As part of DUST's research into improving participation processes, we conducted interviews with policymakers driving key sustainability transitions. This week, we focus on Groningen and two major transition policies, the Territorial Just Transition Fund (TJTP) and the National Programma Groningen (NPG). These conversations shed light on the unique challenges and opportunities in reaching and including least engaged communities (LECs) from a policymakers’ perspectives to support communities in shaping their future.
The TJTP primarily engages major regional players, such as companies, business organisations, labour unions, and educational institutions. However, interviewees highlighted its lack of robust participatory mechanisms directly involving citizens or specific communities. Instead, concerns of vulnerable groups affected by the transition are addressed indirectly through intermediary organisations. Interviewees explained how this gap arose due to the plan's technical nature, combined with significant time pressures from EU and national levels to swiftly develop the plan. Despite these initial shortcomings, efforts to directly engage citizens intensified during the implementation stage. For instance, a traveling festival was introduced to involve communities outside the labour market, promoting greater inclusivity and fostering broader participation in sustainability initiatives.
In contrast, the NPG was explicitly designed to engage Groningen's communities directly, addressing their social and emotional needs by empowering their voices and initiatives in sustainability transitions. Interviewees noted that the NPG employs diverse participatory methods such as workshops, gaming sessions, hackathons, and school programs, adapting to digital platforms during Covid-19 to engage with a broad-ranging audience. Meanwhile, local venues like supermarkets, market squares, and community centres play vital roles in engagement, complemented by innovative approaches in settings like farms and natural areas. The NPG also prioritises youth engagement, recognising their salient role in shaping Groningen's future and embedding sustainability thinking in the next generation.
In both transition policies though, interviewees note several key barriers to participation in sustainability transitions. For example, a significant challenge for engagement is the deep-seated distrust among Groningen residents towards national and provincial governments, exacerbated by controversial decisions on gas extraction. This distrust often led to defensiveness and division, hindering community engagement in decision-making processes. "One major sentiment expressed was a frustration with governmental decisions. Many felt that direct financial support would be more effective than complex projects," remarked one policymaker, echoing the sentiments of others.
Distance also posed a significant challenge to community engagement across Groningen's expansive territory. Remote towns often found themselves on the outskirts of participation due to limited connectivity with major cities. "If you want to go to the doctor, you have to travel 30 minutes by car, and if you don't have a car, you're stuck taking a 45-minute bus," explained one interviewee. The vast geographic spread of Groningen meant that only a few towns provided adequate support for residents in remote areas, exacerbating feelings of isolation and exclusion from decision-making processes.
Resource allocation within the NPG presented a dual challenge as highlighted by interviewees. While substantial resources were allocated for citizen engagement, limited economic resources sometimes hindered effective community outreach. "As an ambassador of the government, I see the growing gap between the haves and have-nots—in health, wealth, and opportunities," noted one policymaker. For instance, the funding process occasionally favoured ideas from individuals connected to organisations poised to benefit financially. In one example shared by an interviewee, a museum board member successfully proposed a project under the NPG, whereas ideas from ordinary citizens faced greater hurdles. This phenomenon often elevated well-known figures, dubbed the "usual suspects," whose proposals were more likely to receive funding. Meaning that despite efforts by the NPG to foster inclusivity, vulnerable neighbourhoods were often marginalised, perpetuating existing social inequalities.
The interviews in Groningen reveal both progress and ongoing challenges in involving least engaged communities (LECs) in sustainability efforts. While initiatives like the TJTP and NPG are making strides to be more inclusive, barriers like government distrust, geographic isolation, and unequal resource access remain significant hurdles. However, the innovative strategies being used to directly involve citizens offer a promising glimpse of a future where everyone can participate in driving sustainability forward. As DUST continues its work, there’s hope that these efforts will inspire even greater inclusivity and community empowerment. Stay tuned for further insights and developments!
Comments