Sustainability 2020,12, 10471 12 of 18In the absence of integrated planning (with the only exception of the Dioxiadis plan of 1985)the pressure on the natural environment grew exponentially. Massive construction and a rapidlygrowing road system caused a loss of urban and peri-urban green areas and most of the Attica waternetwork (including its two rivers) was covered. This has contributed to increasing temperatures,heat waves, and frequency of flush-floods [67,68]. Furthermore, the metropolitan area of Athensproved to be sensitive to deforestation because of different drivers, including land take, urbanizationof peripheries, and wildfires [22]. In the built-up areas, an insufficient climate protection of existingbuildings was observed, and public works or new building construction disregarded local climateconditions. In addition, the lack of updated legislation on energy and environmental protection forbuildings and other urban infrastructure, have contributed to an increase of the urban heat islandeffect, coupled with social and economic decline of the city centre. Athens has also experiencednatural disasters and ’external shocks’ other than those related to climate change. Among these,the City of Athens listed earthquakes, civil unrest demonstrations, and cybercrime [35]. All theseevents contributed to increasing the weaknesses of the city and the long-term stresses underlying them(depressed macroeconomic conditions, aging infrastructure, migration, mistrust).Despite efforts to guide urban growth, a series of structural challenges have remained: (i) a gapbetween planning and implementation; (ii) an even stronger gap between spatial planning andsocioeconomic planning; (iii) the incomplete development of basic land management tools; (iv) the lackof participatory planning. In order to face these problems and to foster resilience in Athens, metropolitangovernance reforms, and a carefully designed financial scheme must be implemented. Stakeholdermobilization has to focus on a shared set of policy priorities for a more “Open, Green, Proactive andVibrant City”, as proposed in the Athens Resilience Strategy for 2030 [35]. The main goals of sucha strategy are to (i) maximize the economic dynamics of the Athenian neighbourhood, (ii) promotea data-driven and inclusive city, (iii) increase nature in the city, and (iv) enhance social cohesion.According to these ambitious aims, the strategy proposes a list of actions to achieve effective andefficient governance through the involvement of its residents along with the different phases of decisionmaking, by fostering data-driven policymaking and accountability, promoting well-being, creativity,and entrepreneurship [69].Major efforts in Resilience Strategy for 2030 was given to the actions that may supportclimate change adaptation and increase of environmental protection, recognizing the leading roleof Nature-Based Solutions in increasing the environmental quality and sustainability in urbanand peri-urban contexts[70–73]. With regards to urban forest management [74], guidelines weremore recently provided for managing environmental resources and increasing its protection,e.g., from wildfires [75] in Attica (Figure 6). This map well depicts the spatial integration betweeneconomic nodes and social functions in the region and the environmental heritage surrounding urbanfabrics. Specific linkages were illustrated between the biggest node (downtown Athens) and otherthree sub-centres (Piraeus harbour, South of Athens, Thriasio industrial settlement, West of Athens,and Messoghia district including the International Airport, East of Athens). These interconnectionsunderline the most relevant development axes in Attica. Less intense developmental axes werealso envisaged in other two socioeconomic nodes (Salamina, south-west of Piraeus and Lavrio,South-east of Messoghia). Finally, the Argosaronic islands (Aegina, Poros, Idra, Spetses), truly south ofAthens but administratively belonging to Attica, were also designed as ‘minor’ socioeconomic nodes.Environmental heritage is conserved in natural (rural) places (more or less) far from these developmentaxes, as clearly demonstrated in Figure 6