Mining Regions and Cities in SAŠA and Zasavska, Slovenia

5. Action plan to support the transition in Slovenian coal mining regions

Abstract

This action plan is designed to support the Slovenian government in implementing priority recommendations from this present report on the transition of regions phasing out from coal (Zasavska and SAŠA). It was drafted in consultation with the Ministry of Cohesion and Regional Development (MCRD), the Regional Development Agency of Zasavska (RDA Zasavska) and the Development Agency of SAŠA (DA SAŠA), as well as relevant municipalities, civil-society stakeholders, lines ministries and other regional development actors.

With a focus on a small set of high-priority recommendations related to regional economic diversification, governance co-ordination and monitoring, this action plan provides practical guidance on how to implement the recommendations within existing institutional and financial frameworks. In light of the report's findings and feedback received from Slovenian stakeholders, the action plan focuses on four critical policy recommendations that address cross-regional and municipal co-operation, project prioritisation, interministerial co-ordination, and monitoring and evaluation of transition progress.

Table 5.1. Priority recommendations for action

Report section	Recommendation
Chapters 3-4	1. Strengthen project preparation and pipelines to advance transition strategies. Establish light pre-application support and pipeline overviews in SAŠA and Zasavska within existing selection frameworks (e.g. Merila 2021-2027 and their successors, territorial just transition plans (TJTPs), regional development plans (RDPs) and long-term regional visions) to help municipalities and other applicants prepare mature, well-documented project proposals across funding sources. Main responsibility: RDA Zasavje and DA SAŠA and related Just Transition Centres (JTCs), in co-operation with the MCRD, municipalities, and relevant permitting and planning authorities.
Chapters 2-4	2. Promote regional innovation capacity and partnerships in SAŠA and Zasavska. For SAŠA, establish a formal co-ordination mechanism among key innovation actors (higher education and research institutions, technology park, major employers, business support structures) around shared transition-related focus areas. For Zasavska, strengthen structured small and medium-sized enterprise (SME)-facing support so that local firms can connect to transition-economy opportunities, using evidence on labour-market trends and skill demand. Main responsibility: DA SAŠA and RDA Zasavje, in co-operation with MCRD, higher education and research institutions, business support organisations and major employers.
Chapter 4	3. Strengthen governance and operational capacity for timely implementation. Streamline co-ordination for complex, multi-actor projects by formalising periodic senior-level meetings at key decision gates (after technical assessment) to unblock files and align ministries. In parallel, secure the medium-term role of JTCs as one-stop shops within RDAs/DAs, with reinforced expertise in permitting, procurement, state aid and environmental compliance, and helping municipalities and stakeholders translate long-term regional development visions and existing selection guidelines (e.g. Merila 2021-2027 and their successors) into strategic, mature project proposals across different funding sources, including the 2028-2034 European Cohesion Policy period. Main responsibility: MCRD, supported by line ministries, RDA Zasavje, DA SAŠA, municipalities.
Chapters 3-4	4. Establish a light, permanent framework to monitor, evaluate and communicate transition progress in the coal regions. Develop a targeted “transition well-being” scorecard for SAŠA and Zasavska using existing systems (e-MA, Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia [SORS]), Environmental Agency of the Republic of Slovenia [EARS], European Sustainability Reporting Standards [ESRS]), including a small set of core indicators on jobs, investment, land reuse, emissions and quality of life. Tag calls and projects with municipal codes to track territorial effects. Publish regular summaries and use them to adjust project pipelines and communicate progress to residents and investors, including through municipal-level summaries and regional investment briefs. Main responsibility: MCRD and SORS, with RDA Zasavje, DA SAŠA, JTCs and municipalities.

Action plan methodology

This action plan was developed in consultation with the MCRD, relevant line ministries, regional development agencies (RDAs/DAs), JTCs, and business and civil-society representatives. It follows four main steps:

1. Identify implementing stakeholders: for each action, a lead institution responsible for implementation was identified, together with key partners. These include municipal governments, RDAs/DAs, JTCs, line ministries, research institutions, agencies such as SORS, the Public Agency for Entrepreneurship, Internationalisation, Foreign Investments and Technology (SPIRIT Slovenia), Slovenian Research Agency (ARIS), business associations (e.g. chambers of commerce and crafts), municipal associations and civil-society organisations.

2. Define the specific action and expected outcome: for each recommendation, specific and feasible steps were formulated, including operational adjustments, targeted investments, regulatory or procedural improvements and capacity-building measures, with a clear expected outcome linked to the just-transition objectives in SAŠA and Zasavska.

3. Set timelines and milestones: indicative timelines were assigned to distinguish short-, medium- and longer-term measures. Milestones are designed to support planning and facilitate monitoring of progress, ensuring that critical actions for the 2025-2030 window are prioritised.

4. Consider risks and opportunities: potential implementation risks (e.g. related to administrative capacity, financing gaps, political support, co-ordination challenges) and available opportunities (existing data, know-how, institutional structures, funding instruments) were considered to help lead institutions anticipate bottlenecks, reduce duplication, and align actions with existing policies and mandates.

Recommendation 1: Strengthen project preparation and pipelines to advance transition strategies

Aim of the associated action: to strengthen project quality and ensure that transition-related investments financed through the Just Transition Fund (JTF), Cohesion Policy and other funding sources are aligned with regional diversification and transition objectives while reducing delays linked to late-stage regulatory issues.

Context: the success of transition-related investments depends on the quality of project selection and strategic alignment with TJTPs, RDPs and long-term regional visions. Slovenia already has a clear and binding framework for project selection under European Union (EU) Cohesion Policy, including Merila 2021-2027 and the associated guidelines approved by the Monitoring Committee. Within this framework, regional actors still face challenges related to project preparedness, feasibility and pipeline visibility across different funding sources. A more systematic approach to project preparation and support, focused on early-stage screening, documentation quality and alignment with existing strategic documents, can help improve the effectiveness of limited public resources without altering existing selection criteria or decision-making procedures.

Action 1.1: Strengthen pre-application project pipeline support within existing selection frameworks

MCRD, together with RDAs/DAs and JTCs, establishes a light, transparent pre-application support process to help municipalities and other applicants prepare mature project proposals. This process operates within existing EU Cohesion Policy selection guidelines (e.g. Merila 2021-2027 and their successors) and strategic documents (TJTPs, RDPs, long-term regional visions), and aims to improve the readiness and clarity of proposals before they enter formal selection procedures (Table 5.2).

• Step 1: map current project pipelines in Zasavska and SAŠA across TJTPs, RDPs and other relevant funding sources (JTF, European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund Plus, national funds). Identify where project ideas are first recorded, how they are developed, and at which points applicants most often encounter delays (e.g. feasibility, permitting, financial planning).

• Step 2: at RDA Zasavje and DA SAŠA, in close co-operation with JTCs, introduce an optional pre-application stage for transition-related projects. This stage provides basic screening and guidance on:

  • alignment with TJTPs, RDPs and the long-term regional development vision

  • consistency with existing selection guidelines, such as Merila

  • minimum documentation for technical, financial and permitting readiness.

• Step 3: develop a standard set of simple, non-binding tools for applicants, such as:

  • a short project concept template (objectives, expected results, link to regional vision and TJTP/RDP priorities)

  • a basic feasibility and permitting checklist

  • a simple financial plan outline, including co-financing and operating cost assumptions, supporting applicants in preparing “mature” proposals but without replacing or modifying formal application forms or official criteria.

• Step 4: Establish a regular information flow between JTCs, RDAs/DAs, MCRD and relevant line ministries to share an overview of the emerging project pipeline (e.g. lists of concepts at different stages of preparation). Use this overview to identify potential “strategic” projects for the 2028-2034 European Cohesion Policy period, based on existing strategic documents and selection guidelines, without creating parallel criteria.

• Step 5: Test the pre-application support process with a first cohort of projects; collect feedback from municipalities and other applicants; and refine templates, timelines and support modalities accordingly.

Table 5.2. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 1.1.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Milestones
RDA Zasavje and DA SAŠA, and related JTCs	MCRD, municipalities; relevant permitting and planning authorities.	1-2 years for design and operationalisation.	M1-3: Project pipelines mapped; bottlenecks identified. M4-6: Pre-application stage and draft tools (templates, checklists) prepared. M6-12: Pilot with first project cohort; feedback collected. M12-18: Process and tools adjusted; regular information flow established. M18-24: Pre-application support fully operational; periodic pipeline overviews produced.

Note: M = Month.

Recommendation 2: Promote regional innovation capacity and partnerships

Aim of the associated action: to build local innovation capacity and formalise co-ordination among education, research, business support and industry actors in both coal regions, creating ecosystems that are more conducive to knowledge transfer, business emergence and strategic alignment with regional transition pathways.

Context: innovation systems in coal-mining regions often suffer from fragmentation, with education institutions, research facilities, business incubators and private enterprises operating with limited co-ordination or synergy. Formalising and strengthening partnerships among these actors and tailoring them to the specific assets and contexts of each region can create ecosystems that are more conducive to innovation and knowledge transfer.

Action 2.1: For the SAŠA sub-region, facilitate and co-ordinate partnerships among key innovation actors around shared strategic objectives

DA SAŠA establishes a formal co-ordination mechanism connecting higher education, research institutions, business support structures, major employers and industry associations around two or three shared innovation focus areas linked to the SAŠA transition pathway (Table 5.3).

• Step 1: DA SAŠA and RDA Zasavje, in co-ordination with MCRD, convene key innovation actors (higher education and research institutions, including the Faculty of Energy; the regional incubator and technology park in Velenje; major industrial employers and exporters; the chamber of commerce; and line ministries) to map existing assets and co-ordination gaps.

• Step 2: compile an evidence pack from TJTPs and RDPs; conduct strategic sessions to test innovation options against the SAŠA transition pathway and feasibility in the 2025-2029 timeframe.

• Step 3: agree on two or three priority innovation focus areas (e.g. energy systems, clean technologies, circular production, advanced manufacturing) that are directly aligned with transition objectives. Name a lead institution for each focus area.

• Step 4: establish a co-ordination routine. This involves a quarterly steering meeting chaired by JTC (SAŠA); a simple role chart for each focus area; and a shared pipeline board tracking proposals from idea through feasibility, permitting and submission.

• Step 5: translate focus areas into joint actions. Issue challenge-driven briefs for SMEs, with mentoring from firms and universities (following Interreg Europe's “Open Innovation Challenge Brief” format and Horizon Europe's Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions Doctoral Networks model); prepare concept fiches for shared facilities or applied research partnerships (informed by the “Activity Fiches” methodology of the EU Strategic Energy Technology Plan); maintain annual calendar of relevant calls.

• Step 6: map systemic gaps (in skills, testing facilities, intellectual property support, finance) and match them to existing national instruments. Consult the Labour Market Platform's sectoral skill-demand forecasts to identify priority skill gaps in SAŠA's target sectors (energy systems, clean technologies, circular production); use the platform data to align feasibility assessments and capacity-building proposals with credible employment pathways.

• Step 7: leverage the chamber of commerce as a convening partner to identify business-led priorities, link large firms with local suppliers and identify supplier development opportunities in clean-technology value chains. Utilise support available through Enterprise Europe Network Slovenia for tailored innovation guidance and access to EU funding opportunities.

Table 5.3. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 2.1.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Timeline
DA SAŠA	MCRD; higher education and research institutions; regional incubator/technology park structures in Velenje; chamber of commerce; major industrial employers.	1-2 years for partnership mapping and agreement; 3+ years for ongoing co-ordination and activity.	M1-4: Key actors mapped and convened; M4-8: Evidence pack compiled and strategic session held; M8-12: Focus areas agreed and leads named; Q2 2025+: Co-ordination routine operationalised; M12-24: Joint actions (challenge briefs, partnerships, templates) launched and refined.

Action 2.2: In the Zasavje region, strengthen structured SME-facing support to help local firms connect to the transition economy

RDA Zasavje, in partnership with local business associations, establishes a co-ordinated interface for identifying SME needs, translating them into tailored support offers and linking firms to opportunities in the transition economy (Table 5.4).

• Step 1: RDA Zasavje, in co-ordination with MCRD and local business associations (Zasavska Regional Chamber of Commerce and Industry, local chambers of crafts), conducts systematic analysis of local SME characteristics, constraints and sectoral composition aligned with transition priorities.

• Step 2: identify priority business-development and innovation needs (process upgrading, compliance, entry into new value chains, skills, digitalisation); leverage the Labour Market Platform (developed by the Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, in partnership with the Employment Service of Slovenia) to ground needs analysis in evidence on labour-market trends and skill-demand forecasts through 2039, ensuring that support aligns with anticipated employment pathways and sectoral opportunities.

• Step 3: build joint capacity-building plan with business associations by strengthening outreach capacity for systematic SME engagement, establishing RDA as stable contact point for smaller companies and identifying specialist support arrangements (engineering, procurement, financial modelling).

• Step 4: co-design targeted support offers with MCRD, the Ministry of Labour and business associations, ensuring alignment with regional transition priorities and available national instruments.

• Step 5: develop practical pre-submission support materials by clarifying requirements for key support programmes, providing templates for project idea structuring and feasibility, and sharing contact matrix and support timeline.

• Step 6: launch structured engagement by holding regular SME roundtables, maintaining accessible feedback loop for priority-setting and tracking take-up of support and business outcomes.

Table 5.4. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 2.2.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Timeline
RDA Zasavje	MCRD and Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities; relevant business-support organisations and industrial representatives.	1-2 years for capacity assessment and planning; 2+ years for delivery and ongoing support.	M1-6: SME characteristics and needs analysed; M6-12: Capacity plan and specialist support arrangements defined; M12-18: Support materials and contact matrix developed; M18+: Structured SME engagement and support delivery operationalised; ongoing: quarterly review and adjustment.

Recommendation 3: Clarify roles and establish predictable timelines for implementation at strategic and operational levels

Aim of the associated action: to accelerate project approval and reduce implementation delays by formalising senior-level interministerial co-ordination at critical decision points and maintaining clear, up-to-date operational guidance for all implementation actors.

Context: while Slovenia's core institutional elements (MCRD co-ordination, JTCs as operational hubs, municipal roles) are in place, projects can face delays when responsibility passes from technical preparation to policy-level approval, particularly when multiple ministries must confirm compliance on environmental permitting, state aid and procurement. Clarifying roles across implementation phases and setting explicit timelines can accelerate approval while maintaining oversight.

Action 3.1: Establish formalised senior-level interministerial co-ordination at predefined implementation gates with clear operational guidance

MCRD establishes and operates a formal senior-level interministerial co-ordination mechanism meeting at predefined implementation gates. Meetings focus on live project files, resolve interministerial issues, assign follow-up responsibilities and confirm timelines (Table 5.5).

• Step 1: MCRD, in co-ordination with relevant line ministries, maps current project-cycle phases and identifies critical implementation gates where senior-level decision-making and interministerial alignment are required (post-technical assessment, post-compliance review, pre-final approval).

• Step 2: establish meeting schedule (monthly or bi-monthly) of senior-level interministerial steering committee at the state secretary level, focused on live project files.

• Step 3: develop and issue operational guidance, clarifying which ministry leads decisions at each phase, what co-ordination steps are required before decisions are finalised, the expected timelines for different decision types and escalation routes.

• Step 4: operationalise senior-level gates, with the steering committee reviewing project files at each gate, confirming implementation timelines, resolving interministerial issues and documenting decisions with clear next steps.

• Step 5: maintain document version control by designating document ownership at MCRD; establishing quarterly review cycle with line ministries, RDAs/DAs and JTCs; and publishing concise summary for applicants.

• Step 6: monitor effectiveness by tracking key performance indicators (KPIs), including average time at each gate, share of projects progressing without escalation and interministerial decision timelines; and adjusting the co-ordination frequency as needed.

Table 5.5. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 3.1.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Milestones
MCRD	All relevant line ministries, RDAs/DAs, JTCs, implementing agencies.	1-2 years for mechanism design, operational guidance development and stakeholder alignment; 3+ years for ongoing operation.	M1-4: Implementation gates and role mapping complete; M4-8: Operational guidance document drafted and consulted; M8-12: Senior-level steering committee established and scheduled; M12-18: Initial gates operationalised and refined; Q2 2025+: Senior co-ordination meetings ongoing; ongoing quarterly guidance review and monitoring.

Action 3.2: Maintain up-to-date operational guidance for JTCs and intermediary bodies within the existing governance framework

MCRD develops and maintains a concise operational handbook and supporting tools that clarify stage-by-stage roles, information flows, service standards, escalation routes and resourcing arrangements for JTCs and intermediary bodies. The handbook explains how JTCs and RDAs/DAs work within existing selection guidelines (e.g. Merila 2021-2027 and their successors) and long-term regional visions to identify and support strategic, mature project proposals for the 2028-2034 European Cohesion Policy period and other funding sources, without changing the criteria or procedures set at the national level (Table 5.6).

• Step 1: MCRD, in co-ordination with RDA Zasavje, DA SAŠA, JTCs and line ministries, maps current roles, tasks and decision points across the full project lifecycle (concept → design → permitting → state-aid checks → procurement → implementation → completion → monitoring); identify role boundaries between the managing authority, line ministries, RDA/DA and JTCs; flag ambiguities or overlaps.

• Step 2: Draft concise operational handbook for JTCs, covering:

  • Stage-by-stage role clarity: explicit responsibilities and decision authority at each phase, showing boundaries between the managing authority, line ministries, RDA/DA and JTCs, with practical examples

  • Use of strategic documents and Merila: how TJTPs, RDPs and long-term regional visions should inform the advice provided by JTCs to municipalities and stakeholders when building project pipelines, and how this advice is framed within the existing Merila selection framework rather than creating new criteria

  • Information flows and templates: who issues interpretations (eligibility, permitting, state aid), how these are recorded and communicated, and standard forms (sourced from EU Competency Framework, Interreg templates, PMI frameworks)

  • Service standards: target response times for queries and interpretations (e.g. “eligibility query response: 5 working days”); meeting cadence for different governance levels; standard preparation calendar shared with municipalities and promoters

  • Escalation routes: when and how to involve senior-level co-ordination (Action 3.1); who convenes cross-ministerial resolution; escalation timelines and decision documentation

  • Multi-ministry interfaces: lead ministry and expected timelines at gates requiring multiple sign-offs; co-ordination sequence and contingency routes

  • Resourcing rules: what expertise JTCs hold in-house (basic guidance, pipeline support, permit sequencing) versus what is pooled or procured externally (specialist engineering, financial modelling, state-aid assessment); how to access technical assistance and arrange short-term specialist support

  • Monitoring: practical indicators (query response time, complete applications, rework cycles) to track whether guidance reduces delays.

• Step 3: develop supporting tools and templates, such as decision trees for common eligibility questions, a contact matrix with roles and contact protocols, a sample preparation calendar with target timelines, a project file completeness checklist and a simple query log template for tracking issues.

• Step 4: establish governance for the handbook and tools by designating a document owner at MCRD; setting a quarterly review cycle with stakeholder input; maintaining version control and a clear change log; and preparing a short public-facing summary (two or three pages) for municipal applicants.

• Step 5: launch and disseminate, by distributing the handbook and tools to all JTCs, line ministries and implementing bodies; organising orientation sessions; making the handbook and templates publicly available; and designating an MCRD helpdesk contact point for guidance questions.

• Step 6: monitor and iterate by tracking KPIs (query response times, application completeness, rework cycles) quarterly and conducting an annual review with JTCs, RDAs/DAs and line ministries to identify needed updates; adjust the handbook and tools based on feedback, including lessons from the 2021-2027 period and new requirements in the 2028-2034 framework.

Table 5.6. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 3.2.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Milestones
MCRD	RDA, DA SAŠA, JTCs, line ministries.	0.5-1 year for mapping and clarification.	M1-3: Current roles and decision points mapped; ambiguities identified. M3-6: Handbook and templates drafted; stakeholder consultation. M6-9: Tools finalised (decision trees, contact matrix, checklists). M9-12: Document governance established; handbook published and disseminated. M12-18: Orientation sessions held; KPI baseline established. M18+: Quarterly monitoring and annual review cycles; handbook updated based on feedback.

Recommendation 4: Monitor, evaluate and communicate progress to build local community trust and sustain delivery momentum

Aim of the associated action: to strengthen accountability and local engagement by establishing systematic monitoring of transition indicators at subregional and municipal levels, developing a holistic transition well-being scorecard, and implementing structured communication mechanisms that demonstrate progress to residents.

Context: monitoring and communicating transition progress serves three critical functions. It enables institutions to check whether projects deliver intended results, helps residents see concrete change in their own municipality and supports accountability. Most current monitoring occurs at national or development region levels, limiting the ability to track outcomes in the areas most directly affected by mine closure. Regular reporting at a scale that is meaningful to communities can sustain engagement and keep expectations aligned with implementation realities.

Action 4.1: Expand tracking of core transition indicators at SAŠA subregional level, with municipal detail for labour-market, demographic and business dynamics

SORS, in co-ordination with MCRD, develops a data infrastructure and consistent methodology for regular tracking of core labour market, demographic, and business indicators at SAŠA subregional level and relevant municipal levels (Table 5.7).

• Step 1: MCRD and SORS, in consultation with EARS, JTCs and municipalities, identify a focused set of core indicators, including employment levels and trends by sector, unemployment rates and duration, business creation and closure rates, sectoral composition, population trends, migration, age structure and educational attainment; incorporate data infrastructure and forecasts (e.g. sectoral skill demand trends to 2039, occupational projections) from the Labour Market Platform into SAŠA and Zasavska monitoring frameworks to enable comparison between actual labour-market outcomes and anticipated transition pathways, facilitating early identification of skill gaps or sectoral misalignments.

• Step 2: map current data sources and identify gaps or frequency limitations; determine which indicators are available at the municipal level versus SAŠA subregional aggregation.

• Step 3: develop data infrastructure by establishing SAŠA as a stable analytical unit within SORS systems, defining data-collection and publishing schedules, creating technical specifications for indicator calculation, and establishing data-sharing agreements with EARS and project managing bodies.

• Step 4: pilot indicator collection and validation; test data extraction with existing data; validate results with RDA Zasavje, DA SAŠA and municipalities; refine procedures based on feedback.

• Step 5: establish publication and feedback system, publishing indicators regularly (quarterly or annual) in accessible formats, designating municipal contact persons at JTCs to provide municipalities with their own indicator profiles and establishing feedback loops to flag data issues.

• Step 6: link indicator tracking to the monitoring and evaluation framework and communication strategy.

Table 5.7. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 4.1.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Milestones
SORS, in co-ordination with MCRD	EARS, project managing bodies, JTCs, municipalities.	1-2 years for data infrastructure development and system design; 3+ years for ongoing collection, analysis and publication.	M1-4: Core indicators identified; data source mapping complete; M4-8: Technical specifications and data infrastructure designed; M8-12: Pilot data collection and validation; M12-18: Publication system operationalised; municipalities briefed; M18+: Quarterly or annual publication cycle established; KPI tracking (data lag, completeness); annual review and refinement.

Action 4.2: Develop and maintain a transition well-being scorecard that extends beyond the JTF funding cycle

MCRD, in collaboration with SORS and EARS, develops a comprehensive transition well-being scorecard tracking holistic progress across economic, social and environmental resilience dimensions. The scorecard is formally embedded in national policy frameworks to ensure continuity beyond 2029 (Table 5.8).

• Step 1: MCRD, SORS and EARS, in consultation with RDAs/DAs, municipalities, universities, research institutions and civil society, define the scorecard’s scope and resilience dimensions, including economic resilience (employment, wages, business dynamism, sectoral diversification); social resilience (social cohesion, health, educational attainment, gender equality, housing affordability); and environmental resilience (air and water quality, mine reclamation, renewable energy, circular economy, biodiversity).

• Step 2: select indicator suite (three to five per dimension) balancing quantitative metrics from administrative sources with qualitative assessments and survey data.

• Step 3: design methodology by defining calculation procedures, establishing baseline measurement (2022/23) and target trajectories for 2029 and 2035, and developing comparison frameworks.

• Step 4: develop the scorecard with community engagement by holding co-design sessions with residents to identify priority indicators, testing scorecard prototype with municipal and policy audiences, and refining the scorecard based on feedback.

• Step 5: calculate the baseline scorecard and develop audience-tailored versions, such as a detailed version for policy and research, simplified municipal-level summaries and a community-facing summary in accessible language.

• Step 6: establish institutional embedding by incorporating the scorecard into national monitoring of Just Transition policies and post-2027 EU Cohesion Policy frameworks, designating a scorecard owner at MCRD and securing multi-year funding commitment.

• Step 7: publish the scorecard annually, releasing a full scorecard report with a trend analysis, disseminating municipal-level summaries, and hosting a presentation and feedback sessions with municipalities and stakeholders.

Table 5.8. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 4.2.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Milestones
MCRD, in collaboration with SORS and EARS	RDA/DA, municipalities, universities and research institutions, civil-society organisations.	1-2 years for scorecard development, baseline measurement and stakeholder validation.	M1-4: Resilience dimensions and indicator suite defined; stakeholder engagement plan developed; M4-8: Community co-design sessions; indicator selection finalised; M8-12: Scorecard methodology designed and tested; baseline data compiled; M12-18: Audience-tailored versions developed and validated; institutional embedding confirmed; M18+: First scorecard published; annual publication cycle established; ongoing community and stakeholder feedback incorporated; review and adjustment cycle.

Action 4.3: Implement a structured and transparent communication framework to share transition progress and ensure feedback loops with communities

MCRD and RDAs, in co-ordination with municipalities and civil-society partners, establish structured communication mechanisms and an annual calendar to share transition progress regularly, enable two-way engagement with communities, and maintain accountability and trust (Table 5.9).

• Step 1: MCRD develops an overarching communication strategy and co-ordination framework which defines communication objectives (inform, demonstrate progress, enable feedback, build trust); establishes roles and responsibilities across MCRD, RDAs, DA SAŠA, municipalities and civil-society partners; identifies target audiences; and develops co-ordination mechanisms for consistent messaging.

• Step 2: design a suite of communication mechanisms:

  • Mechanism A: Annual transition progress reports

    • published at the national level by MCRD and at the regional level by the RDA/DA

    • accessible language with visual presentation of transition well-being scorecard findings (Action 4.2), possibly drawing inspiration from the Observatory for the Just Transition of Asturias

    • celebrate achievements, acknowledge challenges and setbacks, explain next steps

    • include specific outcomes: jobs created, companies established, environmental improvements, community facilities developed, worker transitions supported

    • distribute to municipalities for local discussion and feedback.

  • Mechanism B: Municipal-level transition summaries

    • developed by municipalities with support from JTCs, and distributed annually

    • highlight projects implemented, jobs created, investments made, community benefits

    • connect local outcomes to regional diversification strategy and long-term vision

    • enable residents to see tangible progress in their own municipality

    • format as an accessible 2-4 page summary with photos, data and local stories.

  • Mechanism C: Digital platforms and social media

    • central and regional platforms share real-time updates on funded projects, job opportunities, skill programmes and transition events

    • enable two-way communication whereby community members can ask questions, provide feedback and share experiences

    • use accessible formats (videos, infographics, testimonials, frequently asked questions) suitable for diverse audiences

    • maintain responsiveness and engagement culture.

  • Mechanism D: Local media engagement

    • hold regular briefings with local journalists on transition progress, challenges and opportunities

    • feature stories on project benefits, worker transitions, sectoral changes, environmental progress

    • co-ordinate with RDAs/municipalities to ensure media access and accurate storytelling

    • position local media as a trusted channel for the transition narrative.

• Step 3: develop annual communication calendar outlining key milestones, feedback deadlines and communication touchpoints (Q1 scorecard release; Q2 project showcase; Q3 community consultation; Q4 annual report); consolidate consultation touchpoints to reduce fatigue; communicate calendar publicly to signal predictability and commitment.

• Step 4: establish governance and quality standards, designating a communication lead at MCRD and regional leads at RDAs/DAs/municipalities; define messaging principles (transparency, accessibility, accuracy, timeliness, respect for local context); develop messaging templates and technical standards (accessibility guidelines, multilingual capacity if needed), drawing on international best practices such as the European Commission Toolkit for Communicating About Just Transition, the International Institute for Sustainable Development Just Transition Toolbox for Coal Regions and the EU Governance of Transitions Toolkit.

• Step 5: engage civil society and social partners, identifying partner organisations (trade unions, NGOs, community associations, disability organisations, minority groups) trusted by community members; co-design communication approaches with partners to ensure cultural appropriateness; provide partners with talking points, data and materials to amplify messages authentically; establish partnership co-ordination meetings.

• Step 6: launch and implement: publish annual communication calendar; release first annual progress report (aligned with release of the transition well-being scorecard); operationalise digital platforms and social-media presence; begin media engagement and municipal summary distribution; conduct community engagement sessions to present progress and gather feedback.

• Step 7: monitor and refine, tracking communication reach and engagement (media coverage, social media metrics, municipal report feedback); conduct annual survey of target audiences on awareness of transition progress and trust in institutions; host debrief sessions with RDAs, municipalities and civil-society partners to identify communication gaps; adjust mechanisms, messaging or calendar based on feedback.

Table 5.9. Institutions, time and milestones for the action 4.3.

Lead institution	Supporting institutions	Time required	Milestones
MCRD (overall co-ordination); RDAs, DA SAŠA and municipalities (local implementation)	EARS, civil-society organisations, social partners, local media.	0.5 years for communication strategy design and mechanism establishment; 5+ years for ongoing implementation, monitoring and refinement, based on community feedback.	M1-3: Communication strategy and framework developed; stakeholder consultation; M3-4: Communication mechanisms designed and tested; templates and standards finalised; M4-5: Annual communication calendar published; civil-society partnerships formalised; M5-6: Digital platforms and media engagement operationalised; M6+: Monthly mechanism operation (reports, summaries, social media, media briefings); annual feedback and refinement cycles; monitoring of reach and trust indicators.