Urban megaprojects as a spatial manifestation of neoliberalism are in transitional societies considered a tool for extra-profit for private developers and a source of great corruption among the high-level public authorities. Consequently, such a relationship has negative effects on socio-spatial reality. The paper illustrates how a large-scale unitary project – the Belgrade Waterfront project – jeopardizes the public participation through: the misuse of legal procedures and spatial planning instruments, neglect of private property rights, and simulation of public debate. The conditions enabling democratic social, political and professional environment as a backbone for citizen involvement in public issues are briefly indicated in conclusion.

Throughout its history, but also squeezed between the current challenges of globalisation and sovereignty, the Balkans has been confronted with a number of different political, economic, environmental, and cultural problems. Such a complex social framework inevitably implies spatial degradation, not only in terms of the urban forms as the final planning product, but also in terms of the nature of the planning process and urban governance. Notably, we assume that territorial capital in the Balkans is under serious threat due to the abuse of legal procedures, the neglect of the public interest and the politicisation of planning. To elucidate this, we focus on the megaprojects Belgrade Waterfront (Belgrade) and Hellinikon (Athens) as examples of urban development that require exceptional conditions such as special regulations, additional funding, long-term timeframes, and ad hoc actor networks. Against the conceptual background of multi-level governance and based on in-depth case studies, we examine the nature of vertical cooperation between authorities at different levels (from supranational to local), horizontal cooperation amongst different stakeholders, and the role of planning professionals who are seen as facilitators in this process. Finally, we point out to the most important conditions that enable a democratic social, political and professional framework for urban megaprojects.

There is an overall scientific consensus that green spaces positively affect urban dwellers’ health and well-being. However, there is a gap between knowledge and policy objectives, and their translation into effective interventions to unleash the benefits of green spaces. Examining such ‘implementation gap’ in Zurich is relevant due to the integration of the ‘green urban agenda’ in various Swiss policies. The research narrows its focus to district 9, including the Altstetten and Albisrieden neighborhoods, which contain diverse green spaces despite ongoing densification. The study further explores four green space clusters and their 400-m catchment areas within the district. The research applies a mixed-method approach at three analytical levels: (1) identification of the critical tenets associated with the ‘green urban agenda’ through a review of multi-scale national policies, (2) assessment of green spaces’ provision, types, size, and mutual connectivity in Zurich’s district 9 based on online available quantitative data and on-site observation, and (3) identification of the dominant activities in four green space clusters through on-site observation. Through critical mutual examination of the identified ‘green urban agenda’ principles in the national policies and green space attributes, the findings reveal the extent of the convergence or divergence between policy trends and their implementation in practice.