## 6 Discussion  
Among the main specific results and contributions of this work, we have given the construction methodology and the strategic patterns and profiles finally obtained. When analyzing the distribution of good practices among the different Profiles and Patterns, marking at the same time the country in which each city is inserted (Figure 9), it can be observed that in certain Profiles and Patterns, the presence of certain countries predominates. However, the spatial representation of the obtained strategic patterns will undoubtedly be even more evident and conclusive (Figure 10), with relevant differences observed with respect to state-of-the-art studies that base their spatial distribution in the Northern, Eastern, Western and Southern European regions [18]. Figure 10: Spatial distribution of the four strategic patterns of initiatives found in the research among the 84 good practices of the Mayors Adapt initiative. The population of the city and the geographical location to which the municipality belongs are indicated. Source: compiled by the authors. Figure 9: Distribution of the Mayors Adapt initiative’s good practices developed in each country for each profile and pattern determined in the research. Source: Compiled by the authors. The most striking differences with respect to the state of the art are found in the distribution of Pattern B, related to flood impacts mainly in Central Europe, with its spatial distribution being observed throughout much of the Western region, but also in the Northern region and partially in the Eastern region. On the other hand, it can be verified that there are patterns in adaptation actions throughout Europe. However, instead of fitting into the European regions described by [PERSON] et al. [18], namely bioregions (Figures 7 and 8) or countries' borders (Figure 9), they rather emerge in a more complex set of dimensions related to the impact of climate change. This is an important innovation compared to other similar works. Among the dimensions with great impacts, the geographical location stands out, but it is also observed that it significantly affects the approach to responding to risk. In this sense, the analysis of the patterns and profiles obtained clearly shows the existence of different approaches when it comes to managing or planning (Figure 11). Some profiles are oriented towards protection against risk with important transformations and infrastructure (Pattern A), showing certain opposition to those who focus on planning with and towards nature (Pattern C), the former generally having a higher economic cost than the latter. These approaches are nuanced depending on the type of impact of expected climate change, with water scarcity (Pattern D) at one end, or floods generally at the other end (Pattern B), being decisive. When analyzing the SOM map of the strategies obtained (Figures 6 and 11), clear coincidences are observed, with the most urgent European vulnerabilities detected by [PERSON] et al. in 2018 [18] as key elements, which are floods and water scarcity. Figure 11 shows a synthesis of the patterns observed in the strategy map obtained using the proposed SOM methodology. From the proposed patterns and profiles, it can be concluded that there is indeed no single way of planning for climate change in Europe, but that multiple interests and motivations can be observed [18; 99], and consequently, different strategic approaches should be taken into account when building collaborative networks between interested municipalities. If we analyze the limitations of the research, we can mention those presented by the SOM analysis methodology, which coincide with the shortcomings of the data with which it operates.