Citizen Participation for Better Cohesion Policy

2. The experience of 11 pilots across seven EU countries

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of all pilot initiatives implemented in the 11 participating regions and cities across seven EU countries (Belgium, France, Italy, Poland, Romania, the Slovak Republic, and Spain) as part of the project “Innovative Implementation of the Partnership Principle in Cohesion Policy”. For each pilot, the chapter describes the policy issues at stake, the participatory process adopted to involve citizens in addressing them, and the resulting outcomes. Finally, this chapter performs a cross-pilot analysis to highlight the versatility of citizen participation in Cohesion Policy across policy contexts, policy areas, and stages of the policy cycle.

Selection of participating territories

The European Commission launched two Calls for Expressions of Interest in 2022 and 2024 targeting public authorities responsible for managing or implementing the ERDF, CF or JTF programmes either as managing authorities, intermediate bodies or beneficiaries. Applicants were asked to respond to the Calls jointly with a CSO operating in the field of citizen participation, in respect of the Partnership Principles. A joint panel of DG REGIO officers and OECD experts assessed eligible applications based on the following criteria:

• Clarity in ambitions and expected long-term impact from involving citizens

• Relevance of operational objectives to reach through innovative citizen participation mechanisms

• Quality of envisaged cooperation between public authority and civil society organisation

Relevance and adequacy of the team from public authority and civil society organisation. This process resulted in a total 11 selected public authorities responsible for implementing a pilot initiative with the technical support of the OECD. The selected authorities covered a wide variety of Cohesion Policy programmes: regional programmes, municipal implementation of regional programmes, and a national sectorial programme.

All the pilots were implemented at the subnational level, whether at the regional or municipal levels. Traditionally, participation at the subnational level offer participants and policymakers the greatest “return on investment” due to its proximity and more immediate and tangible impact (OECD, 2024[1]). The subnational context provided the right conditions to experiment and observe results throughout the duration of the project (2022-2025). CSOs contributed to the design, organisation, in some cases evaluation of the processes, and played a central role in reaching out to participants, in particular those who are usually underrepresented or underheard (people with disabilities, young people, etc.).

The 11 OECD-DG REGIO pilots

Table ‎2.1 provides an overview of all pilots by detailing, for each public authority and CSO involved, the policy area, the stage of the policy cycle, and the Cohesion Policy instrument concerned by the participatory process designed and implemented for this project.

Table ‎2.1. Summary of the selected pilots for the OECD-DG REGIO project

Public authority	CSO	Country	Policy instrument	Policy area	Participatory approach	Stage of the policy cycle
Open Government and Cohesion Policy units of the Municipality of Banská Bystrica	Dialogue Centre	Slovak Republic	Integrated Territorial Strategy	Urban planning Environmental policies	Multi-stage participatory process including: Ideathon Digital consultation	Policy formulation
Centre for EU Transport Projects Górnośląsko-Zagłębiowska Metropolis (GZM Metropolis) Transport Department	FADO Social Cooperative (Spółdzielnią Socjalną FADO)	Poland	Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan ERDF	Infrastructure Mobility Accessibility policies	Multi-stage participatory process including: Digital poll Research walks Stakeholder consultations Deliberative processes	Agenda setting Policy formulation Policy implementation
European and Cohesion Policy Unit of the Regional Government of Cantabria	Santander International Entrepreneurship Centre (CISE)	Spain	ERDF ESF+	Employment Social policies Environmental transition	Multi-stage participatory process including: Deliberative process Consultative forum	Agenda setting Policy formulation
Regional Government of Emilia-Romagna	Bangherang Cooperative Union of Municipalities of the Appennino Emiliano Mountain Area	Italy	Strategies for Inner and Mountain Area (STAMI) ERDF	Youth Local development	Student assembly	Policy implementation
International Cooperation at the Municipality of Râmnicu Vâlcea	Vâlcea Community Foundation Happy Cities Association	Romania	Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan Integrated Urban Development Strategy	Mobility Environmental transition	Deliberative process	Agenda setting Policy formulation
Managing Authority of the South-Muntenia Regional Development Agency Dambovita County Council	National Union of County Councils	Romania	Integrated Territorial Strategies ERDF	Local development	Local dialogues (hybrid)	Policy implementation
Managing Authority of the European Regional Development Fund of the Lazio Region	National Association of Italian Municipalities	Italy	Territorial Strategies 2021-2027	Policy evaluation	Civic monitoring	Evaluation
ERDF Department of the Brussels Capital Region	Metrolab	Belgium	ERDF Operational Programme 2021-2027	Urban planning Local development	Collaborative design Social mapping tools	Policy formulation
Normandy Region	Relais Culture Europe	France	ERDF-ESF Operational Programme 2021-2027	Culture	Deliberative process	Agenda setting
Department of Economy and Finance of the Government of Catalonia	University of Catalonia Collective of Political Science and Sociology Professionals in Catalonia (COLPIS)	Spain	ERDF	Public finance	Consultations and co-creation workshops	Policy formulation
Regional Development and Transition Department of the Marshal’s Office of the Silesian Voivodeship		Poland	ERDF	Capacities and skills for participation in the Voivodeship	Quantitative and qualitative assessment Peer exchanges with international best practices Roadmap to improve participation capacities and practices	Throughout

Source: OECD elaboration.

Banská Bystrica and the Dialogue Centre implemented an ideathon for urban planning (Slovak Republic)

This pilot was implemented by the Open Government and Cohesion Policy units of the Municipality of Banská Bystrica in the Slovak Republic and the Dialogue Centre, a CSO whose mission is to promote the culture of dialogue and cooperation across society (Dialogue Centre, 2019[2]).

The Municipality of Banská Bystrica requested technical assistance to involve citizens in the implementation phase of the Integrated Territorial Strategies funded through the ERDF instrument of Cohesion Policy. With the support of the OECD, the Municipality and Dialogue Centre designed a process for collective ideation, a form of participation designed to come up with ideas, and collective solutions to framed problems and involve the public in developing solutions or prototypes (Gabadou, 2023[3]).

The process was held from April to June 2023, following three phases: (1) an in-person co-creation event where 24 participants formulated ideas to improve the Integrated Territorial Strategies (ITS), (2) an online consultation gathered 25 additional ideas, and (3) an online voting platform (Consider.it) to allow the broader public to prioritise among the ideas proposed. The public could suggest ideas around two main topics: a Green and Sustainable City and a Well Managed City. 107 citizens expressed their preferences, for a total of 156 citizens involved (Municipality of Banská Bystrica, 2023[4]). The ideas with more votes included projects to support active ageing, urban cycling infrastructure, and transforming watercourses as recreational areas (City of Banská Bystrica, 2024[5]).

The ideathon provided a space for citizens and public authorities to co-create local policies funded through Cohesion Policy instruments. According to the Municipality’s response: “All proposed ideas, including those that cannot be financed within Integrated Territorial Strategy, will be implemented in Banská Bystrica 2030 City Development Programme or used in the preparation of the City’s Action Plans”. The implementation of the projects is expected to be co-financed “to a large extent within the EU Cohesion Policy resources, primarily through the European Structural and Investment Funds and other sources and programmes for the support of intercity, interregional and European territorial cooperation managed by the European Commission and its specialised directorates" (Municipality of Banská Bystrica, 2024[6])

The Centre for European Transport in Poland (CEUTP), Górnoslasko-Zaglebiowskiej Metropolis and FADO organised a deliberative process to promote in transport policies that include all (Poland)

This pilot was implemented by the Centre for European Transport Projects in Poland (CEUTP) (a national authority) in cooperation with the Transportation Department-team of the Metropolitan Authority of Górnośląsko-Zagłębiowska Metropolis (GZM Metropolis) in Poland, and FADO, a social cooperative specialised in improving the accessibility of people with disabilities in urban design.

CEUPT, as an Intermediate Body responsible for managing EU funds in the transport sector in Poland for nearly 20 years, places strong emphasis on advancing citizen participation and fostering a culture of meaningful public engagement. It actively promotes dialogue between public authorities and investors, recognising that transparent communication and inclusive decision‑making are essential for sustainable and socially accepted transport projects.

CEUTP in partnership with GZM Metropolis and FADO, requested technical assistance to design and implement a multi-stage participatory methodology that combined stakeholder consultations, research methods, and a deliberative process.

GZM Metropolis is investing significant resources in improving its transport system, largely supported by Cohesion Policy instruments such as ERDF. GZM faced important challenges in modernising its transport system so that it could both promote the uptake of low-emission mobility, enable intermodality between different modes of transport, whilst ensuring access for all users. To address such challenges, public authorities decided to consult and involve residents, with particular attention to people with reduced mobility or other disabilities such as blindness.

The participatory process included four phases (GZM Metropolis, 2024[7]):

• An online survey collected 421 responses on commuting behaviours of GZM residents, mains issues, and the environment around railway stations.

• 12 research walks around future stations of the Metropolitan railway network open to residents of the affected areas and professionals working in public transportation. Groups of around 10 participants from different age groups formulated statements and observations that collected a wide range of perspectives and needs. The statements and observations supported the following stages, and particularly the deliberative process.

• Workshops with experts from the Silesian University of Technology and the Technical University of Ostrava, architects and urban designers to review the findings of the research walks and the online survey. This stage also allowed to involve and give a voice to the community of experts to increase legitimacy of the process and its results.

• A deliberative process with 42 randomly selected citizens was held in October 2024. Members were asked to respond to the question “How to design a railway for good transfers in the GZM Metropolis?”. Seven cities located in north-west transportation corridor of the Metropolis committed politically to the outcomes of the Citizens’ Forum (Bytom, Chorzów, Radzionków, Świerklaniec, Tarnowskie Góry, Zabrze, and Piekary Śląskie). The final recommendations highlight the need for a safer and faster public transportation system, more reliable routes and timetables and better access to live data on buses, railways, and other means of public transportation.

The results of the Citizen’s Forum (a representative deliberative process) were presented to local authorities on October 29th in a public meeting (GZM Metropolis, 2024[8])in the presence of the mayors of partner cities, members of the Citizens’ Forum, observers, the monitoring committee, partner organisations and the OECD. The final report which includes the results of the research walks and the deliberative panel is available online (CEUTP, 2024[9]).

This project was already the second CEUTP pilot project carried out under the auspices of DG REGIO and OECD, and it has significantly contributed to the organisation’s further strategic steps. In particular, it led to the establishment of a permanent, interdisciplinary internal expert team within CEUTP, which on a daily basis promotes the values of participation.

The team actively advances participatory approaches not only among beneficiaries of cohesion policy in the transport sector in Poland, but also more broadly, for instance by reaching out to the NGO and academic communities, as well as public authorities at various levels across Poland. It engages in numerous initiatives that promote participatory approaches both nationwide and beyond the country’s borders.

The Regional Government of Cantabria and Santander International Entrepreneurship Centre organised a citizen jury and stakeholder consultations to plan the transition to a low-carbon economy and preserve employment

This pilot was implemented by the Department of Economy and Finance of the Regional Government of Cantabria in Spain, Torrelavega’s Chamber of Commerce and Santander International Entrepreneurship Centre (CISE).

In 2021, the OECD supported the Regional Government of Cantabria in designing and implementing a deliberative process “Besaya’s Citizens’ Jury on Fair and Inclusive Ecological Transition”. A broadly representative group of 35 everyday citizens selected by civic lottery from ten municipalities in the Besaya region elaborated recommendations for the Regional Operational Programme 2021-2027 and the Besaya’s Integrated Territorial Strategy (Deliberativa, 2023[10]). The assembly delivered policy recommendations and orientations identifying two main priorities: the transition to a low-carbon economy and the issue of upskilling and reskilling to preserve employment while transitioning towards an economy producing lower levels of emissions.

In 2022, the Government of Cantabria requested technical assistance to implement a second participatory process. The purpose of this process was to support the Government in better tailoring and implementing the recommendations elaborated by the Citizen Jury, with a special attention for unemployment policies. The OECD provided technical support to design and implement a multi-stakeholder forum bringing together 40 participants representing workers and job seekers in the Besaya region (Besaya´s Citizens Commission). The objective was to support Cantabria authorities in implementing the recommendations of the Besaya Citizens’ Jury by setting clear priorities and identifying concrete actions, with a specific focus on expanding upskilling and reskilling opportunities.

The Citizens Commission held three sessions between May and June 2024. The members of the Commission presented their results to the Regional Government and the Chamber of Commerce. Following the success of the two processes, the Region is now considering launching a third participatory process to involve citizens in the implementation of their proposals. Overall, this project contributed to build capacity for citizen participation processes, leveraging different mechanisms and engagement tools and mobilising participation at different stages of the policy cycle. Moreover, the project strengthened the culture of participation in the Region as a mean to reinforce social cohesion and encouraged local authorities to pursue their efforts in this matter, calling for further institutionalisation of citizen participation at regional level.

The Regional Government of Emilia Romagna and Bangherang organised student assemblies to include young people in local development (Italy)

This pilot was implemented by the Regional Government of Emilia Romagna in Italy, the Union of Municipalities of the Appennino Emiliano Mountain Area, and Bangherang, a CSO specialised in youth engagement. The Appennino Emiliano Mountain and Inner area has been struggling with depopulation and its consequences (Regione Emilia-Romagna, 2021[11]). To combat this, regional authorities developed the Appennino Emiliano Territorial Development Strategy (STAMI) for 2021–2027, which is funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF+).

The Regional Government of Emilia Romagna requested support to design a participatory process to involve young people living in the Appennino Emiliano Mountain Area in the implementation phase of the Territorial Strategies for Inner and Mountain Areas. The Student Assemblies involved high school students (14-19 years-old) in the definition of implementation criteria for the projects included in the STAMI funded by ERDF and ESF+. Students from two local high schools were selected, ensuring balance between men and women, socio-economic representation across academic specialisations. While the selected approach did not reflect entirely the methodology of a representative deliberative process as defined by the OECD, the initiative drew on deliberative principles and methods (such as structured discussion and consensus-base decisions), adapted to the pedagogical and practical context of working with school classes. Throughout the process, facilitators from Bangherang employed non-formal education methodologies, including physical polling and World Café to engage students. This approach not only encouraged participation in policymaking but also helped students develop life skills essential for active citizenship. Between October and November 2023, the Student Assembly convened in Castelnovo ne’ Monti for three sessions. Students presented their recommendations to the Managing Authority in April 2024 which was followed by a public response (Emilia-Romagna Region, 2023[12]).

The students identified the needs and priorities of young people that could be addressed through the implementation of Cohesion Policy. This process generated actionable proposals and criteria for the establishment of the Hubs of Territorial Innovation, one of the flagship projects included in the Territorial Strategies for Inner and Mountain Areas funded by Cohesion Policy. For instance, proposals emphasized the importance of creating well-equipped spaces for group study and venues dedicated to art exhibitions showcasing young emerging artists. Students also highlighted the need for spaces and activities that foster a deeper connection with the territory, alongside concrete actions for environmental preservation, such as recycling and upcycling initiatives. In addition to enriching policymaking, students benefited from the learning experience, increasing their awareness of Cohesion Policy, and increased their sense of agency regarding the future of their local environment (Cibrario, 2025[13]). The fact that the project was conducted during school time increases its value as a meaningful civic learning experience. Teachers allocated class time to the project and headmasters endorsed the approach, an important commitment particularly in a rural context.

The Municipality of Râmnicu Vâlcea, the Vâlcea Community Foundation and Happy Cities Association implemented a deliberative process to involve residents in mobility services (Romania)

This pilot was implemented by the Municipality of Râmnicu Vâlcea in Romania, the Vâlcea Community Foundation and Happy Cities Association, two CSOs with expertise in collective dialogue and community building. The city of Râmnicu Vâlcea was looking for new mechanisms to better inform and involve citizens in the decision-making process around policies regarding public transportation with a broader objective of transition to low carbon mobility system. Together with the civil society organisation Vâlcea Community Foundation and the Happy Cities association, the City of Râmnicu Vâlcea organised Romania’s first representative deliberative process (a citizens’ jury) on how to increase the attractiveness of public transport and other sustainable forms of mobility. Recommendations will feed the next Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan and Integrated Urban Development Strategy funded though Cohesion Policy (European Commission, 2024[14]).

Early 2024, 2,000 invitation letters signed by the mayor of Râmnicu Vâlcea were distributed citywide, and from the respondents, participants were randomly selected through a stratified process to o ensure adequate representation in the Jury, including balance between men and women, participants from all age groups above 16, and different transportation habits. Between March and April 2024, the Citizens’ Jury, facilitated by the Vâlcea Community Foundation and Happy Cities, convened six times to examine urban mobility challenges through a structured process of learning, discussion, and deliberation. During the learning phase, jurors engaged with municipal officials, transport experts, and community representatives to understand mobility policies and explore practices from other cities. Building on this knowledge, they formulated guiding principles across five thematic areas: nature, behavioural change, public transport, alternative transport, and infrastructure. In the deliberation phase, the Jury translated these principles into 24 concrete recommendations (Iliescu, 2024[15]), ranging from protecting green areas and expanding bike lanes to improving communication on mobility options. These recommendations were formally presented to the public authority on 8 May 2024, providing a citizen-driven roadmap for advancing sustainable urban mobility. On 29 January 2025, the Local Council of Ramnicu Vâlcea adopted the Resolution no.25/2025, which included formal feedback to each of the recommendations presented by the jurors. The Local Council committed to support and to implement 20 of the 24 recommendations. The remaining four, which exceeded the scope of the City government, were communicated to the national government.

South-Muntenia Regional Development Agency and the National Union of County Councils put in place local dialogues to improve the effectiveness of the Integrated Territorial Strategies (Romania)

This pilot was implemented by South-Muntenia Regional Development Agency (SMRDA) and the National Union of County Councils (UNCJR). As Regions do not constitute administrative entities in Romania, SMRDA partnered with Dambovita County Council to implement the pilot project.

SMRDA sought to improve the effectiveness of the Integrated Territorial Strategies (ITS) by fostering partnerships with citizens and civil society in the region. At the time of the implementation, the Integrated Territorial Strategies had already been drafted. Citizens and stakeholders were asked to support local authorities to better align existing projects with the needs and the preferences of the affected communities. The objective of this pilot was twofold: to test a participatory methodology in Dambovita, learn and replicate in all Counties in the Region. In addition, SMRDA expressed its interest in building a digital infrastructure for citizen participation that could be re-used for future projects. SMRDA is currently developing in-house an online platform for all its participatory activities (public consultation, working groups, etc) in relation to current and future programming period, based on the open-source software Decidim.

In March 2025, after conducting workshops with SMRDA, Dâmbovița County Council, and UNCJR, defining local needs, and integrating feedback from counterparts, the OECD finalised and translated into Romanian a tailored Methodology for Local Dialogues. In the SMRDA context, Local Dialogues take the form of a hybrid participatory process combining citizen and stakeholder input through digital and in-person stages. SMRDA included references related to the OECD Methodology in the Framework Agreement that will be signed between the Managing Authority of South-Muntenia Regional Programme 2021 - 2027 and the Territorial Authorities (TA) and later to be introduced into their operating procedures. In October 2025, Dambovita County tested the methodology for Local Dialogues. Two meetings with 30 participants each from local authorities at the County and municipal levels, as a testing phase before opening the meetings to citizens. Public meetings took place in Dambovita between November and December 2025. Dambovita is also adapting to Romanian language and context and deploying a digital platform for participation based on the open-source software Decidim to expand the consultation process to a hybrid format.

The Regional Government of Lazio, ANCI and Monithon implemented civic monitoring activities to involve citizens in the evaluation of Cohesion Policy (Italy)

This pilot was implemented by the Managing Authority of European Regional Development Fund of the Lazio Region in Italy together with the National Association of Italian Municipalities (ANCI) and Monithon Europe, a civil society organisation specialised in civic monitoring. The Territorial Strategies 2021-2027 of Lazio Region have a total budget of 140 million euros and cover five territories (Frosinone, Latina, Rieti, and Viterbo, and Rome Metropolitan Area) within the framework of Policy Objective 5 of the ERDF, “a Europe closer to its citizens”.

The OECD supported the Managing Authority of Lazio, in involving citizens and stakeholders in actively monitoring the implementation of Territorial Strategies across four municipalities: Latina, Viterbo, Frosinone, and Rieti. The civic monitoring process was based on the Monithon Europe methodology (Regione Lazio, 2024[16]) which includes a learning phase on strategy implementation, desk and field research conducted by participants, and the presentation of findings in dedicated laboratory sessions with public authorities.

In 2024, Lazio Region and Monithon organized public meetings in the four municipalities involved, primarily engaging existing local partners from the 2022 Territorial Strategies and, in some cases, expanding outreach with the support of the Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini and its OpenHub Lazio initiative. With Monithon’s guidance, stakeholders then carried out a full civic monitoring cycle which culminated in 17 high-quality reports. The results were presented at a series of events in each participating municipality between February and March 2025. A final event at the regional level was held on March 25, 2025, providing participants from the four municipalities to share their experience and consolidate the findings of the pilot. In at least five projects of the Integrated Territorial Strategies, the insights from the civic monitoring report were included in executive planning (the last stage of project development before implementation).

Brussels Region and Metrolab tested and researched participatory approaches to streamline participation at the local level (Belgium)

This pilot was implemented by the ERDF Department of the Brussels Region (Bruxelles Région Capitale) in Belgium and Metrolab, an academic research lab specialising in urban studies and participatory methodologies. The ERDF Department of the Brussels Region coordinates the 2021-2027 operational program of the Brussels Capital Region.

The Brussels Region sought support to strengthen participatory practices in ERDF urban projects by helping project leads integrate co-design and social mapping tools, ensuring interventions in public spaces reflect local needs and foster decision-making that involve all groups in society. In addition, the public authority aimed at streamlining participation across the ERDF department and create an internal culture for participation through onboarding and training other relevant teams in the design and implementation of participatory processes, mapping resources, developing partnerships with local actors, and creating platforms of discussion around participation. MetroLab tested and developed research-based participatory tools which were further explored and assessed within 2021-2027 ERDF urban projects at a hyperlocal level (neighbourhood level).

With OECD support, the pilot improved existing participatory methods developed by MetroLab including co-design and social mapping through surveys, workshops, and design interviews with ERDF funded projects. The objective is to embed participation in the ERDF project cycle, as part of the administrative procedure to be followed by beneficiaries. Although most projects were already at advanced stages, which limited experimentation, the process did generate key lessons for future Cohesion Policy cycles. These were consolidated at a workshop in March 2025.

The Normandy Region and Relais Culture Europe designed a deliberative process to involve the public in the region’s cultural policies (France)

This pilot was implemented by the Normandy Region in France and Relais Culture Europe, a transnational network of experts in cultural policy with a strong expertise in co-designing cultural strategies. The pilot designed and implemented Normandy’s first representative deliberative process conducted at the regional level. To involve residents, the Region requested the support from OECD to design a deliberative process to collectively decide on guidelines or orientations to increase attractiveness of cultural venues in Normandy.

In 2025, a group of 32 randomly selected participants from Caen and the surrounding areas was convened to deliberate on the remit: How can the Normandy Region act to make cultural venues more attractive and encourage everyone to visit them? The process unfolded over four days between September and October 2025: three full days of learning, discussion, and deliberation, and a final half-day dedicated to voting and a closing event. This process allowed participants to progressively deepen their understanding of the challenges, exchange perspectives, and co-develop proposals for how the Normandy Region. In total five cultural institutions in the region were involved in the process as organising partners of the Citizen Forum´s and recipients of participants’ recommendations: Le Cargö (music hall), FRAC Normandie (regional contemporary art collection), Le Sablier (puppet theatre), Le Café des Images (cinema), and L’Institut Mémoires de l’Édition Contemporaine & Normandie Livre et Lecture (a museum-literary institution). Together, these institutions represented a wide spectrum of cultural experiences across performance, visual arts, cinema, literature, and heritage.

Recommendations include suggestions to improve communication and visibility of cultural agendas, to strengthen collaboration among cultural venues, to improve accessibility of cultural spaces, and to integrate the user experience across cultural venues in the Region. The activities of the Citizen Forum were designed and facilitated by the Modernisation Department of the Region, which leveraged service design and collective intelligence methods to structure the activities of the four days. Participants submitted 13 recommendations grouped in 5 categories relating to cultural communication, cultural networks, accessibility and livelihood of cultural spaces, tailored user experiences, and co-creation of culture. The recommendations were presented to the President of the Regional Commission on Culture, Tourism, and Heritage. The Region discussed the implementation of all recommendations with partner cultural institutions and include them in the criteria for future funding of cultural projects.

The Normandy region enforces a “citizen’s right to accountability”, which encourages public authorities to provide, proactively or reactively, timely information on the implementation of the results of participatory processes. The Region committed to updating the participants on the status of implementation of the recommendations one year after the end of the Citizens’ Forum. Two scholars conducted an independent evaluation of experience of the Citizens’ Forum. The evaluation highlighted the quality of the design and implementation of the process while suggesting areas and concrete actions to improve future initiatives (Chassy and Pauils, 2026 (forthcoming)[17]).

The Regional Government of Catalonia, RAONS, and the University of Barcelona piloted a series of consultations for citizens to improve budget formulation and increase the awareness of citizens regarding public finance (Spain)

This pilot was implemented by the Department of Economics and Finance of the Government of Catalonia in Spain together with the University of Catalonia and COLPIS, a Consortium of Professors of Political Science and Sociology.

The initiative “Parlem de pressupostos” (Let’s talk about budgeting), inspired by the “Pre-Budget Consultations” in Canada, aimed at opening the budget cycle to the public. The Catalan government organised workshops for citizens and stakeholders to discuss key elements with public authorities regarding debt management, revenue generation, expenditure priorities, and the strategic use of European cohesion funds. The initiative sought to improve the budget preparation process by involving a wider public through a combination of in-person deliberative sessions, online participation tools, and targeted outreach to underrepresented groups. It also aimed to enhance citizens' and stakeholders’ knowledge and understanding of fiscal and budget policy.

Over the course of summer 2024, the Government of Catalonia and its academic partners conducted 13 in-person events involving over 300 participants from diverse demographic and territorial backgrounds and targeted publics (university students, think tanks, experts). An online survey was also made available on the participatory platform Participa GenCat for citizens who could not attend the in-person events. The process yielded several concrete recommendations such as prioritising gradual debt reduction, increasing progressive and environmental taxation, and investing in health, education, and housing. The Generalitat has committed to integrating the findings of Parlem de Pressupostos into the 2026 budget cycle, including accompanying the draft budget with a synthesis report detailing how citizen input was reflected in fiscal decisions (Pérez-Raynaud, 2025[18]).

The process culminated in a high-level event held in July 2025 in Barcelona, which marked the official launch of the pilot’s final report. Organised by the Generalitat de Catalonia in collaboration with the OECD and DG REGIO, the event brought together public officials, international peers, and civil society actors to reflect on the outcomes of the participatory budgeting process. The event concluded with reflections on how to sustain and institutionalise citizen participation in budgetary governance in Catalonia. Representatives from the city of Paris (France) participated in the high level as peers and shared insights and lessons learned from the experience of the participatory budgeting process, which takes place every year since 2014 (City of Paris, 2024[19]), The Managing Authority of the Silesian Voivodeship is building a roadmap to better integrate participation in infrastructure projects (Poland)

This pilot was implemented by the Managing Authority of the Silesian Voivodeship, one of the 16 provinces of Poland, with Katowice as capital city. The Managing Authority is responsible for the overall monitoring of the European Funds for Silesia 2021-2027 programme. The nature of this pilot was different to the previously described, as it aimed at undertaking a reflection and mapping exercise to better integrate participatory approaches in the monitoring of infrastructure projects funded by ERDF and JTF, rather than implementing a specific methodology. In this sense, the project served as an internal laboratory for institutional learning and capacity building within the Managing Authority, while also generating insights with potential relevance for programme beneficiaries and project implementers.

In 2024, the OECD supported the Silesian Voivodeship in developing capacities and skills as well as mapping challenges and opportunities through a civil servant survey targeting municipalities and an in-person workshop with representatives of the Marshal’s Office of the Silesian Voivodeship. The quantitative and qualitative insights of this analysis highlighted a strong willingness of going beyond minimum legal requirements for participation (e.g. mandatory consultations), especially at the municipal level, but also the challenges of low endorsement by senior leadership, limited financial resources and limited skills among civil servants across the region.

This work forms the foundation for a series of activities that will help regional authorities and municipalities under the 2021–2027 programme integrate citizen participation more effectively into infrastructure project planning and implementation. To advance this objective, the OECD and the Silesian Marshal’s Office agreed on three key activities. First, two peer exchange sessions in May 2025 presented international best practices, focusing on the Cross London Rail Links project and the “Our Region, Our Voice” initiative from New South Wales, Australia. Second, the OECD drafted a Roadmap based on survey and workshop findings. The Roadmap analyses in depth a case of participation process conducted by the Marshal’s Office between December 2024 and February 2025, in which citizens and stakeholders were asked to provide feedback on the draft Landscape Audit (a programming document for long-term special planning) and provides step-by-step actionable guidance on how to improve participatory practices in the context of the Silesian Voivodeship. Finally, the process culminated in a high-level event in June 2025 where the roadmap was presented to Silesian authorities, consolidating a path forward for more transparent infrastructure governance that involves all groups in society in the region. The Roadmap has been translated into Polish, making it accessible and reusable across all departments of the Marshal's Office. Given the role of the Managing Authority in shaping regional development priorities, the pilot project promoted a participatory approach among the programme’s beneficiaries and disseminated best practices at various stages of project implementation.

Beyond individual pilots: Citizen participation as a versatile toolbox to improve Cohesion Policy at the subnational level

The pilots tested a range of participatory approaches applied at different stages of the policy cycle and in different policy domains within the framework of EU Cohesion Policy. Together, these experiences highlight the versatility of citizen participation as a toolbox to improve policies and services by involving citizens and stakeholders in the management of EU Cohesion Policy instruments. Taken together, the pilots showed that there is no single model of participation, it can be flexibly applied across governance levels, policy domains, and instruments, and at different moments of the policy cycle. Whether through consultations, deliberative panels, or participatory budgeting, these approaches generated diverse results from policy recommendations to project ideas and spending priorities that enriched Cohesion Policy decisions.

The pilots involved both citizens and stakeholders

From the public authorities’ perspective, involving citizens and involving stakeholders in policymaking are often understood as similar actions. However, stakeholders and individual citizens require different conditions to participate and produce different inputs (OECD, 2022[20]). The two are not mutually exclusive and can often complement each other through adapted participatory methods and rules of engagement.

For example, stakeholders can provide expertise and more specific input than citizens through mechanisms such as advisory bodies or experts’ panels, whereas citizen participation requires providing the public with time, information, and resources to produce quality inputs. Both citizen and stakeholder participation, if well designed, can result in significant benefits on the quality of policy decisions and on their legitimacy. However, they require different approaches and modalities of engagement to ensure fair and meaningful opportunities for both categories to have a say in government decisions.

The pilots involved mainly individual citizens, through open call recruitment (Banská Bystrica), civic lottery (Normandy) or targeted invitations (GZM). Some pilots involved stakeholders to act as representatives of certain sectors (e.g., unemployed groups in Cantabria), as experts on a specific topic (research institutions in Catalonia), or as members of the community with a say on local governance (CSOs suggested proposals in Banská Bystrica). Some pilots were open to both citizens and stakeholders and encouraged groups of citizens to join forces towards a common objective (civic committees submitted civic monitoring reports in Lazio). Table ‎2.2 provides an overview of the participants to all pilots. Figures vary across pilots depending on the selected participation method and target audience.

Table ‎2.2. Participants per pilot of the OECD-DG REGIO project “Innovative Implementation of the Partnership Principle in Cohesion Policy”

Territory involved	Number of participants
Banská Bystrica	131 participants: 24 in person during the ideathon 107 online for the voting phase
GZM Metropolis	561 participants: 419 survey respondents 100 estimated participants in research walks 42 members of Citizen Forum
Cantabria	69 participants: 40 participants of Citizen Commission 29 members of Citizen Jury
Emilia-Romagna	84 participants (four high-school classes)
Râmnicu Vâlcea	20 participants (members of Citizen Jury)
South-Muntenia	60 participants (internal pilot phase)
Lazio Region	11 groups of participants (local associations and civic committees)
Brussels Capital Region	17 groups of participants (project teams of ERDF-funded projects)
Normandy Region	32 participants (members of Citizen Panel)
Catalonia	300 estimated participants in consultations

Note: No comparative value is given to the number of participants as pilots opted for different recruitment methods. In the pilots where participants were selected through a civic lottery it is normal to have a lower number as those recruitment methods aim at representative samples rather than quantitative samples.

Note: The Silesia pilot is not included in this table as the project did not involve non-public stakeholders nor individual citizens but instead focused on building capacities and methodologies within the Silesian administration for future projects.

Source: OECD elaboration.

The pilots were implemented in a variety of policy contexts

The pilots showed that participatory tools can be tailored to different contexts. They were implemented by a variety of authorities operating at different levels of governance and in different countries, i.e., Slovak Republic, Poland, Spain, Italy, Romania, Belgium, and France. The pilots showed that participatory approaches can be adapted to diverse administrative traditions, political cultures, and governance arrangements. In some cases, participation was introduced in contexts with limited prior experience, while in others it built on a long-standing culture of citizen participation. Despite these differences, the pilots confirmed that participation can generate value regardless of the institutional setting, provided that processes are carefully designed and implemented to reflect local context and specific needs.

Most were led by regional authorities, with the exception of two pilots carried out at the municipal level in Romania and Slovak Republic. In the majority of cases, implementation was enabled by a cooperation between different levels of government. In Emilia-Romagna, the regional authority supported the organisation of a Student Assembly at the territorial level. In Râmnicu Vâlcea, the Municipality benefited from the guidance of the National Open Government Unit. In GZM, metropolitan authorities worked closely with CEUTP, the national agency for EU funded public transport, to align participation with sectoral priorities. In South-Muntenia Region, the Managing Authority for the Regional Programme 2021-2027 introduced guidelines to strengthen citizen participation in the implementation of local territorial strategies, formally embedding these requirements in its agreements with territorial authorities (see Box ‎2.1). Together, these experiences demonstrate that collaboration across levels of government not only broadens the reach of participatory processes but also enhances their legitimacy and long-term sustainability.

Box ‎2.1. Multilevel coordination and support to increase impact of participatory processes in Romania

Multilevel collaboration, between municipalities, county councils, regional development agencies, and national institutions, can amplify the visibility, legitimacy, and impact of participatory practices while ensuring that lessons learned are shared and scaled.

In order to receive support and to increase visibility of the process in Râmnicu Vâlcea and in the whole Romania, the Municipality was backed by the General Secretariat of the Government. The National Open Government Coordinator participated at the opening and closing events of the Citizen Jury, showing support and commitment from the national government. In addition, the Municipality received regional funding and media coverage as part of this partnership. Following the Citizen Jury, the Government of Romania included the use of deliberative processes as part of a commitment in the 2025-2027 Open Government National Action Plan.

In South-Muntenia Region, the Managing Authority for the Regional Programme 2021-2027 introduced citizen participation as a requirement in its agreements with territorial authorities such as County Councils and municipalities. Following the pilot supported by the OECD, the South-Muntenia Regional Development Agency included the Local Dialogues methodology in the procedures of the Territorial Authorities to support the implementation of local territorial strategies.

Source: https://ogp.gov.ro/nou/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/PNA-2025-2027_FINAL.pdf

Participatory approaches were implemented at different stages of the policy cycle.

Citizen participation can be mobilised at various stages of the policy cycle, delivering distinct types of results depending on the policy needs at hand. Pilots had to respond to two distinct policy cycles: on one hand the Cohesion Policy cycle, which is defined at the European level and follows a specific programming period and on the other hand, pilots respond to the context where cohesion funds are applied, for example, municipal or regional agendas. Cohesion Policy cycle was at the implementation stage as decisions regarding priorities and allocations were taken by the European Commission and Member States in 2020. Each pilot had a specific policy cycle depending on the project or initiative.

Although the policymaking process is often complex and non-linear, five main stages compose the policy cycle: agenda setting; policy formulation; decision making; implementation; and evaluation. It is indispensable, throughout all stages, to provide citizens with clear and relevant information. Beyond this, citizens can be actively involved in any of the following stages or, preferably, throughout the cycle (OECD, 2022[20]) (OECD, 2024[1]):

1. Agenda setting is the initial stage of the policy cycle where issues are identified as requiring governmental action, and to establish priorities. Citizen and stakeholders can be associated at this stage to help identify the most pressing problems to solve and map the needs of the public. Participatory approaches can ensure that public concerns and priorities are reflected in the policy agenda, reducing discrepancies between public expectations and government actions.

2. Policy formulation is the stage when policymakers consider the political, social, or economic impacts of the policy at hand, and consider a range of options to address the issue identified during the agenda setting stage. Citizens and stakeholders can be involved to gather inputs or ideas to tackle the problem, enrich a proposed solution, identify risks, prototype or test solutions, or collaboratively draft a policy, project plan, or legislation. Participatory approaches can help policymakers find the most adequate solution by tapping into the collective intelligence.

3. Decision making involves selecting the most appropriate policy option from those formulated. Citizens and stakeholders can be involved to collectively decide on the solution to be implemented, the budget to be allocated, or the projects that will be selected. Participation can enhance the legitimacy and public acceptance of the chosen policy, as well as make sure that the selected solution reflects citizens’ priorities.

4. Policy implementation is the stage when decisions taken by policymakers are translated into concrete actions, programs, or services. It involves mobilising resources, coordinating across institutions, and ensuring that the measures adopted during the formulation stage are carried out effectively. Citizens and stakeholders can be involved to co-design the delivery of services, monitor the progress of implementation, provide feedback on accessibility and quality, and identify barriers to consider. Participatory approaches at this stage help ensure that policies are not only well designed, but also effectively executed and adapted to citizens’ real needs, increasing both legitimacy and impact.

5. Evaluation refers to all activities that aim to assess the process, impact, and outcomes of implementation. Citizens and stakeholders can be engaged to provide feedback on the measures implemented, share lived experiences of how policies have affected them and contribute to identifying improvements. Participatory approaches at this stage help ensure that evaluation goes beyond technical or administrative indicators through civic monitoring or citizen science. This not only strengthens accountability and transparency but also generates valuable insights for improving future policymaking and building a cycle of continuous learning.

Pilots were implemented at different stages of the policy cycle (OECD, 2025[21]). In Normandy, a deliberative process engaged randomly selected citizens in the early stage of agenda setting, helping to define priorities for regional cultural policies. In Banská Bystrica, an Ideathon brought together citizens and stakeholders to formulate projects and solutions to be integrated into Cohesion Policy instruments. In Emilia Romagna, students were actively involved in the implementation phase, ensuring that youth perspectives were reflected in the development of the Innovation Hubs. Finally, in Lazio, public authorities invited citizens and stakeholders to monitor and evaluate local territorial strategies, strengthening accountability and learning.

Even if participation is not a one-size-fits-all model nor a prescriptive methodology, some participatory methods respond better to specific stages of the policy cycle. For example, deliberative processes might respond better at the agenda-setting or policy formulation stages, as this methodology requires time and produces informed opinions and recommendations. Civic monitoring is more adequate for evaluation purposes just as citizen science can be more beneficial at early stages to inform policy and decision makers. Nevertheless, public institutions should envision a model of participation that gives citizens the opportunity to participate throughout the policy cycle.

In some pilots, citizens were involved at multiple stages of the policy cycle. In Cantabria, a deliberative process first defined priorities and needs, followed by a public consultation to formulate concrete policy solutions building on those inputs. In GZM Metropolis, the wider public was initially engaged to map needs and challenges in public transport, after which a deliberative jury developed recommendations to improve the implementation of train stations.

Box ‎2.2. Multi-staged processes can involve citizens at different stages of the policy cycle

A multi-stage process is one that includes more than one moment or stage for participants to provide inputs. For example, the famous Citizen Assembly example in Ireland that changed the Constitution to legalise abortion and divorce, included a deliberative process followed by a referendum, providing two moments for citizens to participate and two distinct forms to express their opinion.

In GZM Metropolis in Poland, public authorities convened citizens and experts at different moments of the policy cycle, through diverse methodologies to gather different inputs. In the agenda setting stage, public authorities deployed a digital consultation to provide the public a space to share needs and priorities. In the policy formulation and implementation stages, GZM Metropolis organised a series of research walks (citizen science) gathering experts and residents to enrich the evidence available for the construction of future train stations and a citizen jury was organised to help the government define a roadmap to improve public transport.

In 2022, the regional government of Cantabria in Spain organised a citizen jury to set the agenda and come up with priorities and orientations for the Regional Operational Programme 2021-2027 and the Besaya’s Integrated Territorial Strategy. Building on this process, in 2024, the government organised a series of consultations to formulate concrete actions to implement the Jury’s recommendations.

Source: https://medium.com/participo/shaping-the-future-of-transportation-polands-first-metropolitan-deliberative-process-79693246c243; https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/newsroom/news/2022/06/16-06-2022-stories-from-the-regions-besaya-delibera-en-europa-citizens-decide-eu-fund-allocations-cantabria

Participatory approaches were tested across a wide range of policy areas

Citizen participation can be embedded across a wide range of policy areas, reflecting the diversity of government action and the many issues that affect people’s lives. Policy areas can be classified in different ways. They may be grouped by thematic domain (or ministerial agendas), such as environmental policies, transport, education, or health. Alternatively, they can be distinguished by the nature of the policies themselves, ranging from every day public services that affect citizens’ daily lives, to fundamental long-term strategies that shape the future direction of society (OECD, 2024[1]).

Pilots covered very diverse policy domains covering the priorities of the European Commission (European Commission, 2024[22]) and showing that participation is a flexible tool for policy makers across government. In Normandy, a deliberative process was used to shape regional priorities in the field of culture. In Emilia Romagna, students brought youth perspectives into innovation and regional development. In Catalonia, participation helped shape questions of public finance, ensuring citizen input on fiscal priorities. Long term issues require solutions that go beyond electoral or policy cycles. Participatory approaches like Citizen Assemblies, can support long-term planning and build consensus for difficult decisions. In Cantabria, citizens contributed to defining needs and solutions for the environmental transition and labour related policies. In GZM Metropolis and Râmnicu Vâlcea, participatory approaches focused on improving transport and mobility, from mapping challenges to enhancing infrastructure.

Participatory approaches were implemented to support different Cohesion Policy instruments.

Policy instruments are the concrete tools and mechanisms that governments use to put public policies into practice and achieve their objectives, including regulatory tools such as laws, regulations, and standards; economic and financial measures like public spending and fiscal policies; and strategic or programming instruments such as action plans, roadmaps, and strategies (OECD, 2014[23]). Citizen participation provides opportunities to meaningfully involve the public in all these aspects. For example, public consultations and townhall meetings can inform laws and regulations; open innovation and co-creation practices can help public authorities shape strategies and action plans in line with citizens’ needs; while participatory budgeting can orient investments and spending priorities.

In the context of Cohesion Policy, policy instruments usually refer to the concrete tools, mechanisms, and frameworks through which EU funds are translated into action at national, regional, and local levels. They include both financial instruments and strategic/programming instruments. Such as:

• Financial instruments: ERDF, ESF+, Just Transition Fund

• Programming instruments: Operational programmes and territorial strategies

Citizen participation can respond and adapt to Cohesion Policy’s policy instruments. Most of the pilots applied participatory approaches to strengthen programming instruments, particularly Integrated Territorial Investments (ITI) and Integrated Local Territorial Strategies. For example, in Banská Bystrica and South-Muntenia, citizens contributed to shaping the Integrated Territorial Strategy. In GZM, engagement was used to enrich the Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan, and in Emilia Romagna students’ voices were integrated into strategies for inner and mountain areas. Finally, in Normandy, citizens were involved citizens were involved to improve the accessibility of cultural institutions as well as to orient the region’s funding criteria for culture.

The pilots experimented with a wide variety of participatory methodologies, from consultations to deliberative processes.

Public authorities can involve citizens in policy and decision-making through a wide variety of methods, depending on their context and specific needs. Participation is not a one-size-fits-all methodology, and new practices are emerging to respond to new challenges, including by leveraging innovative tools, such as digital technologies and artificial intelligence (OECD, 2025[24]; OECD, 2025[25]). The OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes (2022[20]) provide guidance to design and implement eight different methodologies including consultations, participatory budgeting, civic monitoring, and deliberative processes.

The OECD supported the pilots in selecting the adequate methodology, taking into account the policy problem to be addressed, the stage of the policy cycle, the target participants, and the expected outcomes. The pilots tested a diverse set of methodologies, including civic monitoring in Lazio, citizens and stakeholder consultations in Cantabria, Catalonia, and South-Muntenia, deliberative processes in Normandy and Râmnicu Vâlcea, assemblies in Emilia-Romagna, open innovation in Banská Bystrica.

An illustrative example comes from GZM, where several methodologies were combined to generate complementary inputs and create synergies across approaches. The multi-stage process included online consultations, citizen science (research walks), public consultations, and a deliberative process. This design made it possible to engage a wide range of stakeholders, broaden the scope and impact of participation, and enhance the legitimacy of the deliberative process’s recommendations. The case offers valuable inspiration for other municipalities, regions, and metropolitan areas across Europe seeking to create spaces for public deliberation in infrastructure projects.

Another noteworthy example is Brussels, where the objective was not to directly implement projects, but to research and experiment with various participatory methodologies already used at local level. This approach allowed local authorities and researchers to test, compare, and refine existing tools, generating insights on their effectiveness and complementarity. By prioritising learning and innovation, Brussels showed that participation can be a laboratory for democratic experimentation, helping to identify which methodologies are most suitable for different contexts and policy challenges. Similarly, Silesia used its pilot to assess its internal capacity for participation and drew from international best practices and OECD support to plan targeted actions and build tools to improve participation in the Voivodeship. Through this process, Silesia became a laboratory for testing and strengthening institutional capacity for participation.

The processes led to a variety of outputs that supported policy decisions.

The outputs generated through participatory processes can take many forms, from broad ideas on a policy question, to expert opinions on the feasibility of a project, feedback on an existing proposal, or informed recommendations to address a defined problem. The objectives of such processes also vary, ranging from information-sharing and consultation to deeper engagement, sometimes with binding outcomes.

The pilots demonstrated this diversity and flexibility in practice. In Catalonia, citizens delivered orientations for the regional budget. In Banská Bystrica, an ideathon generated ideas and concrete solutions to be included in the Integrated Territorial Strategy, and in GZM participants provided evidence and technical advice on transport and infrastructure planning, with particular emphasis on including the voices of people with disabilities. In Lazio, citizens gave feedback to improve local territorial strategies, while in Brussels, citizens offered evidence to strengthen existing participatory practices.

Policy recommendations are among the most concrete outputs of participatory processes, providing decision-makers with informed proposals that can directly shape public action. In Râmnicu Vâlcea, a deliberative panel on mobility generated recommendations to promote the use of public transport and advance the transition to sustainable mobility. These outputs were presented to policymakers and used by the Municipality both to define a roadmap of action and to better understand citizens’ priorities.

In Cantabria and Emilia Romagna, participatory processes were designed to generate criteria and orientations for government action. In Cantabria, a deliberative process identified priorities for the region’s local development strategy, while in Emilia Romagna students developed proposals of possible uses for the Hubs of Territorial Innovation, a flagship project within the EU-funded Territorial Strategies for Inner and Mountain Areas.

Defining budget priorities through participation allows governments to align spending decisions with citizens’ needs and expectations. In Catalonia, the “Parlem de pressupostos” (“Let’s talk about budgeting”) initiative invited citizens, social actors, and territorial stakeholders to share their preferences on key aspects of budgetary policy, with the aim of integrating these priorities directly into the regional budget cycle.

References

[9] CEUTP (2024), Citizens’ forum on Transport - Report, https://forumobywatelskie.transportgzm.pl/index.php/rekomendacje-i-raport/.

[17] Chassy, A. and E. Pauils (2026 (forthcoming)), Rapport d’évaluation du Forum Citoyen sur la Culture en Normandie.

[13] Cibrario, G. (2025), Students have a say on territorial innovation hubs in inner areas, https://medium.com/participo/students-have-a-say-on-territorial-innovation-hubs-in-inner-areas-89c16cdc4e39.

[5] City of Banská Bystrica (2024), Ideathon, https://ideathonbb.eu.consider.it.

[19] City of Paris (2024), 10 ans de budget paticipatif : vous avez voté, on l’a fait !, https://www.paris.fr/dossiers/10-ans-de-budget-participatif-178.

[10] Deliberativa (2023), Respuesta pública al Jurado Ciudadano de Besaya, https://deliberativa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Besaya-Europa-2023-Informe-Final.pdf.

[2] Dialogue Centre (2019), (R)evolution?, https://dialoguecentre.eu/events/revolution/.

[12] Emilia-Romagna Region (2023), Involvement of young people in territorial development strategies, https://fesr.regione.emilia-romagna.it/comunicazione/attivita-realizzate/partecipazione-di-stakeholder-e-cittadini/progetti-commissione-europea-e-ocse/coinvolgimento-dei-giovani-nelle-strategie-di-sviluppo-territoriale.

[22] European Commission (2024), Commission’s Priorities 2024-2029, https://commission.europa.eu/priorities-2024-2029_en.

[14] European Commission (2024), Ramnicu Valcea involves citizens in EU cohesion policy, https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/whats-new/newsroom/28-06-2024-ramnicu-valcea-involves-citizens-in-eu-cohesion-policy_en.

[3] Gabadou, E. (2023), Banská Bystriça: from ideathon to digital democracy, https://medium.com/participo/bansk%C3%A1-bystri%C3%A7a-from-ideathon-to-digital-democracy-5f8eddf55b50.

[7] GZM Metropolis (2024), How to open the railroad to residents?, https://www.cupt.gov.pl/aktualnosc/rozne/raport-jak-otworzyc-kolej-na-mieszkancow-klucz-do-lepszego-transportu-publicznego-w-gornoslasko-zaglebiowskiej-metropolii/?doing_wp_cron=1728913543.4907090663909912109375.

[8] GZM Metropolis (2024), Public Meeting on the Results of the Transport Forum, https://www.facebook.com/TransportGZM/posts/pfbid0kcLCatnHALr2RUGiyDxwo1FdBsWsVffPhXYT5HVgwqKc5dgAkfxJSVyj1uNv9qkwl.

[15] Iliescu, M. (2024), Un proiect de succes în Râmnicu Vâlcea: primul „Juriu al cetățenilor” din România, https://curierulderamnic.ro/2024/06/29/un-proiect-de-succes-in-ramnicu-valcea-primul-juriu-al-cetatenilor-din-romania/.

[6] Municipality of Banská Bystrica (2024), Final report of the Ideathon on the Integrated Territorial Strategy of the Functional Urban Area Banská Bystrica 2022 – 2027, https://www.banskabystrica.sk/samosprava/otvorena-samosprava-ogp-local/participativne-planovanie/integrovana-uzemna-strategia-udrzatelneho-mestskeho-rozvoja-banska-bystrica/planovane-podujatia/.

[4] Municipality of Banská Bystrica (2023), Ideathon BB, https://ideathonbb.eu.consider.it/?tab=Domov.

[21] OECD (2025), Implementing citizen participation at all stages of the EU Cohesion Policy cycle, OECD Publishing, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/public-governance-case-studies_575651e4-en/implementing-citizen-participation-at-all-stages-of-the-eu-cohesion-policy-cycle_bf709900-en.html.

[24] OECD (2025), Open Government for the Green Transition: Panorama of Good Practices Towards Meaningful Citizen Participation, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/bfa02935-en.

[25] OECD (2025), Tackling Civic Participation Challenges with Emerging Technologies, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/ec2ca9a2-en.

[1] OECD (2024), Exploring New Frontiers in Citizen Participation in the Policy Cycle, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/77f5098c-en.

[20] OECD (2022), OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.

[23] OECD (2014), The Governance of Regulators, OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264209015-en.

[18] Pérez-Raynaud, O. (2025), Putting citizens at the heart of budget decisions: Catalunya’s lessons on participatory budgeting, https://medium.com/participo/putting-citizens-at-the-heart-of-budget-decisions-catalunyas-lessons-on-participatory-budgeting-4000f3de8e37.

[11] Regione Emilia-Romagna (2021), Documento strategico regionale per la programmazione unitaria delle politiche di sviluppo Europeo (DSR 2021-2027), https://areeinterne.unioneappennino.re.it/wp-content/uploads/DOCUMENTO-STRATEGICO-REGIONE-EMILIA-ROMAGNA-Delib.Assem_.-n.44-2021.pdf.

[16] Regione Lazio (2024), Guida al Monitoraggio Civico, https://strategieterritoriali.regione.lazio.it/monitoraggio-civico/guida-al-monitoraggio-civico/.