Toward cooler cities by larger homogeneous functional clusters.

Authors

Xucai Zhang, Xiaobing Wei, Xiaoping Liu, Honghong Wei, Yue Zheng, Hongkai Gu, Yangzi Che, Yeran Sun, Ming Luo, Weilin Liao, Haosheng Huang, Kangning Huang

Published in

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Volume 123. Issue 43. Pages e2617717123. Oct 27, 2026. Epub Oct 19, 2026.

Abstract

Urban heat island (UHI) intensifies heat-related risks and environmental degradation in cities worldwide, yet existing mitigation strategies have largely overlooked how the spatial scale of homogeneous functional building clusters influences local climate. This scale may matter because buildings with similar functions often share similar morphology, activity schedules, and anthropogenic heat-release patterns, allowing their spatial contiguity to shape ventilation and heat accumulation. Here, we introduce the Urban Homogeneous Scale (UHS)-an indicator that measures the spatial scale of contiguous, functionally similar building clusters-and analyze 233,844 observations across 101 global cities to assess its potential for mitigating surface UHI. We find that larger UHS is associated with lower surface UHI: every 100-meter increase in UHS corresponds to 4.5% decrease in daytime UHI. This daytime cooling effect is particularly more pronounced in inland, humid, and high-income regions. In low-income regions, larger building area and higher building volume more strongly weaken UHS cooling capacity than in wealthier regions, revealing a socioeconomic inequality in UHS's mitigation benefits. Our findings identify the spatial scale of building clusters as a essential dimension of urban form associated with urban heat burden, and suggest that considering UHS alongside targeted controls on built environmental characteristics may inform future heat-mitigation planning.

PMID:
42896064
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 20 Oct 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.