Navigating existing funding
In Norway, there are various national support initiatives, grant schemes and other types of support initiatives for sustainable urban development. The navigation and application process may differ depending on the type of initiative, with information communicated through different channels (Huynh et al. 2022). The municipality representatives noted that there are various types of support available in Norway for sustainable urban development, but it is not always clear how to navigate them and find the relevant ones. Nevertheless, none of the interviewed municipality representatives described that as a major challenge but rather as an area with room for improvement. All stressed that FutureBuilt is a private initiative co-owned by the municipalities. None of the interviewees were familiar with any other initiatives like FutureBuilt (Interviewees 2, 3 & 4). Similar views were expressed by the representative from the FutureBuilt secretariat, who reported that many actors beyond the partner municipalities also turn to FutureBuilt for help and guidance. While they do not receive official support from FutureBuilt, the website functions as a hub for information and guidance on sustainable construction. Hence, other actors navigate FutureBuilt for support (Interviewee 1).
The first partner municipality (Drammen municipality) to join FutureBuilt was approached by the secretariat and asked to participate. With time and as the initiative gained recognition, the municipalities of Oslo, Bærum, Asker, Nordre Follo, Lillestrøm, all in the Oslo region, and later Bergen in Western Norway, joined, either by themselves approaching the initiative or being approached (Interviewee 1). The city council of the given municipality decides on whether to join the initiative or not, as there is a fairly significant membership fee (which varies from municipality to municipality) to participate in the initiative. That fee is charged to municipal budgets – the decision to join is thus a political question (Interviewee 3; Drammen Kommune 2021). The initiative is not designed to provide financial support or any form of funding to the partner municipalities or FutureBuilt projects. Instead, FutureBuilt offers support in other ways such as knowledge and expertise, networks, a forum for dialogue between developers and municipalities and a set of criteria to follow. FutureBuilt can communicate to the project developers about where they can turn to apply for funding (e.g. to Enova) but is not in charge of the funding in any way (Interviewees 1 & 2). FutureBuilt can use its website to announce when and where the project developers can apply for funding (see, for example, FutureBuilt 2022b; FutureBuilt 2020).
Interplay between the actors involved
Many of the initiatives and programmes aimed at sustainable urban development in Norway are top-down, meaning that they are initiated at state level and are designed to steer national efforts in certain areas. However, a shift can be seen, with initiatives originating from different actors and with a regional or municipal focus (Huynh et al. 2022). As previously mentioned, FutureBuilt is not an initiative that originated at state level. Rather, it originated from a private initiative partnering up with municipalities and various interest groups and authorities and is a recipient of state funds. “FutureBuilt is very much built from the bottom-up. We used our network to get other actors involved and evolved from being a very small player to being an influential player recognised by many,” explained the representative from the secretariat (Interviewee 1). As FutureBuilt has attracted much interest and requests by municipalities to participate, the initiative aims to span the entire country. However, that would require a funding commitment at state level (FutureBuilt 2023; Interviewee 1). FutureBuilt has a cooperation agreement with the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (Kommunal- og distriktsdepartementet, KDD) and is engaged in dialogue with ministries at the administrative and political level, enabling FutureBuilt to express its aims and what it needs in order to progress (Interviewee 1).
On another level, there is a chance for the municipalities to influence the direction of FutureBuilt through dialogue during board meetings of the initiative. “The municipalities have what I perceive to be a fairly large role and are involved in influencing how the programme is developed based on the needs of the municipalities,” said one interviewee (interviewee 4). That influence is visible in the transition to FutureBuilt 2.0. The partner municipalities expressed the wish for a greater focus on social sustainability and projects that cover a larger geographical area (i.e. neighbourhoods instead of single buildings), which FutureBuilt 2.0 now covers (FutureBuilt 2019b; Interviewee 4). Moreover, FutureBuilt is perceived as a good system for sharing insights on the types of challenges municipalities face in their work on sustainable development and spatial planning. State actors can use this system to understand better the needs of the municipalities and draw on such insights to organise the support better (Interviewees 2 & 4).
Regarding state support, influence and dialogue between municipalities and the state level in general, it was noted that there are numerous counselling and training events at state level with courses and webinars aimed at municipalities. However, possibilities to influence the type of support provided to the municipalities by the state level seem to be somewhat limited (Interviewee 2).
Organisation and leadership of implementation of national support initiatives
The municipalities have the main planning responsibility for local urban development by creating municipal master plans (kommuneplan), area zoning plans (områdeplan) and detailed zoning plans (detaljregulering) (Huynh et al. 2022). FutureBuilt cannot, and should not, take over the municipalities’ planning responsibility. All FutureBuilt pilot projects must follow the overall spatial planning, regulations and guidelines for the various areas. If a potential project does not match the municipalities’ plans on land use, it will not be carried out. ”We are very keen not to work over the head of municipality, but with the municipality and work to provide quality in a way that the municipality wants,” said the representative from the secretariat (Interviewee 1). Insights from FutureBuilt can be used when municipalities are developing spatial plans. In other words, the initiative can exert an influence and show good examples but cannot itself decide the outcome (Interviewee 4). Further, one interviewee explained that FutureBuilt can have a positive impact and indirectly steer the direction taken in the municipality. “Through FutureBuilt and their criteria, it is possible to ensure that the project must have the lowest possible greenhouse gas emissions. It is a way of guaranteeing effective climate and environmental measures for a project. So that’s the advantage of FutureBuilt, but to emphasise, that is on top of the municipality’s regular planning” (Interviewee 2).
FutureBuilt revolves around implementing ambitious pilot projects. Each of the pilot projects must have innovative showcase qualities and the developers must comply to a set of quality criteria, such as on circularity, living environment, greenhouse gas emissions, social sustainability and waste management (see FutureBuilt n.d.c). As previously mentioned, the developers do not receive funding from FutureBuilt to implement the pilot projects. However, they receive guidance about where they can apply for funding opportunities, assistance, quality assurance, reputation building, media profiling, prioritised municipal case management and reduced building application fees offered by some of the municipalities (FutureBuilt 2019a). In addition, the initiative is seen as an important tool for the municipalities to bring in the private building sector as well, which accounts for a large share of developers in the country. It can sometimes be difficult for municipalities to reach and work with such stakeholders, but FutureBuilt has established a forum for improved collaboration between municipalities and private developers (Interviewee 4).
Regarding leadership of implementation of the initiative and especially the pilot projects, it was underlined that active leadership was needed; a detailed set of quality criteria and continuous work are required to oversee the implementation process – that is the responsibility of the FutureBuilt secretariat and its main task (Interviewee 1). During the interviews, the point was raised that there could be a risk of private developers applying to the initiative primarily with the aim of benefiting from media attention, prioritised case management and reduced building fees. However, none of the interviewees held that for highly problematic, since the developers must still meet the FutureBuilt criteria and follow the requirements in the municipal spatial plans; any developers failing to meet those criteria cannot be part of the initiative (Interviewees 2 & 3).