Urban planning decision-makers face wicked problems and are required to make complex decisions regarding the functioning of cities. Spatial decision-support tools (SDSTs) have the potential to change the way decisions are being made and play an important role in shaping future cities. Yet decision-makers experience challenges around SDSTs. This article analyzes what lessons can be drawn for the wider community from New Zealand’s urban planning context and SDSTs developed for New Zealand’s cities on (1) how SDSTs might influence decision-making; (2) what the challenges are toward the appropriate adoption of spatial tools; and (3) how data, technical, and procedural issues may influence the adoption of SDSTs in planning practices. It contributes an integrated view, drawing from literature on complex systems, theories of sociotechnical interactions, and synoptic planning practices based on engagement, and a survey of urban planning stakeholders. The key challenges identified are around technological and user subjectivity and tailored recognition of local contexts. These can be addressed through flexible SDSTs developed with stakeholder engagement and by viewing SDSTs in a wider, spatial sociotechnical system to fully leverage their potential and ensure improved urban outcomes accounting for the local context.

Many cities are increasingly adopting blue-green infrastructure (BGI) to bolster their resilience against environmental challenges. Beyond its well-acknowledged environmental benefits, the role of BGI in enhancing social resilience is becoming an equally important area of focus. However, the integration of BGI in fostering social resilience presents complexities, stemming from the evolving and occasionally ambiguous definition of social resilience. Considering the broad application of BGI across various disciplines makes the evaluation of social resilience within a BGI framework complex. Consequently, a structured approach to develop a clear framework tailored to understanding and measuring social resilience in a BGI setting is needed. This study consolidates various existing frameworks of social resilience, especially utilizing the detailed 5S framework proposed by Saja et al. It integrates findings from an extensive review of literature on social resilience to develop a novel conceptual framework—the BGI Social Resilience Framework. This new framework specifically aims to capture the distinct social aspects and advantages associated with BGI. The BGI Social Resilience Framework is organized into a three-tier model, focusing on four critical aspects of social resilience—social values, social capital, social structure, and social equity—and explores how these aspects are interconnected. Characteristics and indicators are customized to accommodate the context of BGI in a way that integrates the physical and human dimensions within a comprehensive approach to measurement that uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods. Specifically, this research formulates a theoretical framework for BGI with the aim of investigating BGI strategies and viewpoints that bolster social resilience. The BGI Social Resilience Framework takes into account the varied demographics and the physical characteristics of urban areas to explore ways to create BGI spaces that are more inclusive and that contribute to the enhancement of social resilience.