Unlocking the Potential of Intermediary Cities for Regional Development

Annexe C. A pilot policy toolkit to unlock the potential of intermediary cities for regional development

Background: The role of intermediary cities in driving regional development

What are intermediary cities?

Definitions and concepts of intermediary cities vary across countries and contexts. The OECD-EU project “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development” defines intermediary cities (ICs) as small and medium-sized cities that have a population ranging from 50 000 to 250 000 inhabitants in its Functional Urban Area (FUA) and that play an “intermediary” role in providing essential services and economic activities to surrounding areas. This definition does not include the largest FUAs in a country and the FUAs hosting a national capital (See Section 2.3).

Why do intermediary cities matter for regional development?

Intermediary cities – using the definition above – currently account for 59% of all EU cities, 19% of the EU’s urban population, and 9% of the OECD’s population. While they are highly heterogenous and fulfil diverse roles shaped mainly by their geographical and institutional context, intermediary cities act as “bridges” in national urban systems by complementing large cities, serving as regional hubs supporting smaller towns and rural areas, and fostering polycentric economic growth.

What are the “key functions” and “city types” of intermediary cities?

Intermediary cities can play eight key functions that connect urban and rural areas, fostering regional economic activity and service provision: Business, Knowledge, Transport, Housing, Culture, Retail, Health and Government (Figure A C.1). Based on the performance and combination of these key functions, intermediary cities can then be categorised into five types: 1) “Knowledge Hub” hosting universities and other higher education institutions, offering robust business services with a skilled talent base; 2) “Service Hub” offering strong retail and health services; 3) “Housing Hub” providing an important housing function for workers commuting outside the city boundaries, supported by high road transport performance; 4) “Cultural Hub” providing excellent cultural amenities; 5) “Self-contained Employment Hub” providing solid business services and local employment opportunities, while the road transport performance is sub-optimal.

Figure A C.1. Key functions and city types of intermediary cities

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

Pilot policy toolkit for intermediary cities

What is the purpose of this pilot policy toolkit?

The OECD-EU project “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development” aims to help better understanding the potential and challenges of intermediary cities, and guide cities and regional and national policymakers towards achieving balanced, sustainable and inclusive territorial development. Under the first phase of the project, extensive research was conducted to define and identify intermediary cities in OECD countries, deepening the understanding of functions that intermediary cities play, and analysing their economic performance. The second phase of the project used case studies to complement the analytical work of the first phase, by providing more granular, place-based analysis to shed light on the diverse geographical contexts.

This pilot policy toolkit aims to translate these project’s overall insights into practical policy guidance to help intermediary cities realise their full potential and strengthen their bridging role to complement large cities and support smaller towns and rural areas for the balanced regional development.

How is the pilot policy toolkit organised?

The pilot policy toolkit is organised around four parts, elaborated in the Figure A C.3.

✓ Part 1. Contextualising the city

✓ Part 2. Assess intermediary city’s policies with the checklists

✓ Part 3. Learn from inspirational policy examples in other intermediary cities

✓ Part 4: Develop refined policies and actions plans

Who should use the pilot policy toolkit?

While the pilot policy toolkit can benefit all levels of government, it is particularly designed for subnational policymakers, notably those involved in urban and regional planning and development. All municipalities within a FUA can use the toolkit and collectively review the results of their assessment to shape their strategy.

What characteristics does the pilot policy toolkit explore?

The pilot policy toolkit explores three sets of city characteristics in the Figure A C.2:

Figure A C.2. Three sets of city characteristics used in the pilot toolkit

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

Figure A C.3. Overall structure of pilot policy toolkit

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

Part 1: Contextualising the city

Cities are invited to complete a self-assessment in three steps to identify their city type. If your city is located in a country where the OECD has full data coverage (i.e. Austria, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Portugal, Spain and Sweden), you can also look at the pre-assessment results in the Table A B.1. Once you have completed the self‑assessment, you can also consult the Table A B.1. to discover other cities that share similar characteristics.

Before conducting self-assessment, understand your city’s place in the national urban system. Start by checking whether your city (local government) is part of a FUA, using the OECD-EU definition (See Section 2.1). If your city belongs to an FUA, look at the total population of that FUA. A FUA with 50 000 to 250 000 people, which is not the largest in the country and not the national capital, is considered an intermediary city under the OECD definition (See Section 2.3).

Even if your city does not meet these criteria – for example, if it is not part of an FUA or is below the population threshold – it may still perform important intermediary city bridging functions. In this case, you are encouraged to continue using Part 1 of the toolkit to assess which of the five types your city most closely resembles, based on its roles and functions.

Step 1: Choose your city type based on the strength among eight key functions

You can identify your city type by first looking at its main functional strengths, for instance using the indicators listed in the Table A C.1.

Table A C.1. Indicators for the eight key functions of intermediary cities

Function	Indicator	Unit
Business	Employment share in knowledge intensive business service activities (KIBS)	Relative to national average
Knowledge	Number of students enrolled in higher education, per capita	Levels
Transport	Road transport performance	Levels
Housing	Share of working population with job outside of city	Levels
Culture	Number of cultural amenities per capita	Relative to national average
Retail	Number of shopping centres per capita	Relative to national average
Health	Number of hospitals per capita	Relative to national average
Government	Municipal public employment expenditure per capita	Relative to national average

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

In the Section 5.2, cities are then grouped into different types by clustering analysis using data for indicators above. For this toolkit, you do not need to carry out such an analysis. Instead, you can simply choose the city type that best reflects your city’s characteristics by referring to the table below, which shows the main functional strengths of each city type. For example, if the share of residents commuting to jobs outside the city is significatory high in your city, which indicates a strong housing function, your city may be best described as a Housing hub.

Table A C.2. Functional strengths of five clusters (“Intermediary city types”)

Functions	Knowledge Hub	Service Hub	Housing Hub	Cultural Hub	Self-contained Employment Hub
Business	✓				✓✓
Housing			✓✓
Culture				✓✓
Retail		✓
Knowledge	✓✓
Transport			✓	✓
Health		✓✓

Note: ✓✓= significant functional strength observed in that city type, ✓= relative functional strength observed in that city type. Government function was not used in the clustering analysis due to the limited data availability for its indicator.

Source: Author’s own elaboration

Step 2: Better understand your city’s geographical context

You can determine your city’s geographical context based on its distance to the closest large city. Large cities are defined as FUAs with more than 1.5 million inhabitants (see the list below for the EU countries).

The list of large city in the EU: Austria: Vienna; Belgium: Brussels/Leuven; Bulgaria: Sofia; Czechia: Prague; Denmark: Copenhagen; France: Paris, Lyon, and Marseille; Germany: Berlin, Cologne, Frankfurt am Main, Hamburg, Munich, Ruhr Area, and Stuttgart; Greece: Athens; Hungary: Budapest; Ireland: Dublin; Italy: Milan, Naples, Rome and Turin; the Netherlands: Amsterdam and Rotterdam; Poland: Warsaw and Katowice; Portugal: Lisbon; Romania: Bucharest; Spain: Barcelona, Madrid, Seville, and Valencia; Sweden: Stockholm.

The threshold is set at 172.26 km, which represents the average distance between intermediary cities and their closest large city, based on a sample of 173 cities in Austria, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Portugal, Spain and Sweden. If the city is located less than 172.26 km from the closest large city, your city is classified as “Close”, while a city located more than 172.26 km away is classified as “Remote”.

Step 3: Find your country’s institutional context

Institutional contexts are largely shaped at the national level rather than by individual cities. Therefore, to assess your city’s institutional context, find your country in the following Table A C.3, which classifies countries with available data by state structures, the number of subnational levels, and degree of fiscal decentralisation:

Table A C.3. Territorial Organisation in the OECD and EU countries (2025)

	One subnational level	Two subnational levels	Three subnational levels
Federal		Canada, Switzerland, Australia, Mexico, Austria	Germany, Belgium, Spain, United States
Unitary	Iceland, Latvia, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Ireland, Israel, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal, Slovenia, Costa Rica	Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Colombia, Czechia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Norway, Chile, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Malta, New Zealand, Netherlands, Romania, Slovak Republic, Türkiye	France, Poland, United Kingdom

Note: Countries in blue have high levels of fiscal decentralisation, those in green have medium levels of fiscal decentralisation, and those in purple have low levels of fiscal decentralisation.

Source: OECD elaboration based on 2024 Subnational government structure and finance database.

Part 2: Assess intermediary city’s policies with the checklists

Use following checklists to assess how your city is performing in key policy areas to enhance their key functions and capacity. Four types of checklists are available:

i) general policy checklists (applicable to all intermediary cities)

ii) policy checklists by city type

iii) policy checklists by geographical context

iv) policy checklists by institutional context (applicable to all intermediary cities).

For the policy checklists ii) and iii), choose the checklist that matches your city type and geographical context, as identified in Part 1, to get the most relevant policy guidance. Because institutional contexts are multi‑dimensional and largely shaped at the national level rather than by individual cities, iv) institutional‑context checklists are not tailored to specific context. Instead, they focus on common policy priorities related to the institutional context in which intermediary cities operate, in particular multi-level governance as well as finance.

As a first step, identify major policies in your city and, where relevant, at the FUA level that aim to strengthen the city’s role and performance as an intermediary city. These may include city‑wide or FUA‑wide development strategies, economic development policies, service provision (e.g. education, health), or other cross‑cutting policy areas. Where possible, working together with neighbouring municipalities within the same FUA is encouraged. While the exercise can be done by one city individually, it is most useful when carried out jointly across the FUA.

For each statement in the checklist, assess how well your city is performing by giving a score: 1 = the statement is relevant for the city, but currently not achieved;

2 = the statement is partially achieved but significant improvement is needed;

3 = the statement is partially achieved, with some space for improvement;

4 = the statement is fully achieved, and can be counted as a good practice on this matter;

NA = the statement is not applicable.

The score helps identify which areas are already strong and which are relatively weak and require improvement. You can also note the reasons for your score, for example by referencing relevant policies, data, website links or other documents that support your assessment. The assessment can be done by city officials, but it can also include experts (e.g. academics) and other stakeholders (e.g. residents). For example, the checklist can be completed through workshops with them, making the process itself a participatory policy exercise.

Finally, it is important to identify concrete examples of successful policy practices, as well as key bottlenecks and gaps, and to document them. This documentation will not only support the scoring exercise but also help inform the analysis in Part 4 and future policy priorities.

If you would like to explore the ideas behind each statement in more detail, you can find explanations in the Section 6. Some statements also point to inspirational policy examples in Part 3 of this toolkit, illustrating how other cities are addressing similar challenges.

Box A C.1. i) General policy checklists (applicable to all intermediary cities)

Strategy

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We have assessed and identified the strengths and characteristics of intermediary cities around key functions (e.g. business, knowledge, transport, housing, culture, retail. health, and government), and design policies to enhance them, in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We help local communities through major transitions (e.g. energy transition) and develop related infrastructure if any.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We ensure sufficient stakeholder and citizen engagement in designing and implementing strategies and major transition.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We align spatial planning, transport, and economic development strategies across neighbouring municipalities so that the wider urban area grows in a coherent way.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Workforce / skills / innovation

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We forecast demographic trends and labour demand for industries to identify potential workforce gaps; We collect and analyse labour-market data to identify skill mismatches.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have put in place policies or programmes to address workforce shortages or skill gaps.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We offer high‑quality vocational and educational programmes responding to local industry needs, with appropriate supports from the national and regional governments. (see Policy example 2 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We support older workers and multigenerational workforces through age‑friendly services, policies and infrastructure. (see Policy example 16 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We prioritise strategic investment in high‑growth, high value‑added industries that build on existing local assets (e.g. green technologies), in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed. (see Policy example 10 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We foster innovation ecosystems through close collaboration between government, academia, and industry. (see Policy example 7 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Connectivity / infrastructure / services

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We have identified key strengths and weaknesses of our transport networks (e.g. rail, roads, ports and logistics) within the national urban system (e.g. our city’s linkages with large cities, neighbouring intermediary cities and rural areas). (see Policy example 8 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We make a timely investment to improve transport networks (e.g. high‑speed rail), in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed. (see Policy example 7 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We promote transit‑oriented development and mixed‑use neighbourhoods to limit urban sprawl. (see Policy example 8 and 20 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We strive for efficient land use (e.g. compact urban development) to balance development between residential, commercial, and recreational purposes. (see Policy example 8 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We invest in digital infrastructure (e.g. wireless networks) and services leveraging digital technologies (e.g. telehealth), in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We mitigate risk of digital divide via initiatives such as digital literacy training.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Well-being / environment / attractiveness

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We invest in quality of life by ensuring that education and healthcare are accessible (e.g. well-connected by public transport, affordable, and inclusive) to attract and retain workers and residents; We systematically assess gaps in quality and accessibility of those essential services to guide investments. (see Policy example 13 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We align the volume and type of housing supply with local employment dynamics to meet current and future needs. (see Policy example 14 and 15 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have developed a strong city brand that leverages historical and natural assets (e.g. cultural heritage, waterfronts) and key infrastructure (e.g. port). (see Policy example 9 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We invest in infrastructure (e.g. accommodation facilities, studios) to support cultural and tourism activities.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We co-create cultural initiatives with local communities; We collaborate with other municipalities in the region to develop joint cultural routes, shared cultural services and regional identity. (see Policy example 4 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Box A C.2. ii) Policy checklists by city type (use the checklist that corresponds to your city type)

Knowledge Hub

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We have defined clear areas for innovation specialization (e.g. biology) and developed complementary sectors (e.g. health tech) to those innovation areas to support growth, built on strong collaboration between government, academia, and industry. (see Policy example 7 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We are improving regional and intercity transport links to expand access to research networks.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have high-capacity digital infrastructure (e.g. campus Wi-Fi).	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have invested in innovation district infrastructure (e.g. co-working spaces, labs, incubators).	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We are enhancing student and researcher living conditions (e.g. affordable housing, mental health services).	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We position the city as a centre of knowledge and talent, through branding and international partnerships.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Service Hub

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We promote digitalisation of local services (e.g. healthcare and administrative services) to enhance their accessibility, supported by digital literacy training for residents and local government staff, in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have well-developed last‑mile logistics infrastructure (e.g. warehouses).	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have robust health, education, and administrative facilities.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have resilient utilities, such as water, energy, district heating/cooling systems. (see Policy example 18 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have strong health and social service access (e.g. primary care, community health centres).	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have been reducing pollution via interventions such as clean logistics zones and low-emission delivery systems.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We promote service excellence branding to attract businesses and visitors.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Housing Hub

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We have enhanced remote working ecosystems, including co‑working spaces, digital connectivity, and local entrepreneurship support.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We provide reliable, fast, and affordable public transport options for frequent commuter routes.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We invest in community infrastructure (e.g. childcare, schools, health centres, recreation), in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We are promoting digital services for residents such as telehealth and digital municipal services, in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We provide diverse, affordable, and high‑quality housing that meets current and future needs, taking demographic trends into account. (see Policy example 14 and 15 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We are expanding green and blue infrastructure (e.g. parks, rivers, cooling corridors). (see Policy example 17 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We are increasing quality of life amenities (e.g. sports facilities, cultural programming).	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Cultural Hub

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We have a city level cultural plan which is integrated into other policy areas (e.g. transport, tourism)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We support cultural and creative sectors through business support services and skills programmes.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have identified existing cultural and creative micro-clusters and have policies to support their growth.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We promote year-round cultural programming and events to support local artists and increase access to international artistic work.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We preserve and restore heritage buildings while enabling adaptive reuse. (see Policy example 3 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We ensure equal access to culture for our residents by supporting cultural infrastructure (e.g. libraries, museums), programmes and events such as festivals.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We strengthen synergies between culture and tourism by developing joint cultural tourism itineraries and experiences.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We seek to ensure that place identity and branding rooted in culture and heritage reflects the full history of the city and its unique offerings.(see Policy example 9 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Self-contained Employment Hub

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We provide vocational training responding to local industry needs, and promote work-based learning models (e.g. dual-education model), in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed. (see Policy example 2 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We offer workforce services, such as job matching and skills counselling.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We support industrial modernisation by linking firms and technical institutes.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have well-developed rail and road freight infrastructure and capacity.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We are modernising industrial zones with sustainable utilities, circular waste systems, and clean energy.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We invest in community services to support industrial workers’ families (e.g. childcare, recreation).	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We are regenerating post-industrial sites into parks, mixed-use areas or innovation campuses.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We support just-transition initiatives for carbon-intensive sectors.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Box A C.3. iii) Policy checklists by geographical context (use the checklist that corresponds to your geographical context)

Close Hub

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We have quality transport connections with the closest large city to ensure access to jobs, services and opportunities across the wider urban region.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We provide an adequate mix and volume of housing supply, taking into account spillover demand from nearby large cities. (see Policy example 1 and 14 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We assess and respond to demand from large cities by exploring opportunities for retail revitalisation and the provision of specialised healthcare services. (see Policy example 12 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We co-ordinate with the closest large city on transport, housing, and economic development, including through shared investments, in co-ordination with national and regional governments as needed.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Remote Hub

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We strengthen local economic opportunities (e.g. agri‑food markets) for surrounding rural areas to provide residents with viable reasons to stay.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have sufficient education and vocational training institutions to support knowledge and technology transfer to surrounding rural areas, in collaboration with national and regional governments. (see Policy example 2 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We have a robust regional transport connectivity, including road, rail and airport infrastructure, to link rural populations to wider labour markets and services. (see Policy example 1 and 19 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We promote our city as attractive living, service and employment hubs by leveraging relatively affordable housing, expanding cultural and social amenities, reinforcing their role as regional retail and service centres, and enhancing access to healthcare. (see Policy example 4, 9, 15 and 16 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We set a strategy to strengthen urban-rural linkages (economic, social, and functional connections between cities and their surrounding rural areas) and invest in services and infrastructure that function as regional connectors (e.g. urban-rural transport services). (see Policy example 1 and 19 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Box A C.4. iv) Policy checklists by institutional context (applicable to all intermediary cities)

Multi-level governance

Statements	Your scoring	Reason for your score
We have strong inter‑municipal co-operation mechanisms, particularly for service delivery and infrastructure planning (e.g. share service and investment). (see Policy example 1, 5, and 18 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We engage systematically with national and regional authorities so that sectoral strategies and investment decisions reflect local realities.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Finance

 

Statements	Your score	Reason for your score
We have diversified financial sources such as taxes, fees and charges, where permitted by laws, to strengthen own-source revenue.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We responsibly leverage financing tools such as borrowing and public‑private partnerships, where permitted by laws, for investment finance.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We put in place mid long‑term financial plans in line with our city’s strategic objectives, complementing annual budget process.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We identify and mobilise EU, national and regional funding, and integrate these funds into local strategic planning. (see Policy example 11 in Part 3)	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We regularly review EU and national funding we receive, to assess potential duplication or identify opportunities for better alignment with our strategic direction.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​
We assess the distribution of costs and benefits across the core municipalities and surrounding municipalities within the FUA and, where permitted by laws, pursue financing mechanisms to support equitable cost sharing.	1 ​☐​     2 ​☐​     3 ​☐​     4​☐​     NA ​☐​

Part 3: Learn from inspirational policy examples in other intermediary cities

Use the overview Table A C.4 to explore concrete policy examples that are relevant to your city. Start by clarifying your city’s ambition by defining an aspirational city type and overall vision. Then, identify the pathway to reach this ambition by examining which key functions your city needs to strengthen, drawing on the self‑assessment results in Part 2 to identify priority areas for improvement. Finally, take a look at the policy examples in the table below to identify practical actions and approaches that can help strengthen these functions and support your city’s transition towards its aspirational profile.

Table A C.4. Map of the inspirational policy examples in intermediary cities

Inspirational policy examples	City, Country	Business	Knowledge	Transport	Housing	Culture	Retail	Health	Government
1: Joint transportation association	Alba Iulia, Romania			✓					✓
2: Dual education systems – Your Professional Partner Initiative	Alba county, Romania	✓	✓
3: Case di Quartiere: revitalisation of underused buildings	Brindisi, Italy	✓				✓
4: Appia 2030: an inter-municipal slow tourism strategy	Brindisi, Italy	✓				✓
5: Co-ordinated intermunicipal land use planning	Most/ Ústí Region, Czechia	✓		✓					✓
6: Smart City Concept	Most, Czechia	✓		✓	✓	✓
7: Lakeside Science & Technology Park	Klagenfurt, Austria	✓	✓
8: New high-speed railway	Klagenfurt, Austria			✓
9: Cultural strategy and initiatives	Liepaja, Latvia					✓
10: Offshore wind farms in the special economic zone	Liepaja, Latvia	✓
11: Using ERDF Funds to support sustainable urban development	Valence, France			✓	✓			✓
12: Regenerating the retail sector through the “Action Cœur de Ville”	Valence, France				✓	✓	✓
13: Girona Health Campus	Girona-Salt, Spain		✓					✓
14: Urban regeneration through social housing	Como, Italy				✓
15: Braga’s local housing strategy	Braga, Portugal				✓
16. Leveraging silver economy through PPPs	Guimarães, Portugal					✓		✓
17: Green and Blue City Transformation	Ostrów Wielkopolski, Poland					✓
18: Renewable cross-border central heating system	Görlitz-Zgorzelec, Germany & Poland				✓
19: Rural Rail Mobility in Neckar‑Alb	Reutlingen and Tübingen, Germany			✓
20: Regenerating city centre into a mixed-use neighbourhood	Waterford, Ireland				✓	✓	✓

Note: ✓=The policy example contributes to strengthening the function.

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

Box A C.5. Policy example 1. Joint transportation association in Alba Iulia, Romania

Alba Iulia, an intermediary city in Romania, and surrounding municipalities, jointly established a metropolitan transport association to improve rural accessibility and mitigate the effects of administrative fragmentation. The city’s public transport network was deliberately designed to showcase rural products and tourism circuits, providing access to small and remote producers around the city, even when a shorter corridor might have been possible. This approach supported tourism, retail, and branding initiatives while strengthening co-operation between urban and rural communities.

Transport planning is based on the city’s Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan, first adopted in 2017 and updated in 2024, which aims to meet people’s mobility needs both in the city and in its broader area of influence, taking into account future mobility development trends such as electric alternatives. At the national level, Romania’s National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP) provides pilot investments in e-mobility, including new e-vehicle charging stations. Additionally, in 2018, the Ministry for Regional Development facilitated a joint procurement process for four municipalities across Romania, including Alba Iulia, to acquire electric buses at a lower cost.

Source: OECD (2026[1]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Alba Iulia, Romania”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2ef49817-en.

Box A C.6. Policy example 2. Dual education systems – Your Professional Partner Initiative in Alba County, Romania

In Alba County, Romania, vocational education was traditionally undervalued, leading to a shortage of skilled workers in key industries. To address this challenge, representatives from the automotive, food, ceramics, construction, paper, wood processing, metal, and defence industries partnered with the Alba County Council and the School Inspectorate to launch the initiative Your Professional Partner. The cost of approximately EUR 300 000 was funded by the Alba County Council and local business contributions. This has been supplemented by different stakeholders, including educators, counsellors, business mentors, and industry professionals.

The initiative aims to:

• Strengthen school-business collaboration

• Increase enrolment in vocational and dual education

• Provide hands-on experience through internships and apprenticeships

• Improve youth employability through career guidance, industry visits, and educational fairs

• Engage parents and teachers in shaping career pathways

Source: OECD (2026[1]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Alba Iulia, Romania”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2ef49817-en.

Box A C.7. Policy example 3. Case di Quartiere in Brindisi, Italy

In Italy, the Case di Quartiere initiative revitalises underused municipal buildings across Brindisi, an intermediary city in the Puglia Region, transforming them into multifunctional neighbourhood hubs that provide cultural activities, training, co-working opportunities, and welfare services. It operates under a collaborative governance model that fosters citizen participation and combines municipal co-ordination with partnerships from the third sector and non-profit organisations. The network involves 10 managing organisations, 121 operators, 131 partner entities, and 8 schools, engaging over 2 000 citizens. Residents are directly involved in co-designing services through public calls, training programmes.

Puglia Region co-ordinated the initiative and financed it through the Regional Programme on Social Innovation Hubs: European Social Fund (ESF) and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) 2014-2020. By 2025, eight hubs were operational and two more were under renovation, including heritage buildings and properties confiscated from organised crime. Each hub has a distinct profile thematic focus ranging from sport and slow tourism to music, theatre, entrepreneurship, and social innovation. Hubs offer services such as mentoring, digital literacy, and business support. Examples include the Molo12 hub at Palazzo Guerrieri, Scuole Pie (former convent), which centres on entrepreneurship and fab-lab activities, and neighbourhood centres dedicated to youth engagement and cultural programming.

Source: OECD (2026[2]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Brindisi, Italy”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b3a6ab2c-en.

Box A C.8. Policy example 4. Appia 2030: an inter-municipal slow tourism strategy in Brindisi, Italy

In Italy, MediAree is a national urban programme which supported 12 pilot cities with capacity-building activities including workshops, training sessions, technical assistance, and peer-to-peer exchanges with large metropolitan areas. It promoted participatory and place-based approaches, encouraging local authorities to co-design integrated and transformative strategies that respond to local needs while aligning with national and EU priorities.

Through the MediAree programme, Brindisi, an intermediary city in the Puglia region, joined forces with surrounding municipalities to develop a slow tourism strategy called Appia 2030 in 2022. The strategy allowed participating municipalities to establish a common communication plan, enhance services provided along the Via Appia route and organise events with a view to gain UNESCO heritage recognition.

Source: OECD (2026[2]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Brindisi, Italy”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b3a6ab2c-en.

Box A C.9. Policy example 5. Intermunicipal co-operation in the Ústí Region, Czechia

The Ústí Region in Czechia actively convenes municipalities and national stakeholders twice a year to co-ordinate land-use planning. Following such a meeting in 2023, the region instigated a working group of municipalities to develop cycling infrastructure. The leadership of the regional government helped initiate new intermunicipal projects among municipalities that had not previously collaborated in this manner, including planning a new “Route 66” cycle tourism route connecting Most to the city of Chomutov. This collaboration was also supported by the Ústí nad Labem Integrated Territorial Investment (ITI) initiative, through which EU funds for infrastructure are distributed at the regional level to all of the participating municipalities. The Ústí ITI is guided by an integrated investment strategy agreed upon by the 132 municipalities within its jurisdiction, promoting co-operation.

The experience of the city of Most suggests that co-operation and co-ordination on transport planning works best when it seeks to respond to concrete challenges and when municipalities involved have shared objectives. Most holds regular meetings with the mayors of the other municipalities within its “municipality with extended powers” (MEP) administrative district to co-ordinate transport services.

Source: OECD (2026[3]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Most, Czechia”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/fe024be7-en.

Box A C.10. Policy example 6. Smart City Concept in Most, Czechia

Following the introduction of Czechia’s national Smart City Concept in 2018, Most, an intermediary city in the Ústí region, has produced its own Smart City Concept (Koncepce SMART city města Most), which envisions data-driven city management, enhanced citizen engagement, support for business, and integration of solutions across sectors such as transport, logistics, energy, public administration, culture, sports, and tourism. Key objectives include: optimising resource and energy efficiency, improving transport and mobility, enabling effective data sharing and public services by integrating smart tools across city operations.

One of Most’s key Smart City projects is using “digital passports” to track the condition of city-owned assets, schedule maintenance and prioritise investment. The city has recently expanded this internal system to introduce a public passport system for trees called “Trees under control” (Stromy pod kontrolou), through which residents are encouraged to submit information about the trees on their property (e.g. species, age, height, condition) via an online portal, which is then displayed on an interactive map on the municipality’s website.

Source: OECD (2026[3]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Most, Czechia”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/fe024be7-en.

Box A C.11. Policy example 7. Lakeside Science & Technology Park in Klagenfurt, Austria

The Lakeside Science & Technology Park in Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, an intermediary city and the capital city of Carinthia, Austria, serves as Carinthia’s centre for digital innovation, a thriving technological hub developed through collaboration between the city, local universities, and the business community. It brings together developers, start-ups, and established companies with cutting-edge infrastructure and leading research institutions. As of 2025, the park hosted 1 800 employees across 70 companies and 9 research institutions, with an occupancy rate close to 100%. By 2030, it is expected to accommodate around 2 500 professionals. The park receives regional government support such as ownership subsidies, covering around 20% of investment costs for new construction phases.

Originally established to support the Information and Communication Technology sector, the park now fosters globally competitive technologies through unique initiatives. The park exemplifies a dynamic ecosystem where research, development, and market application converge, delivering fast, scalable, and future-oriented solutions. Ongoing research projects at the park developed by various partners (research centres and academic partners) include the use of new technologies of driving economic activity, robotics or the use of digital tools in urban and policy design.

Source: OECD (2026[4]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Klagenfurt, Austria”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/df0052f0-en.

Box A C.12. Policy example 8. New high-speed railway connection in Southern Austria, Austria

Koralm Railway, together with its flagship investment, the Koralm Tunnel, is one of the biggest infrastructure projects in Austria, with an estimated cost of EUR 7 billion. The 130km route will connect Klagenfurt, Villach and Graz, replacing the existing bus line from Graz to Klagenfurt, reducing travel time and improving links between the neighbouring states of Carinthia and Styria. The EU post-pandemic recovery instrument, NextGenerationEU, contributes EUR 543 million in loans and grants to the project. Following its completion at the end of 2025, the Koralm Railway is expected to bring in EUR 167 million per year to the region.

The new railway has substantially reduced travel times: the train ride between Klagenfurt, an intermediary city and Graz, Austria’s second largest city, dropped from over 2 hours to just 45 minutes. This new development will reshape regional economic dynamics and expand the city’s catchment area, enabling Klagenfurt to transition from a rural-surrounded intermediary city to one closely connected with major urban centres. The city of Klagenfurt is also planning to widen its current pedestrian zone in Alter Platz – one of the city’s main squares – and to improve pedestrian and cycling infrastructure near the train station, which is becoming a more important urban node following the Koralm Railway development.

Source: OECD (2026[4]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Klagenfurt, Austria”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/df0052f0-en.

Box A C.13. Policy example 9. Cultural strategy and initiatives in Liepaja, Latvia

Liepaja, an intermediary city in Latvia, has been selected as one of the two European Capitals of Culture for 2027. The city has implemented measures based on universal design principles, improving infrastructure to ensure accessibility for all. A notable example is the installation of a wooden platform on Liepaja’s beach, which facilitates access for wheelchair users and families with pushchairs. These initiatives form part of the Sustainable EU Tourism – Shaping the Tourism of Tomorrow project, which supports EU destinations in their transition towards greater sustainability and resilience. Community involvement is a cornerstone for the success, with Liepaja enjoying strong public support for its inclusive and forward-thinking approach.

This designation has enabled the city to harness its rich cultural heritage and strategically leverage its assets, while securing its position as a city of growing importance within the EU. Through the development of a comprehensive cultural strategy extending to 2035, Liepaja has identified key areas for action to strengthen its regional influence and expand its presence in the wider European context. The city has set ambitious goals, including rising from its current position of 61^st to the top 20 in the European Commission’s cultural richness index, and achieving recognition as a UNESCO Creative City in Media and Arts. To realise these objectives, Liepaja plans to establish strategic partnerships with other European cities and collaborate on the organisation of festivals and cultural events.

Source: OECD (2026[5]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Liepaja-Saldus, Latvia”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a6a418d3-en.

Box A C.14. Policy example 10. Offshore wind farms in the special economic zone, Liepaja, Latvia

The Liepaja Special Economic Zone (SEZ) was established in March 1997, with its legal status and associated benefits set to remain in effect until December 2035. Covering approximately 40 square kilometres, the SEZ encompasses key strategic areas including the Port of Liepaja, Liepaja International Airport, and the former military base of Karosta. It operates under the provisions of the Law on the Liepaja SEZ, which outlines four distinct modes of operation for businesses, each offering varying degrees of eligibility for tax incentives. The Liepaja SEZ encompasses several industrial and business parks, including the VOBP, Liepaja Business Centre, Lauma, and Karosta Industrial Park. These facilities provide essential infrastructure and services to support a diverse range of businesses, These facilities provide essential infrastructure and services to support a diverse range of businesses, thereby reinforcing Liepaja’s role as an intermediary city.

Liepaja SEZ has also outlined a port development plan to establish a logistics base for offshore wind farms, in an 86-hectare area within the breakwater-protected port. The plan foresees the construction of several offshore wind farms in the Baltic Sea, in line with the international agreements of the Baltic Sea Spatial Plan. Starting from 2027, the development of offshore wind farms in the Baltic Sea presents a strategic opportunity for Latvia’s major ports. The Port of Liepaja is particularly well positioned, with a proposed support base that meets most key criteria. The related port expansion project in Liepaja involves dredging and widening the existing fairway.

Source: OECD (2026[5]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Liepaja-Saldus, Latvia”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a6a418d3-en.

Box A C.15. Policy example 11. Leveraging ERDF for strengthening urban centres in Valence, France

Under the 2021-2027 European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) programming and support for sustainable urban development, the municipality of Valence received European funding (EUR 2.28 million) for its sustainable development strategy “Valence the attractive: nature and leisure in the heart of the city”. The strategy aimed to strengthen the various functions of the city centre (economic, housing, services, leisure), support active mobility and sporting activities among Valence’s residents and to integrate nature into the city to create a pleasant living environment whilst combating urban heat islands. The municipality of Valence is also involved in five other ERDF-funded projects, including the construction of a second coronary angiography suite at the Valence Hospital, energy and thermal refurbishment projects for residential complexes in the municipality, and support for the development, structuring, and promotion of a soft mobility corridor between Lyon and Avignon (the ViaRhôna).

Projects launched as part of Valence’s sustainability plan contribute to the sustainable regeneration of the city centre and support its intermediary role at the scale of its functional urban area. Projects also bring additional support to selected intermediary city functions for which Valence recorded lower performances, such as healthcare, thereby helping to strengthen Valence’s role as a regional hub.

Source: OECD (2026[6]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in France”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f92c5f72-en.

Box A C.16. Policy example 12. Regenerating the retail sector through the “Action Cœur de Ville” programme in Valence, France

The national Action Coeur de Ville (ACV) programme was launched in France in 2018 to address challenges commonly faced by medium-sized municipalities in France (10 000-100 000 residents), through five priority areas: housing, retail and economic development, mobility, sustainable urban planning, and local services. ACV’s multi-level governance emphasises the central role of local actors in developing coherent city-scale projects through co-ordination with the State. Projects are formalised through multi-year agreements involving the municipality, region, and inter-municipal authority.

As a beneficiary of this national support programme, the municipality of Valence signed a framework agreement in 2018 to implement the ACV programme, defining a place-based strategy to revitalise its city centre. The strategy focuses on reducing retail space vacancy, revitalising public commercial spaces and renovating housing. Key actions included launching the Mon Cœur Valence (My Valence heart) visual brand, organising innovation competition among city centre retailers, and undertaking several major projects – such as the construction of a new waterpark (parc aqualudique de l’Épervière), and renovation of the Jacques Chirac Convention Centre, inaugurated in 2022 – to boost tourism and business attractiveness. Between 2018 and 2022, Valence delivered 47 projects under the ACV programme, helping reduce commercial vacancy from 7.5% to 5.8%, increase bike‑share use by 15%, and raise cycling activity in the city centre by 35%. The municipality continues to participate in the programme, with over 60 projects planned for 2023-2026, including housing projects under the Programmed Housing Improvement and Urban Renewal Scheme (OPAH-RU).

Source: OECD (2026[6]), “Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in France”, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f92c5f72-en.

Box A C.17. Policy example 13. Regional Health Campus, in Girona, Spain

Girona is an intermediary city with approximately 100 000 inhabitants in the Autonomous Community of Catalonia, Spain. A new regional “health campus” (Campus de Salut) is planned between Girona and the neighbouring municipality of Salt. The development will bring together the future Josep Trueta University Hospital, Santa Caterina Hospital, and new facilities dedicated to health education, research, and innovation. With an estimated investment of approximately EUR 700 million, the project is primarily funded by the Government of Catalonia (Generalitat de Catalunya), with additional support expected from public health budgets and institutional partners.

The integration of research, education, and healthcare facilities will significantly expand capacity, modernise infrastructure, and improve service co-ordination. Once completed, currently expected by the end of 2031, the Girona-Salt Health Campus will serve a substantially larger population while providing higher-quality and more specialised care, thereby strengthening its role within the regional health and education system. By co-locating university faculties in medicine, nursing, and health sciences with hospitals and research centres, the campus will foster a dynamic ecosystem that integrates teaching, clinical practice, and innovation.

Source: Girona Health Campus to receive €700M investment and be ready by 2031, Health tenders the tender for the projects of the new hospital of the Girona Health Campus, The future Trueta hospital will have a promenade, squares and will be connected to Girona and Salt

Box A C.18. Policy example 14. Urban regeneration through social housing in Como, Italy

Como is an intermediary city in Italy, with approximately 83 000 inhabitants. The city is facing a severe housing crisis, with more than 1 300 vacant public units and private market rents exceeding EUR 1 400 for a 100 m² apartment, making stable housing increasingly unaffordable for workers and families. To tackle this crisis, the Lombardy region has launched a targeted social housing project in Camnago Volta, investing EUR 1 million to convert an underused building into 13 regulated‑rent apartments. The project is implemented by the Cooperativa di Abitazione Comense and includes seismic upgrades, energy‑efficiency improvements, barrier‑free accessibility, and full systems modernisation, transforming a partially industrial structure into quality housing.

The apartments will be allocated not only to lower‑income families excluded from public housing, but also to people needing temporary accommodation for work, study, or healthcare, addressing a previously underserved demographic group. This initiative aligns with Lombardy’s broader strategy to expand social housing for middle‑income households facing rising rents, with the region emerging as the first in Italy to structure such a co‑ordinated approach. The creation of new social and affordable housing units helps retain essential workers, counter population decline, and support the local economy, especially as Como experiences a widening mismatch between labour demand and available resident workforce. By creating affordable, well‑located housing, the project strengthens Como’s functional role within the cross‑border Lombardy-Ticino labour pool.

Source: Comune di Como - Assegnazione in concessione di unità immobiliari ad uso abitativo per finalità di housing sociale

Como, emergenza casa: oltre 1.300 alloggi pubblici sfitti

Box A C.19. Policy example 15. Local housing strategy in Braga, Portugal

As an intermediary city in Portugal, Braga’s housing strategy leverages national legislation to adopt a co‑ordinated, data‑driven approach linking housing policy with spatial planning. The municipality bases its decisions on a regularly updated diagnosis of housing needs, demographic trends, household financial capacity and housing deficits, drawing on official national datasets (INE and PORDATA) to track pressures such as population growth, positive migratory balances, and densification trends in central parishes.

This evidence‑based strategy enables Braga to expand land availability for residential construction where housing pressures are the highest, limit dispersed low‑density growth, and promote denser development in already developed areas. Through its Local Housing Strategy, the city sets clear goals, prioritises interventions, and deploys targeted programmes, such as municipal rental support and national housing programmes like 1st Right, Door 65, and IFRRU (Municipal Programmes in Urban Rehabilitation Areas) to increase access to affordable, adequate housing.

By aligning housing with spatial planning, Braga strengthens its role as a regional residential hub, accommodating population inflows, supporting labour mobility, and ensuring balanced territorial development within the Cávado region.

Source: dashousing.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/CM_BRAGA_DASH_presentation.pdf

Box A C.20. Policy example 16. Leveraging the silver economy through Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Guimarães, Portugal

In Guimarães, an intermediary city in Portugal, the Vida Feliz programme connects the city with private companies to promote active ageing among people aged 55 and over. Managed by the municipality and Tempo Livre, a local social co-operative established in 1999, the programme offers activities combining physical exercise, leisure and socialisation, using sport and leisure facilities across the city to foster an age‑diverse local community.

Since its launch, the programme has shown significant impact: it expanded from 60 weekly classes and 400 participants in its first year to 87 classes and 939 participants, eventually reaching 106 weekly classes and 1 100 participants before the COVID‑19 interruption. This growth reflects strong demand among older adults and highlights the programme’s role in combating isolation, improving mobility, and supporting physical and mental health.

By partnering with universities, SMEs, gyms, and healthcare institutions, Vida Feliz also strengthens the local silver economy, generating new services, supporting specialised employment, and positioning Guimarães as a regional hub for active ageing and longevity innovation.

Source : VIDA FELIZ

Box A C.21. Policy example 17. Green‑and‑Blue City Transformation in Ostrów Wielkopolski, Poland

Ostrów Wielkopolski’s Green and Blue City Transformation is an example of a community‑driven urban revitalisation that enhances the well-being of an intermediary city’s residents. With around 70 000 inhabitants, the city aims to reclaim its centre by integrating high‑quality public spaces, green infrastructure, and socially inclusive planning approaches. Launched in 2020 with EUR 2 million in EU funding, the initiative includes the redesign of central areas, including the creation of the Ostrów Local Activity Centre, the modernisation of the Amphitheatre, and upgrades of the Ogródki Jordanowskie playground.

A defining feature of the project is the conversion of the main pedestrian street into a “living street”, prioritising walking and cycling while hosting cultural events such as outdoor cinema and concerts. This physical transformation has been paired with an innovative Revitalisation Participatory Budget, encouraging residents to co‑create activities and shape the future of newly revitalised spaces.

Since 2022, the city has also invested extensively in green‑blue infrastructure, planting 34 trees, 7 000 shrubs, and 16 000 perennials, while modernising key squares, streets, and public monuments. These actions illustrate Ostrów’s commitment to reinforcing environmental resilience, encouraging social engagement, and building a vibrant city centre serving the wider region.

Source: https://urbact.eu/good-practices/green-and-blue-city-transformation

Box A C.22. Policy example 18. Cross-border central heating system in Görlitz, Germany and Zgorzelec, Poland

Görlitz (Germany) and Zgorzelec (Poland) are two shrinking twin cities on the German‑Polish border that are jointly developing Europe’s first climate‑neutral cross‑border district‑heating network. This initiative is advancing their climate transition goals and strengthening their residential function across the wider region. By 2030, the “United Heat” project will connect both cities via a 12‑kilometre network, including a 3.8‑kilometre cross‑border pipeline. The system will deliver heat generated exclusively from renewable sources such as solar thermal energy, seasonal storage, lake and wastewater heat recovery, biomass boilers, and power‑to‑heat systems.

The project involves up to EUR 195 million in investment and is expected to save up to 50 000 tonnes of CO₂ annually once operational. A Polish‑German joint venture between SEC Zgorzelec, Stadtwerke Görlitz, E.ON subsidiaries, and Veolia will manage production, operation, and financing.

By replacing coal‑ and gas‑based heating infrastructure, the initiative improves energy security and accelerates climate neutrality while enhancing urban attractiveness and supporting long‑term residential stability across both sides of the border – potentially limiting further shrinking, which is a common challenge among intermediary cities in Europe.

Source: Görlitz and Zgorzelec to build Europe’s first climate-neutral cross-border heating network | Futurium

Box A C.23. Policy example 19. Rural Rail Mobility in Reutlingen and Tübingen, Germany

The Neckar‑Alb Regional Light Rail project is a major mobility investment connecting the urban centres of Reutlingen and Tübingen, two intermediary cities in southwestern Germany located approximately 20 km apart, with surrounding rural municipalities (with around 700 000 residents in the whole region). It modernises and reactivates existing railway lines and adds new tram‑train infrastructure to create a seamless regional network. The overall project is estimated to cost EUR 1.133 billion (2016, excluding planning costs) and will deliver 198 km of track, 137 km of electrified lines, 38 km of new or reactivated routes, and 55 new stations.

Individual project modules include new tramway segments such as the Reutlingen Gartenstraße line (EUR 140.7 million) and the Pfullingen Alte Bahnstraße line (EUR 111.1 million), designed to serve up to 18 300 passengers per day.

The system will reduce road congestion, increase accessibility for rural residents without access to cars, and strengthen both Reutlingen and Tübingen’s role as an intermediary regional hub. By offering reliable 15-30‑minute services, it enhances economic integration, improves sustainability, and supports long‑term inclusive regional development.

Source: https://www.ramboll.com/projects/transport/enabling-rural-mobility-frequent-rail-service-in-the-neckar-alb-region

https://www.mainspring.co.uk/industry-news/regional-stadtbahn-neckar-alb-progress/

Box A C.24. Policy example 20. Regenerating a city centre into a mixed-use neighbourhood in Waterford, Ireland

The city of Waterford, an intermediary city in Ireland with around 60 000 inhabitants, is undertaking a co-ordinated set of major regeneration projects to strengthen its cultural and business functions, supported by large‑scale national investment. The flagship North Quays Strategic Development Zone received EUR 170.6 million in government funding in 2022 to deliver an integrated transport hub, a sustainable transport bridge, and improved access to the city centre, unlocking a new mixed‑use neighbourhood that will extend and revitalise Waterford’s commercial core. Under the Urban Regeneration and Development Fund (URDF), the city is completing 21 projects across the Viking Triangle and the emerging Waterford Cultural Quarter, including new cultural facilities, refurbished heritage buildings, and an innovation hub on Hanover Street.

Further investment includes EUR 30.3 million in URDF Call 2 for public‑realm upgrades that enhance walkability and attract footfall, while projects like the City of Lights initiative illuminate 19 historic buildings to boost evening‑time cultural activity and tourism. Together, these interventions strengthen Waterford’s role as a regional cultural anchor and business hub, increasing economic activity and improving the urban experience for residents, visitors, and enterprises.

Source: https://waterfordcouncil.ie/services/economic-development/ccmg/regeneration-investment/

Part 4: Develop refined policies and action plans

After assessing your policies using the checklist in Part 2 and drawing inspiration from the policy examples in Part 3, you can translate these insights into a concrete and actionable roadmap. This process should be iterative, inclusive, and aligned across levels of government to ensure both effectiveness and long-term sustainability. The following steps provide a structured approach to guide this process and ensure alignment across levels of government. You can use the template in the Annex E to record and share your results.

1. Individual self-assessment: Each municipality within the FUA conducts a self‑assessment of its policies using the checklist in Part 2 to identify strengths, gaps and priority areas for improvement. This step aims to:

• Identify key strengths and assets as well as policy gaps and bottlenecks

• Highlight priority areas for improvement in relation to such as workforce, connectivity, and well-being

Where possible, this assessment should be supported by data and evidence, including local indicators and stakeholder input.

2. Joint review and consolidation: Municipalities within the FUA meet to collectively review and discuss the results of their self‑assessments. This step helps to:

• Identify shared challenges affecting the broader functional area

• Recognise complementarities across municipalities (e.g. functions, service provision)

• Detect opportunities for co-ordinated or joint action, particularly in areas such as transport, housing, and service delivery

A joint diagnosis is critical to move beyond administrative boundaries and adopt a functional, place-based perspective.

3. Dialogue and feedback with higher levels of government: The consolidated findings are shared with regional and/or national authorities to obtain feedback, ensure policy alignment, and identify opportunities for support in areas needing improvement. This dialogue aims to:

• Ensure vertical policy coherence (local-regional-national alignment)

• Identify regulatory, financial, or institutional constraints that require higher-level intervention

• Explore opportunities for targeted support, such as funding programmes, technical assistance, or policy reforms

As some policy priorities at the local level may depend on prior or parallel actions at regional or national levels, this exchange is important for setting a coherent roadmap and ensuring effective implementation. In addition, as many policy levers (e.g. infrastructure investment, education systems) lie beyond the municipal level, this step is crucial to ensure a feasible and supported roadmap.

4. Collective priority setting: Based on the joint review and feedback received, municipalities agree on a set of common priorities to be addressed at the FUA level, taking into account functional interdependencies and available capacities. These priorities should:

• Build on local strengths and key assets

• Be realistic and achievable, considering available capacities and resources

• Contribute to broader regional and national goals (e.g. cohesion, competitiveness)

Prioritisation is essential, as ICs often face capacity and fiscal constraints and cannot address all challenges simultaneously.

5. Action planning: For each agreed priority, municipalities develop a joint or co-ordinated action plan, drawing on the inspirational policy examples in Part 3. Action plans should

• Define specific actions and deliverables

• Establish clear timelines and milestones

• Assign responsibilities across institutions

• Identify key partners and stakeholders (e.g. other municipalities, private sector, academia)

• Estimate budgetary needs and potential funding sources

• Include implementation status

You may use the action-planning template Table A C.5. Where relevant, municipalities can draw on policy examples and good practices from Part 3 to design context-specific solutions.

6. Mainstreaming action planning into strategic and programming documents: To support implementation and long-term impact, agreed actions should be integrated, where relevant, into existing local, regional and national strategies, such as urban development plans and regional development programmes. This helps to:

• Ensure policy coherence and continuity

• Facilitate access to funding and financing mechanisms

• Anchor the roadmap within established policy and investment frameworks

7. Implementation, monitoring, and iteration: To maintain momentum and ensure accountability, FUAs should establish a light monitoring and review mechanism. This could include:

• Regular progress reviews (e.g. annually)

• Use of key performance indicators (KPIs) aligned with priorities

• Mechanisms for stakeholder feedback

• Periodic revision of priorities and actions based on results and changing conditions

This iterative approach allows ICs to remain adaptive and resilient in the face of evolving economic, social, and environmental challenges

Table A C.5. Action planning template

Ref	Priority	Actions required	Timeline	Responsibility	Key partners	Budget	Status
(example)	Assess gaps in quality and accessibility of essential local healthcare.	Map existing healthcare services within the FUA	XXX 2026 - XXX 2026	Director of XX	Municipality A, B, C	EUR XXX	Completed
		Collect and analyse local health data	XXX 2026 - XXX 2026	Director of XX	Municipality A, B, C	EUR XXX	In progress
		Conduct community needs survey	XXX 2026 - XXX 2026	Director of XX	Municipality A, B, C	EUR XXX	Not started yet
		Evaluate physical and digital accessibility	XXX 2026 - XXX 2026	Director of XX	Regional government	EUR XXX	Not started yet
		Identify infrastructure and workforce gaps	XXX 2026 - XXX 2026	Director of XX	Regional government	EUR XXX	Not started yet
1
2
3
4
…

Source: Author’s own elaboration.

References

[1] OECD (2026), Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Alba Iulia, Romania, OECD publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2ef49817-en.

[2] OECD (2026), Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Brindisi, Italy, OECD publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b3a6ab2c-en.

[6] OECD (2026), Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in France, OECD publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f92c5f72-en.

[4] OECD (2026), Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Klagenfurt, Austria, OECD publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/df0052f0-en.

[5] OECD (2026), Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Liepaja-Saldus, Latvia, OECD publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a6a418d3-en.

[3] OECD (2026), Unlocking the potential of intermediary cities for regional development in Most, Czechia, OECD publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/fe024be7-en.