Integrated urban climate resilience planning in a Hungarian mid-sized city: A scenario-based framework for Kecskemét 2035

Abstract

Medium-sized cities are increasingly exposed to climate risks that cannot be addressed through isolated sectoral interventions. Thus, a scenario-based urban climate resilience framework was developed for Kecskemét, a Hungarian mid-sized city located in the Duna-Tisza Interfluve and the Homokhátság region, one of Hungary’s most climate-sensitive lowland areas. We combined case-based document analysis, scenario-based policy design, SMART indicator structuring, and governance-oriented risk assessment with a structured review of peer-reviewed research on compact development, functional urban-area planning, proximity services, multimodal mobility, blue-green stormwater management, district decarbonization, and socially safeguarded regeneration. The proposed scenario included indicative 2035 targets: A 40% reduction in urban greenhouse gas emissions compared with the 2019 baseline, green space provision of 22 m² per capita, a public transport modal split of 28%, and annual stormwater retention of 86,000 m³ through blue-green infrastructure. The results showed that climate resilience in mid-sized, climate-sensitive cities requires institutional integration across built-environment planning, mobility policy, energy transition, hydrological adaptation, and public participation. Comparative journal evidence indicated that transfer depends on catchment-scale modelling, commuting-area governance, maintenance capacity, auditable greenhouse gas accounting, and affordability safeguards. The Kecskemét case offers a transferable framework for Central European mid-sized cities facing simultaneous pressures of industrial growth, suburban expansion, water stress, and climate adaptation.

Keywords

urban climate resilience / scenario-based planning / blue-green infrastructure / sustainable mobility / SMART indicators / Kecskemét / Central Europe

References

[1] Balogh Z, Szemereyné Pataki K (2025) Climate-friendly urban policy in Kecskemét. Pro Publico Bono Magyar Közigazgatás 13: 75-111. https://doi.org/10.32575/ppb.2025.1.4

[2] Bibri SE, Krogstie J, Kärrholm M (2020) Compact city planning and development: Emerging practices and strategies for achieving the goals of sustainability. Dev Built Environ 4: 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2020.100021

[3] Mathey J, Rößler S, Banse J, et al. (2015) Brownfields as an element of green infrastructure for implementing ecosystem services into urban areas. J Urban Plann Dev 141: A4015001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000275

[4] Kabisch N, Frantzeskaki N, Pauleit S, et al. (2016) Nature-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation in urban areas: Perspectives on indicators, knowledge gaps, barriers, and opportunities for action. Ecol Soc 21: 39. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08373-210239

[5] Fletcher TD, Shuster W, Hunt WF, et al. (2015) SUDS, LID, BMPs, WSUD and more-The evolution and application of terminology surrounding urban drainage. Urban Water J 12: 525-542. https://doi.org/10.1080/1573062X.2014.916314

[6] Alves A, Gersonius B, Kapelan Z, et al. (2019) Assessing the co-benefits of green-blue-grey infrastructure for sustainable urban flood risk management. J Environ Manage 239: 244-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.036

[7] Frantzeskaki N (2019) Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environ Sci Policy 93: 101-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.12.033

[8] Kasprzyk M, Szpakowski W, Poznańska E, et al. (2022) Technical solutions and benefits of introducing rain gardens-Gdańsk case study. Sci Total Environ 835: 155487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155487

[9] May AD (2015) Encouraging good practice in the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans. Case Stud Transp Policy 3: 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2014.09.001

[10] Sýkora L, Mulíček O (2009) The micro-regional nature of functional urban areas (FUAs): Lessons from the analysis of the Czech urban and regional system. Urban Res Pract 2: 287-307. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535060903319228

[11] Derkenbaeva E, Vega SH, Hofstede GJ, et al. (2022) Positive energy districts: Mainstreaming energy transition in urban areas. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 153: 111782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111782

[12] Kennedy C, Steinberger J, Gasson B, et al. (2010) Methodology for inventorying greenhouse gas emissions from global cities. Energy Policy 38: 4828-4837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.08.050

[13] Reckien D, Salvia M, Heidrich O, et al. (2018) How are cities planning to respond to climate change? Assessment of local climate plans from 885 cities in the EU-28. J Cleaner Prod 191: 207-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.220

[14] Anguelovski I, Connolly JJT, Cole H, et al. (2022) Green gentrification in European and North American cities. Nat Commun 13: 3816. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31572-1

[15] Moreno C, Allam Z, Chabaud D, et al. (2021) Introducing the ‘15-Minute City’: Sustainability, resilience and place identity in future post-pandemic cities. Smart Cities 4: 93-111. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities4010006

[16] Óvári Á, Kovács AD, Farkas JZ (2023) Assessment of local climate strategies in Hungarian cities. Urban Clim 49: 101465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2023.101465

[17] Sandover R, Moseley A, Devine-Wright P (2021) Contrasting views of citizens’ assemblies: Stakeholder perceptions of public deliberation on climate change. Politics Gov 9: 76-86. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v9i2.4019

[18] Anguelovski I, Shi L, Chu E, et al. (2016) Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: Critical perspectives from the Boston case study. J Plan Educ Res 36: 333-348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X16645166