This article introduces a framework that enhances urban sustainability planning by integrating human and non-human perspectives, suggesting a more inclusive approach.
Purpose This article introduces Middle-Out Design (MOD), a collaborative framework that integrates human and non-human perspectives in urban sustainability planning. It addresses limitations in existing participatory design and planning approaches that privilege institutional or human-centred agendas. Design/methodology/approach The MOD framework structures collaboration across top-down, bottom-up and mediating actors through four iterative stages: Coalition, Design, Development and Deployment. Its exploratory application is illustrated through four formative vignettes focused on community gardening, flood resilience, wombat rehabilitation and adaptive robotic environments. Findings Through these vignettes, the article contributes illustrative insights into how MOD fosters more inclusive and adaptive planning by enabling coalitions to form that work across diverse priorities, knowledge systems and spatial scales. The studies these vignettes are based on highlight the role of intermediaries, the value of connecting with institutional processes and the need for adaptive governance that includes ecological and non-human considerations. Practical implications MOD provides an adaptable pathway for practitioners, researchers and policymakers to engage with complex urban systems. It fosters decision-making responsive to changing social, environmental and institutional conditions and supports coalitions capable of sustaining long-term, cross-scale collaboration. Originality/value MOD advances participatory design and planning by extending its remit beyond human actors and early-stage engagement. It contributes a novel approach that embeds collaboration and learning throughout implementation and post-deployment, and in so doing, it integrates more-than-human considerations in urban planning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fredericks et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: