Size matters: action space for sustainability transition among planners in Swedish municipalities

Figures & data

Table 1. The number of Swedish municipalities, the number of municipalities that participated in the survey, according to SALAR (2017), and the number of ‘Climate Initiative municipalities’.

Municipal categories	Total No. of municipalities per category A-C, in Sweden	No of municipalities responding the survey [No. of Climate Initiative municipalities among respondents]
A. Municipalities with cities and near cities
A1. Cities, with a population of at least 200 000 inhabitants	3	1 [0]
A2. Municipalities near cities, where more than 40% of the working population commute to work in a large city	43	10 [3]
B. Municiplaities with medium-sized towns and municipalities near medium-sized towns
B3. Medium-sized towns, with a population of at least 50 000 inhabitants and at least 40 000 inhabitants in the largest urban area.	21	13 [9]
B4. Municipalities near medium-sized towns, where more than 40% of the working population commute to work in a medium-sized town.	52	16 [0]
B5. Municipalities with a low commuting rate near medium-sized towns.	35	12 [1]
C. Municipalities with smaller towns and rural municipalities
C6. Small towns, with a population of at least 15 000 and less than 40 000 inhabitants in the largest urban area.	29	10 [3]
C7. Municipalities near small towns, where more than 30% of the working population commute to work in a small town.	52	17 [0]
C8. Rural municipalities, with a population of less than 15 000 inhabitants in the closest town, very low commuting rate (less than 30%).	40	16 [1]
C9. Rural municipalities with tourism industry.	15	8 [0]
Total	290	103 [17]

Table 2. The results of the Mann–Whitney U’s Kruskal–Wallis test of the null hypotheses, the character of the municipalities, and the action space of municipal planners.

Variables	Null hypothesis rejected (size matters) = x	Variable content (all questions had the alternatives ‘to a very high degree,’ ‘to a high degree,’ ‘to some extent,’ and ‘not at all’)
F1		Changes connected to climate change and digitalisation of the energy system and transportation (like smart grids, autonomous cars, sharing economy) will lead to radical changes of our cities and regions in 20–30 years
F2	x	Is there any long-term (approximately 20–30 years) strategic planning in your municipality at the moment (like adaptation of the infrastructure for challenges like climate change, digitalisation or resource exploitation)?
F3	x	New technologies in the transport system will affect the planning of our cities and regions through autonomous and connected cars
F4a		Technological changes will affect the planning of smart and sustainable cities and regions – The ‘sensor city’
F4b		– eGovernance (new forms of citizen participation)
F4c		– New adapted ways of construction (compact cities, garden cities, mixed cities)
F5		The municipality is part of a network that regards sustainable regional planning – sustainable mobility
F6		The municipality applies for funds from national programs to manage challenges that regard digitalisation and climate transition (like development and innovation projects)
F7	x	There are ongoing projects regarding climate transition or digitalisation which involve the planning processes in the municipality
F8a	x	We get new information within the municipal administration about new technologies and challenges related to climate change in society – Via experts within the municipality
F8b	x	– Via collaboration with the university
F8c	x	– Via collaboration with consultants
F8d		– Via public reports from the government, the parliament, or the EU
F8e	x	– Via social media such as blogs, podcasts, networking services

SALAR. 2017. “Classification of Swedish Municipalities.” Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions. https://skr.se/download/18.6b78741215a632d39cbcc85/1487772640274/Classification%20of%20Swedish%20Municipalities%202017.pdf.

 Google Scholar