Next Article in Journal
Estimating Biomass in Eucalyptus globulus and Pinus pinaster Forests Using UAV-Based LiDAR in Central and Northern Portugal
Previous Article in Journal
Spatiotemporal Coupling Characteristics Between Urban Land Development Intensity and Population Density from a Building-Space Perspective: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration
Previous Article in Special Issue
Evolution and Mechanism of Cooperative Innovation Networks Based on Strategic Emerging Industries: Evidence from Northeast China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Strategic Planning for Urban Sustainability

by
Carlos J. L. Balsas
1,* and
Awais Piracha
2
1
Belfast School of Architecture and the Built Environment, Ulster University, York Street, Belfast BT15 1ED, UK
2
School of Social Sciences, University of Western Sydney, Penrith, NSW 2751, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2025, 14(7), 1458; https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071458
Submission received: 8 July 2025 / Accepted: 13 July 2025 / Published: 14 July 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Strategic Planning for Urban Sustainability)

1. Introduction

The inception of strategic planning in the Western world can be traced to the post-World War II period [1]. Strategic planning in public administration and territorial management has been borrowed mostly from the private sector, where reducing a large number of variables to only the most plausible and prioritising short- and medium-term actions according to the most consensual criteria are the norm [2]. Strategic planning is a variation of rational comprehensive planning [3] without the need to collect and analyse large amounts of data, arriving at the most important priorities and only then formulating desirable courses of action [4].
As a direct consequence of private sector protagonism in the US and UK during the 1980s, strategic planning in the public sector experienced a resurgence during the 1990s. For instance, the Portuguese Program for the Consolidation of the National Urban System and Support for the Execution of Municipal Master Plans (PROSIURB) was aimed at strengthening medium-sized cities’ roles in the structuring of the national territory. As such, medium-sized cities were eligible to receive public development funds pending the making and adoption of both master and strategic plans. The strategic plans were aimed at bolstering not only a network of medium-sized cities, especially in the interior part of the country near the Spanish border, but also strengthening the sustainability of territorial development elsewhere [5].
Also in the early 1990s, Lisbon was perceived to be a pioneer of strategic planning in Europe when it prepared its master plan in tandem with the city’s strategic development plan. The master plan was spatial and comprehensive in nature, covering the whole municipality, while the strategic plan identified a limited but implementable number of strategic projects and programmes, which would anchor most of the urban regeneration of the country’s capital, including the redevelopment of the EXPO’98 site, on the western side of the Tagus River [6,7].
Across the Atlantic Ocean in the US, strategic planning was equally perceived as capable of delivering more focused territorial development results with fewer resources than those needed to produce extremely detailed and lengthy general plans [8]. Said master plans in the US have traditionally been the outcomes of extensive land use, transportation, infrastructure, economic development, housing, and environmental studies and analyses. Anchor territorial projects, coupled with the identification of key stakeholders and developmental scenarios, became fundamental components of most strategic plans. For instance, Porter’s Regional Development Study for the Pioneer Valley of Western Massachusetts [9] comprised the identification of sources of regional competitiveness, the characterisation of their economic performance within a business environment, and the establishment of priorities for the government in hopes of strengthening regional growth clusters.
Over the years, strategic planning gained its place within established planning theories taught in universities’ Urban and Regional Planning programmes and implemented in the world of planning practice at all territorial levels, from the neighbourhood to the city, metropolis, region, state, and country [10].
John Bryson at the University of Minnesota in the US and Louis Albrechts at KU Leuven in Belgium have been some of the most prolific key thinkers on the value of strategic planning in urban and regional planning, public administration, and spatial development [2,11]. Strategic planning initiatives in the city-region of Los Angeles, California [12], and Antwerp in the Belgian region of Flanders [13] provide additional food for thought on the advantages and shortcomings of this particular style of planning.
On a more global scale, the edited volume titled ‘Situated Practices of Strategic Planning’, co-edited by Albrechts, Balducci, and Hillier [4], gathers worldwide perspectives on some of the latest advances in strategic planning in such places, regions, and countries as China’s booming Pearl River Delta, East Africa, the Oresund region of Denmark and southern Sweden, France, the USA, Australia, South Africa, Egypt, Italy, Wales, Greater Vancouver, and Rio de Janeiro, among others.

2. Rationale for the Special Issue

It is well known that land for urbanisation, analogously to water [14], exists in high abundance in certain locations and is extremely scarce in others. The water cycle comprises evaporation and condensation. However, contrary to water, land in general does not change stages by itself. Usually, land for urbanisation is readily and affordably available in locations where one is not supposed to build and quite scarce and extremely expensive where it barely exists. Excessive urbanisation in suburban locations can lead to the potential decline of more centrally located neighbourhoods.
Land in the developed world is covered by a wide array of regulatory instruments. Depending on its location, land may be utilised intensively or left alone as open space. The utility and production components of land ought to benefit not only their owners but also the administrative jurisdictions with management and oversight responsibilities over their use. The administration of land uses can at times be contentious. The same can be said about the timing of land markets and the community gains that such land transformation processes give rise to. Anticipatory and integrated strategic land use and transportation planning mechanisms are needed to obviate opportunistic and speculative land markets.
In many cities of the Global North, the iatrogenic nature [15] (p. 50) of uncoordinated policy–market imbalances has resulted in sprawl, leap-frog development, spoiled countrysides, vehicle dependence, long commutes, unfeasible mass transit, unhealthy environments for vulnerable populations, environmental externalities, and overall poor urban quality of life for everybody. Major societal transformations, motivated by lifestyle preferences, technological possibilities, the COVID-19 pandemic, and post-growth scenarios, have transformed the ways we live, work, and play [16]. While the level of social interaction has resumed, collective consciousness and environmental pressures now require more strategic approaches to the built and natural environments where we spend most of our time [17].

3. Overview of the Special Issue

The Special Issue of Land on Strategic Planning and Urban Sustainability sought to fill a gap in how land and the transformation of the built environment have utilised strategic planning to enhance urban sustainability. Though initially we were seeking novel approaches to land, land use planning, urbanisation, land retrofit, regulatory systems, urban redevelopment, urban regeneration, and ecological approaches to improving and conserving land and natural resources, given the journal’s worldwide scope, we ended up publishing ten research articles and one review article on the following seven themes: (i) transportation planning and policy; (ii) climate change adaptation and nature-based solutions; (iii) urban amenities, business vitality, and cooperative innovation networks; (iv) neighbourhood gentrification; (v) sustainable urban planning; (vi) low-impact development; and (vii) stormwater and water-sensitive urban design.
Zhang et al. (contribution 1) is a study of the relationship between bus travel and land use around bus stops and along bus routes. The research paper explores a novel method to estimate passenger flow volumes from and to bus stops based on land use elements. Using a square in the Chinese city of Dalian, the authors built and evaluated a gravitational logic estimation method for passenger flow volumes. Regression fitting and fuzzy estimation were used to analyse bus travel patterns based on land use elements, which, according to the authors, serve to facilitate strategic alignment in transit-oriented development (TOD) planning decisions.
Olgun et al. (contribution 2) is an examination of nature-based solutions scenario planning for climate change adaptation in cities with arid and semi-arid climates. Using the rapidly urbanising city of Phoenix, Arizona, as a case study, the research paper examines how the strategic benefits of ecosystem services provided by blue–green infrastructure (BGI) can be maximised in desert cities. The methods comprised GIS-based multicriteria decision-making techniques with special emphasis on a Green Infrastructure Spatial Planning model integrated with the city’s existing water structures at the US census scale. The model’s mapping of BGI hotspots and an expert stakeholder-driven weighting system revealed that social vulnerability and environmental risks have a positive correlation in Phoenix, which, according to the authors, suggests that stormwater management and urban heat island effects are the criteria to be considered first in BGI planning.
Giedych et al. (contribution 3) assess whether eco-spatial indices can be effective tools for climate change adaptation in residential neighbourhoods. The research paper analyses the effectiveness of the Ratio of Biologically Vital Areas (RBVA) mechanism in a residential district in the southern part of Warsaw, Poland, compared to similar deployments in two Norwegian cities. The study employed a serious simulation game developed under a Norwegian-funded project comprising these five environmental parameters: air temperature, oxygen production, CO2 sequestration, rainwater harvesting, and biodiversity. The authors claim that the method by which each indicator is calculated is fundamentally a strategic and political choice, which also influences the type of nature-based solutions (NbSs) put forward. The study concludes that higher levels of adaptation to climate change depend on the comprehensiveness of environmental indices and measurement metrics.
Ji et al. (contribution 4) is a study of how urban amenities impact business circle vitality in 32 Chinese metropolises. It is known that urban business circles influence economic and social activities in city-regions. The study’s authors argue that even though the promotion of sustainable economic development is high on most city managers’ agendas, there is a paucity of research on the specific factors influencing business circle vitality. They also claim that government officials need integrated strategic land use planning to obviate market-oriented speculative land markets. The results suggest that even though the effect of urban amenities on business circle vitality varied considerably across different cities and business districts, the number of residential, transportation, educational, cultural, and recreational amenities and the diversity of catering and retail amenities had significant positive impacts on business circle vitality. The research paper concludes with ways to improve the vitality of business circles by bolstering urban amenities at the street and block levels.
Astore and Tricarico (contribution 5) analyse recent urban transformations in Rome’s San Lorenzo neighbourhood. The research paper is an exploratory investigation of how gentrification tendencies are related to the effectiveness of the urban planning tools deployed by the municipality. The authors relied on a theoretical framework to trace the evolution of urban transformations and associated planning interventions. They also conducted interviews with key informants (representatives of local institutions, residents, other researchers, etc.). The findings suggest broader implications for urban governance, namely that the failure of the 2008 New General Regulatory Plan (NGRP) to provide clear and strategic directions has led to inconsistent development outcomes in San Lorenzo.
Gavanas et al. (contribution 6) is a multicriteria analysis of transport policy pathways for autonomous road vehicles (AVs) in the European Union. The research paper evaluates different policy pathways of AV deployment for sustainable urban development in the next EU programming period (2028–2034). It begins with a review of the main strategic priorities of the EU transport policy for the implementation of AVs in urban areas. And it concludes with a study combining the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), VIseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR), the participation of experts across Europe, and the weighting of evaluation criteria. The authors suggest that the proposed methodology provides a very important tool for public debate and decision making on how AVs can help to promote sustainable urban development in the European Union.
Muñoz et al. (contribution 7) is a review article of a conceptual model of floodable parks as instruments for urban stormwater management using nature-based solutions. Cities are increasingly utilising floodable parks as effective strategies to mitigate water-related hazards. The systematic review was fourfold: (i) to analyse the conditions needed for the implementation of floodable parks, (ii) to assess their design criteria, (iii) to review the connection between design and ecosystem services, and (iv) to perform an examination of the main processes occurring within a floodable park. The authors conclude that floodable parks can help to create more sustainable, climate-resilient, and circular urban areas in cities.
Balsas (contribution 8) advocates the need to make hidden sustainable urban planning and landscape knowledge visual and multisensorial. The research paper analyses how four educational and research programmes implemented at the University at Albany, New York (USA), built upon visual and multisensorial research methods to (i) augment educational outcomes, (ii) bolster scholarly significance, and (iii) provide up-to-date knowledge to empower concerned stakeholders. According to the author, the deployment of visual and multisensorial knowledge can help to change (a) unsustainable urbanisation practices, (b) social inequities and injustices in cities, and (c) car dependence and sedentary lifestyles, as well as (d) protect natural resources and livelihoods while (e) reducing environmental and social harm. The research methods comprised literature reviews, self-reflections on the implemented programmes, and analyses of participant evaluations of various outreach activities. The author concludes with remarks for other researchers interested in making their pedagogical and scholarly activities more effective and rewarding for themselves and the intended beneficiaries.
Rostamzadeh et al. (contribution 9) examine the effects of low-impact development best management practices (LID-BMP) on reducing stormwater caused by urban land use transformations in Tehran City, Iran. The research methods comprised a combination of geographic information system-based multicriteria decision analysis (GIS-MCDA) and spatial criteria from 2000 to 2022. Rainfall–runoff modelling was also applied to calculate changes in the area using the soil conservation service curve number (SCS-CN) method. The authors suggest that LID-BMP serves as a multifaceted tool within strategic urban planning frameworks, providing environmental, social, and economic benefits that are essential for sustainable urban development.
Tasnia and Growe (contribution 10) conducted a systematic literature review of water-sensitive urban design and flood risk management in contexts of strategic urban sustainability planning. The research paper consists of a PRISMA literature search and bibliographic analysis of 44 articles relevant to water-sensitive urban design (WSUD) and flood risk management (FRM) worldwide from 2013 to 2023. The authors concluded that WSUD and FRM share sustainability goals but differ in their focus and applicability depending on the settlement type and indicators.
Finally, Zhou et al. (contribution 11) investigate the spatial formation and evolution of cooperative innovation networks in strategic emerging industries in northeast China. Using invention patent data and spatial econometric models, the research paper constructs and analyses inter- and intra-city cooperative innovation networks from 2009 to 2023. The authors suggest that the findings offer policymakers empirical evidence to strategically optimise cross-regional innovation ecosystems in resource-dependent regions while supporting urban sustainability and fostering innovation-driven development.

4. Conclusions

As collaborative and communicative planning and just city theories [18] have evolved to occupy centre stage in research and scholarly circles [19], strategic planning can now be clearly found in the private and public sectors, as well as anywhere in between. It is our conviction that this Special Issue provides avenues to help revive strategic planning in the Global North [20] and to test it within distinct geographic realities and processes, most, if not all, being conducive to a greater understanding of urban sustainability, climate change, urban expansion and shrinkage, community resilience, social cohesion, and territorial innovation, as well as post-conflict, post-truth, and degrowth scenarios [21,22].

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, C.J.L.B. and A.P.; writing—original draft preparation, C.J.L.B.; writing—review and editing, C.J.L.B. and A.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

List of Contributions

  • Zhang, J.; Cai, J.; Wang, M.; Zhang, W. An Estimation Method for Passenger Flow Volumes from and to Bus Stops Based on Land Use Elements: An Experimental Study. Land 2024, 13, 971. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13070971.
  • Olgun, R.; Cheng, C.; Coseo, P. Nature-Based Solutions Scenario Planning for Climate Change Adaptation in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions. Land 2024, 13, 1464. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091464.
  • Giedych, R.; Maksymiuk, G.; Cieszewska, A. Eco-Spatial Indices as an Effective Tool for Climate Change Adaptation in Residential Neighbourhoods—Comparative Study. Land 2024, 13, 1492. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091492.
  • Ji, Y.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, D. Exploring the Impact of Urban Amenities on Business Circle Vitality Using Multi-Source Big Data. Land 2024, 13, 1616. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13101616.
  • Astore, A.; Tricarico, L. Understanding the Transformations of San Lorenzo, Rome: An Attempt at Conceptual Order between Gentrification and Urban Policy. Land 2024, 13, 1632. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13101632.
  • Gavanas, N.; Anastasiadou, K.; Nathanail, E.; Basbas, S. Transport Policy Pathways for Autonomous Road Vehicles to Promote Sustainable Urban Development in the European Union: A Multicriteria Analysis. Land 2024, 13, 1807. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13111807.
  • Muñoz, S. M.; Elliott, S.; Schoelynck, J.; Staes, J. Urban Stormwater Management Using Nature-Based Solutions: A Review and Conceptual Model of Floodable Parks. Land 2024, 13, 1858. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13111858.
  • Balsas, C.J.L. Making Hidden Sustainable Urban Planning and Landscape Knowledge Visual and Multisensorial. Land 2025, 14, 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14010001.
  • Rostamzadeh, S.; Malekmohammadi, B.; Mashhadimohammadzadehvazifeh, F.; Arsanjani, J.J. The Effects of Low-Impact Development Best Management Practices on Reducing Stormwater Caused by Land Use Changes in Urban Areas: A Case Study of Tehran City, Iran. Land 2025, 14, 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14010028.
  • Tasnia, T.; Growe, A. A Systematic Literature Review of Water-Sensitive Urban Design and Flood Risk Management in Contexts of Strategic Urban Sustainability Planning. Land 2025, 14, 224. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14020224.
  • Zhou, X., Liu, T., Zhang, P.; Zhang, X.; Chu, N. Evolution and Mechanism of Cooperative Innovation Networks Based on Strategic Emerging Industries: Evidence from Northeast China. Land 2025, 14, 691. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14040691.

References

  1. Mintzberg, H. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning; The Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bryson, J.M. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  3. Veal, A.J.; Piracha, A. Meeting the need for a rational basis for open space and recreation planning in new high density residential areas: The recreational activity benchmark model. Aust. Plan. 2022, 58, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Albrechts, L.; Balducci, A.; Hillier, J. (Eds.) Situated Practices of Strategic Planning—An International Perspective; Routledge: Oxon, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  5. Cabral, J.; Sá Marques, T. Do planeamento estratégico ao desenvolvimento sustentável: Experiência em Portugal. Inforgeo 1996, 11, 107–116. [Google Scholar]
  6. Alden, J.; da Rosa Pires, A. Lisbon: Strategic planning for a capital city. Cities 1996, 13, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Balsas, C. Expo’98: From idea to legacy. Plan Can. 2005, 45, 23–25. [Google Scholar]
  8. Kaufman, J.L.; Jacobs, H.M. A public planning perspective on strategic planning. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 1987, 53, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Porter, M.E. Regional Competitiveness in the Pioneer Valley. In Proceedings of the Talk to the Pioneer Valley Regional Competitiveness Council, Chicopee, MA, USA, 10 October 2003. [Google Scholar]
  10. Healey, P. Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies; Palgrave MacMillan: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  11. Albrechts, L. Ingredients for a more radical strategic spatial planning. Environ. Plann. B Plann. Des. 2015, 42, 510–525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. McCutcheon, J.M. Utopian Visions in United States Urbanism. Moreana 2005, 42, 157–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Broeck, J. Spatial planning in Flanders and Antwerp 1940–2012: Movements, clashing values and expertise. In Situated Practices of Strategic Planning—An International Perspective; Albrechts, L., Balducci, A., Hillier, J., Eds.; Routledge: Oxon, UK, 2017; pp. 233–254. [Google Scholar]
  14. Harvey, D. Marx, Capital and the Madness of Economic Reason; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  15. Badami, M.G. Urban transport policy as if people and the environment mattered: Pedestrian accessibility the first step. Econ. Political Wkly. 2009, xliv, 43–51. [Google Scholar]
  16. Sharifi, A.; Khavarian-Garmsir, A.R. The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 749, 142391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Bleicher, J.; Kumar, P. A novel framework integrating resilient and sustainable urbanism for designing climate resilient sustainable urban neighbourhoods. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2025, 106577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Fainstein, S.S. New directions in planning theory. Urban Aff. Rev. 2000, 35, 451–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gunder, M.; Madanipour, A.; Watson, V. (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Planning Theory; Routledge: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  20. Olesen, K. Reviving strategic spatial planning for the challenges ahead. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2023, 31, 2318–2326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bryson, J.M.; Edwards, L.H.; Slyke, D.M. Getting strategic about strategic planning research. Public Manag. Rev. 2018, 20, 317–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Savini, F. Strategic planning for degrowth: What, who, how. Plan. Theory 2025, 24, 141–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Balsas, C.J.L.; Piracha, A. Strategic Planning for Urban Sustainability. Land 2025, 14, 1458. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071458

AMA Style

Balsas CJL, Piracha A. Strategic Planning for Urban Sustainability. Land. 2025; 14(7):1458. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071458

Chicago/Turabian Style

Balsas, Carlos J. L., and Awais Piracha. 2025. "Strategic Planning for Urban Sustainability" Land 14, no. 7: 1458. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071458

APA Style

Balsas, C. J. L., & Piracha, A. (2025). Strategic Planning for Urban Sustainability. Land, 14(7), 1458. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071458

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop