EUKI Interview: Driving Climate Action in Small Cities

Why did you focus on climate neutrality strategies for small and medium-sized municipalities in the project? 

Big cities, such as those that are members of the NetZeroCities network or participate in larger European projects, already have the capacities, knowledge and experience needed for developing local climate neutrality strategies.  

In small and medium-sized municipalities, however, these capacities and access to specialised knowledge are often more limited. At the same time, there are many committed officials who are already working on climate issues alongside their day-to-day administrative tasks. Our aim was to strengthen this engagement and create space for more strategic long-term thinking. Smaller municipal administrations can have a greater impact on local communities. They have a good understanding of their citizens’ needs and challenges and are closer to them than in big cities.  

What was your first offer to these municipalities? 

We started the project by publishing a 200-page guide, Developing ambitious local long-term climate neutrality strategies (LLCS), which is designed specifically for small and medium-sized municipalities and is available in six languages. 

The publication includes advice on how to start the process of achieving climate neutrality, addressing issues such as governance and stakeholder communication. It presents various pathways towards climate neutrality based on local geographic, economic and social conditions and describes tailor-made measures that focus on climate-related topics such as water and health and are suitable for implementation in small and medium-sized municipalities. 

We were very happy that the guidance received such positive feedback and generated strong interest among municipalities. To support its practical use in workshops and internal meetings, we also provided printed copies. 

Training is always a key to developing the capacities needed for a climate neutrality strategy. How did you address this? 

We conducted various training measures. I especially liked the webinar series because it was based on a needs assessment that we had conducted at the start of the project. It covered topics such as financing, citizen participation and energy poverty. But we also held on-site workshops with municipalities and offered a study tour. The whole process culminated in pilot actions in eight municipalities that brought them a step closer towards developing LLCS. We provided support and advice, connected the municipal administrators with experts, assisted with documentation, organised meetings, and helped them to move forward with their ideas.  

The project involved partners from five different countries, each with their own diverse conditions and frameworks. Was this a challenge or a source of mutual inspiration? 

Apart from the German partner, we formed the consortium with Central and Eastern European partners whom we had already worked with before. While our national backgrounds are not identical, we share many similar challenges, especially in the building sector and with regard to citizen engagement.  

Differences appeared at city level, however. Some cities were far behind on the path to climate neutrality, while others were more advanced. But they all shared a strong political will to move forward. While not all cities have adopted a formal 2050 climate neutrality goal yet, we witnessed strong motivation and a real commitment to making progress. What was needed was structured guidance and practical tools to translate ambition into long-term strategies. 

Site visits were an important part of the workshops. Why was that so? 

The site visits were very inspiring and demonstrated what is possible. Participants could see some real-world investments and initiatives. During our on-site workshops in Poland, we visited Siemiatycze to explore one of the most advanced renovation initiatives: a building complex housing a primary school, a music school and a municipal swimming pool, accessible for all citizens. The building has been renovated to make it climate-friendly and now uses waste heat, renewables, heat pumps and geothermal energy. This was a significant and impressive investment, driven by a mayor who is strongly committed to climate action. During the same visit, we also saw nature-based solutions and urban regeneration projects, such as the transformation of abandoned areas into spaces for citizens, the construction of bicycle paths and the establishment of a cross-border Climate Education Centre. We also visited the historic city of Cieszyn in Poland, which has many heritage-protected buildings. Investing in climate-friendly solutions there is more difficult, but the city showed that action is still possible. Their pilot initiative revealed that even small investments, without innovative technologies, can deliver meaningful results. 

Izabela Kuśnierz 

is a project manager at the Association of Municipalities Polish Network “Energie Cités” (PNEC), a non-governmental organisation working on local sustainable energy policies and climate protection, energy efficiency and renewable energy use in cooperation with local authorities in Poland. She holds a Master of Science from the University of Krakow. 

The project’s main site visit took place in the German city of Chemnitz. What were the main lessons learned there? 

Participants were especially impressed by the city’s long-term vision and its holistic approach. Chemnitz addresses many sectors of the energy transition simultaneously, guided by a clear goal. In that sense, it differs considerably from other Central and Eastern European countries, for example, where municipalities often only plan investments when funding becomes available. One year it might be a school renovation, the next year it might be renewables, always depending on government funding programmes. The Chemnitz example showed that it is possible to pursue a long-term goal and still adapt your projects to funding opportunities while always staying on track. Participants also learned that preparation is key. For example, identifying projects in advance allows municipalities to submit proposals quickly when a funding application window opens. 

Looking back, what were the project’s most important outcomes and learnings? 

We succeeded in initiating change in quite a few municipalities and helped to start and shape a process. There is now a better understanding of the importance of a long-term vision and strategic climate planning, but there are still gaps in knowledge and financing. Municipalities still depend on grants, which may soon decrease. Many municipalities have recognised the added value of having committed experts on board. If dedicated energy managers, city gardeners or specialised staff are in place, it is much easier to make progress. 

As the project made clear, people are the key factor. Technical experts cannot act without decision-makers, and decision-makers need trusted experts. We must reach both groups. Finally, social connections are extremely important. It is people who make projects successful, so a people-centred approach is crucial.