The City as a Climate Actor: Whose Voices, Whose Future?

In the face of escalating climate challenges, understanding the intricate relationship between social identity and environmental impact has never been more urgent. Factors such as social class, place of origin, gender, age, and health are not only markers of identity, but also key determinants in how individuals experience and contribute to climate change. These identity traits are closely linked to structural inequalities in access to resources, political power, and public services—inequalities that significantly shape both behavior and vulnerability in the context of climate disruption.

Research highlights that dominant social groups, typically associated with higher consumption patterns and elevated greenhouse gas emissions, are disproportionately responsible for environmental degradation. This dynamic is captured by the concept of “extractivist subjectivity”—a framework that critiques the objectification and commodification of both natural resources and human labor for the benefit of privileged classes (Daalen et al., 2019; Dietz et al., 2020; Islam & Winkel, 2017). These extractivist logics are at the heart of environmental exploitation and are embedded in global systems of inequality.

Conversely, marginalized communities bear the brunt of the consequences. Populations with limited access to resources and political representation—often racialized, gendered, or economically disadvantaged—face greater exposure to climate hazards and have fewer means to recover from environmental shocks. This imbalance perpetuates cycles of social and environmental vulnerability, highlighting the centrality of climate justice in both discourse and policy (Islam & Winkel, 2017). Power dynamics underpinning these injustices must be addressed if we are to achieve equitable and sustainable climate solutions.

Adding to the complexity is a paradox of climate awareness versus climate behavior. Individuals belonging to high-emission social groups may express deep concern for the environment while continuing unsustainable lifestyles. Meanwhile, those with limited awareness or concern might maintain low-carbon habits due to structural constraints, rather than intention. This contradiction underscores the need for holistic approaches that integrate both education and structural transformation to reduce emissions across all societal groups.

Nowhere is this dynamic more evident than in urban European settings, where identity-based inequalities and environmental pressures converge in particularly visible ways. In cities, social class disparities manifest not only in income levels but in access to public goods, including green spaces, transport, housing, and climate resilience infrastructure. Over the last decade, scholars and practitioners alike have emphasized the importance of embedding justice and inclusivity into urban planning practices.

A justice-oriented lens on environmental planning invites critical questions: Who benefits from urban sustainability initiatives? Who decides what is developed, and for whom? Without careful consideration, processes like gentrification and touristification risk undermining the very goals of green planning, displacing vulnerable populations and restricting their access to shared urban resources. These processes, now common in medium to large cities across Europe, produce uneven landscapes of opportunity and exclusion, often concealed beneath the surface of progressive environmental policies.

Urban sustainability strategies too often rely on a trickle-down assumption—that the benefits of green infrastructure and development will eventually reach all residents. However, the evidence points in the opposite direction. Women, racialized groups, migrants, low-income workers, and gender minorities consistently face more limited access to quality public space and basic urban services. Without deliberate efforts to address these structural barriers, sustainability will remain an exclusionary practice rather than a transformative one.

Creating inclusive, climate-resilient cities requires the active participation of those most affected. Activist networks, cultural workers, educators, researchers, residents, and community organizations are all critical actors in imagining and implementing alternative urban futures. These diverse groups bring vital knowledge and lived experiences, offering grounded insights into how cities might evolve toward more just and sustainable configurations.

We must therefore co-create urban strategies that are not only technically sound but socially grounded, emerging from collaborative, creative, and safe spaces where plural perspectives can be heard. This approach is not merely a question of better policy—it is an invitation to rethink what urban life can be, and for whom it is designed.