Strengths and weaknesses of the 100 Resilient Cities Initiative in ...

The 100RC Initiative refers to a definition of resilience interpreted as “the capacity of individuals, communities, institutions, businesses, ... Skiptomaincontent Advertisement SearchallSpringerOpenarticles Search DownloadPDF Casestudy OpenAccess Published:02November2020 Strengthsandweaknessesofthe100ResilientCitiesInitiativeinSouthernEurope:RomeandAthens’experiences AdrianaGalderisi1,GiadaLimongi1&Konstantina-DimitraSalata2  City,TerritoryandArchitecture volume 7,Article number: 16(2020) Citethisarticle 6760Accesses 6Citations Metricsdetails AbstractCitiesarenowadaysfacedwithanunprecedentedcrisis,dueabovealltotheimpactsofclimatechangeandtheincreasingsocialinequalities,whichrequireinnovativeapproachesandmoreeffectivetools.Resilienceiswidelyinterpretedasakeyprincipletore-frameurbanpolicies,pavingthewaytocross-sectoralurbanstrategiescapableofbettercopingwithcontemporarychallenges.Thiscontributionfocusesinparticularonthe100ResilientCities(100RC)Initiative,launchedbytheRockefellerFoundationandaddressedtosupportcitiesallovertheworldindevelopingandimplementingstrategiescapableofincreasingurbanresilienceinthefaceofmultipleshocksandstresses,includingclimatechange.Indetail,basedonthecomparativeanalysisoftwocasestudies,RomeandAthens,thispaperaimsatprovidinginsightsonthemainstrengthsandweaknessesofcities’resilience-buildingprocessesdevelopedunderthe100RCInitiativeandatdeeplyanalyzingthecontributionofthedeliveredResilienceStrategiestotheimprovementofcities’capacitiestocopewithcontemporarychallengesandaboveallwiththeincreasingimpactsofclimatechange. EnhancingCities’Resilience:whyandhowCitiesnowadaysareatthecoreoftheinternationalplanningdebate,duebothtotheirrapidgrowthandchanginggeographies(BrennerandSchmid2015)andtothemultipleandofteninterconnectedfactors,suchastheimpactsofnaturalandclimate-relatedhazards,theenvironmentaldegradationortheincreasingsocialinequalities,whicharethreateningtheirlivabilityaswellastheirfuturedevelopment(ZhangandLi2017).Justafewyearsago,theItalianplannerBernardoSecchirecognizedtheimpactsofclimatechangeandtheincreasingsocialinequalitiesasthecrucialaspectsofa“newurbanquestion”(Secchi2013).However,theseaspectsarenotindependentofeachother,notonlybecauseoftheadversesocialconsequencesofclimatechange,whichcouldcontributetoradicalizecurrentinequalities(Beck2010),butalsotothepotentialinfluenceofclimatepoliciesoneconomicinequalitiesaswellasonsocialcohesionandwellbeing(HallegatteandRozenberg2017;MarkkanenandAnger-Kraavi2019).Inthefaceofthecontemporaryandinterconnectedcrisisinducedbyclimatechangeandincreasinginequalities,innovativeandmoreeffectiveapproachesandtoolsarerequired(Albrechtsetal.2020).TheAgenda2030,andnamelyitsgoal11—“makecitiesinclusive,safe,resilientandsustainable”—hasclearlyunderlinedtheneedof“(…)adoptingandimplementingintegratedpoliciesandplanstowardsinclusion,resourceefficiency,mitigationandadaptationtoclimatechange,resiliencetodisasters”(UN2015).However,theprogressestowardsthistargetarestilllimited(UN2019):greenhousegas(GHG)emissionscontinuetogrowup,eventhoughatdifferentratesindifferentcountries,andtheincreasinginequalitiesinincomeandwealthlevels,currentlyexacerbatedbythepandemicandconsequenteconomiccrisis,risktounderminetheoverallefforttowardstheSustainableDevelopmentGoals.Thus,howtopushaprogresstowardsthegoalsandtargetsestablishedbytheAgenda2030?Whatinnovativeandeffectiveapproachesandtoolscanwedeployinordertosupportcitiesindevelopingandimplementingintegratedpoliciescapableofaddressingcontemporarychallenges?Thepolysemicconceptofresilience,towhichmultiplemeaningshavebeenattributedovertheyears,alsoduetoitsmigrationacrossdifferentdisciplinaryfields(Alexander2013;Galderisi2018),inthefieldofurbanresearchisrapidlychanging“fromanemergingresearchtopicdirectionintomainstreamone”(ZhangandLi2017).Nowadays,itiswidelyinterpretedasakeyprincipleto“framescientificandpoliticaldiscoursesoncities”(YamagataandSharifi2018)andtopavethewaytocross-sectoralurbanstrategiescapableofovercomingsectoralapproaches(Gabellini2018).However,resilienceisstillanambiguousconceptsinceitisinterpretedaccordingtodifferentapproaches,whichvaryfromthemost‘conservative’ones,referabletothesystems’abilitytoabsorbshocksorstresses,thusensuringtheirpersistence,tothe‘transformative’ones,referabletosystem’sabilitytoradicallytransformwhenchangingecological,economicorsocialconditionsmakethecurrentstateunsustainable(Beneetal.2012;WangandYamashita2015).Moreover,althoughtheresilienceconceptisincreasinglyassociatedwiththesustainabilityone,therelationshipsbetweenthemarestillpoorlydefined.ThedocumentsunderlyingtheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsandparticularlytheGoal11narrowlydefineoruseinterchangeablytheconceptsofresilienceandsustainability(Elmqvistetal.2019),andtheAgenda2030doesnotprovideadefinitionofthekeyterms—sustainableandresilient—identifiedascrucialtothefuturedevelopmentofhumansettlementsbythegoal11.Despitethelackofagreeddefinitionsaswellasofsoundandsharedmethodstoanalyze,assessandimproveurbanresilience,inthelastdecadetheinitiativesaimedatenhancingitinthefaceoftheincreasinglypressingsocialandenvironmentalchallengeshavemultipliedaroundtheworld.Thankstonumerousinternationalinitiativesaddressedtotranslateresilienceintopractice,byprovidingbothatheoreticalframeandoperationaltoolstosupportaresiliencebuildingprocessatcityscale,thisconcepthasgainedprominenceintheurbanagendasallovertheworld.Theon-goinginitiatives,whilesharingthecommongoalofenhancingcities’capacitytodealwithmoreandmorepressingenvironmental,socialandeconomicchallenges,largelydifferfromeachother,astheyarepromotedbydifferentorganizationsandpursuedifferentgoals.Themostrelevantones,intermsofnumberofinvolvedcities,arethe‘MakingCitiesResilient’Campaign,launchedin2013bytheUnitedNationsInternationalStrategyforDisasterReduction(UNISDR)thatisstillon-going,andthe100ResilientCities(100RC)Initiative,launchedin2013bytheRockefellerFoundationthatendedin2019.Whiletheformerisaddressedtoprovidecitieswithoperationaltoolsforcopingwithacuteshocksinducebynaturalandman-madehazards,thelatter,groundingonaholisticapproachtocities,aimsatprovidingthemwithfinancialandoperationaltoolsinordertosupportthedevelopmentandimplementationofstrategiescapableofincreasingcities’resilienceinthefaceofawiderangeofstressesandshocks,rangingfrommigrationstowatershortage,fromearthquakestoclimatechange(TheRockefellerFoundationandArup2016).Thispaperfocusesonthe100RCInitiative:indetail,“The100RCInitiative”sectionprovidesabriefpresentationoftheInitiativeaswellasofthesupportingtoolsofferedtotheparticipatingcitiestoanalyze,assessandimprovetheirresilience;“Casesdescription:RomeandAthens,twoparadigmaticexamplesofthe‘newurbanquestion’”sectiondetailswhyRomeandAthens,twocitiesthatduetotheircurrentenvironmentalandsocialfeaturescanbeconsideredasparadigmaticexamplesofthe“newurbanquestion”,havebeenselectedascasestudiesandprovidesabriefdescriptionoftheircommonfeaturesandpeculiarities;“RomeandAthens:theresiliencebuildingprocess”sectionand“RomeandAthensResiliencestrategies:thefocusonclimateissues”sectionprovideacomparativeanalysisoftheresiliencebuildingprocessesintheselectedcasestudies,highlightingstrengthsandweaknessesofthetwoprocessesandfocusingindetailonthecontributionprovidedbytheResilienceStrategiestotheimprovementofcities’capacitiestocopewiththeincreasingimpactsofclimatechange.Thefinalsectioncriticallydiscussestheoutcomes,positiveandnegative,ofthe100RCInitiative.The100RCInitiativeThe100RCInitiativewaslaunchedinthe2013bytheRockefellerFoundation,aprivatefoundationestablishedin1913topromotethewell-beingofhumanitythroughouttheworld,byfocusingonfourcorecommitments:toendenergypoverty,toachievehealthforall,tonourishtheworld,andtoexpandeconomicopportunity.Footnote1MirroringthebroadgoalsoftheRockefellerFoundation,the100RCInitiativewasdesignedtofinanciallyandtechnicallysupportcitiesallovertheworldinenhancingtheirresilienceinthefaceofmultipleandcomplexchallenges.Inparticular,engagedcitieswereexpectedtoimprovetheirperformancesinthefaceofawiderangeofacuteshocks,suchasearthquakes,floodsorfires,andchronicstresses,suchasunemployment,migrations,foodandwatershortage,etc.ratherthanpreventingormitigatingthelossofassetsduetoaspecifichazard(TheRockefellerFoundationandArup2015).The100RCInitiativereferstoadefinitionofresilienceinterpretedas“thecapacityofindividuals,communities,institutions,businesses,andsystemswithinacitytosurvive,adapt,andgrownomatterwhatkindsofchronicstressesandacuteshockstheyexperience”(TheRockefellerFoundationandArup2015).Suchadefinition,whichseemstocombinean‘adaptive’perspective,addressedtoadjustcitiestoaconstantlychangingcontext,witha‘transformative’one,aimedatradicallychangingthemaccordingtomodifiedcontextsandcircumstances,resultsfromalineofstudiesfocusedontheresilienceofsocio-ecologicaladaptivesystemsandnamelyontheirabilitytoadaptandsignificantlytransformwithorwithoutexternaldisturbance(GothamandCampanella2010;Shaw2012).However,despitetheprovideddefinition,somedocumentsavailableontheinitiative’swebsiteclearlyemphasizetheaimtosupportcitiesindevelopingtheircapacitytorecoverquicklyandeffectivelywhencrisesarise,Footnote2provingagreateraffinitywithamore‘conservative’approachtoresilience,rootedintheengineeringresilience(Holling1996)andlargelywidespreadindisasterstudies.Inordertoguidetheselectedcitiesalongaresiliencebuildingprocess,theRockefellerFoundationincooperationwiththeglobaldesignfirmArupandbasedonanextensiveanddocumentedresearchwork,Footnote3developedasetoftoolsallowingcitiestoanalyzeandassesstheirownresilience.Thekeytoolstoanalyzeandassesscities’resiliencearethe‘CityResilienceFramework’(CRF)andtheCityResilienceIndex(CRI).TheCRFisacircularmodelcomposedofdifferentringsandsectors:itidentifiesfourdimensions(Health&Wellbeing;Economy&Society;Infrastructure&Environment;andLeadership&Strategy)and12keygoals(3foreachdimension)thatrepresentthemainoutcomesthataresilientcityshouldaimfor.Hence,buildingontheCRF,theCRIprovidesasetof52indicatorsandadequatemetricsformeasuringandassessingcity’sresilience.Eachindicatorisrelatedtothesevenqualitiesthataresilientsystemshouldstrengthentoeffectivelywithstand,respondandadapttoshocksandstresses,andnamely:inclusiveness,integration,reflectiveness,resourcefulness,robustness,redundancy,andflexibility.Theoverallsetofindicatorscanbemeasuredthrough156questionsandtheresponsescanbethenre-aggregatedinrespecttothe12goalsoftheCRF(TheRockefellerFoundationandArup2016).Themaingoalofthe100RCInitiativeistodrivetheselectedcitiestowardsthedeliveringofaResilienceStrategy,builtthroughaparticipatoryprocessguidedbytheappointedChiefResilienceOfficer(CRO)andalocalresilienceteamsupportedbyinternationalconsultants(suchasArup).Thesemi-standardizedresiliencebuildingprocessshouldlastfrom6to9monthsandisgenerallystructuredintwomainphases(FitzgibbonsandMitchell2019):afirstoneaddressedtocarryoutabaselineassessmentofcity’sresilience,basedonCRFandCRI,toselecttheshocksandstressesthateachcityintendstoprimarilyaddress,andtodefinethePreliminaryResilienceAssessment;asecondoneaddressedtodelivertheResilienceStrategy,intendedasalivingdocumenttobecontinuouslyfine-tunedasforeseenactionsareimplementedandprioritiesareaddressed(BerkowitzandKramer2018).AlltheResilienceStrategiesdevelopedunderthe100RCInitiativehavebeendesignedaccordingtoacommonstructurethatincludespillars,goalsandactions.GoalsandactionsarealignedwiththeCRFgoalsandindicatorsthattheStrategy,basedonthepreviousassessment,aimsatimproving(Croeseetal.2020).Theoutlinedstructureoftheresiliencebuildingprocesswithintheframeofthe100RCInitiative,eventhoughitprovidedcitiesallovertheworldwithasystematicandcommonframeworktoassessandimprovetheirresilienceaccordingtotheirownpriorities,raisedalsosomequestionsrelated,forexample,totheinfluenceoftheCRF—consideredasauniversallyvalidframeofreference—inshapinglocalgoalsandactions,alsowhenlocalissuesdidnotneatlyfitintothe100RCtools(Sutherlandetal.2019)or,even,totherealimportanceassignedtotheinvolvementoflocalstakeholders.ThelimitedtimegiventocitiestodelivertheResilienceStrategiesseemstoconflict,infact,withthelargeemphasisputonthestakeholders’engagement,especiallyforcitiesstillpredominantlycharacterizedbytop-downdecision-makingprocesses,asmostcitiesinSouthernEuropeaswellasintheGlobalSouth.Intheframeoftheresiliencebuildingprocessoutlinedbythe100RCInitiative,thispaperfocusesonhowthisprocesshasbeenunfoldedintwocaseselectedstudies,AthensandRome.Inthefollowingsectionscommonalitiesandpeculiaritiesofthetwocasestudiesaswellaspositiveandnegativeoutcomesofeachprocesswillbeoutlined,andthecontributionofthedeliveredResilienceStrategiestotheimprovementofclimateresilienceintheselectedcitieswillbeexplored.Casesdescription:RomeandAthens,twoparadigmaticexamplesofthe‘newurbanquestion’InEurope,the100RCinitiativewasjoinedbynineNorthernEuropeancities(includingfivefromtheUK)andsevenMediterraneancities(AthensandThessalonikiinGreece,RomeandMilaninItaly,BarcelonainSpain,LisboninPortugalandBelgradeinSerbia).AmongtheinvolvedEuropeancities,twoMediterraneancities,RomeandAthens,whicharerespectivelythecapitalcitiesofItalyandGreece,havebeenselectedascasestudies.Thetwocitiesshow,infact,numeroussimilaritiesrelated,forexample,totheirclimaticprofileandtothemultiplehazardstheyareproneto;moreover,bothcitieshaveathousand-yearhistorybehindthemwhilstshowingnowadaysasocial,economicandenvironmentalcrisismakingtheirfuturedevelopmenthighlyuncertain.Inthefollowingsections,theprofilesofthetwoselectedcitiesaswellasthemaincommonchallengestheyhavetofacehavebeenbrieflyoutlined.Indetail,besidessomegeneralinformationrelatedtotheiradministrativedemographicandmorphologicalfeatures,themainenvironmentalandsocialcriticalities(suchaslandtake,soilsealing,populationaging;etc.)aswellasthemainshocksandstressesthetwocitiessufferedinthelastyearshavebeendescribedinordertohighlightwhyRomeandAthenscanbeconsideredasparadigmaticexamplesofthetwomainfacetsof“newurbanquestion”(Secchi2013):theimpactsofclimatechangeandthegrowingsocialinequalities.Duetotheirfeatures,theselectedcasesstudycouldprovideusefulinsightsontheeffectivenessofaresilience-basedapproachintacklingthedifferentchallengesthreateningurbanfuturedevelopmentand,inparticular,thoserelatedtoclimateimpactsandtheirmultipleconsequences.Rome:thecityprofileRomeistheItaliancapitalandhostsabout2,900,000inhabitantsonaterritorialsurfaceof1285 km2.ItisoneofthelargestcitiesinEuropebypopulationsizeandbyterritorialextension.RomeisthemaincityofthehomonymousMetropolitanCitythatisdividedinto121municipalities,whilethemaincityisdividedinto15administrativeunits.TheMetropolitanCityofRomehostsmorethanfourmillioninhabitantsonasurfaceof5363 km2.ThedevelopmentofthecityhasbeenlargelyinfluencedbythelocalmorphologyandnamelybythepresenceoftheTiberriver.Sinceancienttimestheriverhasrepresentedoneofthecity’sstrengths,beingakeyelementofitspeculiarlandscape,butalsoaweakness,duetoitsfrequentflooding.Romehaslongsoughttobalancethegrowingdemandforurbanizationwiththefragilityofitsnaturalenvironment.Inthelastcentury,thepopulationgrowthandthesocietaldevelopmentletarisenewdemands,contributingtofurtherexacerbatethefragilebalancebetweenthecityanditsnaturalenvironment(ResilientRome2018).Currenturbanstructuremirrorsthedemographicgrowthofthecityovertheyears:about500,000inhabitantsliveinthecitycenter,characterizedbyaveryhighpopulationdensity,whilstabout1,600,000inhabitantsliveinthepost-warbelt,andabout750,000inhabitantsliveintheperipherallow-densityareasFootnote4(ResilientRome2016).Theindexofsocialdiseasehighlightssocio-economicgaps,betweenthecentraldistrictsandthesuburbs,characterizedbyaseveremarginalization.Itrangesfrom-2.3forthefirstcentraldistrictto4.9forthesixthperipheraldistrict(MunicipalityofRome-GeneralAccounting2017).Inaddition,basedondataprovidedbytheItalianNationalStatisticsInstitute,theoldageindexincreasedfrom150in2004to170in2019,andthenumberofresidentforeigncitizenshastripledinthelast15 years:thepercentageofforeigncitizensincreasedfrom4.8%in2004to13.4%in2019.Theoldageindexandtheincreasingmigrationflowsrequiremoreadequateservices,capabletobettercopewiththeneedsofdisadvantagedcategories(elderly,immigrants,lowincomepopulation),byincreasingtheiropportunitiestoaccesspublicfacilities,promotingsocialinclusionandensuringhigherlevelsofsafety.RomeistheItaliancitywiththehighestabsolutevalueofsoilconsumptionFootnote5in2018and2019.Thisvaluerangesfromveryhighvalues(about70%)recordedinthecentralhistoricaldistrictstolowvalues(about15%)registeredintheperipheralones(MunafòandPolverini2019).Theincreaseinthelasttwoyearsismostlyduetotheconstructionofnewsealedareas,commercialareas,residentialbuildingsandinfrastructuresinperipheralareas(Munafò2019a,2020).TheaveragepercentageofconsumedsoilforthewholeMunicipalareaisabout24%,and22%isconsideredaspermanentconsumption.Finally,ithastobeunderlinedthatsoilconsumption,andaboveallthepercentageofsoilsealinginfloodproneareas,havesignificantlyexacerbatedfloodrisk:almost82%ofthetotalconsumptionofsoilinRomeoccurredinfloodproneareaswithseriousconsequencesontheexpecteddamageduetoextremerainfalls(MunafòandPolverini2018).Moreover,soilsealingcontributestothephenomenonoftheUrbanHeatIsland(UHI),eventhoughitalsodependsonotherfactorssuchaslayoutoftheurbanizedareas,buildingmaterials,vegetationandwinds.ConsideringthemetropolitanareaofRome,thetemperaturevariationbetweendenselybuiltartificialsurfacesandruralareasisabout3 °C(Munafò2019b).Duringthe2001–2013summerstheLandSurfaceTemperature(LST)reached31 °C(Morabitoetal.2015).ThephenomenonoftheUHIrepresentsasignificanthazardfactorespeciallyforelderlythat,asmentionedabove,areconstantlyincreasing.Despitenaturalareascoveringmorethan60%oftheMunicipalsurface,publicgreenareasrepresentonlythe5%ofthetotal(ResilientRome2018).Thedifficultmaintenanceofthenaturalheritage,aswellasofthehistoricalandculturalheritage,islargelyduetotheirquantity,diffusionandheterogeneity.Theinfrastructuralnetworksalsosufferfromalackofeffectivemaintenance:theagingandscarcelymaintainedtransport,watersupply,wastedisposalnetworksstrugglemoreandmoretosatisfypopulationneeds.Thelowefficiencyofpublictransportcontributestoacontinuousgrowthofcar-basedmobilityand,consequently,totheincreaseofgreenhousegasemissionsandairpollution:highvaluesofNO2arecurrentlyreportedbothforthemoredenselypopulatedareasandforthemainroadswithhightrafficflows.Footnote6Intermsofgovernance,Romesuffersfromthelackofintegratedstrategicframeworks,andcross-sectoralinnovativepolicies(Coppola2018).Athens:thecityprofileTheCityofAthenshasapopulationof664,046inhabitants(2011Census),livingintoanareaof37.954 km2.ItcoversthecentralpartoftheAtticaRegionFootnote7(3.828.434inhabitantsin2011)anditisoneofthemostdenselybuiltandpopulatedmunicipalitiesinGreece.TheAtticaRegionshowsacomplexandinterestingmorphologicallandscape,withtheCityofAthenslocatedintheimmediatevicinityofmountains,protectedareas(Natura2000network,NationalPark),forestsandcoastalareasaswellasthePortofPiraeus(thelargestinGreeceandoneofthebiggestintheMediterraneanareaandEurope).TheCityofAthensischaracterizedbyahighpopulationdensity,aging(andinsomeareasverylowquality)builturbanfabric,narrowstreetsandlackofgreen(public)openspaces.Rapidurbanization,uncontrolledlandtakeandresidentialdevelopment,frequentlybuiltwithoutanypermission,hasledtoahighpercentageofsoilsealing(morethan80%ofitssurfaceiswaterproof),tothedepletionofperi-urbangreenareasalongwiththecoveringofaconsiderableportionofitsnaturalwaternetwork(streams)(ResilientAthens2017).AccordingtothedataprovidedbytheCORINElandcover,in2018thetotalartificialarea(LEACcategories)forCentralAthensFootnote8wasequaltothe74%ofthetotalsurface.Footnote9TheRegionofAtticaisconsideredoneofthemostexposedregionstonaturalhazards(particularlyearthquakes,floods,heatwavesandforestfires)inGreece.Moreover,theaforementionedfeaturesoftheCityofAthensfurtherexacerbatephenomenasuchasUHI,flash-floodsandlowlevelsofairquality(Chalkiasetal.2015;Kartalisetal.2017;MaloutasandSpirellis2019;ResilientAthens2017).ThemajorflashfloodsandforestfiresthathittheAtticaRegioninthelastyearsareadirectresultofthiscomplexsituationandclearlydemonstratetheinsufficientplanningframeworkandpractice,thelackofcity’spreparednesstocopewithhazardouseventsand,overall,thehighdegreeofphysicalandinstitutionalvulnerability.Theserioussocio-economiccrisis(anaftermathoftheglobalfinancialcrisisof2007–2008)aggravatedthealreadyhighhuman,socialandinstitutionalpre-crisisvulnerability,especiallyagainstnaturalhazardsand,also,ledtosevereausteritypoliciesandmeasures.Amongthemainconsequencesoftheresultingrecessionweredecliningincomes,growingpersonaldebt,highrealestatetaxesaswellasincreasinglevelsofunemployment,povertyandhomelessness,leadingtoviolenceandcivilunrest.Moreover,austerityledtosignificantcutsinlocalgovernment’sbudgetandthusinpublicworksandsocialservices,whichhavedeeplyaffectedthemostvulnerablepopulation.Atthesametime,thelargeflowsofrefugeesandimmigrantsinthecityintensifiedthesocialpressures,creatednewmarginalitiesinsidealreadyexistingmarginalities(MonnoandSerreli2020)andstrengthenedthefeelingofmistrustbetweencitizensandlocalAuthorities(Chalkiasetal.2015;MaloutasandSpirellis2019;ResilientAthens2017).BasedonareportoftheInternationalOrganizationforMigration(IOM)OfficeinGreece(2020),inJanuary2020,7276migrantsFootnote10werelivinginmainlandopenaccommodationsites(camps)intheRegionofAttica,oneofwhich,“EleonasLong-TermAccommodationSite”,islocatedwithinthemunicipalityofAthens,accommodating1796people(withatotalcapacityof1.850people)(IOM-OfficeinGreece2020).RegardingESTIAAccommodationScheme,Footnote11inMarch2020,therewere11,651asylumseekersandrecognizedrefugeeslivingintheRegionofAttica(UNHCRGREECE2020).However,thisshockhasprovokedawaveofcitizens’mobilizationandsolidaritynetworks,andthegrowthofcivilsocietyresponses,includingnon-profitorganizationsandinformalgroups.Gradually,itbecameclearthatrefugeesmayrepresentanopportunityforthecity’scrucialproblemofsharplydecliningandagingpopulation.Thischangeindemographicfeaturesaffectsthecity’sculturalmixandidentity.ItisworthnotingthattheCityofAthens,incontrastwithothermunicipalitiesoftheRegion,isasociallymixedarea,characterizedbytheexistenceofverticalsocialdifferentiationFootnote12(MaloutasandKaradimitriou2001;MaloutasandSpirellis2015).City’surbanstructurewithmulti-storyresidentialbuildingandmixeduseshasenabled,tosomeextent,thisverticaldifferentiationamongsocialclassesandethnicidentities,thusavoidingthecreationofurban‘ghettos’(ResilientAthens2017).RomeandAthens:commonchallengesBothRomeandAthenshaveexperiencedseveralchangesthroughouttheirhistory,andtheystandnowatthecrossroadofmultiplechallenges,manyofwhichcommontoothercitiesinEuropeandbeyond,butalsoofopportunitiesfortriggeringmoreresponsibleurbandevelopmentprocesses.Climate-relatedimpacts,suchasflashfloods,heatwaves,forestsfires,representamajorchallengeinbothcities,alsoduetothehighlyvulnerablebuiltenvironment:highpopulationdensity,inadequateinfrastructures,lackofpublicgreenareasaswellasofeffectivemaintenancepoliciesresultinalimitedcapacityofbothcitiestocopewithmoreandmorefrequentclimate-relatedhazards(Figs. 1,2).Moreover,inthelastdecadeeconomiccrisisandmigrationflowssignificantlyaffectedbothcitiesdeterminingasignificantincreaseinpovertyandsocialinequalitieslevels,inparticularinAthens,wherelarge-scaleflowsofrefugees,combinedtothesevereconsequencesintermsoflossofjobs,reductionofincomesandincreaseoftaxes,ledtoacutesocialconflicts.Fig. 1Source:ResilientRome(2016)OccurredshocksandstressesinRomeFullsizeimageFig. 2Source:ResilientAthens(2017);meteo.gr;www.hnms.gr/emy/OccurredshocksandstressesinAthensFullsizeimageThus,RomeandAthenscanbenowadaysconsideredasparadigmaticexamplesofthemainfacetsofthe“newurbanquestion”(Secchi2013):theimpactsofclimatechangeandthegrowingsocialinequalities.Thus,theselectedcasesstudycouldprovideusefulinsightsontheeffectivenessofaresilience-basedapproachintacklingthemostrelevantinterconnectedchallengesthreateningurbanfuturedevelopment.RomeandAthens:theresiliencebuildingprocessFollowinganapplicationsubmittedbythecitiesthemselves,RomeandAthenswereselectedtobepartofthe100RCInitiative,respectivelyin2013andin2014.Bothofthemfollowed,althoughwithslightlydifferenttiming,thesemi-standardizedprocesssuggestedbytheRockefellerFoundationtodeliverthePreliminaryResilienceAssessmentfollowedbytheResilienceStrategy.In2013,Romewasselectedasoneofthefirst32citiestobepartofthe100RCnetwork;inthesameyeartheChiefResilienceOfficer(CRO)andadevotedworkingteamwereestablished.InJune2014,withtheAgendaSettingWorkshop,theworkingteamgavethestarttotheresiliencebuildingprocess.Thefirstphaseoftheprocess,aimedatoutliningthereferencescenariofortheResilienceStrategy,ledtothePreliminaryResilienceAssessment(PRA)in2016(Fig. 3).Duringthefirstphase,theworkingteamengagedlocalstakeholdersthrough:Fig. 3Source:ResilientRome(2016)MainstepsoftheResilienceStrategybuildingprocessinRome.Fullsizeimage focusgroups,involvingrepresentativesofcompetentauthoritiesinthefieldofinfrastructuresandtransportnetworks,watermanagement,technologicalnetworkcompanies,departmentsforenvironmentalandculturalheritageprotection; surveysandworkshops,involvingprofessionalandcitizenassociations,companies,andcitizens(ResilientRome2016). Theseactivitiesallowedtheteam,supportedbyexternalexperts,identifyingstrengthsandweaknessesofRomeaswellasshocksandstressesthataffectthecityandprioritizingthemaccordingtothestakeholders’perception.Basedontheseactivities,in2015theTeamdrafted4intermediatereports,includingtheStakeholderEngagementPlan,andinJanuary2016publishedthePRAthatidentifiedthemainshocksandstressesthatRomehadtocopewith,themostcriticalassetsandthefivemainchallengestobeaddressed.FollowingthereleaseofthePRA,RomehasgonethroughaslowdownoftheactivitiesduetotheestablishmentofaSpecialCommissionertoadministertheCity.AftertheestablishmentofthenewCityGovernment,inSeptember2017,anewCROwasappointedandthenewResilienceSteeringCommittee(RSC)andResilienceTeamestablished.BothofthemweremostlycomposedbyDeputyMayorsandmembersofdifferentMunicipalDepartments,suchasculturalpolicies,urbanplanning,environmentalsustainability,heritageandhousingpolicies,youthandsocialpolicies,economicdevelopment,digitalpolicies,tourism,andlaborpolicies.Thistransitionledtoareviewofthepreviouslyidentifiedchallenges,accordingtothepoliticalagendaofthenewMayor,andsignificantlyaffectedthetimingoftheprocess.Hence,aftertheselectionofthenewCROinSeptember2017,therenewedteamsupportedbytheexternalexpertsfromtheARUPgroup,whilstthefirstphaseoftheprocesshadbeensupportedbytheICLEI,outlinedthefinalResilienceStrategythatwasofficiallylaunchedinJune2018.ThefinalResilienceStrategyoutlinedavisionforaninclusiveandsupportivecitywithanexceptionalnatural,historicalandculturalheritage,capableofsafeguardingitspastanddevelopingitbypromotingenvironmentalsustainability,economicdevelopment,andpublicwell-being(ResilientRome2018).TheengagementofRomeinthe100RCInitiativewaspartofawideractionpromotedbytheUrbanTransformationandEnvironmentDepartmentandaimedatlaunchingurbaninnovationpathwaysinacontextscarcelyorientedtoinnovation(Tocci2015)andcharacterizedbyasignificantlackofinternalresources(Coppola2016).Athenswasselectedin2014(oneofthe35citiesselectedinthesecondround)tojointhe100RCInitiative.Inthespringof2015,throughtheAgendaSettingWorkshop(inwhich130Athenianswereinvolved),theframeworkandthemethodsofthe100RCprogramwerepresented.TheCROwasappointedinJanuary2016,whiletheOfficeofResilienceandSustainability(ORS)wasestablishedinFebruary2016andgainedanofficialstatusaspartoftheMayor’sOfficeinDecember2016(GovernmentGazetteNo3812/B’/28-11-2016).TheORS,supportedbytheARUP’sexternalexperts,laidthefoundationsfordraftingandimplementingtheResilienceStrategy.Moreover,theRSCwasestablishedtoprovideinterdisciplinaryinputandguidancethroughoutallthephases(conceptualization,drafting,implementation,monitoring)oftheprocessaimedatdeliveringtheResilienceStrategy.Itinvolvedaninterdisciplinarygroupofstakeholdersfromdifferentgovernmental,academicandnonprofitinstitutionscoveringabroadrangeofexpertiseandledbytheMayorofAthens(ResilientAthensADDMASA2016;ResilientAthens2017).Stakeholders’engagementwasoneofthemostimportantgoalsofAthens’Strategy:hence,themappingofrelevantstakeholdersandthedevelopmentofanintegratedStakeholderEngagement&CommunicationPlanwerethefirststepsoftheprocess(ResilientAthensADDMASA2016;ResilientAthens2017).Thus,duringthefirstphaseofthedrawingupoftheAthens’Strategy(February–June2016)andbasedonthemethodologyestablishedbythe100RCInitiative,threetoolswereusedtoidentifythecity’scriticalassets,shocks,stressesandvulnerabilities: PerceptionsTool:thepersonalviewsofvariousstakeholdersonwhatmakesAthensresilientweregatheredthroughinterviews,onlinesurveys,focusgroups,workshops,conferencesandmeetings.Awiderangeofstakeholderswasapproached(promptedbythe100RCprogram)withtheaimtogivevoicetocitygroupsthatareusuallyexcludedfromthedecision-makingprocess.Thus,thedifferentinitiativesinvolvedcitydistricts’councilmembers,citystaffandelectedofficials,centralgovernmentauthorities,architects,urbanplanners,start-uppers,tourguides,youngentrepreneurs,CSOs,NGOs,migrantwomen,homeless,streetpapervendorsandelders.Intotal,365stakeholderswereengaged,171stakeholdersfromthecivilsociety,100fromthepublicadministration,49businessesand45experts(academic,administrative,architects,urbanists,etc.), Assets&RisksTool:thenaturalandman-maderesourcesofthecityincombinationwiththeunexpectedcrisesthatthreatenormaythreatenAthens,weredocumentedincollaborationwithagroupofacademicandadministrativeexpertsonnaturalhazardsbutalsowithrepresentativesofthemunicipalityandpublicorganizations,and ActionsTool:451actions(initiatives,policies,strategies,projects,studies,strategicplans)weredocumented(mostofthemwerecollectedbytheMunicipalityofAthensbutalsofromtheRegion,theMinistry,variousinstitutionsandthecivilsociety). Basedontheseactivities,inJuly2016,thePRAwasreleased:itshapedthevisionforaresilientAthens—acityopen,green,proactiveandvibrant—andpresented5discoveryareasthatAthenshadtoexploreindetailinthesecondphase,inordertoidentifytheopportunitiesthatcouldcontributetoenhancecityresilience.Then,intheperiodfromMarchtoJune2017,theAthensResilienceStrategywasdraftedanddiscussedwiththeMayorofAthens,thecityCouncil,themunicipalExecutiveCommittee,theRSCandthemunicipalpoliticalparties.ItsofficialpubliclaunchwasheldonJune13,2017.Intotal,140organizationsand900citizensparticipatedin40workshops,conferencesorpublicevents.PhaseIIIoftheprocess,whichstartedinJuly2017,includedthelaunchoftheOneYearActionPlanaimedatsupportingtheimplementationoftheStrategy(Fig. 4).InMay2018,themunicipalityofAthensconductedanassessmentofthe3 yearsofORS,inordertomonitorthecourseofimplementation(ResilientAthensADDMASA2016;ResilientAthens2017).Fig. 4Source:BasedonResilientAthens(2017)MainstepsoftheResilienceStrategybuildingprocessinAthens.FullsizeimageItisworthunderliningthat,eventhoughAthensjoinedthe100RCInitiativeinthesecondround(1 yearlaterthanRome),itmanagedtofillthetemporalgap,bysurpassingRomeintermsofspeedoftheStrategybuildingprocess.Also,whiletheprocessinAthenswaslinear,inRomeitwassloweddownbythechangeofCROandResilienceTeamaswellasbyaredesignofthepreliminaryvisionaccordingtothenewMayor’sagenda.ThecomparisonbetweenthetwoprocesseshighlightssomedifferencesinthecharacteroftheleadingactorsandnamelyinthecompositionoftheRSC:whileinRomeinvolvedactorsaremainlyrepresentativesoflocalinstitutions,Athensopenedtoabroaderrangeofexternalexperts(suchasacademics,representativesofNGOsandofsomeprofessionalcategories,etc.).InbothcitiestheAgendaSettingWorkshopwasanopportunitytotriggeraparticipatory,cross-sectoralandinnovativedecision-makingprocess,byengaginganumberofstakeholders,incitiesforlongcharacterizedbyalimitedparticipationofcitizensindecision-makingprocessesaswellasbyascarcecooperationbetweendifferentsectorsofthepublicadministration.Accordingtothesemi-standardizedprocesssetupbythe100RCInitiative,infact,eachcityhadtoengageawiderangeofstakeholders,coveringabroadspectrumofgroupsandexpertise,inthedifferentphasesoftheresiliencebuildingprocess.Stakeholders’engagementisconsideredcrucialtoallthestepsoftheresiliencebuildingprocess,enablingResilienceTeamstoembracedifferentperspectivesindefiningbothcriticalissuesandinnovativevisionsforthefuturedevelopmentofcities.Moreover,itmaycontributetoincreasestakeholders’awarenessaboutchallengesandopportunitiesofthecontextatstake,whichcanbeveryimportanttoensuretheactiveengagementofstakeholdersalsointhefollowingimplementationoftheStrategies.However,ithastobeoutlinedthatbothinRomeandinAthens,thestakeholders’engagementprocessisonlyroughlydescribedinthePRAs:althoughdevotedStakeholderEngagement&CommunicationPlansareexplicitlymentionedineachPRA,thesePlansarenotavailableonline.TheoutcomeofthetwoprocesseswasthedeliveringoftheResilienceStrategiesthat,asmentionedin““The100RCInitiative”sectionhavebeendesignedaccordingtoacommonstructurethatincludespillars,goalsandactions.However,withinthiscommonstructure,eachcity,throughthebrieflydescribedparticipatoryprocess,hastoselectthepeculiarshocksandstressesitintendstofaceandhastosetitsownpriorities.Thisexplainsthedifferencesamongpillars,goalsandactionsidentifiedbyeachcity,revealingalsotheflexibilityofthemethodologyprovidedbythe100RCInitiative.RomeandAthensResiliencestrategies:thefocusonclimateissuesThissectionfocusesontherelevanceattributedtoclimateissuesbytheResilienceStrategiescarriedoutinthetwoselectedcasestudiesbydeepening,inparticular,thebalanceamongmitigationandadaptationmeasuresoutlinedineachcontextandthelinksamongtheResilienceStrategiesandotherplansandinitiativesandnamelywithspatialplanningtools.Thefocusonclimateissuesderivesfromseveralreasons.Firstofall,inbothcities,theissueofmitigationandadaptationtoclimatechange,despitetheimportanceattributedinthelasttwodecadestothisissueininternationalagendas,hasbeenforlongovershadowedbyotherpriorities.Bothcities,infact,havegonethroughalongphaseofeconomicandsocialcrisis,whichcertainlydidnotcontributetoidentifyclimateissuesasapriority.Nevertheless,bothcitiessufferedsomeclimate-relatedeventsduringtheprocessaimedatbuildinguptheResilienceStrategy.Inparticular,inthecaseofRomeflashfloodsoccurredonanannualbasisinthetimespan2014–2018andasnowfallhitthecityin2018.Moreover,theseismicevents,whichhitalargeareaofcentralItalybetween2016and2017,contributedtoincreasetheconcernofcitizensanddecision-makersforthehighfragilityofthewholecountryinthefaceofnaturalhazards(Fig. 1).InthecaseofAthens,theAtticaRegioninthetimespanofreferencewasaffectedbyseveralflashfloodstoo(Fig. 2).Moreover,in2018severewildfireshittheRegionofAttica,withtheheatwavethataffectedmostofEuropeinthesummerof2018,alsocontributingtotheexacerbationofflames.However,theseeventsarenotreportedinFig. 2,sincetheCityofAthenswasnotdirectlyhitbythefires.Secondly,climatechangeismoreandmorewidelyrecognizedasacross-cuttingissue,dependingonandaffectingdifferentsectors,fromtransportationtowaterandlandusemanagement.Therefore,itrequirestheovercomingofthesectoralapproach,stillprevailingespeciallyintheselectedcasestudies,andthedevelopmentofcross-sectoralstrategies,capableofstrengtheningbothverticalandhorizontalcooperationamongdifferentgovernmentlevels,differentsectorsanddepartmentsofamunicipality.Hence,ResilienceStrategies,thankstotheengagementofdifferentstakeholdersaswellastothecreationofdevotedResilienceOffices,representachallengeforthetwocitiesatstake,butalsoanopportunitytopromoteamoreeffectivemulti-sectoralcooperationandcollaborationamongdifferentsectorsoflocaladministration.Finally,whilsttheimportanceofmitigationandadaptationpoliciesismoreandmorewidelyrecognizedbothinthepoliticalagendaandinthescientificdebateallovertheworld,thedoubtsontheeffectivenessofthestrategiessofarundertakenandthealarmfortheirlikelyfailureisconstantlyincreasing.Lookingattherankingprovidedbythe2019GlobalRiskReport,the‘failureofclimatechangemitigationandadaptationpolicies’isplacedatthesecondplaceinthetoptenoftheperceivedglobalrisksbothintermsoflikelihood(followingtheextremeweatherevents)andintermsofimpact(WEF2019).Hence,itisimportanttounderstandifthemeasuresintroducedbytheResilienceStrategieshaveafollow-upintermsofimplementation.Stresses,shocksandchallengestobefacedinRomeandAthensInthecaseofRome,thePRAprovidedadescriptionofthecurrentstatusofthecityand,basedontheopinionsoftheengagedstakeholders,definedboththemostrelevantshocksandstressesandthemainchallengesthatthecityhadtoface.Indetail,climate-relatedevents(flashfloods,pluvialandriverfloods,landslides,sinkholes,heatwave)andnaturalhazards(earthquakes)havebeenidentifiedasthemostrelevantshocks,whilethenumerouschronicstresseshavebeenreferredtothelackofintegratedplanning,tothesoil,waterandairpollution,tothelossofecosystemservices,tothepoormaintenanceofpublicareas,infrastructuresandbuilding,totheinadequacyofpublictransportandtothelackofcitizenship(Fig. 5).Fig. 5Rome:shocks,stresses,andchallengesasperceivedbytheinvolvedstakeholdersFullsizeimageMoreover,thePRAidentifiedfivemainchallengesthatRomehadtocopewith:economiccrisisandincreasingvulnerabilityofpopulation,integratedgovernance,qualityoflife,urbansafetyandclimatechange,maintenanceofthecity’sheritage.Athens’PRAdescribedAthens’status,regardingthedemographicandsocialanalysisoftheurbanarea,theeconomy,thephysicalandman-madeinfrastructures,theculturalresources,thedevelopmentstrategy,thefundingtoolsaswellastheadministrativestructure.Basedonthethreetoolsalreadydescribedin“RomeandAthens:theresiliencebuildingprocess”section—thePerceptions,theAssets&RisksandtheActionstools—shocksandstresses,aswellasthemainchallengesthatthecityhadtocopewith,wereidentified.InthecaseofAthens,naturalhazards(earthquakes)andclimate-relatedevents(heatwavesandflashfloods)werealsoperceivedasimportantshockstobefaced,combinedwithcivilunrest(largelyduealsotothepressureoftheeconomiccrisis)andcybercrime.Regardingchronicstresses(fewerweredocumentedcomparedtoRome),themostrelevantonesreferredtotheimpactsoftheeconomiccrisis,totheaginginfrastructuresandtotheconstantincreaseofmigrationflows.Theidentifiedmainchallenges,alsointhiscasefiveareas,rangedfromtheurbandecaytoclimateimpacts(Fig. 6).Fig. 6Athens:shocks,stressesandchallengesasperceivedbytheengagedstakeholdersFullsizeimageResiliencestrategies:relevanceofclimaterelatedmeasuresTheRomeResilienceStrategyisbasedonfourpillars,mirroringthestrategicvisionoutlinedforthecity.Inrespecttoeachpillar,somepriorityactions,directlylinkedtothepillars,thekeygoalsandtheactionsthatwillallowthecitytoachievethemhavebeenidentified(Fig. 7).Fig. 7ThestructureoftheRomeResilienceStrategyFullsizeimageItisworthnotingthatinrespecttothewholesetofactionsoutlinedbytheStrategy(58actions),27ofthem(representingabout46%)arerelatedtoclimateissues,withaprevalenceofmitigationmeasures(16actions)(Table 1).Allclimaterelatedactionshavebeenclassifiedintermsofmitigation,adaptationormixedmeasures.Table 1ThewholesetofactionsoutlinedbytheRomeResilienceStrategyandthoseaddressedtocounterbalanceclimatechangeFullsizetableInparticular,thegoalB,whichisrelatedtothePillarIIandaddressedtopromoteurbanregeneration,includesrelevantmitigationactionsrelated,forexample,tothedevelopmentandtestingtestofpilotprojectsofsmartgrids,nearlyzeroenergybuildingsandPositiveEnergyBlocks—aimedtoimprovetheuseofrenewableenergy—andPositiveEnergyDistricts—aimedtoachieveazeroorpositiveenergybalanceintheurbandistricts—intheareassurroundingtherailwaystationsofTiburtinaandPietralata,ortotheimprovementofpublictransportstoreduceclimate-alteringemissions.Stillinthesecondpillar,thegoalGisentirelydevotedtoadaptingthecitytothemainimpactsofclimatechange–heatwavesandfloods-throughgreenandblueinfrastructuresaswellasthroughspecificcampaignsaimedatincreasingcitizens’awareness.Finally,alltheactionsincludedinthefourthpillararespecificallyaddressedtoclimatemitigationoradaptation.Theremainingplannedactions,accordingtotheotherchallengesthatthecityshouldcopewith,aremostlytargetedtoimprovetheefficiencyandeffectivenessofthedifferentdepartmentsofthepublicadministration,bypromotingmeanwhileabetterintegrationamongthem;torestoreandmaintainculturalandnaturalheritageandtoreducemarginalityamongtheweakestsocialgroups.Athens’ResilienceStrategyisalsobasedonfourpillars,mirroringthedesiredfutureconditionsforthecity.Everypillarincludesdifferentgoalsandeachgoalcomprisesasetofactionsthat,alltogether,willcontributetoachievethevisionoftheStrategy(Fig. 8).Fig. 8ThestructureoftheAthensResilienceStrategyFullsizeimageAmongthe44actionsincludedintheStrategy,thosespecificallyaddressedtocounterbalanceclimatechangehavebeenidentified,bydistinguishingtheonesthatmaycontributetothereductionofGHGemissions(mitigationactions)fromthosemorerelatedtotheadjustmentandregulationofurbansystemaswellastochangesinbehaviorinordertobettercopewiththemorefrequentclimateimpacts(adaptationactions).Someactions,andnamelythosefocusedontheregenerationofurbandistrictsorontherecoveryofindividualbuildings,addressbothmitigationandadaptation(Table 2).Thisanalysisindicatesthatabout45%oftheactionsconcernclimate-relatedissues(20outof44actions).Athens’Strategy,contrarytothatoneofRome,devotesequalrelevancetomitigationandadaptationmeasures,withaslightlymoreattentiontoadaptation.Table 2ThewholesetofactionsoutlinedbytheAthensResilienceStrategyandtheactionsaddressedtocounterbalanceclimatechangeFullsizetablePillarIIisalmostentirelyrelatedtotacklingclimatechange,comprisingactionsaimedatthedevelopmentofactionplansbothformitigationofandforadaptationtoclimatechange.Italsoincludesurbanregenerationprojects,acomprehensivemobilityroadmapalongwiththeestablishmentandmanagementofenergy,foodandwastesystems.Inparticular,itsactionsaimatintegratingnaturalsystemsintotheurbanfabric(throughthecreationofgreenandblueinfrastructures)andbettermanaginggreenareasinordertosupportandenhancenaturalenvironmentaswellaspromoteresidents’well-beingandimprovetheirqualityoflife.PillarIIIismorefocusedonadaptationandpreparationagainstchallengesandcrises.PillarIVincludesbothmitigationandadaptationactions,suchastheregenerationofunusedspacesandabandonedlotsaswellasthecreationofurbancorridors,linkinggreenareaswithculturallandmarks.Theremainingactionsaremostlyaddressedtoimprovemoretransparent,effectiveandparticipatorygovernancemechanismsaswellastoenhancesocialcohesion,aboveallatneighborhoodscale.Ithastobehighlightedthat,despitetherelevanceofthemigrationissue,theactionsfocusedonthisaspectareverylimitedcomparedtothetotal.Therelationshipswithotherurbanstrategies,plans,policiesandinitiativesOneofthemainopportunitiesforcitiesadoptingaresiliencestrategyisrelatedtothepossibilityofsystematizingactionsalreadyincludedinotherplanningtools,framingthemintoacommonandsharedvisionforfuturedevelopment.Theattentiondevotedtothebuildingupoflinkagesamongactionsalreadyincludedinotherplansandprograms,approvedorwithastillpendingapproval,issurelyoneofthestrengthsoftheRomeResilienceStrategythatcomprisesnumerousactionsandmeasuresalreadyincludedinpreviousplansandprojects(plansforurbanregeneration,sustainablemobility,urbangreening,etc.).Thenumberofactions,alreadyinprogressatthetimeofthedeliveringoftheStrategy,whichhavebeenframedintotheStrategyitselfisdoubleinrespecttothenumberofnewactions.AsclearlystatedintheStrategy,thismaycontributetoguaranteeboththeirimplementationandahighercontinuityinthecity’sdevelopmentpolicies.Allactionsaimedatcreatingplatformsforimprovinganddisseminatingknowledge,alsothroughcitizens’involvement,canbetracedbacktotheDigitalAgendaofRome(2016),addressingthedigitaltransformationofthepublicadministration.Theseactionsmaycontributeinthecreationofauniqueinterfacebetweenpublicandprivateactors,stakeholdersanddecisionmakers,allowingupdatingandintegratingdataandinformationfromdifferentsectors.TheestablishmentofaResilienceOfficeandthebuildingupofanopendataplatformaimatreducingdistancesbetweencitizensandlocalgovernmentaswellasatcreatinganoperationandmanagementcentercapableofsimplifyingtheintegratedmanagementofeventsinordinaryandemergencysituations.Furthermore,theparticipationintothe100RCnetworkisalsoanopportunitytocreatesynergieswithotherprojectsorinitiativesaimedatenhancingurbanresilience,suchasSmartMatureResilience(SMR)financedundertheHorizon2020Programanddevelopedinthetimespan2016-2018.TheaimsoftheSMRprojectwerefullyinlinewiththe100RCinitiativeandrelatedtoimproveamultilevelandmultisectoralcoordinationofallkey-stakeholders,fromnationalandinternationallevelstolocalinstitutions,includingcivilsociety,toensureabettercoordinationamongresiliencepolicies.Moreover,RomewasalreadypartoftheC40NetworkandoneofthesignatorycitiesofthefirstCovenantofMayors.Hence,mostoftheactionsclassifiedasmitigationactionsarealreadyinprogress,beingpartoftheSustainableEnergyActionPlan,issuedin2013,althoughnotfullyimplemented.Ontheopposite,adaptationactionsaregenerallynew,duetothelackofapreviousadaptationplan:theMunicipalCouncil,thattookofficein2016,joinedtheNewCovenantofMayorsforClimateandEnergyin2017,eventhoughtheSustainableEnergyandClimateActionPlan(SECAP)hastobestillsubmitted.However,theactionsaddressedtocounterbalanceclimatechange,mostlyincludedinthesecondandfourthpillarsoftheResilienceStrategy,andaimedatpromotingurbanregeneration,sustainablemobility,publicgreenareas,arefullyinlinewiththeobjectivesestablishedbytheEuropeanUnionfortheSECAP.DespitethenumerouslinkagesamongdifferentplanningtoolscarriedoutbythedifferentsectorsoftheMunicipality,thepersistinglackofcoordinationamongdifferentPublicBodieshastobeunderlined.Inparticular,theactionsrelatedtothegoal“Preparecity’sadaptationtoclimatechange”couldbenefitfromaclosestrelationshipbetweentheStrategyandthe10-yearprogramofactionsdesignedbytheRiverBasinAuthoritytoguaranteethesafetyofRomefromfloods,landslidesandsinkholes(RiverBasinDistrictAuthority2018).Unfortunately,thisprogramisnotevenmentionedintheStrategy,probablyduetoitsrecentadoption.Otherspecificactionsarestronglylinkedtosectoralplans,suchastheSustainableUrbanMobilityPlan(SUMP).Finally,itisworthnotingthattheResilienceStrategydoesnotexplicitlyrefertothe2008GeneralUrbanMasterplan,whichwasupdatedin2016,introducingissuesinlinewiththeclimate-relatedonesdefinedbythestrategy,suchasthecreationofurbanecologicalnetworks(Fig. 9).Fig. 9PlansandinitiativesrelatedtoRomeResilienceStrategyFullsizeimageAthens’ResilienceStrategyalsodrawsuponotherlocal,regional,nationalandinternationalstrategicdocumentsanditseemstobeawareofthelackofcommunicationamongthedifferentmunicipaldepartmentsandpublicbodiesand,consequently,ofthelackofcoherenceamongpoliciesandplans.Moreover,itclearlyacknowledgesthecitizens’needformoreinformationandimprovedmechanismsallowingtheirengagementindecision-makingprocesses.Hence,theStrategyaimsatcreatinginformationplatformsformunicipaldepartments,stakeholdersandcommunities,promotingpartnershipswithnationalandinternationalnetworksandfavoringlinkageswithotherplans,programsandinitiatives.Theseendeavorsmakedataandservicesavailabletoeveryone,ensurethecomprehensivedisseminationofrelevantinformationandraiseawarenessaboutresilienceissues.Regardingtheinterdependencieswithotherplans(Fig. 10),City’sPlanofIntegratedUrbanInterventionandtheIntegratedTerritorialInvestmentsActionsaretwoofthemaindocumentsunderpinningtheResilienceStrategy.City’sSustainableUrbanDevelopmentPlanisanotherkeydocumentalongwiththeNewRegulatoryPlanofAthens-Attica2021.TheStrategyalsotakesintoaccounttheUrbanAgendafortheEU,theNewUrbanAgenda—HabitatIIIandtheUNSustainableDevelopmentGoals.Moreover,manyactionsoftheAthens’ClimateChangeAdaptationandMitigationPlanareincorporatedintheResilienceStrategy.ThisPlanistheoutcomeofthecollaborationbetweenORSandtheC40AdvisorforAthens(C40CitiesClimateLeadershipGroup)andincludestwoparts,respectivelyfocusedonmitigationandadaptation,outliningspecificactionsaimedatimprovingqualityoflife,mostlyinrespecttoincreasingtemperatures,flashfloodsandpoorairquality.OtheractionsoftheStrategyarelinkedwithurban,regionalandnationalplansforsustainablemobility,wastemanagementsystem,energysavingprogramsandeconomicstrategicplans,themigrantintegrationactionplan,thepublicspaceco-developmentframework,thecrisispreparednessandmanagementplansaswellasthesustainablefoodpolicyplan.Fig. 10PlansandinitiativesrelatedtoAthensResilienceStrategyFullsizeimageItisworthmentioningthatAthensenteredtheSmartMatureResilience(SMR)projectinNovember2017,whichrespondstotheneedforenhancedresilienceinEuropeancities.AthensisoneoftheTier3cities,meaningthatisoneofthe‘engaged’citiesthatreceivestrainingintheuseofthedevelopedtools(Grimes2018).Theengagementofthecityintothisprojectcouldrepresentafurtheropportunitytostrengthenawareness,capabilitiesandskillswithinthedifferentsectorsofthepublicadministrationandtoempower,insodoing,localinstitutions,makingthelattermoreautonomousinrespecttotheleadingrolehithertoassumedbytheRockefellerFoundation.Finally,itisworthmentioningthatsomeoftheactionsincludedintheAthensStrategyservedasamodelforothercities,suchtheopen-schoolsinitiative,theEXTREMAEuropephoneapplicationandtheLycabettusHillProgram.Footnote13However,itisworthoutliningthat,despitetheattentionpaidtocreatinglinkswithotherplansandinitiatives,inboththedeliveredResilienceStrategiesthemutualinfluencesamongtheforeseenactions(boththenewonesandthosealreadyplanned)arenotexplicitlyanalyzed.ThisisasignificantweaknessforStrategiesaimedatframingdifferentactionsintoacommonandsharedvisionsincetheydonotallowrecognizingforexample,thepotentialimpactsofthelargeneighborhoods’redevelopmentprojectsincludedinbothstrategiesonexistingsocialinequalities.Theseprojects,ifnotadequatelydesignedandimplemented,couldsignificantlyincreasesocialinequalitywhileimprovingenvironmentalquality:therefore,despitethepremisesofthe100RC,theexaminedResilienceStrategiesseeminadequatetoprovideaneffectivelyintegratedapproachtothemultiplechallengesthatcontemporarycitiesarecalledtofaceand,inparticular,tothetwosidesofthenewurbanquestion.DiscussionandconclusionsSixyearsafterthelaunchofthe100RCInitiative,inJuly2019,theRockefellerFoundationhasdeemedtobeconcludedthisprogram,launchingnewonesforsupportingcities’activityinthisfield:theResilientCityCatalystFootnote14andthenewGlobalResilientCitiesNetwork(GRCN),Footnote15bothofthembuiltonthelegacyofthe100RC.ReflectingonthisInitiative,andaboveallonhowithasbeenunfoldedinRomeandAthens,weaimtocontributetotheemergingdebateonboththelegacythatthisInitiativelefttocitiesallovertheworld,intermsofnewapproachestourbanresilienceaswellasofnewtoolstoanalyze,evaluateandimproveit,andonthedoubtsandquestionsitraise.Inrespecttothelegacy,itisworthunderliningthatlocalgovernmentshavebeenprovidedwithusefultoolsforunderstanding,assessing,andimprovingtheircapacitytocopewithdifferentstressesandshocks:CFRandCRIallowcitiesestablishingabaselineagainstwhichtheycandefineandprioritizegoalsandactionsandmonitortheirprogresses.Alltheinvolvedcitieshadtheopportunity,thankstothesetoolsaswellastotheexternalfinancialandorganizationalsupport,torecognizeboththemainshocksandstressesandthemainchallengestobefacedandtocarryoutaresiliencestrategyaimedataddressingthem.Moreover,alltheresiliencestrategieshavebeendevelopedthroughparticipatorydecision-makingprocessesbasedonacross-sectoralcooperationamongdifferentinstitutionsaswellasontheengagementofmultiplestakeholders,includingcitizens,whichallowedincreasingdecisionmakers’andcommunities’awarenessonresilienceissues.Theexperimentationofthesenewformsofgovernance,innovativeinsomecities,suchastheconsideredcasestudies,representedanopportunitytoprogresstowardsasystemic-orientedknowledgeofurbanphenomena(WilliamsandHardison2013),whichisconsideredaprerequisitefordevelopingcross-sectoralstrategiescapableofovercomingthestillprevailing“silo”approachtourbanpolicies(Proustetal.2012;Galderisi2016).Finally,theinvolvementintoaworldnetworkallowedcitiesandcommunitiesrecognizingcommonchallenges,learningfromeachother,andsharinggoodpractices(TheRockefellerFoundation2019).AsremarkedbyElmqvistetal.(2019)thecitynetworkcreatedbythe100RCInitiativecanbeconsideredaremarkableexampleofhow“knowledgeco-productionamongstcitiesandcity-networksmaybringaboutnewurbansolutionsapplicableacrossscalesandacrossgeographiesforurbanresilienceandurbansustainability”.Despiteitspositivelegacy,the100RCInitiativeraisesalsosomedoubtsandquestions.Firstofall,mostoftheResilienceStrategiescarriedoutbytheinvolvedcities,includingtheanalyzedcasestudies,refertothemunicipalboundariesofthecities.However,citiesarenowadayswidelyinterpretedasopensystemsthatshouldbeanalyzedandregulatedthroughmulti-scaleapproaches,capableoftakingintoaccountthemultiplerelationshipslinkingboththedifferentneighborhoodswithinthecityandthecityitselftoitsmetropolitanorregionalcontext.Hence,itwouldbeimportanttodeeplyanalyzethepotential,positiveornegative,implicationsthatimprovingresilienceatagivenspatialscalemighthaveatdifferentscales,widerornarrowerinrespecttotheconsideredone,suchasaregionorasingleneighborhood(Sapountzaki2007;Elmqvistetal.2019).Unfortunately,atleastintheexaminedcasestudies,cross-scaleanalysesaimedatevaluatingthepotentialimplicationsoftheforeseenactionsatdifferentscalesaremissing.Moreover,thetwocasestudieshighlightthelackofaneffectivecross-sectoralapproach.DespitetheemphasisputbytheInitiativeonthecross-sectoralcooperationamongdifferentsectorsofthepublicadministration,itisworthnotingthatinbothcities,noevaluationofthecross-sectoralimpactsoftheforeseenactions,neitherinitinerenorexpost,hasbeencarriedout.Forexample,thepotentialimpactsonthealreadyrelevantsocialinequalitiesofthelargeneighborhoods’redevelopmentprojects,includedinbothstrategiesandaddressedtoimproveenvironmentalquality,shouldbeadequatelyaddressed,sinceResilienceStrategiesshouldimprovecities’capacitiestocopewiththemultipleandofteninterconnectedchallengesthatcontemporarycitieshavetoface.Anotherkeypointtobediscussedreferstotheeffectivenessofthestakeholders’engagementprocesses.DespitethelargeemphasisputbythisInitiativeontheactiveparticipationoflocalstakeholders,whichrepresentsacriticalfactorforanyeffectiveandinclusiveresiliencebuildingprocess(Borquezetal.2016;Satorrasetal.2020),thelimitedtimelinefordeliveringtheResilienceStrategiesraisessomereasonabledoubtsonthepossibilityofarealinvolvementoflocalstakeholders,especiallyforcitiesthatlackaconsolidatedtraditionofcitizens’participationindecision-makingprocesses,astheselectedcasestudies.Theactiveparticipationofdiverseurbanstakeholders,includingscientists,politicians,business,media,andcitizensinallthephasesoftheprocessis,infact,generallytime-consuming,especiallyincontextsthatstartsfromscratch.Therefore,itseemstobenotfullycompatiblewiththeshort-termhorizonassignedtothedeliveringoftheResilienceStrategies.Furthermore,bothcasestudieslackadetaileddescriptionoftheadoptedcriteriaforselectingandprioritizingcitizens’groupstobeinvolved.Focusingindetailonthetwocasestudies,itisworthremindingthattheyshownumeroussimilaritiesintermsofshocksandstressestobefacedandthat,inbothcities,climate-relatedimpactsarerecognizedasamajorchallengeexacerbatedbyavulnerablebuiltenvironment,characterizedbyhighpopulationdensities,inadequateinfrastructures,lackofpublicgreenareasaswellasofeffectivemaintenancepoliciesofthebuildingstock.Eventhoughtheeconomiccrisisandthatinducedbytheincreasingflowsofmigrantsandrefugeesarementionedaschronicstressesinbothcities,theirrelevanceinAthensissignificantlyhigher,whilethelackofintegratedandparticipatorygovernancerepresentsaverysensitiveissueinbothcases.Inbothcities,theinvolvementinthe100RCInitiativehassurelyrepresentedanopportunitytoaddresssomecriticalissuesrelatedtodifferenturbandimensions(society,economy,environmentandgovernance),todevelopasharedvisionforfuturedevelopment,andtosystematizeintoacommonframenewandon-goingactionsalreadyincludedindifferenttools(e.g.climateplans,urbanregenerationprojects,etc.).Moreover,theengagementinthe100RCInitiativecontributedinbothcasestoimprovedecision-makers’andcitizens’awarenessabouttheexistingandemergingchallengestheyhavetocopewithandtotestnewgovernancemodels,basedonmoreparticipatoryandcross-sectoralapproachestodecisionmakingprocesses.Still,bothcitieshavefullygraspedtheopportunityofferedbythisInitiative,alsoduetothelimitedtimespanfordeliveringtheResilienceStrategies,tosystematizealreadyexistinginitiativesandactions,bringingthemunderacommonumbrella(FitzgibbonsandMitchell2019).InRome,theresiliencebuildingprocessallowedframingtheon-goingactionsintoanoverallstrategy,basedonasharedvisionforcity’sdevelopment.Nevertheless,thediscontinuitiesthatcharacterizedtheresiliencebuildingprocess,largelyduetothechangeofitsleadingactors,contributedtoslowdownthedeliveringoftheResilienceStrategy.Itisworthemphasizingthatthelackofastablepoliticalleadership,asinthecaseofRome,mayalsoaffectthefollowingphaseoftheresiliencebuildingprocess,thatistheimplementationphase,whentheorganizationalandtechnicalsupportprovidedbytheRockefellerFoundationandbytheexternalexperts,suchasARUP,isnolongeravailableandtheprocessiscompletelyentrustedtolocalactors.Furthermore,bothcasestudieshighlightthesensitivenessoftheresiliencebuildingprocesstothebackgroundoftheselectedcitiesintermsofavailableknowledge,previousinvolvementininternationalnetworks,leadingcapacitiesinpromotingurbanpolicies.Availablescientificliteratureclearlyunderlinesthatwhilecitiescharacterizedbyalong-termleadershipinpromotingurbanpoliciesonsustainabilityandclimatechangefoundintheirengagementinthe100RCInitiativeanopportunitytobroadenthescopeoftheirpoliciestowardsasustainableandresilienturbandevelopment(SpaansandWaterhout2016),citiescharacterizedbyastructuralweaknessofurbanpolicies,astheexaminedonesorsomecitiesfromtheGlobalSouth(Sutherlandetal.2019),encounteredsignificantdifficultiesalongthepathaimedatdeliveringtheResilienceStrategydue,forexample,tothelackofadequateknowledge,whichresultedintoalongertimefordevelopingadeepunderstandingofthecity’scontext,ortothelowpropensityforcollaborationbetweendifferentsectorsofpublicadministration.InthecaseofAthens,themostsignificantlegacyofitsengagementinthe100RCInitiativeistheinstitutionalizationoftheroleoftheCROandthechange,hopefullylasting,inplanningprocesses.TraditionallytheGreekplanningsystemhasbeenhighlycentralized,focusedontheregulatoryaspectsofplanning,withslowandlong-termprocessesandrelativelyweakinstitutionalstructuresregardingimplementationandsocialacceptancealongwithinadequatedatawhichareessentialforaddressingclimatechange(YiannakouandSalata2017;Yiannakou2020).Inthiscontext,theResilienceStrategyrepresentedasignificantopportunitytointroduceandtestmorecollaborative(includinglocalandinternationalpartners)andparticipatorydecision-makingprocesses.Finally,itisworthpointingoutthat,2 yearsafterthereleaseofboththeResilienceStrategies,theselectedcasestudieslackstructuredmonitoringreports,highlightingtheprogressesactuallymadeandthewaystilltogo.InAthens,anassessmentofthe3 yearsofORSwasperformedbythemunicipalityinMay2018.Accordingtothisassessment,26actionsoutofthe44includedintheStrategywerebeingimplementedatthatmoment.MostofthemarepartofthePillarsI&II,withthemajorityofthelatterbeingcharacterizedintheStrategyasnewactions.However,thisinformationhasbeenprovidedbyemailbytheResilienceandSustainabilityDepartmentoftheCityofAthens,whileinthecaseofRometherequestsforinformationremainedunanswered.Thefailuretoestablishastructuredandcontinuousmonitoringprocessrepresentsasignificantweakness:accordingtoan‘evolutionary’approachtoresilience(Davoudietal.2012),infact,theresiliencebuildingprocessshouldbeintendedasanongoingprocessbasedonlearning.Alongthisprocess,the100RCprogramshouldrepresentsonlyoneastepandalsothedeliveredStrategyshouldbealivingdocument,tobecontinuouslyupdatedandfine-tunedasplannedactionsareimplemented(BerkowitzandKramer2018). Availabilityofdataandmaterials Notapplicable. Noteshttps://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/about-us/our-history/.https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/blog/valuing-resilience-dividend/.https://www.arup.com/projects/city-resilience-index.LookingatthedataprovidedbytheMunicipalRegistry(2016),theaveragepopulationdensityisabout2236inh/km2.However,itrangesfrommorethan8000inh/km2inthecitycentre,tolessthan2000inh/km2intheperipheralcensusunits.IthastobenoticedthatattheEuropeanlevelitiscommonlydistinguishedlandtake,intendedasameasureofthesurfacesconvertedfromanatural/seminaturaluseintoanurbanorotherartificialdevelopment,fromsoilsealing,intendedastheportionoflandthatiseffectivelysealed(seehttps://soil4life.eu/en/il-consumo-del-suolo/).InItaly,availabledataprovidedbytheNationalInstituteforEnvironmentalSafeguardandResearch(ISPRA)includebothconceptsintheterm‘soilconsumption’(https://www.isprambiente.gov.it/it/attivita/suolo-e-territorio/il-consumo-di-suolo/definizioni).http://qa.arpalazio.net/index.php.TheAtticaRegionisdividedintoeightRegionalUnits,oneofwhichistheRegionalUnitofCentralAthens,inwhichtheCityofAthensislocated.Insomecases,dataforwiderspatialareashavebeenused,sincedatafortheCityofAthensarenotavailable.https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/dashboards/land-cover-and-change-statistics.Includingasylumseekersandbeneficiariesofinternationalprotection.Peopleaccommodatedinrentalapartmentsandwholebuildings.Thereishoweveranorthwestpartofthemunicipalitymainlyoccupiedbylower-middleclass.TheEXTREMAEuropephoneapplicationhasbeendevelopedbytheNationalObservatoryofAthens(NoA)intheframeworkoftheEuropeanprojectTREASURE.IspartoftheSupportingActionIII.A.1.5[III.ProactiveCity,A.1.5CollaborationwithNationalObservatoryofAthens(NoA)].TheLycabettusHillProgramispartoftheActionII.A.2(II.AGreenCity,A.2Majorgreenareasmanagingauthority).https://www.rcc.city.https://www.rockpa.org/project/global-resilient-cities-network/.Abbreviations100RC: 100ResilientCities CRF: CityResilienceFramework CRO: ChiefResilienceOfficer ESTIA: EmergencySupporttoIntegrationandAccommodation GHG: Greenhousegas GRCN: GlobalResilientCitiesNetwork IOM: InternationalOrganizationforMigration LEAC: LandandEcosystemAccounts LST: LandSurfaceTemperature ORS: OfficeofResilienceandSustainability PRA: PreliminaryResilienceAssessment RSC: ResilienceSteeringCommittee SECAP: SustainableEnergyandClimateActionPlan SMR: SmartMatureResilience SUMP: SustainableUrbanMobilityPlan UHI: UrbanHeatIsland UNISDR: UnitedNationsInternationalStrategyforDisasterReduction ReferencesAlbrechtsL,BarbanenteA,MonnoV(2020)Practicingtransformativeplanning:theterritory-landscapeplanasacatalystforchange.CityTerritArch7(1):2–13.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-019-0111-2Article  GoogleScholar  AlexanderDE(2013)Resilienceanddisasterriskreduction:anetymologicaljourney.NatHazardsEarthSystSci13:2707.https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-13-2707-2013Article  GoogleScholar  BeckU(2010)Remappingsocialinequalitiesinanageofclimatechange:foracosmopolitanrenewalofsociology.GlobalNetw10(2):165–181.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0374.2010.00281.xArticle  GoogleScholar  BénéC,WoodRG,NewshamA,DaviesM(2012)Resilience:NewUtopiaorNewTyrannyreflectionaboutthepotentialsandlimitsoftheconceptofResilienceinrelationtovulnerabilityreductionprogrammes.IDSWorkPapers405:1–61.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2012.00405.xArticle  GoogleScholar  BerkowitzM,KramerAM(2018)Helpingcitiesdrivetransformation:the100ResilientCitiesInitiative,FieldActionsScienceReports[Online],SpecialIssue18.http://journals.openedition.org/factsreports/4885.Accessed12Sep2020BorquezR,AldunceP,AdlerC(2016)Resiliencetoclimatechange:fromtheorytopracticethroughco-productionofknowledgeinChile.SustainSci12:163–176.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0400-6Article  GoogleScholar  BrennerN,SchmidC(2015)Towardsanewepistemologyoftheurban?City19(2–3):151–182.https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2015.1014712Article  GoogleScholar  ChalkiasC,DelladetsimasPM,SapountzakiK(2015)NaturalhazardsandclimatechangerisksinAthens.In:MaloutasT,SpirellisS(eds)Athenssocialatlas.https://www.athenssocialatlas.gr/en/article/natural-hazards-and-climate-change/.Accessed5Mar2020CoppolaA(2016)Mobilitàdellepoliticheeinerziadellocale:ilcasodiRomaResiliente.WorkingpapersUrban@it2:2-12.ISSN2465-2059CoppolaA(2018)ProblemipubbliciemergentifrascienzaedazionepubblicaLasfida(rimandata?)dellegovernanceedellepolitichedellacomplessitàaRoma.In:CoppolaA,PunzianoG(eds)RomainTransizioneGoverno,strategie,metabolismiequadridivitadiunametropoli.PlanumPublisher,Roma GoogleScholar  CroeseS,GreenC,MorganG(2020)LocalizingthesustainabledevelopmentgoalsthroughthelensofurbanResilience:lessonsandlearningsfrom100ResilientCitiesandCapeTown.Sustainability12(2):550.https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020550Article  GoogleScholar  DavoudiS,ShawK,HaiderJLetal(2012)Resilience:aBridgingConceptoraDeadEnd?“Reframing”Resilience:ChallengesforPlanningTheoryandPracticeInteractingTraps:ResilienceAssessmentofaPastureManagementSysteminNorthernAfghanistanUrbanResilience:WhatDoesitMeaninPlanningPractice?ResilienceasaUsefulConceptforClimateChangeAdaptation?ThePoliticsofResilienceforPlanning:ACautionaryNote.PlanTheorPract13(2):299–333.https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.677124Article  GoogleScholar  ElmqvistT,AnderssonE,FrantzeskakiN,McPhearsonT,OlssonPetal(2019)Sustainabilityandresiliencefortransformationintheurbancentury.NatSustain2:267–273.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0250-1Article  GoogleScholar  FitzgibbonsJ,MitchellCL(2019)Justurbanfutures?Exploringequityin“100ResilientCities”.WorldDev122:648–659.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.06.021Article  GoogleScholar  GabelliniP(2018)Lemutazionidell’urbanistica.Principi,tecniche,competenze.Caroccieditore,Roma GoogleScholar  GalderisiA(2016)Thenexusapproachtodisasterriskreduction,climateadaptationandecosystemmanagement:newpathsforasustainableandresilienturbandevelopment.In:ColucciA,MagoniF,MenoniS(eds)Peri-urbanareasandfood-energy-waternexus.sustainabilityandresiliencestrategiesintheageofclimatechange.Springer,Cham.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41022-7_2Chapter  GoogleScholar  GalderisiA(2018)TheResilientCitymetaphortoenhanceCities’capabilitiestotacklecomplexitiesanduncertaintiesarisingfromcurrentandfutureclimatescenarios.In:GalderisiA,ColucciA(eds)Smart,Resilientandtransitioncitiesemergingapproachesandtoolsforaclimate-sensitiveurbandevelopment.Elsevier,Amsterdam GoogleScholar  Gotham,K.andCampanella,R.(2010)TowardaResearchAgendaonTransformativeResilience:ChallengesandOpportunitiesforPost-TraumaUrbanEcosystems.CriticalPlanningSummer.http://richcampanella.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/article_Gotham%20Campanella%20Critical%20Planning-resilience%20of%20New%20Orleans.pdfAccessed12Sep2020GrimesC(2018)SmartMatureResilienceStakeholder.WorkshopReportICLEI–LocalGovernmentsforSustainability.https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/documents/downloadPublic?documentIds=080166e5b6cff9bb&appId=PPGMS.Accessed09Apr2020HallegatteS,RozenbergJ(2017)Climatechangethroughapovertylens.NatureClimateChange7:250–256.https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3253Article  GoogleScholar  HollingCS(1996)EngineeringresilienceversusEcologicalresilience.In:SchulzeP(ed)Engineeringwithecologicalconstrains.NationalAcademy,Washington GoogleScholar  InternationalOrganizationforMigration(IOM)OfficeinGreece(2020)ImprovingtheGreekreceptionsystemthroughsitemanagementsupportandtargetedinterventionsinlong-termaccommodationsites.SiteFactsheetJanuary2020.https://greece.iom.int/sites/default/files/FINAL_21_2-min_0.pdf.Accessed10Mar2020KartalisK,OikonomouD,KokkosisH,SantamourisM,AgathaggelidisE,PolydorosA(2017)TheImpactofclimatechangeontheGreekeconomy.Athens:diaNEOsis.https://www.dianeosis.org/en/2017/08/impact-climate-change-greek-economy/.Accessed17Mar2020MaloutasT,KaradimitriouN(2001)VerticalsocialdifferentiationinAthens:alternativeorcomplementtourbansegregation?IntJUrbanRegRes25(4):699–716.https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-242700340Article  GoogleScholar  MaloutasT,SpirellisSN(2015)VerticalsocialsegregationinAthenianapartmentbuildings.In:MaloutasT,SpirellisS(eds)Athenssocialatlas.https://www.athenssocialatlas.gr/en/article/vertical-segregation/.Accessed30May2019MaloutasT,SpirellisSN(2019)InequalityandsegregationinAthens:Mapsanddata.InMaloutasT,SpirellisS(eds)Athenssocialatlas.https://www.athenssocialatlas.gr/en/article/inequality-and-segregation-in-athens/#1.4%20Ethic%20groups.Accessed5Mar2020MarkkanenS,Anger-KraaviA(2019)Socialimpactsofclimatechangemitigationpoliciesandtheirimplicationsforinequality.ClimPolicy19(7):827–844.https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1596873Article  GoogleScholar  MonnoV,SerreliS(2020)Citiesandmigration:generativeurbanpoliciesthroughcontextualvulnerability.CityTerritArchit7(6):2–17.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-020-00114-xArticle  GoogleScholar  MorabitoM,CrisciA,GioliB,GualtieriG,ToscanoP,DiStefanoVetal(2015)Urban-hazardriskanalysis:mappingofheat-relatedrisksintheelderlyinmajorItalianCities.PLoSONE10(5):e0127277.https://doi.org/10.1371/journalpone0127277Article  GoogleScholar  MunafòM(2019a)Consumodisuolo,dinamicheterritorialieserviziecosistemici,ed.2019.ReportSNPA08/19:62-78.ISBN978-88-448-0964-5MunafòM(2019b)Consumodisuolo,dinamicheterritorialieserviziecosistemici,ed.2019.ReportSNPA08/19:149-155.ISBN978-88-448-0964-5Munafò,M.(acuradi),2020.Consumodisuolo,dinamicheterritorialieserviziecosistemici.Edizione2020.ReportSNPA15/2020MunafòM,PolveriniR(2018)IlconsumodisuolodiRomaCapitale.RomaCapitale-ISPRA.https://www.comune.roma.it/web-resources/cms/documents/Consumo_suolo_1_02_19.pdf.Accessed30May2019MunafòM,PolveriniR(2019)IlconsumodisuolodiRomaCapitale.AnalisidellacoperturadisuolonelterritoriodelComunediRoma.Rapporto2019.ProgettodelServizioCivileNazionaledellaUOStatistica–OpenDatadiRomaCapitaleincollaborazioneconl’ISPRA–DipartimentoperilServizioGeologicod’ItaliaMunicipalityofRome-GeneralAccounting(2017)IprincipaliindicatoridifabbisognoperMunicipioaRomaCapitale.Anno2015.RagioneriaGenerale.IDirezione“Sistemiinformatividipianificazioneecontrollofinanziario”.UOStatisticaRoma.https://www.comune.roma.it/web-resources/cms/documents/Indicatori_fabbisogno_2015.pdf.Accessed03Mar2020ProustK,NewellB,BrownHetal(2012)Humanhealthandclimatechange:leveragepointsforadaptationinurbanenvironments.IntJEnvironResPublicHealth9(2012):2134–2158.https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph9062134Article  GoogleScholar  ResilientAthens(2017)AthensResilienceStrategyfor2030:RedefiningtheCity.Athens:ResilientAthens&CityofAthens.https://www.100resilientcities.org/strategies/.Accessed30May2019ResilientAthens-AthensDevelopmentandDestinationManagementAgency(ADDMASA)&CityofAthens(2016)Athens:EmergentMetropolis.PreliminaryResilienceAssessment.Athens:ResilientAthens.ADDMASA&CityofAthensResilientRome(2016)ValutazionePreliminarediResilienza.http://www.urbanistica.comune.roma.it/roma-resiliente/1243-valutazione-preliminare-resilienza.html.Accessed09Apr2020ResilientRome(2018)RomeResilienceStrategy.CityStrategies100ResilientCities.https://www.100resilientcities.org/strategies/.Accessed30Apr2019RiverBasinDistrictAuthority(2018)IlPianoRomaSicura.Primorapportosurischioalluvioni,frane,cavitàdelsottosuoloeacquesotterranee.RiverBasinDistrictAuthority.ItaliaSicura,DPC,ISPRA.http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files2018/pubblicazioni/rapporti/piano_roma_sicura.pdf.Accessed23May2019SapountzakiK(2007)Socialresiliencetoenvironmentalrisks:amechanismofvulnerabilitytransfer?ManagEnvironQual18(3):274–297.https://doi.org/10.1108/14777830710731743Article  GoogleScholar  SatorrasM,Ruiz-MallénI,MonterdeA,MarchH(2020)Co-productionofurbanclimateplanning:insightsfromtheBarcelonaClimatePlan.Cities.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102887Article  GoogleScholar  SecchiB(2013)Lacittàdeiricchielacittàdeipoveri.Laterzaeds,Roma GoogleScholar  ShawK(2012)“Reframing”Resilience:challengesforPlanningTheoryandPractice.PlanTheorPract13(2):308–312.https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.677124Article  GoogleScholar  SpaansM,WaterhoutB(2016)Buildingupresilienceincitiesworldwide—Rotterdamasparticipantinthe100ResilientCitiesProgramme.Cities61:109–116.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.05.011Article  GoogleScholar  SutherlandC,RobertsD,DouwesJ(2019)Constructingresilienceatthreescales:The100ResilientCitiesprogramme,Durban’sresiliencejourneyandwaterresilienceinthePalmietCatchment.HumanGeogr12(1):33–49.https://doi.org/10.1177/194277861901200103Article  GoogleScholar  TheRockefellerFoundation(2019)ResilientCities,ResilientLiveslearningfromthe100RCNetworkJuly2019TheRockefellerFoundation&Arup(2015)CityResilienceFramework.https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/City-Resilience-Framework-2015.pdf.Accessed13Sept2020TheRockefellerFoundation&Arup(2016)CityResilienceIndex:Understandingandmeasuringcityresiliencehttps://www.rockefellerfoundationorg/report/city-resilience-index/.Accessed13Sept2020TocciW(2015)Nonsipiangesuunacittàcoloniale.Notesullapoliticaromana.GoWare,Firenze GoogleScholar  UN(2015)TransformingOurWorld:The2030AgendaforSustainableDevelopment.A/RES/70/1,UnitedNations.sustainabledevelopment.un.orgUN(2019)TheSustainableDevelopmentGoalsReport2019.UnitedNations,NewYork.https://www.unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/The-Sustainable-Development-Goals-Report-2019.pdf.Accessed15Apr2020UNHCRGreece(2020)PopulationbreakdowninESTIAAccommodationSchemeasof10March2020.https://www.data2unhcrorg/en/documents/download/74504.Accessed11Mar2020WangQ,YamashitaM(2015)Social-ecologicalevolutionaryresilience:aproposaltoenhance“SustainabilityTransformation”abouttheoreticalfoundation.OpenAccessLibraryJ.2:e1426.https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1101426Article  GoogleScholar  WEF(2019)TheGlobalRiskReport2019.14thEdition.WorldEconomicForum,Geneva.http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Global_Risks_Report_2019.pdf.Accessed15Apr2020WilliamsT,HardisonP(2013)Culture,law,riskandgovernance:contextsoftraditionalknowledgeinclimatechangeadaptation.ClimChang120(3):531–544.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0850-0Article  GoogleScholar  YamagataY,SharifiA(eds)(2018)Resilience-orientedurbanplanning:theoreticalandempiricalinsights.Springer,Switzerland GoogleScholar  YiannakouA(2020)Urbanregenerationasaperpetualplanningprocess:understandingtheroleofstakeholdersinproperty-ledregenerationprojectsinGreekcities.LocalEcon35(2):83–104.https://doi.org/10.1177/0269094220914470Article  GoogleScholar  YiannakouA,SalataKD(2017)Adaptationtoclimatechangethroughspatialplanningincompacturbanareas:acasestudyintheCityofThessaloniki.Sustainability.https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020271Article  GoogleScholar  ZhangX,LiH(2017)Urbanresilienceandurbansustainability:whatweknowandwhatdonotknow?Cities72:141–148.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.08.009Article  GoogleScholar  DownloadreferencesAcknowledgementsNotapplicable.FundingThearticleprocessingchargeforthepublicationinthisopenaccessjournalwasfundedbythe“V:ALERE2019program”oftheUniversityofCampaniaLuigiVanvitelli(Italy).AuthorinformationAffiliationsDepartmentofArchitectureandIndustrialDesign,UniversityofCampaniaLuigiVanvitelli,Aversa,ItalyAdrianaGalderisi & GiadaLimongiSchoolofSpatialPlanningandDevelopment,AristotleUniversityofThessaloniki(AUTh),Thessaloniki,GreeceKonstantina-DimitraSalataAuthorsAdrianaGalderisiViewauthorpublicationsYoucanalsosearchforthisauthorin PubMed GoogleScholarGiadaLimongiViewauthorpublicationsYoucanalsosearchforthisauthorin PubMed GoogleScholarKonstantina-DimitraSalataViewauthorpublicationsYoucanalsosearchforthisauthorin PubMed GoogleScholarContributionsThispapershouldbeconsideredaresultofthecommonworkoftheauthorsunderthesupervisionofthefirstauthorAG,whoconceivedandguidedthework.AGwrote“EnhancingCities’Resilience:whyandhow”,“The100RCInitiative”,and“DiscussionandConclusions”sections;GLandKDSwrote“Casesdescription:RomeandAthens,twoparadigmaticexamplesofthe‘newurbanquestion’”,“RomeandAthens:theresiliencebuildingprocess”,and“RomeandAthensResilienceStrategies:thefocusonclimateissues”sections.FiguresareelaboratedbyGL.Allauthorsreadandapprovedthefinalmanuscript.CorrespondingauthorCorrespondenceto GiadaLimongi.Ethicsdeclarations Competinginterests Theauthorsdeclarethattheyhavenocompetinginterests. AdditionalinformationPublisher'sNoteSpringerNatureremainsneutralwithregardtojurisdictionalclaimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.Rightsandpermissions OpenAccessThisarticleislicensedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0InternationalLicense,whichpermitsuse,sharing,adaptation,distributionandreproductioninanymediumorformat,aslongasyougiveappropriatecredittotheoriginalauthor(s)andthesource,providealinktotheCreativeCommonslicence,andindicateifchangesweremade.Theimagesorotherthirdpartymaterialinthisarticleareincludedinthearticle'sCreativeCommonslicence,unlessindicatedotherwiseinacreditlinetothematerial.Ifmaterialisnotincludedinthearticle'sCreativeCommonslicenceandyourintendeduseisnotpermittedbystatutoryregulationorexceedsthepermitteduse,youwillneedtoobtainpermissiondirectlyfromthecopyrightholder.Toviewacopyofthislicence,visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. ReprintsandPermissionsAboutthisarticleCitethisarticleGalderisi,A.,Limongi,G.&Salata,KD.Strengthsandweaknessesofthe100ResilientCitiesInitiativeinSouthernEurope:RomeandAthens’experiences. CityTerritArchit7,16(2020).https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-020-00123-wDownloadcitationReceived:20April2020Accepted:17October2020Published:02November2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-020-00123-wSharethisarticleAnyoneyousharethefollowinglinkwithwillbeabletoreadthiscontent:GetshareablelinkSorry,ashareablelinkisnotcurrentlyavailableforthisarticle.Copytoclipboard ProvidedbytheSpringerNatureSharedItcontent-sharinginitiative KeywordsResilientCities100ResilientCitiesClimatechangeSocialinequalitiesResilientstrategies DownloadPDF Advertisement