Balancing practicality and aspiration: A comparative analysis of sustainable holistic planning system toolkit designs

• Evaluates how sustainability toolkits structure goals and priorities using SHPS-TSI. • Maps toolkits by local-global scope and aspirational-practical aims with a 2×2 alignment matrix. • Reveals patterned variation in design strategies across ten SHPS evaluation indicators. • Constructs a framework for 'most different' case analysis to support toolkit comparison. • Analyzes how toolkit design relates to risks of greenwashing, fatigue, and weak commitment. Sustainability planning toolkits serve as critical instruments for guiding communities toward environmental, social, and economic resilience. Yet toolkits vary widely in their design, influencing how communities balance local flexibility with global sustainability commitments. While prior research has emphasized the risks of greenwashing and green fatigue, this study identifies an additional key tension: the balance between practical realism and aspirational idealism. We introduce the Sustainable Holistic Planning Systems Taxonomic Screening Instrument (SHPS-TSI) to systematically evaluate toolkits across ten design dimensions. Using this instrument, we conduct a comparative analysis of planning toolkits from diverse geographic, governance, and institutional settings. Our findings reveal strategic variations in toolkit orientation—from compliance-driven, incremental models to transformative, leadership-focused frameworks. We further present the SHPS Alignment Matrix, a novel two-axis framework for categorizing toolkits based on their ambition and their orientation toward local or global priorities. The study concludes by highlighting the importance of transparency in toolkit design and advertising, reflexive self-assessment for communities, and the inclusion of diverse environmental knowledge systems. These strategies can help mitigate green fatigue and greenwashing while fostering authentic, sustained commitment to sustainability planning.