Despite remarkable progress in planning and management, the development of adaptive governance for urban settings is incomplete; particularly in the context of global change and uncertainty (Birkmann et al. 2010, Wilkinson 2012. Urban settings are characterised by complex institutions and power relations that tend to resist rather than adjust to change. Established interests are often prioritised; emergent 'non-core' interests can remain marginal, and can lose capacity during critical change (Jänicke 1997). Given this situation, how does the governance of a 'non-core' policy arena adjust to change over time? The research concludes that rather than seeing resilient policy arenas as requiring the 'governance of adaptation' through particular normative forums, structures or principles, it is more useful to focus on and potentially steer the supporting factors that underpin diverse inter-actor responses to change across a policy arena. This iii 'governance and adaptation' view recognises that in urban settings, actors and their agency are embedded within multiple structures. Many of these structures cannot be adapted, but critically, some realign as an adjustment to change and this potentially supports adaptation. Metagovernance is found to be critical, although in general it is partially decentred amongst a set of key actors. A 'governance and adaptation' framework builds a policy arena-wide explanation from empirical settings. The findings have significant implications for efforts to enhance responsive governance in urban settings and to better strengthen its resilience to future uncertainties.iv