| Title: | Regenerative urban transformation in urban planning : a systematic review of key themes and planning implications |
|---|
| Authors: | ID Başcan Yüce, Selin (Author)
ID Tezer, Azime (Author) |
|---|
| Files: |  PDF - Presentation file, download (926,73 KB)
MD5: B51E220DF8937FAD73A6A91FA4BB33E6
|
|---|
| Language: | English |
|---|
| Typology: | 1.02 - Review Article |
|---|
| Organization: |  UIRS - Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia
|
|---|
| Abstract: | Regenerative development has gained prominence as an ecological paradigm in urban planning; however, its integration into urban transformation processes remains conceptually fragmented and uneven in practice. This study examines how regenerative development is framed within discussions on urban transformation, with a particular focus on its implications for planning systems and policymaking. A systematic literature review, guided by PRISMA protocols, identified thirty-eight peer-reviewed articles indexed in Scopus, which were coded using MAXQDA and analysed through reflexive thematic analysis. The findings reveal five interrelated dimensions of regenerative urban transformation (RUT): underlying rationales, key components, implementation challenges, modes of integration into urban planning, and evaluation approaches. The literature positions RUT as a response to the unsustainability of dominant urban models that degrade ecosystems and increase climate vulnerability. Core components – such as circular economy principles, public participation, adaptive reuse, and digital technologies – are widely acknowledged but often addressed as isolated interventions rather than integrated planning mechanisms. Key challenges include limited social acceptance, financing constraints, behavioural change requirements, and weak institutional coordination. Although integration into urban planning is commonly framed through alignment with sustainable development strategies and ecosystem services, persistent gaps remain in governance alignment and policy coherence. The study concludes that current assessment tools suffer from limited scale adaptability and weak links to planning and policy decision-making, constraining the practical evaluation of RUT. |
|---|
| Keywords: | regenerative development, regenerative urbanism, urban regeneration, circular city, reflexive thematic analysis |
|---|
| Publication status: | Published |
|---|
| Publication version: | Version of Record |
|---|
| Submitted for review: | 10.01.2026 |
|---|
| Article acceptance date: | 14.04.2026 |
|---|
| Publication date: | 30.06.2026 |
|---|
| Year of publishing: | 2026 |
|---|
| Number of pages: | str. 89-114 |
|---|
| Numbering: | Letn. 37, št. 1 |
|---|
| PID: | 20.500.12556/DiRROS-31262  |
|---|
| UDC: | 71 |
|---|
| ISSN on article: | 0353-6483 |
|---|
| DOI: | 10.5379/urbani-izziv-2026-37-01-04 |
|---|
| COBISS.SI-ID: | 283207683 |
|---|
| Note: | Besedilo v angl., prevod v slov.;
|
|---|
| Publication date in DiRROS: | 23.07.2026 |
|---|
| Views: | 111 |
|---|
| Downloads: | 45 |
|---|
| Metadata: |    |
|---|
|
:
|
Copy citation |
|---|
| | | | Share: |  |
|---|
Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click
on the title to get all document metadata. |
