prevent  potential  shocks  and  the  risks 
faced  by  cities’  cultural  heritage.  Finally, 

innovations should investigate how nature-
based  solutions  can  future-proof  cultural 
heritage  and  further  develop  methods  to 
assess vulnerabilities of assets from both 
shocks and stresses.

City  vulnerability  profiles  and  shock  and 
stresses  maps  adapted  to  the  differ-
ent  scales  of  cities  need  to  be  developed, 
together  with  early  warning  systems  that 
alert  cities  to  and  prevent  hazards,  and 
contingency  plans.  Widely  accepted  and 
comparable  frameworks,  inventories,  in-
dexes  and  scoreboards,  audit  and  bench-
marking protocols, risk charts and coordin-
ation  protocols  among  service  provider 
tools  need  to  be  elaborated.  All  of  these 
should be sensitive to the size and scale of 
a  city  and  address  the  robustness,  adapt-
ability  and  transformability  dimensions  of 
resilience.  Additionally,  R&I  actions  should 
provide  platforms  that  gather  and  make 
accessible  data  on  existing  solutions  and 
practices,  along  with  visual  user-friendly 
tools to deliver information.

  RESILIENCE

87

It  is  also  critical  to  understand  the  inter-
dependencies  between  the  different  infra-
structure systems and the potential cascad-
ing effects. Special attention should be paid 
to  forecasting,  buffer  systems  and  mitiga-
tion  actions  for  multiple  shocks  and  to  in-
novative financial mechanisms to tackle the 
necessary actions to increase the resilience 
of  the  cities,  as  well  as  to  creating  safe-
guards against maladaptation.

At  the  institutional  level,  resilience-expert 
staff need to be part of urban planning of-
fices. At the citizen level, innovative methods 
from  behavioural  sciences  are  needed  to 
engage citizens in understanding risks and 
vulnerabilities and taking action to increase 
city  resilience  and  to  identify  the  correct 
incentives  (nudges)  for  people  to  invest 
in  protecting  themselves  from 
‘prob-
abilistic’ events and not rely exclusively on 
city-planner actions (72, 73, 74, 75)

Foundations for building 
resilience

Important skills need to be developed to ad-
vance resilience understanding at different 
city scales, from individual to organisational 
resilience within the cities. Major efforts are 
needed to strengthen the institutional cap-
acity for resilience by building the capacity 
of both city staff and citizens. 

72  Da Silva, J., Kernahan, S., Luque, A., ‘Systems Approach to meeting the Challenges of Urban Climate Change’, 

International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, Vol. 4 (2), 2012, pp. 125–145 http://www.tandfonline.
com/doi/ full/10.1080/19463138.2012.718279?scroll=top&#x0026;needAccess=true

73  Martin-Breen, P. and Marty Anderies, J., The Bellagio Initiative, Background Paper: Resilience: A Literature Review, 
Institute of Development Studies, The Resource Alliance, The Rockefeller Foundation, 2011. https://opendocs.ids.
ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456789/3692/ Bellagio-Rockefeller%20bp.pdf?sequence=1

74  Meerown, S., Newell, J. P., Stults, M., ‘Defining Urban Resilience: A Review’, Landsc. Urban Plan., 147, 2016, pp. 

38–49. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0169204615002418

75  100 Resilient Cities, http://www.100resilientcities.org

CROSS-CUTTING 
PRIORITY: 
GOVERNANCE

90

Urban  governance  is  a  complex  concept 
that involves multiple actors. It affects how 
public,  private  and  civic  life,  business  and 
markets, sociotechnical systems, and urban 
ecologies are organised and managed, how 
city affairs are conducted and how the vary-
ing actors behave and interact. Governance 
is  a  broader  notion  than  government  and 
refers to the relationship between civil so-
ciety and the state, between rulers and the 
ruled,  the  government  and  the  governed. 
It  includes  the  many  ways  individuals  and 
public  and  private  institutions  plan  and 
manage  the  common  affairs  of  the  city. 
The  SDG  as  a  whole,  and  SDG  11  in  par-
ticular as well as the Urban Agenda for the 
EU, embed and reflect within them what the 
global community sees as good and urgent 
governance  –  a  set  of  principles  that  are 
increasingly  etched  into  proposed  policies, 
strategies, criteria, norms, rules, regulations 
and laws.

According to UN-Habitat, urban governance 
is the enabling environment, which requires 
adequate  legal  frameworks  along  with 
effective  political,  managerial  and  admin-
istrative  processes  to  enable  the  local  gov-
ernment  response  to  the  needs  of  citizens. 
It  can  be  defined  as  the  many  ways  that 
institutions  and  individuals  organise  the 
day-to-day management of a city, and the 
processes used for effectively realising the 
short-term and long-term agenda of a city’s 
development. Urban governance is the soft-
ware  that  enables  the  urban  hardware  to 
function. Effective urban governance today 
is  characterised  as  democratic  and  inclu-
sive, long-term and integrated, multi-scale 
and  multilevel,  territorial,  proficient  and 
conscious of the digital age (76). 

76  https://unhabitat.org/governance/

A  central  principle  today  is  public  open 
governance.  This  is  the  practice  of  facili-
tating  individual  and  group  dialogue  along 
with  engagement  in  collaborative  exchan-
ges that enable citizens to initiate and ad-
vance discussions and ideas, beyond mere-
ly  responding  to  ideas  or  policies  initiated 
by  government.  It  holds,  too,  that  citizens 
have the right to access the documents and 
proceedings  of  their  government  to  allow 
effective public oversight, so increasing ac-
countability  and  transparency.  It  involves 
using  the  potential  of  open  data  as  well  as 
notions of crowdsourcing ideas, e-governance 
or  testing  new  forms  of  decision-making, 
from citizen juries to liquid democracy.

Why are we dealing with 
this issue?

Our  world  is  becoming  increasingly  urban. 
Cities  are  identified  as  a  favourable  arena 
for  collective  decision-making.  Local  gov-
ernments  have  the  proximity  to  translate 
the  principles  of  good  urban  governance 
into effective management, governance and 
development of a city, and ensure equitable 
access to citizenship. However, they require 
adequate  legal  frameworks  and  efficient 
political,  managerial  and  administrative 
processes,  as  well  as  mechanisms,  guide-
lines and tools to respond to citizens’ needs. 
Aspects such as legitimacy, representative-
ness, accountability and efficiency are typ-
ical dimensions of good governance.

The  governance  of  cities  is  witnessing  im-
portant challenges in adapting to the current 
scenario, where more actors and demands 
than  before  are  present.  Among  important 
global  trends  are  economic  globalisation, 

  CROSS-CUTTING PRIORITY: GOVERNANCE

91

privatisation  of  traditional  state  functions, 
the increasing importance of public-private 
partnerships  as  well  as  greater  needs  for 
private  capital  for  urban  development  due 
to  public  budget  constraints.  These  and 
other  trends  have  leveraged  an  increasing 
presence of the private sector in cities’ de-
velopment  and  the  proliferation  of  public 
agencies.  In  parallel,  proactive  urban  gov-
ernance  combines  the  claims  of  civil  soci-
ety  organisations,  community-based  or-
ganisations and other formal and informal 
groups  to  participate  in  decision-making. 
Public authorities are giving space to these 
groups to be involved in policy design and 
decision-making by co-designing, co-creat-
ing and even co-producing policy outcomes.

The  watchword  is  the  ‘right  to  the  city’ 
movement, which is expressed in the rise of 
policy labs, new participation platforms and 
new  attempts  at  collective  decision-mak-
ing,  such  as  citizen  juries.  The  frustrations 
with the speed of governments in respond-
ing to urgent issues is also witnessed by re-
volts of young people, as in school strikes, 

or  the  development  of  organisations,  such 
as  Extinction  Rebellion,  who  stretch  the 
boundaries of legality.

The sources of political power have become 
more  diffuse.  New  governance  arrange-
ments  have  created  new  institutions  and 
empowered  new  actors,  while  disempow-
ering others. The roles of business and civic 
leadership in cities rearticulate relationships 
and create public-private partnerships in a 
continuing process in which conflicting or di-
verse interests need to be accommodated.

Urban governance is a critical issue in shap-
ing the future of cities. Policies and decisions 
affect: urban development – city design and 
where  and  how  to  build,  which  social  and 
economic activities are boosted and which 
transport infrastructure developed; the pro-
vision of fresh water, energy and food; sew-
age, recycling and waste collection systems; 
the  connections  of  a  city  with  its  regional 
hinterland and the rest of the world. These 

92

The  profound  transformations  that  have 
affected  cities  in  recent  decades  make 
urban  governance  a  cross-cutting  issue.  It 
is embedded in different EU policies such as 
the Urban Agenda for the EU and EU region-
al  and  urban  development  (78),  as  well  as 
OECD reports (79) and global agendas such 
as the Habitat III New Urban Agenda (80). All 
of  these  emphasise  the  need  to  reinforce 
urban  governance  to  address  global  chal-
lenges.  Several  H2020  research  priorities 
have  addressed  governance  issues,  such 
as  the  recently  launched  ‘Governance  for 
the  Future’  programme.  However,  further 
R&I  actions  are  expected  to  be  developed 
to  address  the  governance  processes  and 
arrangements needed to govern the innova-
tive cities of the 21st century. 

planning and policy interventions have ex-
tremely longstanding consequences, linked 
not  only  to  infrastructure  (which  can  last 
for decades) but also to potential lock-in ef-
fects for the future (77). Such decisions are 
not simply a matter of land use but a mat-
ter of redistribution. 

Often, most of these decisions are taken in 
a scenario of uncertainty, political power 
asymmetries  in  relations  with  national 
states,  limited  institutional  capacities, 
path  and  context  dependencies,  fragility 
and  low  levels  of  autonomy,  coalitions 
with  private  and  civil-society  actors, 
outdated  policy  silos  and  other  barriers 
that 
impede  decision-making.  Urban 
governance  institutions  are  required  to 
be  equipped  to  address  such  risks  and 
challenges.

77  Burdett, R., Rode, P., Shankar, P., Vahidy, S., Governing urban futures, LSE Cities, London School of Economics and 

Political Science, London, 2014.

78  https://ec.europa.eu/info/eu-regional-and-urban-development_en
79  Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Governing the city, OECD, Paris, 2015.
80  Habitat III, Policy Paper 4 – Urban Governance, Capacity and Institutional Development.

  CROSS-CUTTING PRIORITY: GOVERNANCE

93

Priorities and R&I actions 
for governance

These  actions  can  be  grouped  around 
the following priorities:

1.  defining urban governance
2.  understanding the complexities 

of urban governance

3.  governing the cities of the future
4. 

citizen engagement.

Defining urban governance

The scientific analysis of urban governance 
has  been  dominated  by  case  studies  and 
by  theoretical  claims  with  little  empirical 
support  (81).  Urban  decisions  might  have 
long-term implications that not only affect 
the boundaries of individual cities. However, 
little  information  exists  on  how  cities  are 
governed, how governance works in differ-
ent  contexts,  what  are  the  dimensions  of 
good  governance  in  the  European  context, 
the governance gaps and deficits EU cities 
face, how policy outcomes can be measured 
and even the limitations of the governance 
concept  itself.  Investigating  the  different 
urban governance landscapes is necessary 
to understand the way cities are governed 
and how decisions are made (or not made). 
The  differences  between  cities  linked  to 
their  different  sizes,  development  patterns 
or political approaches should be identified 
and good (and bad) practices examined. 

We  lack  global  data  and  global  comparative 
research on urban governance. Regardless of 
the ever-increasing availability of information 

on  institutional  arrangements  in  individual 
cities,  knowledge  and  methodologies  to  cap-
ture and compare the wide spectrum of urban 
governance systems are limited. Some efforts 
have been made, such as the global surveys 
on urban governance launched by LSE Cities in 
partnership with UN-Habitat and United Cities 
and  Local  Governments  but  further  research 
is needed. 

R&I actions need to develop and nurture a 
solid  and  multidisciplinary  theoretical  field 
on  urban  governance  and  to  provide  cit-
ies  with  tools  to  collect,  analyse,  compare 
and  visualise  results  to  address  the  chal-
lenges  faced  by  their  current  governance 
systems.  The  influence  of  aspects  such  as 
levels,  organisation-
size,  development 
al  skills  and  capabilities  and  the  cultural 
and  legal  contexts  in  which  urban  govern-
ance occurs have to be integrated into the 
frameworks  and  methods  proposed.  This 
knowledge system should not only consid-
er cities and metropolitan regions, but also 
their complex, evolving connections to their 
hinterlands,  rural-urban  interactions  and 
the effects on governance of the networks 
of collaboration in which cities are involved, 
together  with  the  influence  of  urban  gov-
ernance at the global level.

The complexities of 
urban governance

Urban  governance  embraces  a  multitude  of 
aspects  that  are  often  in  conflict.  Cities  are 
confronted  with  increasing  responsibilities, 
such as addressing some of the most global-
ly  relevant  challenges  such  as  urbanisation 
or climate change. The governance of cities 

81  da Cruz, N.F., Rode, P., McQuarrie, M., ‘New urban governance: A review of current themes and future priorities’, 

Journal of Urban Affairs, Vol. 41, 2019, pp. 1-19.

94

and the governance of the planet are inter-
twined.  However,  current  governance  sys-
tems do not match the functional scales of 
today’s  globalised  cities.  Present  debates 
gravitate around the ‘fit’ between the size of 
the  administrative  boundary  and  the  extent 
of  the  challenges  that  cities  have  to  address. 
The  absence  of  directly  responsible  actors  or 
governing bodies at a global level, cities’ limited 
administrative  and  jurisdictional  scales 
and  national legal and fiscal contexts make 
it  almost  impossible  to  tackle  these  issues 
without  defining  new  frameworks  that  re-
cognise  the  role  that  cities  can  and  must 
play. The existing sectoral divisions of power, 
together  with  often  relatively  short-sighted 
political  cycles  and  concerns,  make  it  very 
difficult to manage the large-scale functional 
connections linking cities to their regions and 
the  Earth  system.  Low  levels  of  autonomy, 
fragmented and overlapping jurisdictions and 
responsibilities, difficulties in working across 
governance tiers, insufficient public budgets, 
short-termism,  lack  of  national  support  for 
urban agendas and financial deficits are just 
some of the issues that constrain the regular 
practice of city governance.

Priority should be given to R&I actions that 
advance multi-level governance approaches 
to  bridge  geographic  scales  and  deliver 
knowledge  on  the  best  scale  to  address 
each  of  the  relevant  issues  faced,  along 
with investigations into innovative financing 
methods. Further knowledge is needed on the 
appropriate  scales  for  addressing  different 
problems  (global,  neighbourhood  or  even 
household),  the  interconnections  between 
scales,  the  governance  arrangements  that 
may align cities’ operations, dynamics and 
processes with the global challenges faced 

nowadays and the design of national urban 
policies to fulfil the crucial role cities play. 

Urban governance has to include ‘stakehold-
ers’  in  decision-making.  But  who  are  these 
stakeholders  and  at  what  level  of  govern-
ment should they operate? Inclusivity among 
multiple  stakeholders  is  a  critical  issue.  We 
need  much  more  knowledge  on  how  to  in-
clude a multitude of relatively autonomous 
actors with limited resources for and interest 
in collaboration. This is the nudging system 
to  tackle  underrepresentation  of  vulnerable 
groups in public decision-making.

Mayors  and  civil  servants  face  powerful 
business  interests,  often  in  a  scenario  of 
budget  restrictions  and  difficulties  in  de-
livering  the  increasing  quantity  of  public 
services that citizens demand. Good practi-
ces in good governance need to be explored 
in different contexts as do the mechanisms 
through  which  powerful  interests  influence 
the public life of cities. 

At  the  operational  level,  urban  decision- 
makers  are  expected  to  match  strategic 
plans and projects and long-term decisions 
with four-year political terms, often in con-
texts  of  inflexible  bureaucracies  and  rigid 
rules.  Citizens  demand  improved  service 
delivery, well-functioning infrastructure and 
economic  dynamism  but  are  reluctant  to 
pay more taxes. Some leaders have strong 
power and are influential at city and high-
er  levels,  work  in  networks,  can  negotiate 
and have access to influential boards. Many 
other  city  leaders  have  to  develop  their 
work with insufficient formal authority and 
limited  budgets.  Furthermore,  city  mayors 
often  face  highly  departmentalised  gov-
ernance  structures,  often  leading  to  frag-

  CROSS-CUTTING PRIORITY: GOVERNANCE
  CROSS-CUTTING PRIORITY: GOVERNANCE

95

mented policy initiatives, which might have 
particularly  adverse  effects.  R&I  actions 
need to test different approaches to break-
ing  silos  to  link  creative  bureaucracy  (82) 
with  accountability  and  responsibility,  re-
place  traditional  hierarchical  coordination 
with  more  networked  forms  of  work  and 
boost inter-disciplinary approaches that en-
able joint work between the managers and 
officers of different city departments.

Governing the cities 
of the future

The governance of the cities of the future 
faces  strong  transformations  and  tran-
sitions,  such  as  those  linked  to  the  emer-
gence of new technologies in city life, major 
disruptions that might affect local govern-
ment  operations,  the  need  to  lead  urban 
transitions  and  transformative  solutions 
and new trends in urban commoning. 

ICT  technologies  and  the  digitising  world 
are  considered  as  key  enablers  of  the 
urban  transformation  and  are  dramatically 

changing  the  urban  scenario.  Smart  urban-
isation and its sensors, devices, connectivity 
and  cloud  services  are  powering  open- 
innovation  systems,  evolving   co-creative 
decision-making  and  increasingly  trans-
forming  urban  governance.  Cities  are  in-
teresting  test  beds  for  experimenting  with 
these technologies, but the universe opened 
by ICT, open access to information and big 
data  might  also  be  viewed  as  an  inherent 
threat  and  a  source  of  concern.  Data  pro-
tection,  who  owns  data,  for  what  data  is 
used  and  what  control  might  citizens  and 
local  governments  exert  in  the  use  of  the 
data they produce are distressing issues. 

Cities  are  increasingly  affected  by  exter-
nal events, which often lead to significant 
local  disruptions.  The  most  recent  trends 
are linked to economic recession, populism 
and civic unrest, but others might happen 
in the near future and interfere with urban 
governance. The phenomenon of populism 
is linked to the decline in trust in author-
ities,  experts,  elites  and  decision-mak-
ers.  Rising  wealth  gaps  and  increasing 
inequalities  have  made  lay  people  feel 
left outside of growth and well-being dy-
namics.  Public  opinion  is  increasingly  led 
by  information  shared  by  popular  peers 

82  Landry, C. and Caust, M., The Creative Bureaucracy & its Radical Common Sense. Comedia, Gloucestershire, 2017.

96

and information sources that are opaque 
and  not  independentaly  evaluated.  City 
officials  are  expected  to  lead  transitions, 
innov ations  and  transformative  solutions. 
R&I should provide them with mechanisms 
to cope with disorders and address change 
and uncertainty. 

Urban  commoning  is  a  rising  movement  in 
Europe (83) and beyond that considers urban 
space as a space of social interactions where 
resources are collectively owned and shared. 
It  emerged  as  a  reaction  to  the  retreat  of 
the  welfare  state  and  its  defence  of  public 
goods,  and  to  the  increasing  privat isation 
of places and issues that used to be in the 
public sphere: public services, social housing 
and public lands. It aims to empower citizens 
and defend their right to the city, developing 
direct  democracy  mechanisms,  new  modes 
of access and management of urban resour-

ces  and  more  active  participation  in  urban 
issues relevant to citizenship. Different goods 
and  services  are  now  considered  as  urban 
(or global) commons, such as public spaces, 
housing, energy, food, clean air or even health 
and  well-being,  and  citizenship  dynamics 
have been activated. R&I actions should ex-
plore  how  innovative  institutional  arrange-
ments and responsibilities might enable and 
control the expansion of urban commoning. 

Citizen engagement

Engaging  citizens  in  urban  governance  is 
a  priority.  Cities  are  testing  new  ways  of 
working  with  citizens,  including  new  forms 
of  deliberative  democracy  in  multilevel  gov-
ernance.  With  national  governments  and  the 
EU in need of better tools for listening to and 
engaging with its citizens, cities might be at 

83  Bologna Regulation for the Care and Regeneration of Urban Commons, 2014.

  CROSS-CUTTING PRIORITY: GOVERNANCE

97

R&I  actions  are  needed  to  inspire  all  levels 
of  government  to  build  societies  where 
people come first, making a positive impact 
on  the  way  decisions  are  taken  in  Europe 
and to promote a new sense of ownership 
through new forms of citizen engagement. 
Working  with  cities  is  an  opportunity  for 
Europe  to  reconnect  with  its  citizens  and, 
therefore,  successfully  tackle  today’s  chal-
lenges. To make the most of opportunities, 
we need to work together across all levels 
of government and with our citizens. 

the  forefront  of  participatory  approaches 
and inspire all levels of government.

Citizen  engagement  ranges  from  civic  en-
gagement and public participation, to citizen 
science and do-it-yourself prac tices, offering 
an effective way to connect citizens, experts 
and policymakers (84). Different initiatives in 
Europe aim to involve citizens in a dialogue 
about  how  to  govern  the  cities,  to  work 
closely with citizens and civil society to ad-
dress key problems and reinforce trust and 
ownership of public policies. One example is 
the EUROCITIES Campaign, ‘Cities4Europe – 
Europe for citizens’ that showed how work-
ing  directly  with  citizens  can  help  develop 
better urban and European solutions. 

Citizen engagement might contribute to re-
search, accelerate market creation and fa-
cilitate closure of ethical debates on science 
and technology-related issues. Citizens are 
increasingly demanding to be engaged with 
scientific  and  technological  issues  and  to 
have a voice on R&I decisions and actions 
since  they  place  high  hopes  and  expect-
ations  on  what  science  and  technology 
might deliver for the future. Citizen-science 
actions  are  increasingly  present  in  the 
European  research scenario. 

84  Figueiredo Nascimento, S., Cuccillato, E., Schade, S., Guimarães Pereira, A., Citizen Engagement in Science and 

Policy-Making, JRC Science for Policy Report, 2016 doi: 10.2788/40563.

CROSS-CUTTING 
DIMENSION: 
MEASURING 
INNOVATIVE CITIES

100

This  cross-cutting  dimension  aims  to 
support  cities  in  addressing  emerging 
urban  challenges  by  means  of  such 
approaches  for  an  inclusive  and  cross-
sectorial ‘urban ecosystem’ framework. R&I 
actions within this cross-cutting dimension 
aim  to  advance  existing  knowledge  on 
innovative  urban  ecosystems  by  defining 
new frameworks for the collection of city-
level data to combine these into a systemic 
framework  of  indicators  and  measures 
and  elaborate  them  to  monitor  both  city-
level  evolutionary  trajectories  and  policy 
actions as well as to evaluate impact. R&I 
actions aim to advance our understanding 
of how cities work in practice, where they 
stand in terms of people, place, prosperity 
and  resilience  and  how  their  position 
in  this  space  evolves  over  time  and  in 
response to policies in both developed and 
less-developed  regions  of  Europe.  This 
contributes  to  accomplishing  the  overall 
mission of SDG 11 in a fully  integrated and 
systemic manner.

Measurement  is  central  to  achieving  the 
goal  of  sustainable  innovative  cities.  The 
development  of  suitable  metrics  makes 
it  possible  to  assess  initial  conditions,  set 
credible  goals  and  objectives,  monitor 
progress  and  evaluate  the  impact  (and 
value added) of public policies from a local, 
national  and 
international  comparative 
perspective.  Measurement,  monitoring  and 
evaluation  are  now  common  practice  (and 
binding  requirements)  in  virtually  all  fields 
of EU policymaking, including innovation and 
urban policies. However, a siloed approach 
has  so  far  dominated  existing  metrics  of 
innovation, social and economic well-being 
and  prosperity  in  cities.  Conversely,  the 
measurement,  monitoring  and  evaluation 
in  the 
interventions  proposed 
of  the 
four  dimensions  of  this  report  call  for  a 
fully  integrated  and  systemic  approach 
to  measurement.  Dealing  with  human-
centred innovative cities means developing 
new integrated metrics able to capture inter-
connections  and  feedback  loops  between 
people,  place,  prosperity  and  resilience. 
This,  in  its  turn,  calls  for  a  new  innov-
ative  systemic  approach  to  measurement, 
monitoring and evaluation that needs to build 
upon existing data and methods to combine 
them in innovative ways.

  CROSS-CUTTING DIMENSION: MEASURING INNOVATIVE CITIES

101

Why are we dealing with 
this issue?

of all SDG indicators have a local or urban 
component (89). 

The definition of the SDG has been accom-
panied by identifying a set of widely avail-
able indicators to measure the position and 
advancement  of  countries  towards  their 
achievement.  Currently  232  indicators  (85) 
are  part  of  the  global  indicator  framework 
for the SDG and targets of the 2030 Agenda 
for Sustainable Development. They effective-
ly map all dimensions of the full set of SDG 
and  their  evolution.  In  2017,  the  European 
Commission developed a reference indicator 
framework  to  monitor  the  SDGs  in  the  EU 
(86), aligned with high-level scoreboards for 
EU  policies.  This  has  been  coupled  with  an 
annual review conducted by Eurostat on the 
evolution of this set of indicators (87).

The sub-national and city-level component 
of this measurement framework remains 
significantly  under-developed.  This 
is 
in  sharp  contrast  with  paragraph  45  of 
Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda 
for  Sustainable  Development  (88),  which 
commits  UN  Member  States  to  ‘work 
closely  on  implementation  with  regional 
and 
local  authorities’  and  assigns  a 
central role to cites in the implementation 
of  the  entire  2030  Agenda.  UN-Habitat 
suggests that approximately one in three 

‘The  absence  of  disaggregated  results  for 
each individual EU Member State and sub-
national  entities  (regions,  cities)  is  […]  an 
important  limitation  of  the  current  moni-
toring  of  the  SDGs  in  the  EU  since  na-
tional,  regional  and  local  policies  and  re-
forms are crucial to achieving the goals by 
2030’  (90).  Conversely,  the  UN  Sustainable 
Development  Solutions  Network  regularly 
offers city-level indices for the USA (91).

This  significant  knowledge  gap  has  also 
been  highlighted  by  the  UN  Statistical 
Commission:

‘The  group  agreed  that  territorial/spatial 
disaggregation is fundamental for most of 
the indicators. In particular, the use of geo-
spatial information for the development of 
some of the indicators (for instance in the 
case of cities) was stressed. In this context, 
the need to increase the utilization of data 
at  the  lowest  geographical  sub-nation-
al level was highlighted – as it was also a 
recommendation by the IEAG report on the 
Data Revolution (92).

85  https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/indicators/indicators-list/
86 

European Commission, Next steps for a sustainable European future, Communication COM(2016) 739 final.
87  https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/276524/9479054/2019-01-08__EU_SDG_indicator_set_2019_review_

final_report.pdf/7234d06f-4fd5-40ce-8071-7bcddc4013c2

88  United Nations, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, 2015  

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

89  https://unhabitat.org/un-habitat-for-the-sustainable-development-goals/
90  European Economic and Social Committee, Exposing EU policy gaps to address the Sustainable Development 
Goals, 2019, p.25, https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/publications-other-work/publications/exposing-eu-
policy-gaps-address-sustainable-development-goals-study
http://unsdsn.org/resources/publications/leaving-no-u-s-city-behind-the-2018-u-s-cities-sdgs-index/

91 

92  United Nations, Informal Note for UN Statistical Commission agenda, Expert Group Meeting on the Indicator 

Framework for the Post-2015 Development Agenda, 2015, p.7, https://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/doc15/BG-
EGM-SDG-summary1.pdf

102

Even  if  they  lack  the  systematic  time  and 
spatial  coverage  needed  to  monitor  and 
evaluate  SDGs,  there  is  a  vast  array  of 
measurement  systems  coming  out  of  the 
public  arena  as  well  as  private  sources 
covering a variety of fields affecting urban 
life. These range from the state of the en-
vironment – globally, nationally or locally – 
to the economic vigour, social dynamics or 
liveability and quality of life. Among these 
systems  are  the  Innovation  Cities™  Index, 
the  world’s  largest  global  city  ranking, 
with  500  benchmark  cities,  which  focuses 
on  human  infrastructures,  cultural  assets 
and  networked  markets,  or  the  Economist 
Intelligence Unit’s Global Liveability Ranking, 
which ranks 140 cities, its Democracy Index, 
Mercer’s  Quality  of  Living  Index,  which  in-
cludes  231  cities  and  the  Monocle  Quality 
of Life index. However, all these collections 
of indicators cannot cover the full spectrum 
of  information  needed  to  assess  progress 
on SDGs at the city level and they lack the 
geographical  coverage  that  is  needed  to 
monitor  and  measure  the  entire  EU  urban 
hierarchy. In addition, existing metrics fail to 
capture broader outcomes that involve so-
cial value judgements or the assessment of 
public value in a variety of areas (from cul-
ture to childcare) involving citizens in new, 
innovative ways (93).

Logic of the intervention 

To address the fundamental need to assess 
the  contribution  of  cities  to  accomplishing 
SDG  through  innovative  sustainable  solu-
tions, R&I actions in this area need to adopt 
a different logic and move beyond the state 
of the art discussed above.

First, R&I actions should support the collec-
tion of data with a granularity that fully re-
flects the urban nature of the sustainability 
challenge. Cities (with their functional metro 
area) should be the relevant spatial unit for 
collecting  and  processing  data.  Indicators 
at a finer spatial scale and on network con-
nectivity, such as input/output matrices, are 
also central to the strategy in order to look 
at trends and dynamics within and between 
cities. There are both technical and financial 
challenges,  linked  to  costs  and  associated 
with more granular data on social, econom-
ic  and  environmental  dynamics,  that  R&I 
actions should address in innovative ways.

Second,  measurement  goes  beyond  quan-
titative indicators. Most cities have a vision 
or aims, and these will increasingly include 
the  SDG  agenda  and  issues  such  as  in-
clusivity  as  well  as  other  dimensions  that 
are  specific  to  their  own  goals.  Inevitably, 
they  include  local  liveability  or  quality-of-
life  targets,  including  availability  of  health 
facilities  or  parks,  and  targets  for  cultural 
participation  as  well  as  those  related  to 
education or innovation. The assessment of 
these  key  urban  dimensions  has  as  much 
to  do  with  qualitative  assessment  as  with 
quantifiable  facts.  The  assessment  of  the 
performance of cities has often to do with 
expectations,  feelings  and  perceptions.  For 
instance,  whilst  a  city  may  objectively  do 
well economically, it may become less com-
petitive  due  to  weaker  institutional,  social 
or other soft factors. Cities, therefore, need 
to  measure  themselves  both  subjectively 
and more objectively. This reminds us what 
David Yankelovich said: ‘The first step is to 
measure whatever can be easily measured. 
This  is  okay  as  far  as  it  goes.  The  second 

93  NESTA, Public Value. How can it be measured, managed and grown?, 2019.

  CROSS-CUTTING DIMENSION: MEASURING INNOVATIVE CITIES

103

step  is  to  disregard  that  which  cannot  be 
measured or give it an arbitrary value. This 
is  artificial  and  misleading.  The  third  step 
is  to  presume  what  can’t  be  measured 
isn’t really important. This is blindness. The 
fourth  step  is  to  say  that  what  can’t  be 
easily measured really doesn’t exist. This is 
 suicide!’ (94).

Third,  the  measurement  problem  (both 
qualitative  and  quantitative)  goes  beyond 
‘cities’ as administrative, economic or pure-
ly physical entities. Coherently with the ap-
proach that underpins this report, measure-
ment should be targeting cities as dynamic 
integrated ecosystems that simultaneously 
involve multiple layers: people, place, pros-
perity and resilience. To achieve a fully sys-
temic approach to measurement, indicators 
are  not  only  developed  and  collected  for 
each ‘pillar’ of the system but are dynam-
ically inter-connected to reflect or capture: 

evolutionary  trajectories  over  time,  e.g. 
bouncing back of the system after a shock 
and development of resilience through path 
generation; feedback loops between indica-
tors;  expenditure and policy data, with all 
public influences on the system being care-
fully  monitored  –  e-government  and  open 
data are central to this process; and diver-
sity in the relevant spatial scale to capture 
different types of phenomena. 

Fourth, the measurement problem involves 
the assessment of value in a variety of ac-
tivities and policy areas that are central to 
sustainable innovative cities and their pro-
vision of key services, such as childcare and 
health, and amenities, such as green spaces 
and  museums.  Capturing  value  in  these 
areas  is  of  key  importance  to  making  key 
policy decisions and comparing alternative 
projects by means of cost-benefit analysis 
and/or cost-effectiveness ratios. 

94  https://www.publicagenda.org/pages/remembering-dan-yankelovich

104

Fifth,  measurement  cannot  be  disjoined 
from  modelling.  Indeed,  a  feedback  loop 
between use and production of information 
is  central  to  the  process.  Indicators  need 
to  be  linked  into  a  theory-driven  model  of 
the urban system to: capture trade-offs be-
tween goals, for example if achievements in 
one area happen at the expenses of other 
–  also desirable – objectives; identify spatial 
spillovers  and  their  spatial  extents;  identify 
threshold values to assess success and failure 
in public policies.

Sixth,  measurement  and  modelling  can-
not  become  part  of  a  policy-learning  pro-
cess  if  they  are  not  part  of  a  rigorous 
policy-evaluation  process  that  is  able  to 
capture  impacts  and  value  added  of  key 
urban policies and decisions and form the 
basis  of  evidence-based  decision-making. 
Indicators are brought into life by their use 
in suitably designed analysis and evaluation 
models  based  on  suitable  counterfactuals 
(what would have happened in the absence 
of a certain policy or incentive or decision).

Finally,  continuous  training  and  learning 
are  an  integral  part  of  the  measurement 
cross-cutting  pillar.  Civil  servants  and  key 
decision-makers  should  be  constantly 
trained (and re-trained with an appropriate 
system of monetary and non-monetary in-
centives)  in  order  to  contribute  actively  to 
both  the  generation  and  the  use  of  new 
data that becomes available. 

All this needs to be embedded into appro-
priate  governance  systems  for  the  collec-
tion  and  protection  of  data  at  all  levels, 
from the individual level to the city and na-
tional levels, and feed, by means of appro-
priate  governance  arrangements,  into  an 
evidence-based decision-making process.

  CROSS-CUTTING DIMENSION: MEASURING INNOVATIVE CITIES

105

Priorities and R&I actions 
for measurement

The intervention logic discussed above 
offers the foundations to identify prior-
ity  R&I  actions  for  Horizon  Europe  to 
support the measurement of innovative 
urban ecosystems in Europe. 

To  reflect  the  intervention  logic  dis-
cussed above, cross-cutting R&I actions 
are  organised around three key priority 
areas:

1.  data collection and quali-quanti 

integration 

2.  modelling, benchmarking and 

evaluating

3.  education, training and culture 

of measurement and evaluation 
for citizens.

Data collection and  
quali-quanti integration

R&I  actions  in  this  priority  area  will  target 
the  systematic  and  timely  collection  of 
quantitative and qualitative data on the four 
key  dimensions  of  human-centred  innova-
tive cities outlined in this report. R&I actions 
will  deal  with  the  conceptual  justification 
and collection of indicators based on but not 
limited to SDG indicators at the city as well as 
sub-city level to capture inter-city and intra-
city  phenomena  and  dynamics.  R&I  actions 
will also explore how ‘big data’ and artificial 
intelligence  can  be  used  to  collect  and  pro-
cess new real-time information on cities and 

their  citizens  in  ways  that  are  compatible 
with privacy, safety and public value.

R&I  actions  will  also  advance  the  meas-
urement  of  the  city  as  an  integrated  eco-
system  (people,  place,  prosperity  and  re-
silience) by involving not only topic-specific 
objectifiable indicators such as measures of 
inclusion,  trend  data  on  levels  of  crime  or 
measures  on  the  adoption  of  circular  pro-
cesses  but  also  other  (mostly  qualitative) 
frameworks to assess city-level innovative 
capacity  and  progress.  R&I  actions  on  the 
integration between quantitative and quali-
tative, objective and subjective information 
could include four clusters, all of which can 
be  assessed  by  a  combination  of  qualita-
tive and quantitative measures. The first is 
how  a  city  nurtures  and  identifies  its  cre-
ative potential, where issues such as open-
ness,  trust,  tolerance  and  accessibility  are 
assessed as well as the talent and learning 
landscape.  The  second  is  how  innovative 
capacity is enabled and supported through 
the political and public framework, the stra-
tegic leadership, its agility and vision and its 
professionalism and effectiveness. The third 
is how a place exploits and harnesses its ex-
pertise, talents and aspirations through its 
entrepreneurship,  its  communication,  con-
nectivity  and  networking.  The  final  is  how 
the  innovative  actions  based  on  our  pro-
posed four pillars are expressed in the lived 
experience of the city. This focuses on how 
the city’s place-making is evolving in terms 
of SDGs as well as how it fosters distinct-
iveness, diversity and vitality, so enhancing 
overall liveability and well-being in all types 
of regions (95).

95  Hyams, J. and Landry, C., The Creative City Index: Measuring the pulse of your city, Comedia, Gloucestershire, 

2012.

106

Modelling, benchmarking 
and evaluating

If data and indicators are not incorporated 
into  models  of  analysis  and  interpretation 
that reflect the live functioning (in technic-
al,  social  and  economic  terms)  of  the  city, 
they  cannot  inform  policy  decisions.  R&I 
actions in this area will assess through suit-
able  models  both  the  direction  of  change 
of urban systems as well as uncover trade-
offs – for example between SDGs or across 
cities – and synergies. R&I actions will also 
develop and implement suitable methodol-
ogies  to  benchmark  EU  urban  ecosystems 
from  a  global  comparative  perspective. 
Finally, R&I actions will involve the counter-
factual  evaluation  of  city-level  policies  as 
well  as  key  R&I  actions  implemented  in 
the intervention framework outlined in this 
report. R&I actions will explore how evalu-
ation  of  all  urban  policies  can  feed  into 
evidence-based  city-making  capable  of 
avoiding the replication of mistakes in dif-
ferent cities and based on practical learning. 
Finally, R&I actions will evaluate the value 
for money as well as the returns in terms of 
public value from resources invested in new 
urban initiatives.

Education, training and 
culture of measurement 
and evaluation for citizens

The  measurement  of  the  city  as  an  inte-
grated  ecosystem  and  the  integration  be-
tween  qualitative  and  quantitative  data 
can  only  be  meaningful  if  supported  by 
the  active  involvement  and  participation 
of  citizens.  Citizens  need  to  be  generators 
and validators as well as users of their own 
city-level  data.  Measurement  as  well  as 
evaluation should become part of daily civic 
life.  To  achieve  this  objective,  R&I  actions 
will investigate new ways to foster the par-
ticipation of citizens into the measurement 
of urban ecosystems and the evaluation of 
urban policies, including through living labs 
and  demonstration  projects.  R&I  actions 
will identify new cost-effective ways to mo-
bilise all citizens around the measurement 
and evaluation theme. R&I actions will also 
investigate  the  institutional  and  organisa-
tion arrangements and incentives to foster 
a  culture  of  measurement  and  evaluation 
of the public administration at all levels but 
especially the city level, including the study 
of early childhood interventions.

SUCCESSFUL 
CITIES: 
LEARNING 
FROM THE BEST

108

What is success? 

The idea of a successful city has changed, and 
with it the criteria for assessing pro gress. In 
the past, we thought physical infrastructures 
were the basis of success upon whose foun-
dations  economic  prosperity  could  grow.  A 
reliable  job  and  income  were  mostly  seen 
as enough. Now we realise there is more to 
success.  Success  now  means  being  a  city 
that  is  just,  equitable  and  fair.  It  includes 
creating  a  positive  physical  environment, 
the  ability  to  move  towards  carbon  neu-
trality and to make a circular economy and 
cradle-to-cradle thinking a reality. Cities be-
come prosperous when they mobilise all hu-
man,  technological,  economic  and  financial 
resources in new and innovative ways and 
operate within planetary boundaries. They in-
vest in resilience now, rather than waiting until 
disaster  strikes,  and  respond  in  a  way  that 
makes  the  city  grow  and  thrive  afterwards. 
Their governance arrangements balance top-
down  and  bottom-up  well  and  within  these 
arrangements,  the  subsidiarity  principle  of 
making  decisions  at  the  lowest  appropriate 
level is key.

How do successful cities 
operate?

Successful  innovative  cities  recognise  how 
their context and operating conditions have 
dramatically  changed.  They  conclude  that 
a  business-as-usual  approach  will  not  get 
them  to  where  they  want  to  be.  The  best 
cities  start  with  values  about  what  is 
important to them and the world. They es-
tablish  principles  that  guide  their  actions, 
such  as  being  citizen-centric  and  fostering 
sustainable development. They assess their 
situation honestly and overcome the power 
of  denial.  They  understand  their  position 

and resources and seek help from the best 
people  they  can  find.  They  tackle  difficult 
problems  head-on.  They  are  willing  to  be 
unpopular to achieve global goals. They in-
volve the people, organisations and sectors 
in their city and listen to their constituencies, 
especially  trusting  their  youth  and  going 
with  their  enthusiasms.  The  bigger-picture 
view  they  paint  is  open  so  that  everyone 
can  find  a  place  in  it,  creating  widespread 
ownership  and  commitment.  Such  a  grand 
picture is broad enough to inspire but nar-
row  enough  to  enable  practical  tasks  to 
happen.  This  develops  a  mood  of  success 
and involvement.

Leaders explain the direction of travel, but 
with  flexibility  in  the  plan  so  that  space  is 
opened  for  dialogue.  This  fosters  a  shared 
sense of identity to allow different voices to 
thrive.  They  build  a  team  and  set  of  net-
works around themselves. This establishes 
a widespread leadership grouping. Together 
they  discuss  and  identify  catalysts  and 
game  changers.  They  have  the  confidence 
to  challenge  the  accepted  canon  and  the 
inevitable  inertia  in  many  spheres.  Their 
open, flexible approach dares to risk uncer-
tainty or failure as they know that without 
experimenting  and  testing  out  ideas  and 
projects,  bigger  gains  or  successes  will  be 
more  difficult  to  achieve.  They  create  con-
ditions where people and organisations can 
think, plan and act with imagination.

They  learn  by  doing,  they  rethink  process-
es and procedures and so gently persuade 
using  good  examples  to  overcome  organ-
isational rigidities. They realise that getting 
things done involves partnering. The public 
administration  becomes  less  controlling 
and  more  enabling  and  the  private  organ-
isations understand that fostering the public 
interest  helps  them  in  the  longer  term  as 

  SUCCESSFUL CITIES: LEARNING FROM THE BEST

109

both  profit  and  public  good  can  be  com-
bined. Good places find room for commun-
ity  or  activist  groups  and  critics  to  bring 
ideas and solutions to the joint city-making 
endeavour. 

To  become  effective,  the  best  cities  think 
big and start small, as being incremental 
allows  flexibility  to  be  built  in.  Confident 
cities  go  with  the  grain  of  their  local  cul-
ture – they start with themselves and build 
from that. 

They  build  a  strong  evidence  base  to 
create  legitimacy  –  a  vital  ingredient  in 
the  process  of  change.  They  have  a  tra-
jectory  to  move  forward  anchored  by  a 
paced and purposeful approach that helps 
gain credibility.

Leading  players  possess  and  express  pas-
sion as this keeps up energy and motivation. 
Narrating a story of the benefits of what can 
be builds emotion. Innovative places try to 
communicate well with a real simplicity of 
message and clarity of purpose and identify 
meaningful catalysts. They get the many to 
own  the  transformation.  Ambitious  places 
instigate quadruple-helix linkages between 

the public sectors, the private sectors, uni-
versities and wider communities of interest. 
This helps convince governments to assist. 
Orchestration  is  the  watchword  as  good 
city-making is complex and needs to bring 
the disparate elements together. 

People 

The  human-centred  city  looks  at  itself 
from  a  360º  perspective.  It  is  welcoming 
to  people  from  all  backgrounds,  diver-
sities and age groups. It guarantees equal 
rights,  opportunities  and  respect  to  all 
gender groups.

Here, people are shapers, makers and co-cre-
ators of their evolving city. There is a strong 
discussion  culture.  People  participate  and 
are  more  at  the  centre  of  decision-making, 
which is transparent, and so people do not 
feel  diminished.  Opportunities  for  face-to-
face  interaction  abound  in  public  places, 
while  digital  possibilities  are  used  to  help 
people  become  smart  citizens.  There  is 
not  only  planning  for  the  built  and  natur-
al  environments  but  also  for  social  sta-
bility  and  equity,  providing  educational 
opportunity  and  cultural,  entertainment 
and  recreation  possibilities  all  anchored  in 
economic opportunity. 

110

This  city  takes  care  of  the  fragile  or 
vulnerable,  be  they  children,  the  elderly 
or  those  with  mental  health  issues  or 
lifestyle diseases. They develop strategies 
and mechanisms to avoid social isolation. 
By  nurturing  and  empowering  its  citizens 
through  an  attractive,  appealing  and 
desirable  environment,  it  helps  physical 
and mental well-being and health. 

This  city  provides  a  sense  of  anchor-
age,  familiarity  and  solidity,  of  possibility, 
choices  and  opportunity,  of  connection, 
bonds and solidarity where divides between 
rich and poor are mitigated. It is a place of 
caring and welcome where differences can 
meet,  and  somewhere  that  provides  the 
ability to self-improve and grow, as well as 
a sense of inspiration. This city then able to 
retain its talented people to attract others 
from outside to come to it.  

Place

The  task  of  planning  for  the  built  city,  its 
infrastructures and its activity programmes 
is to communicate well and visibly the col-
lective  intent  to  be  sustainable  and  inclu-
sive.  Innumerable  messages  express  this, 
from bike- and car-sharing stations to green 
facades and living walls that benefit the en-
vironment,  buildings  and  human  welfare,  or 
co-working spaces that bring people together. 
Its well-designed public realm communicates 
generosity and accessibility, and attention to 
heritage helps generate civic pride.

A successful place seeks to engage its ci ti  zens 
and organisations in taking respon sibility for 
its continuing social and economic develop-
ment and environmental requirements. In so 
doing, it pays attention to the need to pro-
tect,  enhance  and  restore  its  natural  cap-
ital and resources sustainably and to focus 
on  circular  economic  processes  that  help 
sustainability  goals,  such  as  decarbonising 

  SUCCESSFUL CITIES: LEARNING FROM THE BEST

111

the city, or managing waste processes ef-
fectively.  This  city  aims  to  be  restorative, 
self-healing  and  regenerative,  so  creating 
the conditions for it to become resilient.

Its urban planning regime and focus is tightly 
bound to sustainability objectives and is en-
vironmentally  conscious.  Citizens  safeguard 
resources.  In  so  doing,  it  encourages  high-
density  communities  to  avoid  sprawl  and 
to use fewer resources. Its design of public 
space, such as parks, gardens, green facades 
or  green  architecture,  makes  the  best  use 
of  wind  and  shade  and  uses  of  renewable 
energy. In building infrastructure, from hous-
ing to public facilities, it leverages numerous 
prefabricated  solutions,  advanced  building 
materials  and  efficient  construction  tech-
niques.  It  creates  positive-energy  districts 
or  neighbourhoods  and  encourages  citizens 
to  be  urban  farmers.  Zero  to  limited  traffic 
congestion  is  achieved  by  new  approaches 
to work and working hours, sharing mobility, 
walking and cycling, and a conscious design 
of both materials and goods flows.

Its  integrated  systems  approach  involves  in-
stalling sensors in the city to achieve real-time 
feedback  loops  where  automated  systems 
can  bring  positive  benefits.  These  climate 
sensors or core city-infrastructure systems 
help safeguard cities from natural disasters 
and infrastructure failures. 

This place addresses key dilemmas of urban 
development,  such  as  maintaining  afford-
ability, especially in housing, and it counter-
acts the negative aspects of gentrification.

The  impact  of  these  approaches  can  be 
strong.  A  grid  mix  of  50-70 %  renewable 
energy  by  2030  can  be  achieved  (96)  and 
this  can  contribute  to  addressing  energy 
poverty.  Optimising  the  energy  efficiency 
in buildings can close 20-55 % of the gap 
between  current  emissions  trends  and 
2030  abatement  targets.  Next-generation 
mobility  thinking  can  reduce  emissions 
equal  to  20-45 %  of  2030  targets  (97). 
Managing  waste  better  can  achieve  up  to 
10 %  of  the  emissions  reductions  needed 
by  2030  (98).  Adopting  circular-economy 
principles  could  generate  a  net  economic 
benefit  of  €1.8   trillion  by  2030  its  social 
benefits aside.

Across  the  three  sectors  of  mobility,  food, 
and the built environment, carbon emissions 
would  drop  by  as  much  as  48 %  by  2030 
(31 %  on  current  development  paths)  and 
83 %  by  2050  (61 %  currently),  compared 
with  2012  levels.  Disruptive  technologies 
could  improve  resource  productivity  in  the 
EU and reduce costs by €0.9 trillion in 2030. 
In a circular scenario, primary-material con-
sumption  could  drop  as  much  as  32 %  by 
2030 and 53 % by 2050. The average cost 
per  car-kilometer  could  drop  as  much  as 
75 %,  thanks  to  car-sharing,  autonomous 
and driverless driving, electric vehicles and 
better materials. In buildings, industrial and 
modular processes could lower construction 
costs by 50 % compared with on-site trad-
itional  construction.  Passive  houses  could 
reduce energy consumption by 90 % (99).

96  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/report-progress-renewable-energy-april2019_en.pdf
97  A strategic approach to climate action in cities-focused acceleration, C40 and McKinsey, 2017 https://www.

mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability/our-insights/a-strategic-approach-to-climate-action-in-cities-
focused-acceleration
 Understanding Energy Poverty in Europe Forum, EU Energy Poverty Observatory https://www.energypoverty.eu/
Europe’s circular-economy opportunity, McKinsey, 2015

98 
99 

112

Prosperity

Prosperous  cities  deal  with  human-driven 
economic  development  and  finance  to  the 
benefit of citizens within planetary bound-
aries.  They  mobilise  human,  technological, 
economic  and  financial  resources  in  new 
and innovative ways in order to be ‘inclusive, 
safe, resilient and sustainable’ (SDG 11).

Prosperous cities are innovative urban eco-
systems  that  generate  new  sustainable 
solutions  to  new  global  urban  challenges. 
They  combine  capital,  skills  and  ideas  in 
new  ways,  generating  opportunities  for 
all  in  an  inclusive,  equitable  and  cohesive 
urban economy. They leverage urbanisation 
economies, the mixity and diversity present 
to generate jobs, growth and well-being for 
their  citizens.  They  are  globally  connected 
and  are  active  open  nodes  of  global  net-
works  of  skills,  knowledge,  investments 
and people.

Prosperous  cities  are  the  sustainable  en-
gines  of  economic  development,  job  cre-
ation and prosperity for Europe, its Member 
States and beyond. They thrive in both de-
veloped  and  less-developed  countries  and 
regions  of  the  EU  and  offer  opportunities 
for  learning  for  other  cities  and  countries 
on  a  global  scale.  They  ‘support  positive 
economic,  social  and  environmental  links 
between urban, peri-urban and rural areas 
by strengthening national and regional de-
velopment planning’ (SDG11).

They  can  thrive  in  both  developed  and 
less-developed countries and regions of the 
EU  and  offer  opportunities  for  learning  for 
other cities and countries on a global scale. 
They support positive economic, social and 
environmental  links  between  urban,  peri-
urban and rural areas by strengthening na-
tional and regional development planning.

  SUCCESSFUL CITIES: LEARNING FROM THE BEST

113

Prosperous  cities  benefit  from  well- 
designed,  dynamically  evolving  and  co-
hesive  urban  institutions  and  governance 
arrangements  that  shape  and  coordinate 
the behaviour and interactions of all local 
stakeholders,  with  a  focus  on  planetary 
boundaries.

These prosperous cities succeed and remain 
sustainable by mobilising – in new and in-
novative ways – public and private finance. 
The  public  policies  that  work  are  careful-
ly  monitored  and  evaluated  and  so  act  as 
multipliers  for  public  and  private  funds  to 
achieve the goals of SDG 11. 

A resilient city is a city where there is min-
imal  human  vulnerability,  a  diversity  of 
livelihoods  and  employment  opportunities, 
where  adequate  safeguards  to  human  life 
and  health  are  present  and  where  collect-
ive identity, cultural recognition and mutual 
support is fostered, which helps social sta-
bility and security as does reduced physical 
exposure  and  vulnerability  along  with  the 
continuity  of  critical  services.  Additionally, 
financial  resources  are  available  as  are 
communications  and 
reliable  mobility. 
Effective leadership and management, em-
powered  stakeholders  and  integrated  de-
velopment  planning  complete  the  cycle  of 
the resilient city (100).

Resilience 

A resilient city is not only prepared to sur-
vive  the  shocks  and  stresses  that  might 
occur over time but is also able to respond 
in a way that makes the city grow and thrive 
afterwards.  By  investing  in  resilience  now, 
rather  than  waiting  until  disaster  strikes, 
cities stand to benefit from the investment 
in good times as well as bad. 

100  The Rockefeller Foundation | Arup, City Resilience Framework, 2014.

KEY 
PERFORMANCE 
INDICATORS

116

The key performance indicators (KPIs) to be 
considered for Horizon Europe’s R&I on in-
novative cities should relate to the key fac-
tors for urban success described above and 
the mission for ‘Climate-neutral and Smart 
Cities’. That agreed mission is the overarch-
ing KPI that should target 2030 as its deliv-
ery date. Any KPI suggested is ultimately a 
political choice decided either at the EU, na-
tional, regional or city level. Many city-level 
KPIs will also depend on local ambitions and 
visions.  For  many  aspirations,  it  is  difficult 
to attach a precise KPI figure. However, an 
aspiration, such as to involve communities 
in  any  decision  that  affects  them,  can  be-
come general common sense and a default 
position. A danger is that figures are picked 
out of the air without sufficient information 
or evidence as to how they can be achieved. 
The type of targets suggested should have 
relevance to all the dimensions discussed 
in this report and might include ‘to reduce 
levels of inequality by 15 %’ by 2030. This 

KPI, from the people dimension of the report, 
implies growing prosperity. It will have im-
plications for the quality of place and cre-
ate more resilience. An alternative KPI is ‘to 
create 300 000 new jobs in European cities 
by 2026 through the application of sustain-
able  innovation’.  This  KPI  comes  from  the 
prosperity  dimension  but  its  achievement 
depends  on  the  place  and  people  dimen-
sions  while  its  capacity  to  survive  shocks 
of all sorts rests on the R&I outlined in the 
resilience dimension. Other KPI will be of a 
binary nature. ‘To ensure every city of scale 
has an intercultural city strategy’, implies a 
reduction in prejudice and increased sensi-
tivity to how places are shaped and built as 
well  as  creating  job  opportunities.  Another 
KPI,  ‘to  reduce  by  20 %  the  percentage  of 
the time CO2 exceeds the prescribed limit’, 
would imply taking serious measures to de-
carbonise and to foster circular economies, 
while  ‘to  increase  the  proportion  of  waste 
recycled by 25 %’ would also help.

Cover page image: iStock, ©deberarr #1016246132
Images  – pg 6: © European Commission – pg 9: iStock, ©CreativeNature_nl #960572332 – pg 13: iStock, ©yangphoto 
#871834640 – pg 15: Fotolia, ©bluesky6867 #13711641 – pg 16: Fotolia, ©WavebreakmediaMicro #128756707 – pg 17: iStock, 
©lamontak590623 #981344368 – pg 19: Fotolia, ©Vlada Z #88525420 – pg 20: iStock, ©diatrezor #1033890050 – pg 24: 
iStock, ©dennisvdw #1131102682 – pg 26: Fotolia, ©pixssell #121275343 – pg 27: iStock, ©blackred #185306597 – pg 28: 
iStock, ©Orbon Alija #1059095448 – pg 31: iStock, ©Leonardo Patrizi #629589564 – pg 33: iStock, ©Orbon Alija #973190966 
– pg 35: iStock, ©Marco_Piunti #639109564 – pg 36: Fotolia, ©william87 #103113374 – pg 39: iStock, ©MoreISO #168613509 
– pg 40: Fotolia, ©Frank Gartner #110801033 – pg 42: Fotolia, ©stbaus7 #134778878 – pg 45: iStock, ©christianchen 
#637527164 – pg 46: Fotolia, ©kenzo #8711507 – pg 49: Fotolia, ©fabdrone #157499912 – pg 51: Ville de Luxembourg, 
©GilPe – pg 52: iStock, ©Yelizaveta Tomashevska #668077094 – pg 55: Fotolia, ©massimhokuto #48855591 – pg 56: iStock, 
©bdsklo #495453044 – pg 59: iStock, ©Eric Cowez #1064136344 – pg 60: iStock, ©Meinzahn #507876811 – pg 63: iStock, 
©RomoloTavani #506181336 – pg 64: Fotolia, ©Thaut Images #4002158 – pg 67: iStock, ©Dutchy #157676681 – pg 69: 
Fotolia, ©SeanPavonePhoto #60916895 – pg 72: Fotolia, ©imagesef #49780715 – pg 75: iStock, ©Rawpixel #943940212 – pg 
76: iStock, ©Lena Maximova #1051514604 – pg 79: iStock, ©TommL #589118460 – pg 81: iStock, ©ultraforma_ #813363232 
– pg 82: iStock, ©Darwel #857549528 – pg 85: iStock, ©NataliaDeriabina #686237574 – pg 86: iStock, ©RomanBabakin 
#1067134142 – pg 89: iStock, ©ozgurdonmaz #933003688 – pg 91: Fotolia, ©waku #84470535 – pg 92: iStock, ©AdrianHancu 
#950295748 – pg 95: iStock, ©mathess #530450205 – pg 96: iStock, ©Nikada #172488300 – pg 99: iStock, ©xijian 
#531304056 – pg 100: iStock, ©CreativeNature_nl #960572332 – pg 103: iStock, ©martinwimmer #1028375052 – pg 104: 
iStock, ©mf-guddyx #170094749 – pg 106: iStock, ©Nikada #182509052 – pg 107: iStock, ©Bim #1020736146 – pg 109: 
iStock, ©olaser #588259196 – pg 110: iStock, ©IR_Stone #861004850 – pg 112: iStock, ©SolStock #860940546 – pg 115: 
iStock, ©themorningglory #1056647996 – pg 116: iStock, ©Orbon Alija #185221294 – pg 119: iStock, ©olaser #184928369

Getting in touch with the EU

IN PERSON
All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct information centres.  
You can find the address of the centre nearest you at:  
https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en

ON THE PHONE OR BY EMAIL
Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union.  
You can contact this service: 

– by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls), 
– at the following standard number: +32 22999696 or 
– by email via: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en

Finding information about the EU

ONLINE
Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on 
the Europa website at: https://europa.eu/european-union/index_en

EU PUBLICATIONS
You can download or order free and priced EU publications at:  
https://publications.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of free publications may be 
obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre  
(see https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en)

EU LAW AND RELATED DOCUMENTS
For access to legal information from the EU, including all EU law since 1952 in all the official 
language versions, go to EUR-Lex at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

OPEN DATA FROM THE EU
The EU Open Data Portal (http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en) provides access to  
datasets from the EU. Data can be downloaded and reused for free, for both commercial and  
non-commercial purposes.

Today, more than half of the world’s population live in urban areas. This is 

projected to increase to 80 % by 2050. Cities and metropolitan regions are 

centres of encounter and economic activity, but also major contributors to 

global challenges. In this sense, European cities and cities around the world 

have a critical role to play in enabling humanity to meet the goals and targets 

set out by international policy frameworks such the COP21 Paris Agreement 

and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and Habitat III New Urban 

Agenda. To do this, European cities will have to take prompt action and adopt 

just, equitable and fair transformational strategies and solutions. This High-

Level Expert Group report provides a vision for European cities of the future 

and recommends how EU-funded research and innovation can assist cities in 

their transition towards a resilient, climate-neutral, smart, inclusive, prosperous 

and sustainable future. 

Across its four core chapters, ‘People’, ‘Place’, ‘Prosperity’ and ‘Resilience’, 

and its two cross-cutting ones on ‘Governance’ and ‘Measurement‘, the report 

emphasises the need for citizens to be involved in the conceptualisation, 

design and execution and dissemination of any research and innovation 

action. Such involvement will ensure a human-centred city transition that 

will provide equal opportunities for citizens and leave nobody behind. The 

report aims to trigger discussions among policy makers, EU institutions, the 

scientific community and society at large, and inspire strategic planning and 

investments within Horizon Europe and its dedicated Mission on ‘Climate-

neutral and Smart Cities’.

Research and Innovation policy