Climate Proofing Handbook: A toolkit for climate resilient and carbon neutral urban development

Climate Proofing Handbook A toolkit for climate resilient and carbon neutral urban development CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 2 Authors Peter Scheibstock [email protected] Felicitas Leithner [email protected] Jill Theobald [email protected] Sara Rossi [email protected] Buro Happold GmbH Pfalzburger Straße 43/44 10717 Berlin, Germany www.burohappold.com 3 Disclaimer The content, format, citations, and sources presented in this report are the sole responsibility of the author. While efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the content presented, there may be gaps in the information provided, or the information may become outdated over time. Readers are encouraged to independently verify any information presented in this report to ensure its accuracy and relevance to their specific needs or circumstances. © 2025 Buro Happold GmbH. All rights reserved CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 4 Co-funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA). Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. This project has received funding from the Horizon Innovation Actions under the grant agreement n° 101096405. 5 Content Content ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5 List of Figures ..........................................................................................................................................................6 Abbreviations ...........................................................................................................................................................7 Executive Summary ...............................................................................................................................................9 1. Background ......................................................................................................................................................10 1.1 UP2030 Project .....................................................................................................................................10 1.2 Climate Change in Cities ....................................................................................................................12 1.3 Mitigation and Adaptation in the Urban Context .......................................................................15 1.4 Co-Creation .............................................................................................................................................18 2. Climate Proofing ............................................................................................................................................20 2.1 Methodology ...........................................................................................................................................20 2.2 Summary ................................................................................................................................................... 32 3. Climate Proofing in Practice ......................................................................................................................34 3.1 Blankenburger Süden, Berlin .............................................................................................................. 35 3.2 Münster, Germany ..................................................................................................................................36 3.3 Kommunale Klimaquartiere, Germany ............................................................................................ 37 4. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................ 38 5. Bibliography .....................................................................................................................................................40 CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 6 List of Figures Figure 1 UP2030 Logo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 2 Components of the project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 3 Pilot Cities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 4 Historical and future trends in net greenhouse gas emissiones for the EU-27 . . . . . . . 13 Figure 5 Heat-sensitive areas in Bad Düben, Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Figure 6 Women planting tree for the project ForestaMI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Figure 7 Relation with Synergy, Trade-offs and Conflicts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Figure 8 UP2030 Action Workshop in Pilot Ciy of Münster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 9 Climate Proofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Figure 10 Effects of the implementation of Climate Proofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Figure 11 Workshop in Münster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Figure 12 Blankenburger Suden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Figure 13 Guideline developed in Münster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 14 Scheme on the different project/scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Figure 15 Klimaquartiere Hessen, site visit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 7 Abbreviations EEA European Environmental Agency GHG Greenhouse gases NBS Nature Based Solutions NCAS National Centre for Atmospheric Science SDG Sustainable Development Goals UKGBC UK Green Building Council UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change UNDP United Nation Department WMO World Meteorological Organization WRI World Resources Institute 9 Executive Summary Climate Proofing is a strategy integrating climate mitigation and adaptation, aiming for just transition in urban neighborhoods. The need for such a strategy has first been identified through work in urban development projects across Germany. UP2030, an innovative project supporting the implementation of Climate-neutral and Smart Cities Mission, provided the opportunity to further evolve Climate Proofing. The handbook itself is developed as part of this programme. Climate Proofing supports cities and local authorities in translating climate neutrality and resilience objectives into actionable strategies. It provides a framework for identifying, prioritising and implementing integrated mitigation and adaptation measures that are tailored to local conditions, planning processes and institutional capacities. Climate Proofing responds to accelerating impacts of climate change, many of which are projected to be irreversible over the long term, by promoting early and evidence-based actions. It facilitates the identification of synergies and trade-offs between mitigation and adaptation, enhancing co-benefits for public health, biodiversity and liveability in urban areas. Climate Proofing is grounded in principles of multilevel governance and requires alignment across policy domains, regulatory instruments and institutional mandates. It supports scenario-based planning, performance monitoring and adaptive management, enabling cities to operationalise climate targets through decision-making in urban planning. By embedding climate considerations into urban development from the outset, Climate Proofing contributes to climate-resilient development pathways and supports the long-term sustainability of urban systems. Stakeholder and Strategic Relevance of Climate Proofing Climate Proofing is designed for diverse urban stakeholders engaged in planning, design and implementation of climate action. This is particularly relevant for public authorities at regional and local levels who are responsible for developing and enforcing policies on climate neutrality and resilience. It also serves urban practitioners such as planners, architects, engineers and consultants who are tasked with integrating climate objectives into urban development processes. Through an adaptable framework, Climate Proofing enables these actors to embed mitigation and adaptation considerations into early planning stages, ensuring that urban development aligns with long-term environmental and social goals. Climate Proofing supports cross-sectoral collaboration and provides a common reference point for aligning technical assessments, policy instruments and participatory processes. The value of Climate Proofing lies in its capacity to integrate climate mitigation and adaptation into urban planning and design, supporting a just transition. It promotes future-oriented solutions by bridging disciplines such as energy, mobility, water management and urban design. The approach supports informed decision-making through scenario modelling and impact assessment, helping to identify the most effective measures for reducing emissions and a climate resilient urban realm. Furthermore, Climate Proofing aims to empower cities to align urban growth with climate neutrality targets while enhancing resilience and liveability. It facilitates the development of evidence-based strategies that are responsive to local challenges and adaptable to evolving policy and environmental contexts. CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 16 Integrating Mitigation & Adaptation According to Qi and Terton (2022), mitigation and adaptation are two sides of the same coin: they are two complementary approaches to addressing one of humanity’s greatest challenges. That’s why choosing between mitigation or adaptation is not a solution; tackling the climate and environmental crisis requires both. Climate Change Mitigation in urban areas encompasses technical and infrastructural investments, renewable energy adoption, and improvements in energy efficiency. Mitigation measures can be expansive but often incorporate "win-win" scenarios. Given the challenges in predicting climate responses, estimating the overall costs and benefits of policies to limit GHG emissions, and forecasting socio-economic and demographic shifts, the necessity of incorporating adaptation strategies becomes clear (Laukkonen, 2009). Climate Change Adaptation is defined as the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects in human and/or natural systems (IPCC, 2014). Adaptation actions enhance the adaptive capacity of human and natural systems to the changing climate and increase their resilience to vulnerabilities and impacts (Qi & Terton, 2022). Mitigation and adaptation are closely interconnected, often resulting in both synergies and trade-offs (UNFCCC, 2022). This chapter will examine these complex dynamics and highlight the importance of an integrated planning. Synergies and Conflicts Synergies between adaptation and mitigation can emerge when adaptation can reduce the cost of mitigation or vice versa, or in a situation where an adaptation strategy supports the mitigation strategy at the local level. Synergies in adaptation and mitigation can be identified in three main levels: policy, organizational, and practical levels. Further, there is potential for synergies within policy goals and areas where the objectives of mitigation and adaptation intersect, for example, urban regeneration or retrofitting actions into which adaptation and mitigation policies can be mainstreamed. The organizational level includes management actions that can be taken by city officials and a variety of public and private stakeholders. These drivers of synergies are related to innovative planning and management, awareness raising, and cooperative and cross-sectoral actions. Lastly, several examples of synergies are identified in practical measures, primarily related to urban green infrastructure, as well as transport, energy, and construction (Landauer et al., 2015). Instead of synergies, conflicts or trade-offs can also occur. Most conflicts become manifested when there are competing uses for the cities' physical space, since drivers of conflicts can be derived from differences in scale, lack of financial resources, cost of measures, administrative structure, and lack of interaction among actors (Landauer et al., 2015). Trade-offs arise when attempting to balance adaptation and mitigation, but the integration of the two policies is only partially or entirely unsuccessful. In a situation where trade-offs between mitigation and adaptation are being made, conflicts may appear. But a conflict situation can also lead to trade-offs when attempts to implement adaptation and mitigation measures simultaneously fail (Landauer et al., 2015). In urban planning and sustainability discourse, it's essential to recognize that competing interests often lead to conflicts or trade-offs. These tensions need to be negotiated within urban realms, and ideally resolved through synergies that benefit multiple stakeholders. The graphic accompanying this discussion illustrates the dynamic among mitigation and adaptation synergies and conflicts quite effectively, highlighting how thoughtful design and policy can mediate complex urban challenges. Mitigation is defined as a human intervention to reduce the sources or enhance the sinks of greenhouse gases. IPCC, 2014 “ ” Adaptation defined as the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects in human and/ or natural systems. IPCC, 2014 “ ” Women planting tree for the project ForestaMI ©3blmedia MITIGATION Synergy Synergy Conflict Trade-Offs Trade-Offs ADAPTATION Background 17 Not all actions have positive consequences on adaptation or mitigation, therefore it’s crucial to consider potential trade-offs as well. Adaptation actions, such as ecosystem-based adaptation projects, can have positive effects on mitigation by either increasing or maintaining carbon stocks. Good examples of adaptation actions with positive effects for mitigation derive from nature-based solutions (NBS). A recent study estimated that NBS could provide 37% of cost-effective CO2 mitigation needed between now and 2030 to limit temperature increase to 2°C (UNFCCC, 2022). For example, The ForestaMi project, launched by the Municipality of Milan, aims to plant three million trees by 2030. This ambitious urban greening initiative is designed to enhance air quality, boost urban biodiversity, and mitigate the effects of climate change, contributing to a healthier and more resilient city environment (Comune di Milano, 2020). Green roofs provide another good example of synergy between mitigation and adaptation. To reduce the urban heat island phenomenon, policies to support urban greening can encourage green roofs and roof gardens. Roof gardens help mitigate climate change by sinking carbon and providing cooler internal buildings, which require less artificial cooling. They help a city to adapt to increasingly warm temperatures and slow flooding during heavy rains (Laukkonen, 2009). A compelling example of how mitigation actions can support climate adaptation comes from the City of Vienna. The Green Social Housing Programme integrates affordable housing with climate resilience, featuring energy-efficient buildings, district heating systems, and equitable urban planning. This holistic approach not only reduces emissions but also enhances the city's capacity to adapt to climate impacts (Stadt Wien, 2019). Despite the linkages, some examples demonstrate that conflicts can arise between adaptation and mitigation strategies. This can be exemplified in the context of the built environment. While high densities in urban areas minimize commuter distances and provide opportunities to incorporate common energy schemes that can reduce emissions, they also contribute to the urban heat island effect, can increase the likelihood of urban flooding, and a dense-built environment can reduce the incorporation of urban green or tree cover, which helps reduce the need for cooling aids (Laukkonen, 2009). While understanding of integrating adaptation and mitigation has gained momentum, still, in the past mitigation and adaptation have largely been addressed separately for three main reasons: 1. Many sectors continue to underestimate the need for adaptation, and adaptation remains at the periphery of global climate action. 2. Mitigation actions are mainly addressed at a larger scale. 3. There is often an artificially constructed division between mitigation and adaptation at the institutional level that creates barriers to moving integrated solutions forward. As a result, different sets of stakeholders are involved in each domain, with limited inter-communication, assessing the synergies and trade-offs between mitigation and adaptation actions during their planning and implementation processes. Continuing to address mitigation and adaptation in silos is inefficient and wastes valuable resources. The siloed approach will lead to stranded assets, lost opportunities for maximizing synergies, duplication of work, higher overall project costs, and the displacement of limited staffing capacities in developing countries (Qi & Terton, 2022). Relation with Synergy, Trade-offs and Conflicts © Buro Happold CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 18 Inclusive participation is key throughout the UP2030 project’s full cycle of activities so that real needs of communities are reflected in the city-specific visions, and co-creation interventions maximise delivery of co-benefits. One of the objectives of UP2030 is to have a measured positive impact on spatial justice, and give the opportunity to citizens to participate in the transition by becoming agents of change themselves through their sustainable behavioural shifts. In this context, Climate Proofing empowers municipalities and communities to co-create resilient and low-carbon neighborhoods, making co-creation a cornerstone of the Just Transition. Over the past decade, urban planning practices have undergone two major transformations: the growing involvement of citizens as co-creators of planning solutions and the widespread digitalization of planning processes. Contemporary urban planning increasingly emphasizes the use of diverse participatory methods to engage residents, local stakeholders, and communities in shaping the urban environment. This inclusive approach ensures that the ideas, needs, and concerns of urban dwellers are meaningfully represented, empowering them to influence decisions that directly affect their neighborhoods and daily lives. Moreover, it fosters innovation by incorporating a broader range of perspectives, ultimately leading to more sustainable and widely supported urban outcomes (Angelidu et al., 2021). Participatory urban planning marks a shift from static, top-down, and often spatially biased models to dynamic, people-centered, and integrative approaches. It is increasingly recognized as a more effective governance model than traditional expert-driven planning (Hassan et al., 2011). In the context of sustainable urban development, co-creation and co-design are essential tools for achieving SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). Implementing co-creation in cities requires clear, adaptable methodologies that enable diverse urban actors, like planners, policymakers, citizens, and private stakeholders, to collaborate effectively (Avila, 2024). The concepts of co-creation and co-design are context-dependent and have evolved from disciplines such as psychology and sociology into urban consultancies and design practices. Initially known as "participatory design" in 1960s Scandinavia, these concepts have since expanded into urban contexts, where they are used to engage citizens in shaping public spaces, mobility systems, housing strategies, and climate adaptation plans. Co-creation, in particular, emphasizes the involvement of urban residents throughout all stages of planning and research, from problem identification to solution implementation. This evolution from user-centered to co-design approaches supports the development of more resilient and livable urban environments (Avila, 2024). By embedding solutions within their original urban context and selecting them through informed, democratic processes, cities can ensure that interventions are both relevant and sustainable. Co-creation is embedded as a foundational governance principle within the Climate Proofing methodology. Its integration was significantly advanced through the UP2030 project, where it emerged as a strategic lever to overcome siloed administrative structures and enable more cohesive climate action. Rather than being a linear process, co-creation is inherently iterative: each step of the Climate Proofing framework is revisited and refined in response to stakeholder input. This iterative approach ensures that climate strategies remain adaptive to local dynamics and evolving conditions, while fostering meaningful dialogue and mutual understanding across municipal departments. Co-creation processes enhance resilience by fostering adaptability, learning, and innovation, although they can sometimes present challenges. They prompt stakeholders to revisit and refine strategies, expose institutional weaknesses, and encourage flexible, inclusive approaches. By navigating these complexities together, participants build stronger ownership and trust, making co-creation more robust and responsive to evolving urban needs (Mahmoud, 2021). Throughout the development of the methodology, several key obstacles were encountered that reflect broader issues commonly associated with co-creation approaches. These challenges are outlined below and serve to illustrate the complexity and demands of implementing co-creation Co-creation is any act of collective creativity that is shared by two or more people. Avila, 2024 “” 1.4 Co-Creation Background 19 in practice. 1. Co-creation is iterative, not linear. It involves revisiting and refining earlier phases based on feedback and evolving conditions. 2. Inclusivity and openness are essential. All types of actors should be encouraged to participate, and processes should be tailored to local needs through bottom-up approaches. 3. Long-term commiment is built through ownership. Stakeholders are more likely to stay engaged if the feel a sense of belonging and responsibility throughout the process. 4. Governance structures must evolve. Effective co-creation requires changes in administrative procedures to support multi-actor engagement. 5. Co-creation expertise should be institutionalized. Public administrations need to embed co-creation as a standard practice in urban planning and decision-making. Co-creation has emerged as a transformative force in contemporary urban planning, redefining how cities approach climate action, spatial justice, and citizen engagement. As demonstrated through the Climate Proofing methodology and its integration within the UP2030 project, co-creation is not merely a participatory tool, it is a strategic enabler of inclusive, adaptive, and resilient urban transformation. Climate Proofing offers a replicable framework for municipalities seeking to align mitigation and adaptation efforts through co-created solutions. It demonstrates that when cities embrace co-creation not just as a method but as a guiding principle, they unlock the potential to build more livable, low-carbon, and socially inclusive urban futures. UP2030 Action Workshop in Pilot Ciy of Münster © Climate Unit (Stabstelle Klima Münster) CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 20 Climate Proofing was originally developed as a structured framework to guide urban development projects through five overarching steps. Beyond its technical application, it also supports participatory processes by aligning stakeholder engagement with evolving priorities and informs institutional advisory work, neighborhood assessments, and quantitative evaluations. This makes it a versatile tool for revisiting objectives and adapting governance structures in response to climate-related challenges. Climate Proofing policies, strategies, plans and measures enhance resilience and support climate mitigation. It involves designing urban systems that can withstand and adapt to a range of environmental challenges, such as extreme weather events, rising temperatures, sea-level rise, and shifting ecosystems. By making cities “climate proof,” we are not only protecting them from future risks but also creating more livable, equitable, and sustainable urban environments. The implementation of Climate Proofing spans from the neighbourhood level to the city-wide scale. Neighbourhoods serve as manageable units with distinct characteristics and needs, making them ideal starting points for identifying requirements, evaluating risks, and developing targeted measures. Focusing on these smaller areas allows for more precise planning and the active involvement of local communities, ensuring that solutions are both relevant and effective. Once tested and refined at the neighbourhood level, these measures can then be scaled up and adapted for broader application across the entire city. Climate Proofing is a methodological framework for integrating climate mitigation and adaptation measures into urban development from the earliest stages of planning. By embedding these considerations early, it enables identification and linking of sectoral goals and spatial demands that may compete, and to harness positive synergies through multifunctional design. For example, building surfaces and outdoor spaces can be used in a balanced way, simultaneously supporting renewable energy systems, urban greening, open space use, and rainwater retention. Climate Proofing suggests continous and early involvement of relevant stakeholders. Through participatory formats and inclusive processes, diverse perspectives and needs can be effectively incorporated into the development of measures. This ensures that climate mitigation and adaptation are implemented in a way that is both integrated and socially equitable. Moreover, Climate Proofing ensures that existing data and knowledge sources are made accessible to stakeholders. This supports the development of evidence-based measures that are tailored to local challenges and grounded in real-world conditions. This section presents a structured methodology designed to support integrated climate action at the urban level. The outlined steps are intended to be pursued in parallel, ensuring that both mitigation and adaptation are addressed simultaneously. Each step also identifies opportunities for stakeholder engagement through participatory processes. To facilitate informed decision-making, guiding questions are provided for each phase, focusing on mitigation, adaptation, and inclusive participation. Climate Proofing Roadmap to Climate Neutrality & Resilience for Cities 2 Climate Proofing supports decision-making and implementation of actions for climate adaptation and mitigation already in early project phases. The approach provides quantitative results, also with limited data availability and qualitative results in the form of evidence-based policy recommendations. 2.1 Methodology Climate Proofing 21 Climate Proofing © Buro Happold CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 22 Mitigation The first step towards integrating climate mitigation at different scales is to identify overarching climate neutrality goals that need to be taken into account. These objectives form the basis for a site-specific ambition in the area of climate mitigation This involves analysing specific requirements and framework conditions that provide for a reduction in GHG emissions, a reduction in other environmental impacts and resource consumption as well as the overarching promotion of climate mitigation. This includes national and state-wide requirements as well as city´s ambitions with regard to climate mitigation, resource conservation and the preservation of existing buildings at municipal level. Checklist: ✓ What are the overarching climate neutrality goals (local, regional, national)? ✓ What is the current CO₂ footprint of the area (buildings, mobility, energy)? ✓ Are there existing energy or emissions balances or cadastres? ✓ What is the age and renovation status of buildings? ✓ What is the modal split and mobility infrastructure baseline? ✓ Are there existing plans for renewable energy or circular economy? ✓ What are the legal frameworks (e.g. zoning, preservation, energy codes)? Identify Identification of relevant framework conditions for strengthening climate mitigation and adaptation in the considered area. Important questions to pose in this phase include whether the neighbourhood has an integrated district development concept available, what demographic and socio-economic data are accessible, and which urban requirements need to be taken into consideration. This phase involves a thorough analysis of climate goals, urban development regulations, and social structures to help shape a shared vision for the project. At the same time, relevant stakeholder groups are identified early on and prepared for participation in subsequent engagement formats. Identify Evaluate Minimize Implement Monitor & Document Climate Proofing 23 Adaptation As a basis for climate-adapted neighbourhood development, overarching objectives and requirements are to be understood. Participation Identification of relevant stakeholder groups which can then be integrated into the process using specific participation methods. In addition to identifying the stakeholder groups, the degree of participation and the time of integration of the respective groups can also be defined. Comprehend Checklist: ✓ What climate risks are relevant (heat, flooding, drought, storms)? ✓ Are there hazard maps or climate projections available? ✓ What is the current state of green and blue infrastructure? ✓ Are there vulnerable groups or facilities (e.g. schools, care homes)? ✓ What adaptation goals or standards apply? ✓ Are there existing adaptation concepts or action plans? Checklist: ✓ Who are the relevant stakeholders (departments, residents, businesses)? ✓ What are the demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the area? ✓ What participation standards or formats exist and how can participation be inclusive and accessible? ✓ Are there existing networks, initiatives, or community groups? ✓ What is the level of climate awareness and readiness? Evaluate Adapt Implement Monitor & Document CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 24 Mitigation The fields of action that contribute to climate protection are identified and their concrete influence in the area under consideration is evaluated. These fields include various domains in which greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced, resources conserved, and natural climate protection strengthened: the supply and consumption of energy, the materials and resources used in construction, refurbishment and operation, and the opportunities for natural carbon storage in open spaces and vegetation. The prioritisation of the fields of action evaluates the areas with significant potential for savings and those with a high level of influence on the subsequent development of measures. Evaluate Based on a clear understanding of the objectives and overarching framework conditions that need to be taken into account in neighbourhood development, the second stage of the process involves defining and prioritising fields of action to ensure climate-friendly neighbourhood development. In the second step of the climate proofing method, the specific fields of action are identified and prioritised, within which measures are then developed. Checklist: ✓ Which fields of action can be applied in the target area to minimise greenhouse gas emissions and preserve natural resources? ✓ Which of the identified fields of action currently have the greatest negative impact on the neighbourhood and can be implemented at low cost? ✓ Can building clusters be addressed collectively (e.g. serial renovation)? ✓ What are the trade-offs between density, energy use, and mobility? ✓ What are the barriers and opportunities for transformation? Evaluate Minimize Implement Identify Monitor & Document Climate Proofing 25 Adaptation Specific climate risks are analysed for the area under consideration, and the extent to which these risks have an impact is prioritised using hot spot analyses. This includes, for example, the effects of higher temperatures, increased heavy rainfall events, or longer periods of drought. By identifying specific risks and their spatial distribution, it becomes clear which adaptation strategies will be necessary in further development to strengthen resilience. Participation Based on the prioritisation of fields of action in the areas of climate change mitigation and adaptation, the next step is to assign the stakeholders and actors to be involved in the respective fields of action. Evaluate Checklist: ✓ Where are spatial hotspots for climate risks? ✓ What is the adaptive capacity of infrastructure and ecosystems? Are there areas lacking shade, cooling, or water retention? ✓ Is there a risk of overheating? Are there places that require special shading measures? Are there cooler places to retreat to? ✓ How do risks vary by season and time of day? ✓ What are the synergies between adaptation and other urban functions? ✓ What is the potential for nature-based solutions? Checklist: ✓ What needs and challenges exist in the identified fields of action for climate protection and climate adaptation? Which actors are relevant for each priority field? ✓ What formats are suitable for different groups (e.g. workshops, surveys)? How can feedback be gathered and integrated? Are there existing participatory tools (e.g. stakeholder mapping, cognitive mapping)? ✓ How can vulnerable groups be specifically addressed? Adapt Implement Comprehend Monitor & Document CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 32 Climate Proofing enables planners and decision-makers to test scenarios, identify levers for change and optimize masterplans for long-term sustainability. Most importantly, Climate Proofing enables consultation, co-creation and collaboration of various stakeholders, such as city administrations. It supports the integration of climate mitigation and adaptation in urban development through a structured five-step approach: identification (i), evualuation (ii), development (iii), implementation (iv) and monitoring (v). Implementing Climate Proofing at the governance level means embedding climate resilience into the core decision-making structures of a city. By promoting inclusive processes and participatory design, Climate Proofing directly contributes to Just Transition, ensuring that climate actions are not only effective but also equitable and socially responsive. Through its emphasis on co-creation and stakeholder engagement, Climate Proofing empowers cities to design accessible, inclusive and climate-effective urban spaces. It helps ensure that the benefits of climate action are shared across communities, particularly those most vulnerable to climate impacts, and that no one is left behind in the transition toward climate neutrality and resilience. This approach goes beyond technical solutions, it reshapes how institutions, stakeholders, and citizens interact wth climate challenges through: • Fostering cross-departmental Collaboration. Climate proofing encourages interdepartmental coordination (for example, between urban planning, transportation, energy, and environmental departments). This breaks down silos and enables (i) joint planning of infrastructure projects with climate resilience in mind, (ii) shared data and resources for better forecasting and risk managment, (iii) co-development of policies that align mitigation and adaptation goals. • Implementing a systemic approach for integrating synergies between climate mitigation and climate adaptation measures into urban development processes, ensuring that climate considerations are embdded in land use planning, building codes and transport systems. It supports long-term thinking avoiding short-term fixes that may conflict with broader sustainability goals. • Promoting replication and scaling in other districts. Once Climate Proofing is embedded in governance structures, successful models can be replicated across districts, used to develop toolkits and guidelines for other municipalities, scaled up through regional or national policy frameworks. • Fostering citizens involvement in processes of climate actions. Climate Proofing creates space for inclusive participation, where citizens can co-design solutions through workshops and consultations. This activity builds trust and ownership, making climate action more democratic and responsive. • Increasing public acceptance for the implementation of measures among residents. When climate measures are transparently governed and co-created, residents are more likely to understand the benefits and support implementation, the resistance to change is reduced and the acceptance grows. To successfully adopt Climate Proofing, municipalities must go beyond securing financial resources, they must embed the methodology into their core ways of working. While funding from internal budgets, national programmes, EU funds, or climate finance mechanisms remains essential, long-term success depends on building internal capacity and fostering a culture of collaborative, climate-informed governance. This means establishing dedicated interdisciplinary teams within the municipality that are equipped to lead and coordinate Climate Proofing efforts across departments. These teams should be supported by clear structures, defined roles, and sufficient human resources to ensure continuity and ownership. Knowledge management and data sharing are critical enablers of this process. Climate Proofing thrives on access to reliable local data, such as emissions inventories, climate risk maps, and urban development plans, which must be made available across departments and stakeholder groups. Establishing shared platforms for data exchange and documentation helps ensure transparency, consistency, and informed decision-making. Embedding co-creation into municipal workflows ensures that climate strategies reflect local realities and priorities, particularly for vulnerable populations. This participatory approach strengthens trust, enhances social equity, and ensures that climate action delivers benefits for all. Ultimately, adopting Climate Proofing is not just about applying a tool, but it’s about transforming institutional practices to make climate resilience and neutrality central to urban governance. It requires municipalities to 2.2 Summary Climate Proofing 33 invest in people, processes, and partnerships that enable sustained, integrated, and equitable climate action. To illustrate how Climate Proofing is applied in urban planning practice, the following section presents three case studies from cities that have implemented the Climate Proofing. These examples demonstrate how Climate Proofing can be adapted to different scales, from district-level planning to city-wide strategies, and offer insights into successful approaches, challenges, and lessons learned. Effects of the implementation of Climate Proofing © Buro Happold CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 34 In this chapter, three case studies are introduced, demonstrating the application of Climate Proofing in concrete projects. These projects vary primarily in terms of their scale of application, ranging from district-level initiatives to city-wide strategies and advisory in implementing Climate Proofing for organisations. These case studies demonstrate the versatility of Climate Proofing and its ability to be tailored to different contexts and scales. By showcasing successful examples of adaptation, we aim to provide valuable insights and lessons learned that can inform future efforts to enhance climate resilience. The three case studies presented are: 1. Blankenburger Süden, Berlin, Germany 2. Münster, Germany 3. Kommunale Klimaquartiere, Germany Across all case studies presented, a set of consistent and interconnected principles emerge, showcasing the robustness and adaptability of the methodology. Each project demonstrates a clear integration of climate mitigation and adaptation, treating them not as separate agendas but as complementary strategies for sustainable urban development. Whether addressing operational and embodied emissions or enhancing resilience to climate risks like heatwaves and flooding, the dual focus ensures that climate action is both proactive and protective. Each project applies the methodology’s five-step process while tailoring it to local contexts and priorities. A strong emphasis on stakeholder engagement and participatory governance runs through each example. Municipal departments, planners, and citizens are actively involved through workshops, interviews, and co-creation sessions. This participatory approach aligns with the UP2030 programme’s commitment to a Just Transition, ensuring that climate strategies are inclusive, equitable, and responsive to the needs of diverse communities. The methodology is grounded in evidence-based planning, using tools like CO₂ balance calculations and climate simulations. Importantly, all case studies are framed within broader climate neutrality targets, whether set by the EU’s Horizon Europe City Mission or local frameworks like Berlin’s Energy and Climate Protection Programme (BEK) 2030. Climate Proofing serves as a bridge between strategic ambitions and actionable interventions, translating high-level goals into locally grounded solutions. The methodology proves to be scalable and transferable, applicable across different urban contexts and governance structures. Its flexibility allows cities to start small and expand, making it a valuable tool for both pilot projects and long-term urban transformation. Climate Proofing in Practice Case Studies 3 Workshop in Münster © Buro Happold Climate Proofing in Practice 35 Climate Proofing (under the name of "Climate Check") was first developed during the early planning phase of the Blankenburger Süden neighborhood project in Berlin, a new city district in Berlin, designed to include up to 6,000 housing units as well as schools, green and commercial spaces. Buro Happold introduced Climate Proofing to assess both climate mitigation and adaptation potentials using microclimate simulations and GHG emission accounting. The process was marked by close collaboration with the Berlin Senate and a co-creative approach involving multiple stakeholders. A key success factor was the integration of various senate departments through regular working groups, which ensured alignment and broad acceptance of the outcomes. The results were translated into spatial recommendations that now serve as a foundation for climate-neutral and resilient district development. Through implementing Climate Proofing in Blankenburger Süden we explored how the future urban developement for this area can be designed to minimize negative climate impacts while enhancing resilience. The strategies developed aim to proactively address challenges such as heatwaves and heavy rainfall, while also reducing the neighborhood’s overall carbon footprint. Within the framework of a “climate check,” two planning scenarios were assessed: a standard variant, which incorporates baseline climate measures aligned with current practices, and an ambitious variant, which integrates a comprehensive set of advanced mitigation and adaptation strategies to achieve a climate-positive outcome. The process followed the different phases which later led to the 5-step approach of Climate Proofing: • Phase 1 - Foundations and Goal Settings - involves reviewing existing climate and environmental data, defining guiding principles and goals, establishing planning scenarios (including baseline, current, and climate-optimized options) and translating these into urban design variants in coordination with other foundational concepts. • Phase 2 - Climate Checks - evaluates operational, mobility-related, and embodied emissions, as well as CO₂ sinks. The Climate Adaptation Check models day and night scenarios to assess microclimate impacts and inform resilient urban design. • Phase 3 - Integrated Action and Measures Concept - focuses on developing a comprehensive strategy that integrates climate mitigation and adaptation, centered around key themes such as creating a dense, blue-green city, achieving climate neutrality, and ensuring climate resilience. • Phase 4 - Reporting and Ongoing Coordination - involves compiling final reports and accessible documentation, maintaining regular coordination with stakeholders through public presentations, and integrating the findings into urban planning competitions. The "Climate Check" framework showed that only the more ambitious "Plan Pioneer scenario" can deliver a climate-positive balance, primarily through reducing embodied emissions, leveraging renewable energy, timber construction, and enhancing green infrastructure. 3.1 Blankenburger Süden, Berlin Blankenburger Suden © yellow z / bgmr Landschaftsarchitekten CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 36 For the past 30 years, the city of Münster has been dedicated to climate protection and adaptation. In 2019, the City Council set an ambitious goal of achieving climate neutrality by 2030. To expedite progress towards this goal and demonstrate solidarity with the EU, Münster successfully applied to join the "100 Climate Neutral and Smart Cities by 2030" initiative in 2022, part of the European Horizon Europe City Mission. The first version of the Climate City Contract, which was drawn up by 2024 as part of the City Mission, strategically underpins the City of Muenster's goal. With the declarations of commitment from the administration and urban society as well as the investment and action plan, the Climate City Contract sets out the necessary steps to achieve the ambitious climate targets. Münster aims to align and coordinate its climate mitigation and adaptation efforts while promoting social and spatial justice through participatory approaches. The city’s key objectives include developing a neighborhood-level roadmap for climate action and harmonizing the use of technical tools and planning instruments across municipal departments. Additionally, Münster seeks to better understand which specific data are available or missing, and how knowledge and data can be more effectively shared between departments. To support these goals, the city has implemented Climate Proofing, which facilitates the creation of a roadmap toward a climate-friendly city. This approach is grounded in the three core pillars of the UP2030 initiative: Just Transition, Carbon Neutrality, and Resilience. To apply Climate Proofing in Münster, an organizational tracker was created to structure existing data, tools, and guidelines related to climate action and co-creation. These resources were mapped to the tool’s process steps based on their relevance to local planning and implementation. In collaboration with the city’s Climate Staff Unit, specific needs were identified to shape the Transition Guideline, which includes: (i) an overview of district development in Münster, (ii) the tool’s methodological background, (iii) a step-by-step implementation guide, and (iv) profiles of key local climate action resources. Section (iii) of the guideline is the core implementation component. It features step-by-step checklists with guiding questions for each phase of Climate Proofing, covering climate mitigation, adaptation, and co-creation. These checklists include links to internal and external Münster-specific resources, enabling direct access from the document. The guiding questions are designed to be both locally relevant and broadly applicable, encouraging users to reflect on existing resources, explore synergies and trade-offs between topics, and generate new ideas for climate strategies within their projects. Section (iv) of the guideline features detailed profiles of key resources, including existing concepts and data relevant to climate proofing in Münster. Each profile includes an introduction, classification regarding liability and implementation, and a breakdown of how it supports Climate Proofing. It also provides examples and highlights synergies with other resources. This ensures local knowledge is effectively utilized rather than overlooked, making the tool a practical framework for stakeholders. Following the completion of the guideline, its integration into Münster’s administration is planned for the upcoming Upscaling Phase. This phase will focus on developing a structured implementation strategy, effective communication for broad adoption, and mechanisms to keep the document updated. It will also explore governance frameworks and funding opportunities to support its application. 3.2 Climate Just Neighborhood Regeneration in Münster Scheme on the different project/scales © Buro Happold Guideline developed in Münster © Buro Happold Climate Proofing in Practice 37 The Klimaquartiere Hessen project demonstrates how Climate Proofing can be applied as a strategic and operational framework to support smaller municipalities in developing and implementing locally adapted climate mitigation and adaptation measures. Climate Proofing was used to guide the development of tailored measures roadmaps for each municipality. These roadmaps were built upon an initial Climate Check, which assessed existing conditions and identified key fields of action. The Climate Check covered a wide range of topics, including energy consumption reduction, renewable energy integration, building greening, and heat stress mitigation. Based on this assessment, each municipality received a customized roadmap outlining priority measures, implementation timelines, cost estimates, relevant funding programmes, and responsible stakeholders. The Climate Proofing methodology was applied across all five process steps to support municipalities in developing tailored climate strategies. The process began with the identification of local climate goals and spatial conditions, forming the basis for a shared vision in each municipality. In the evaluation phase, climate risks and emissions hotspots were analyzed, and key fields of action were prioritized based on their potential impact and feasibility. Building on this, concrete and individual measures were developed for each municipality, ranging from photovoltaic installations on public buildings to decentralized rainwater management and shading strategies for heat-sensitive areas. During implementation, the municipalities received targeted support in applying for funding, preparing tenders, and coordinating with local stakeholders to initiate the measures. The project placed a strong emphasis on the actual implementation of measures, ensuring that planning efforts translated into tangible climate action on the ground. The project followed a long-term perspective by fostering knowledge exchange and intermunicipal collaboration, ensuring that insights and results could benefit not only the participating municipalities but also others across the region. A key feature of the project was its strong emphasis on co-creation and participation. In each municipality, workshops were held to engage local stakeholders, ranging from administration and utilities to residents and civil society groups. These sessions helped ensure that the proposed measures were context-sensitive, socially accepted, and aligned with local priorities. The participatory approach also fostered ownership and built capacity for long-term climate action. To support knowledge exchange and scaling, the project included an intermunicipal coordination framework, enabling cross-learning between the five municipalities and contributing to a broader regional climate strategy. The Klimaquartiere Hessen initiative showcases how Climate Proofing can be used not only as a technical tool but also as a governance and engagement strategy to drive integrated climate action at the local level. 3.3 Kommunale Klimaquartiere, Germany Klimaquartiere Hessen, site visit © Buro Happold CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 38 Multiple projects often run in parallel without coherence or connection among individual initiatives. These efforts require structured linkages to enable integrated perspectives on climate mitigation and adaptation. As demonstrated in the Münster case study, the central challenge was not to develop additional isolated, case-specific solutions, but to operationalize existing resources and embed them within a targeted and holistic strategy. Climate Proofing acts as the backbone of sustainable urban transformation: a solid, structured foundation upon which additional projects, tools, and strategies can be built and integrated. Much like a spine supports and connects the entire body, it provides the essential framework that holds together diverse climate actions, ensuring they are not isolated efforts but part of a cohesive, strategic approach. Without this backbone, other initiatives risk remaining fragmented, disconnected from broader urban planning processes, and lacking long-term impact. By embedding Climate Proofing into the core of municipal planning and governance, cities can systematically address climate mitigation, adaptation, and co-creation from the outset. This enables other tools, such as carbon accounting platforms, nature-based solutions, or climate check guidelines, to be effectively aligned with shared goals and embedded within a common methodology. This foundational role is clearly demonstrated in the guideline developed for the city of Münster. Originally designed to support internal municipal processes, the guideline has shown strong potential for scaling and transferability to external stakeholders such as urban planners, architects, engineers, and researchers. For planners, it offers a strategic framework to align projects with climate goals while tailoring solutions to local conditions. Architects and engineers benefit from its co-creation approach, which integrates community perspectives into designs that balance aesthetics, sustainability, and resilience. Scientific collaborators gain access to a structured, evidence-based methodology for developing integrated climate strategies. Scalability is a key strength of Climate Proofing, making it applicable across multiple spatial and administrative levels, from neighborhood interventions to city-wide strategies and regional planning frameworks. At the neighborhood level, it enables targeted, place-based actions that respond to local climate risks and community needs. At the city level, it provides a structured framework for integrating climate goals into municipal governance, aligning departments, policies, and planning instruments around shared objectives. At the regional level, Climate Proofing can inform broader spatial strategies, harmonize climate action across municipalities, and support regional climate targets through coordinated planning and data sharing. Its flexibility allows for adaptation to different regulatory contexts, planning cultures, and resource capacities, making it a powerful tool for scaling climate action in a coherent and context-sensitive way. Moreover, Climate Proofing facilitates knowledge sharing, data integration, and collaborative working structures across departments and stakeholders. It supports the development of internal capacity, promotes transparent decision-making, and fosters a culture of continuous learning. In doing so, it transforms the way cities work, moving from siloed approaches to integrated, resilient, and inclusive urban development. In essence, Climate Proofing is not just a tool: it is the spinal structure of climate-resilient urban planning. It enables cities to connect, coordinate, and scale their efforts, ensuring that every project, policy, and intervention is part of a larger, integrated vision for a sustainable and equitable urban future. Conclusion 4 Conclusion 39 CLIMATE NEUTRAL AND ADAPTIVE URBAN DEVELOPMENT 40 Bibliography 5 Albers et al. (2014). Overview of challenges and achievements in the climate adaptation of cities and in the Climate Proof Cities program.In Building and Environment. Angelidou, M., Froes, I., Karachaliou, E., & Wippoo, M. (2021). Co-creation Techniques and Tools for Sustainable and Inclusive Planning at Neighbourhood Level. Experience from Four European Research and Innovation Projects. In E. G. Nathanail, G. Adamos, & I. Karakikes (Eds.), Advances in Mobility-as-a-Service Systems: Proceedings of 5th Conference on Sustainable Urban Mobility, Virtual CSUM2020, June 17-19, 2020, Greece (pp. 562-572). Springer. Ayyoob, S. (2021). Co-benefits and synergies between urban climate change mitigation and adaptation measures: A literate review. In Science of the Total Environment volume 750. Avila-Garzon, C., & Bacca-Acosta, J. (2024). Thirty years of research and methodologies in value co-creation and co-design. In Sustainability, 16. City of Lahti, (2023), Climate City Contract: 2030 Climate Neutrality Action Plan of the City of Lahti. Comune di Milano, (2020, July 15), Verde. Con Forestami avanza piano per 3 milioni di alberi entro il 2030 (https://www.comune.milano.it/-/verde.-con-forestami-avanza-piano-per-3milioni-di-alberi-entro-il-2030) Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). (2019). A new narrative of Resilient and Climate Smart Societies. Berlin, Germany. European Commission, (2025, July 30), Vilnius' sustainable summer as the 2025 European Green Capital. Directorate-General for Environment. (https://environment.ec.europa.eu/news/ vilnius-sustainable-summer-2025-european-green-capital-2025-07-30_en) Halvorsrud et al. (2021). Identifying evidence of effectiveness in the co-creation of research: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the international healthcare literature. In Journal of Public Health Volume 43. Oxford, UK. Hassan, G. F., Hefnawi, A. E., & Refaie, M. E. (2011). Efficiency of participation in planning. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 50(2), 203–212 Howarth et al. (2024). Integrating climate mitigation and adaptation: a new framework for achieving “climate resilient net zero” in preparing for heat risk. Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment Working Paper 413. London: London School of Economics and Political Science Intergovernamental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2014). Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report Bibliography 41 of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland. IPCC (2022). Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate C Change, Chapter 8. IPCC. (2023). Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. Kamenders, A., Rosa, M., & Kass, K. (2017). Low carbon municipalities. The impact of energy management on climate mitigation at local scale. Kılkış, Ş., Ulpiani, G., & Vetters, N. (2024). Visions for climate neutrality and opportunities for co-learning in European cities.In Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 195. Klein et al. (2007). Inter-relationships between adaptation and mitigation. In Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Landauer et al. (2015). Inter-relationships between adaptation and mitigation: a systematic literature review. InClimatic Change. Laukkonen, J., et al. (2009). Combining climate change adaptation and mitigation measures at the local level, in Habita International 33. Mahmoud et al. (2021). Co-creation pathways to inform shared governance of urban living labs in practice: lessons from three European projects. In Frontiers in Sustainability Cities. Matti et al. (2022). Co-creation for policy: participatory methodologies to structure multi-stakeholder policymaking processes. Publications Office of the European Union. Luxembourg. Pan, J., & Sun, T. (2023). Understanding the Nature and Rationale of Carbon Neutrality. In Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies. World Scientific Publishing Co. Volume 11. Qi, J. & Terton, A. (2022). Addressing Climate Change Through Integrated Responses: Linking adaptation and mitigation. In International Institute for Sustainable Development Policy Brief. Resilient Cities Network, What is Urban Resilience (Retrieved 30 June 2025, from https:// resilientcitiesnetwork.org/what-is-urban-resilience/) Stadt Wien – Magistratsabteilung 20. (2019). Städtisches Energieeffizienz-Programm