What do we mean by innovation in urban regeneration? Leveraging youth engagement for intergenerational dialogue

Purpose This article redefines innovation in urban regeneration as a systemic, educational process rather than purely a technological pursuit. It examines how participatory, youth-engaged approaches – like co-design, citizen science, service learning and multi-criteria decision analysis – generate micro-scale innovations that transform governance and community relations, operating as a living system of collaboration. Through three case studies in Italy, the United States and a global Connect4Climate workshop, the article explores how systems thinking reveals feedback loops between learning, governance and place. It argues that when participation is viewed as a dynamic system, youth become catalysts of micro-innovation driving inclusive, intergenerational and sustainable urban transformation. Design/methodology/approach The study employs a qualitative, comparative case study methodology grounded in participatory action research. Three cases – Sorrento Saggia (Italy), Renew Towns Lab (USA) and Youth4Innovation (global) – illustrate how youth-engaged, intergenerational collaboration fosters innovation in urban regeneration. Data were collected through participant observation, document review and interviews, analyzed thematically to identify patterns of process, social and institutional innovation. The framework draws from theories of participatory urbanism, social innovation and intergenerational governance, using “micro-innovation” as a lens to interpret how local educational and relational practices generate scalable systemic change. Findings Across all cases, youth acted as catalysts of innovation – introducing new ideas, bridging generations and reframing local challenges through human-centered design. The research reveals those micro-innovations – such as co-created campaigns, adaptive reuse of heritage buildings and intergenerational design workshops – strengthen local resilience and governance capacity. Educational partnerships between higher education institutions and communities emerged as key drivers, transforming cities into civic laboratories for sustainability. The study shows that innovation thrives in relational processes that nurture learning, inclusion and shared authorship, challenging the assumption that progress depends solely on technological advancement, but rather leveraging those through people-centered and driven design. Research limitations/implications The study's scope is limited to three illustrative cases emphasizing small-scale, community-based initiatives; findings may not generalize to large metropolitan contexts. The author's participatory involvement introduces potential bias, mitigated through triangulation and comparison with existing literature. Long-term impacts remain under observation, as several projects are ongoing. Nevertheless, the study offers analytical generalization by linking empirical insights to broader theories of participatory and intergenerational governance. Future research should explore quantitative indicators of social innovation and longitudinal effects of youth engagement on institutional transformation and policy integration. Practical implications Urban practitioners and policymakers can apply these findings by embedding youth engagement and educational partnerships within regeneration processes. Mechanisms such as youth advisory boards, participatory decision tools (e.g. multi-criteria decision analysis) and service-learning collaborations can generate creative, locally grounded solutions. Municipalities can leverage higher education as civic partners, fund small-scale innovation pilots and formalize 4P (public-private-people) partnerships to sustain results. By treating participation as both education and governance, cities can create regenerative ecosystems that build social capital, improve policy continuity and foster inclusive, future-ready communities. Social implications The research demonstrates how intergenerational collaboration enhances social cohesion, equity and civic trust. Engaging youth as co-creators empowers marginalized voices, supports knowledge exchange between generations and revitalizes collective ownership of place. Projects like Sorrento Saggia and Renew Towns Lab show that youth involvement can counter urban disengagement, stimulate volunteerism and renew civic pride. Such participatory frameworks contribute to the democratization of planning and align with the UN SDGs' call for inclusive, resilient and human-centered cities. They foster a culture of shared responsibility where innovation benefits both current and future generations. Originality/value This study offers a novel contribution by positioning education and intergenerational participation as central to urban innovation. It bridges planning, sustainability and youth development literature to argue that process and relational innovations are as transformative as technological ones. The article's comparative analysis across local and global cases provides new empirical evidence of “micro-innovation” in practice. By reframing higher education institutions as civic laboratories and youth as boundary-spanners in governance, it introduces a transferable model for inclusive, low-cost innovation in small and mid-sized communities worldwide.