[
1. Wang, S., Xie, Z., Wu, R., Feng, K. How does urbanisation affect the carbon intensity of human well-being? A global assessment. Applied Energy, vol. 312, 2022, 118798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.11879810.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118798
]Search in Google Scholar
[
2. Zhong, Z., Chen, Z. Urbanization, green development and residents’ happiness: The moderating role of environmental regulation. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 97, 2022, 106900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.10690010.1016/j.eiar.2022.106900
]Search in Google Scholar
[
3. Cortinovis, C., Olsson, P., Boke-Olen, N., Hedlund, K. Scaling up nature-based solutions for climate-change adaptation: Potential and benefits in three European cities. Urban forestry and Urban greening, vol. 67, 2022, 127450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.12745010.1016/j.ufug.2021.127450
]Search in Google Scholar
[
4. Project for public spaces [online, cited 10.09.2022]. https://www.pps.org/article/what-is-placemaking
]Search in Google Scholar
[
5. Ballon, P., Van Hoed, M., Schuurman, D. The effectiveness of involving users in digital innovation: Measuring the impact of living labs. Telematics and Informatics, vol. 35, no. 5, 2018, pp. 1201–1214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.02.00310.1016/j.tele.2018.02.003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
6. Bifulco, F., Tregua, M., Amitrano, C. C. Co-governing smart cities through living labs. top evidences from EU. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, vol. 50E, 2017, pp. 21–37. https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.2017.000210.24193/tras.2017.0002
]Search in Google Scholar
[
7. Lin, Y. A comparison of selected Western and Chinese smart governance: the application of ICT in governmental management, participation and collaboration. Telecommunications Policy, vol. 42, no. 10, 2018, pp. 800–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2018.07.00310.1016/j.telpol.2018.07.003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
8. Reforgiato Recupero, D., Castronovo, M., Consoli, S., Costanzo, T., Gangemi, A., Grasso, L., Lodi, G., Merendino, G., Mongiovi, M., Presutti, V., Rapisarda, S. D., Rosa, S., Spampinato, E. An innovative, open, interoperable citizen engagement cloud platform for smart government and users’ interaction. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, vol. 7, no. 2, 2016, pp. 388–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-016-0361-010.1007/s13132-016-0361-0
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. Sinkiene, J., et al. Potential for Transformation of Urban Open Public Spaces in Modernist Multi-Apartment Districts in Lithuania. Architecture and Urban planning, vol. 14, no. 1, 2018, pp. 127–132. https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2018-001710.2478/aup-2018-0017
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. De Guimaraes, J.C.F., Severo, E.A., Junior, L.A.F., Batista da Costa, W.P., Salmoria, T. Governance and quality of life in smart cities: towards sustainable development goals, Journal of Cleaner production, vol. 253, 2020, 119926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.11992610.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119926
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Zvolska, L., Lehner, M., Voytenko Palgan, Y., Mont, O., Plepys, A. Urban sharing in smart cities: The cases of Berlin and London. Local Environment, vol. 24, no. 7, 2019, pp. 628–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2018.146397810.1080/13549839.2018.1463978
]Search in Google Scholar
[
12. Cabannes, Y. Participatory budgeting: A significant contribution to participatory democracy. [Presupuesto participativo: Una contribución significativa a la democracia participativa]. Environment and Urbanization, vol. 16, no. 1, 2004, pp. 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1630/09562470432302613310.1630/095624704323026133
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Bassoli, M. Participatory budgeting in Italy: An analysis of (almost democratic) participatory governance arrangements. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, vol. 36, no. 6, 2012, pp. 1183–1203. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2011.01023.x10.1111/j.1468-2427.2011.01023.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
14. Laruelle, A. Voting to select projects in participatory budgeting. European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 288, no. 2, 2021, pp. 598–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.05.06310.1016/j.ejor.2020.05.063
]Search in Google Scholar
[
15. Goel, A., Krishnaswamy, A. K., Sakshuwong, S., Aitamurto, T. Knapsack voting for participatory budgeting. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation, vol. 7, no. 2, 2019, article no. 8, pp. 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/334023010.1145/3340230
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Akmentina, L. Broadening Public Engagement in Spatial Planning through Digital Participatory Mapping: Experiences from Latvia. Architecture and Urban planning, vol. 18, no. 1, 2022, pp. 30–42. https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2022-000410.2478/aup-2022-0004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
17. Akmentina, L. Participatory Planning in Post-socialist Cities: A Case Study of Riga. Architecture and Urban planning, vol. 16, no. 1, 2020, pp. 17–25. https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2020-000410.2478/aup-2020-0004
]Search in Google Scholar
[
18. Geipele, S., Kundzina, A., Pudzis, E., Lazdins, A. Evaluation of Community Involvement in Participatory Process – Lessons Learned in the Baltic Sea Region. Architecture and Urban planning, vol. 16, no. 1, 2020, pp. 56–65. https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2020-000910.2478/aup-2020-0009
]Search in Google Scholar
[
19. Krenjova, J., Raudla, R. Participatory budgeting at the local level: Challenges and opportunities for new democracies. Halduskultuur, vol. 14, no. 1, 2013, pp. 18–46.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
20. Kempa, J., Kozłowski, A. R. Participatory Budget as a Tool Supporting the Development of Civil Society in Poland. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, vol. 13, no. 1, 2020, pp. 61–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/nispa-2020-0003.10.2478/nispa-2020-0003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
21. Fain, B., Goel, A., Munagala, K. The core of the participatory budgeting problem. In: Cai, Y., Vetta, A. (eds.), Web and Internet Economics. WINE 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, vol. 10123, 2016, pp. 384–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54110-4_2710.1007/978-3-662-54110-4_27
]Search in Google Scholar
[
22. Lehtonen, P. Policy on the move: the enabling settings of participation in participatory budgeting, Policy Studies, vol. 43, no. 5, 2021, pp. 1036–1054. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2021.189598110.1080/01442872.2021.1895981
]Search in Google Scholar
[
23. Tomor, Z., Meijer, A., Michels, A., Geertman, S. Smart governance for sustainable cities: Findings from a systematic literature review. Journal of Urban Technology, vol. 26, no. 4, 2019, pp. 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2019.165117810.1080/10630732.2019.1651178
]Search in Google Scholar
[
24. Bardovič, J., Gašparík, J. Enablers of participatory budgeting in Slovakia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, vol. 29, no. 1, 2021, 1248. https://doi.org/10.46585/sp2901124810.46585/sp29011248
]Search in Google Scholar
[
25. Jüptner, P., Klimovský, D. Vertical and horizontal intergovernmental relations during the first wave of the COVID-19 crisis: Experience from the extremely fragmented CEE countries. Local Government Studies, vol. 48, no. 2, 2022, pp. 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930.2021.194485810.1080/03003930.2021.1944858
]Search in Google Scholar
[
26. Sharifi, A., Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R. The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Science of the Total Environment, vol. 749, 2020, 142391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.14239110.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142391
]Search in Google Scholar
[
27. Ardito, L., Ferraris, A., Messeni Petruzzelli, A., Bresciani, S., Del Giudice, M. The role of universities in the knowledge management of smart city projects. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 142, 2019, pp. 312–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.03010.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.030
]Search in Google Scholar
[
28. Benneworth, P., Hospers, G.-J. Urban competitiveness in the knowledge economy: Universities as new planning animateurs. Progress in Planning, vol. 67, no. 2, 2007, pp. 105–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2007.02.00310.1016/j.progress.2007.02.003
]Search in Google Scholar
[
29. Miller, K., McAdam, R., McAdam, M. A systematic literature review of university technology transfer from a quadruple helix perspective: Toward a research agenda. R&D Management, vol. 48, no. 1, 2018, pp. 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.1222810.1111/radm.12228
]Search in Google Scholar
[
30. Chatterton, P. The cultural role of universities in the community: revisiting the university-community debate. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, vol. 32, no. 1, 2000, pp. 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1068/a324310.1068/a3243
]Search in Google Scholar
[
31. Benneworth, P., Jongbloed, B. W. Who matter to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation. Higher Education, vol. 59, 2010, pp. 567–588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9265-210.1007/s10734-009-9265-2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
32. Bednarz, S. W., Chalkley, B., Fletcher, S., Hay, I., Le Heron, E., Mohan, A., Trafford, J. Community engagement for student learning in geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, vol. 32, no. 1, 2008, pp. 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309826070173155310.1080/03098260701731553
]Search in Google Scholar
[
33. Beecroft, R. Embedding higher education into a real-world lab: A process-oriented analysis of six transdisciplinary project courses. Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 10, 2018, 3798. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1010379810.3390/su10103798
]Search in Google Scholar
[
34. Raven, R., Sengers, F., Spaeth, P., Xie, L., Cheshmehzangi, A., de Jong, M. Urban experimentation and institutional arrangements. European Planning Studies, vol. 27, no. 2, 2019, pp. 258–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.139304710.1080/09654313.2017.1393047
]Search in Google Scholar
[
35. Koekkoek, A., van Ham, M., Kleinhans, R. Unraveling university-community engagement: a literature review. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, vol. 25, no. 1, 2021, pp. 3–24.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
36. Best practice brief, no. 32, April 2005 [online, cited 01.09.2022]. https://outreach.msu.edu/bpbriefs/issues/brief32.pdf
]Search in Google Scholar
[
37. Tijsma, G., Urias, E., Zweekhorst, M. B. M. A thematic approach to realize multidisciplinary community service-learning education to address complex societal problems: a-win-win-win situation? Frontiers in Education, vol. 5, 2021, 617380. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.61738010.3389/feduc.2020.617380
]Search in Google Scholar
[
38. Participative Budgeting [online]. Tartu [cited 25.08.2021]. https://www.tartu.ee/en/participative-budgeting
]Search in Google Scholar
[
39. Participatory Budgeting 2020 [online]. Tampere [cited 25.08.2021]. https://mun.tampere.fi/processes/osbu2020/f/1/
]Search in Google Scholar
[
40. Decidim: Free Open-Source Participatory Democracy for Cities and Organisations [online]. Decidim [cited 05.09.2021]. https://decidim.org
]Search in Google Scholar
[
41. Rīgas domes Izglitības, kultūras un sporta departaments. Projektu konkurss “Apkaimju iniciatīvas līdzdalības un piederības veicināšanai” (Project competition “Initiatives to promote public participation and sense of belonging in the neighbourhood”) [online, cited 25.08.2021]. https://integracija.riga.lv/lv/integracija/finansesanas-konkursi?target=184
]Search in Google Scholar
[
42. Riga City Council City Development department started the new initiative “Multifunctional public open space development in Riga’s neighbourhoods” [online, cited 25.08.2021]. https://www.rdpad.lv/portfolio/daudzfunkcionalas-publiskas-artelpas-attistiba-rigas-pilsetas-apkaimes/?fbclid=IwAR31ey-uyJZizdKgiEMjuQEmYdNLU5rgJ4io4KlNA-O7mReNdgrx3mR8-Qw
]Search in Google Scholar
[
43. Welcome to the world’s most popular website builder, 2021 [online]. WordPress [cited 25.08.2021]. https://wordpress.com
]Search in Google Scholar
[
44. Rīgas dome, 2020. Rīgas pilsētas līdzdalīgās budžetēšanas projektu īstenošanas konkurss (Riga City participatory budgeting project implementation competition) [online, cited 25.08.2021]. https://www.riga.lv/lv/rigas-pilsetas-lidzdaligas-budzetesanas-projektu-istenosanas-konkurss
]Search in Google Scholar
[
45. Rīdzinieku iesaistes programma pilsētas attīstībai – līdzdalības budžets (Program for Riga’s inhabitants involvement in city’s development – participatory budgeting) [online]. Balso Rīga [cited 25.08.2021]. https://balso.riga.lv/
]Search in Google Scholar
[
46. About Drupal [online]. Drupal [cited 25.08.2021]. https://www.drupal.org
]Search in Google Scholar
[
47. Barcellini, F., Prost, L., Cerf, M. Designers’ and users’ roles in participatory design: What is actually co-designed by participants? Applied Ergonomics, vol. 50, 2015, pp. 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.02.00510.1016/j.apergo.2015.02.005
]Search in Google Scholar
, 