Towards a new neighbourhood-scale climate risk-adaptation approach

Rigoni, C; Oliveira, S; Romice, O; Moreno-Rangel, A and Chatzimichali, A (2026) Towards a new neighbourhood-scale climate risk-adaptation approach. Buildings & Cities, 7(1), pp. 360-377. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

A new multimodal analytical approach is proposed to assess, act upon and predict climate risks that materialise differently across neighbourhood contexts. Current methods for assessing neighbourhood responses to climate risks tend to be dominated by either city-level adaptive capacity frameworks or building-level adaptation strategies. These approaches often overlook the empirically grounded and integrative potential of the neighbourhood scale. Neighbourhoods, particularly their capacity for collective action, which is linked to urban form, play a critical role in fostering adaptive behaviour. Despite this recognition, analytical approaches examining adaptation responses to climate risk at this level remain underdeveloped. Using a staged integrative approach, the study involved an initial scoping literature review of 494 documents, from which sources (n = 77) published over the past two decades were selected. This process revealed key environmental, spatial and social dimensions of neighbourhood adaptation in relation to climate risk. This proposed approach enables a richer understanding of climate risk by shifting from simple capabilities at the meso-scale to dynamic adaptive systems. Without this lens, local responses to climate risks remain standardised, lacking the diversity and dynamism required at context-specific levels. PRACTICE RELEVANCE The proposed approach helps planners, policymakers and design practitioners understand how adaptation occurs, why it varies across neighbourhoods, and how climate risks/ responses emerge from urban form, infrastructure, social practices and governance interactions often obscured by city-wide or building-level analyses. Standardised measures thus miss local vulnerabilities/capacities, but this analytical approach assesses neighbourhoods as adaptive systems to enable targeted, context-sensitive interventions. Key actions include integrating neighbourhood-scale analysis into planning, combining spatial/environmental data with community insights, and using iterative monitoring to support adaptive decision-making over one-size-fits-all solutions.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: climate adaptation; climate risk; governance; neighbourhood resilience; neighbourhoods; urban adaption; urban planning
Index terms: adaptation, adaptive capacity, adaptive system, adaptive behaviour, governance, dimension, interaction, planner, monitoring, urban form, literature review, strategy, key action, climate risk, urban planning, vulnerability, social practice, documents, practitioner, climate adaptation, collective action, decision-making
Subjects: user focus, climate science, practitioner, urban planning, urban form and morphology, theoretical framing, urban design, behavioral psychology, environmental hazards, communities and social development, business, human factors, profession, control systems, health monitoring assessment and metrics, data analysis and analytics, management, professional development, social theory, decision analysis
Topics: Site Management, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Governance, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Health and Safety
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here