Policy capacity: vertical and horizontal governance tensions
Land use sector
Vertical governance
In the land use sector, Icelandic municipalities generally enjoy considerable autonomy to create and update municipal master plans that guide local spatial planning. Nonetheless, they must adhere to national guidelines, such as those outlined in the National Planning Policy (Skipulagsstofnun, 2016, 2020). That sometimes results in regulatory tensions and sustainability trade-offs.
In Reykjavík, vertical governance tensions arise in cases where state-owned land falls within municipal boundaries, such as the domestic airport, which remains under national jurisdiction despite being located in the municipality (Interviewee 29, 2024). Such cases require coordination between municipal and national authorities, sometimes leading to conflicting interests regarding land use priorities. Additionally, while municipal master plans provide long-term direction, they must be approved by the National Planning Agency to ensure that local initiatives align with national objectives (Lidmo et al., 2020). Despite these hierarchical constraints, Reykjavík retains considerable policymaking flexibility in areas not subject to national oversight, such as urban densification strategies and climate-oriented spatial planning.
Horizontal governance
The horizontal governance structure for land use in Reykjavík is characterised by cross-sectoral collaboration, involving departments responsible for transport, housing, environment and public health. While this integrated approach enhances comprehensive urban development, coordination of efforts across multiple municipal departments and agencies remains complex.
As the largest municipality in the Capital Region, Reykjavík must also coordinate land use planning and infrastructure projects with neighbouring municipalities through the regional plan, overseen by the Association of Municipalities in the Capital Region (SSH, 2015; Skipulagsstofnun, 2020). This can prove challenging since it involves coordinating planning efforts across administrative boundaries while addressing the specific needs and priorities of each individual municipality. One challenge lies in ensuring compatibility between neighbouring land uses and the creation of cohesive and functional spaces across borders. Coordination of multiple stakeholders and sectors can be challenging, requiring robust governance frameworks and clear communication channels (Interviewee 29, 2024). Public engagement presents an additional challenge. Low public participation in planning discussions often limits citizen input, while in cases with high public engagement, discussions can become polarised, particularly on controversial land use decisions (Interviewee 29, 2024).
Despite these challenges, horizontal governance structures offer significant opportunities for intermunicipal cooperation. The regional plan, data-sharing initiatives and formal agreements strengthen cross-municipal coordination, promoting balanced and sustainable development. By harnessing these opportunities, municipalities in the Greater Reykjavík area have been able to address complex challenges, improve service delivery and join forces in the effort to create more cohesive, vibrant and sustainable communities. Within the municipality, collaboration between departments fosters better understanding of complex issues, leading to informed decisions and streamlined service delivery. Furthermore, it sparks innovation and agile responses to community needs (Interviewee 29, 2024).
Buildings and construction sector
Vertical governance
The governance of building regulations and housing policy in Iceland involves both national and municipal authorities as well as private sector actors. The national government establishes building standards, covering environmental performance, energy efficiency and sustainability requirements. Municipalities are responsible for zoning, permits and implementation, requiring cooperation across different public authorities, including planning agencies, environmental regulators and transport bodies (Lidmo et al., 2020). Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are also increasingly used for financing and developing infrastructure projects, but naturally they must adhere to the same set of guidelines, laws and regulations.
Recent regulatory changes reflect a growing emphasis on sustainability. The Icelandic Housing Authority (HMS) has approved the mandatory implementation of Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs) and carbon footprint calculations for all building projects. From September 2025, building permit applicants must submit LCA data at both the design stage and upon project completion (EFLA, 2024). By making these assessments mandatory, Iceland aims to promote a more sustainable and environmentally conscious approach to the construction industry. The requirement to submit LCA and carbon footprint data will also provide valuable insights for design optimisation and selection of materials, ultimately contributing to a reduction in the environmental impact of buildings (Interviewee 32, 2024). While this policy shift strengthens Reykjavík’s progress on its sustainability goals, ensuring regulatory compliance while maintaining housing affordability is a key challenge moving forward.
Horizontal governance
Horizontal governance tensions arise from the complexity of meeting housing standards and environmental obligations while remaining financially competitive. Challenges include infrastructure constraints, transport congestion and meeting both housing demand and environmental targets. Balancing economic development, environmental sustainability and affordability requires cross-sectoral coordination, particularly as the city seeks to reduce urban sprawl while ensuring sufficient housing supply (Interviewee 32, 2024). In response, Reykjavík has adopted Smart Growth principles, promoting mixed-use development and transit-oriented housing strategies to minimise sprawl and reduce reliance on private vehicles. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) offer additional opportunities for innovative and affordable housing solutions (Interviewee 29, 2024). Although initial efforts to integrate housing, transport and environmental planning faced difficulties, ongoing coordination has led to more cohesive planning approaches, which are key to ensuring sustainable development (Interviewee 29, 2024).
Transport and mobility sector
Vertical governance
Governance of the transport sector in Reykjavík is shaped by multilevel coordination between municipal, national and state-owned agencies. While Icelandic municipalities have autonomy over local transport planning, large-scale infrastructure projects, such as the Borgarlína Bus Rapid Transit system, require substantial state funding and regulatory approval. This financial dependence on the national government can create delays and governance tensions, particularly when municipal and state priorities do not fully align (Interviewee 29, 2024; Interviewee 31, 2024).
A key aspect of Reykjavík’s transport governance is the division of responsibilities between municipal and national authorities. In the Capital Region, some roads within the city come under state ownership and are maintained by the Transport Authority, while others are managed at the municipal level. Continuous intergovernmental coordination is therefore required to ensure a cohesive and efficient transport network. Additionally, multiple state institutions and municipal departments are involved in transport planning across the Greater Reykjavík area, further adding to the complexity of governance (Lidmo et al., 2024).
Despite the challenges, Reykjavík has been successful in structuring multilevel governance frameworks to manage transport transformation in the Capital Region. Formal agreements between the national government and municipalities in the Capital Region have facilitated resource sharing and policy alignment, making it possible to pursue large-scale projects aimed at sustainable mobility and reduction of carbon emissions (Interviewee 29, 2024; Interviewee 31, 2024). While financial reliance on the state can be a constraint, the agreement between the state and municipalities in the Capital Region highlights the potential for collaborative funding and resource allocation, presenting opportunities for securing long-term investment in sustainable transport infrastructure.
Horizontal Governance Tensions
The development of an integrated and sustainable transport system in Reykjavík requires coordination not only between the various levels of government but also across municipal departments and neighbouring municipalities. However, achieving policy alignment and resource sharing across these different entities can be challenging, sometimes resulting in fragmented efforts and inefficiencies. Internally, ensuring that different departments work towards shared sustainability goals can prove challenging, particularly when projects require cross-sectoral resource allocation.
As Reykjavík forms part of a larger metropolitan region, transport planning must also account for commuting patterns, regional infrastructure needs and intermunicipal connectivity. The Association of Municipalities in the Capital Region plays a key role in coordinating these efforts, yet differences in municipal priorities, financial capacities and land use strategies can stall progress.
Institutional capacity: Knowledge, relational resources and mobilisation capacity
Knowledge Capacity
Reykjavík has a solid foundation of technical expertise and data-driven decision-making, particularly in emissions monitoring and climate accountability. As a member of the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy and its predecessors since 2012, the city regularly publishes its Climate Account, which assesses carbon emissions across various sectors. Using the City Inventory Reporting and Information System (CIRIS) and in alignment with the Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories (GPC), Reykjavík ensures transparent and standardised emission reporting (EFLA, 2022). This knowledge infrastructure enhances the city’s ability to monitor and refine its climate strategies.
In the land use sector, Reykjavík collaborates with the Association of Municipalities in the Capital Region to share data and best practices for urban planning. This coordination enables a regional approach to sustainable development, although differences in municipal capacities and priorities present challenges in harmonising efforts. Likewise, in the buildings and construction sector, Reykjavík benefits from specialised knowledge through initiatives such as the Green Housing of the Future project, which integrates research on sustainable construction materials and energy efficiency strategies. However, ensuring that all stakeholders – from municipal departments to private developers – remain aligned and committed to sustainable construction principles remains a challenge.
Reykjavík’s transport sector also benefits from extensive local expertise. The city actively engages with municipal departments, state agencies and private stakeholders to design sustainable mobility solutions. Nevertheless, the implementation of these policies often requires ongoing adjustments due to evolving transport demands and regulatory constraints.
Relational Resources
Reykjavík actively engages in international, regional and national networks to enhance its relational resources. As a participant in the EU Smart City network, the city explores smart energy solutions for integration into urban development (European Commission, 2022). Reykjavík is also part of a Nordic capital cities network, which facilitates knowledge exchange and collective efforts on climate-related initiatives, including a joint declaration on climate change ahead of COP21 (Nordic Capitals, n.d.). These networks strengthen Reykjavík’s ability to draw inspiration from global best practices while contributing to common sustainability goals.
At the regional level, cooperation among municipalities in the Capital Region is critical for coordinated land use planning and infrastructure development. However, managing these relationships can be complex due to differing local policies and financial constraints. In the buildings sector, Reykjavík collaborates with private developers and national agencies to promote sustainable construction. However, maintaining long-term commitment by all stakeholders remains a challenge. Similarly, in the transport sector, the city works closely with national transport agencies and international networks to enhance mobility solutions. However, ensuring alignment between state-level policies and local priorities requires continued negotiation and adaptation.
Mobilisation Capacity
Reykjavík’s ability to translate knowledge and partnerships into action demonstrates its mobilisation capacity. As a participant in the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), the city publicly shares data on carbon consumption, fostering accountability and encouraging community engagement in climate initiatives (CDP, 2023). This transparency helps mobilise both public and private sector efforts towards emission reductions.
In the land use sector, municipal policies must align with national climate obligations, requiring careful coordination to balance local autonomy with broader environmental commitments. While this alignment strengthens Reykjavík’s contribution to national sustainability targets, it also adds complexity in navigating regulatory frameworks and policy adjustments.
In the buildings and construction sector, the city promotes sustainable practices through initiatives like the Green Housing of the Future project with the aim of reducing environmental impacts. Driving industry-wide change in construction methods, however, remains an ongoing effort requiring both regulatory support and market incentives.
Reykjavík’s transport sector highlights the importance of mobilisation at multiple levels. The city engages residents through public consultations and stakeholder collaborations to promote green mobility solutions. However, achieving significant shifts in transport habits, such as reducing car dependency, requires sustained political commitment, infrastructure investments and initiatives to drive behavioural change.