In the process of Europeanisation, the local level takes an intermediary position between citizens, the national and the European level. On the one hand, municipalities are the place where citizens not only directly feel the consequences of European policies, but also try to shape them. Beyond the established channels for the representation of political interests, a variety of different forms of engagement with Europe can be found at the local level. Civic engagement for Europe can include direct bottom-up mobilisation or simply engagement for Europe or 'the European idea' in the local environment or with European partners. On the other hand, municipalities also assume an intermediary position vis-à-vis the citizens of a municipality when it comes to applying, explaining, and making European policy comprehensible.

The paper presents fresh quantitative and qualitative data from a current research project focusing on the German case to examine the local levels’ role as the basic territory in the European multi-level-governance system in the time of permanent crisis. In our contribution, we examine the role of local actors as European intermediaries vis-à-vis European institutions on the one hand and Europe’s citizens on the other. In a first step of analysis, we empirically investigate the variety of bottom-up mobilization that can be found at the local level and the role of local actors – city administrations, civil society associations and others – in creating opportunities for citizen engagement. In a second step of analysis, we look at the institutional and organisational conditions under which bottom-up European activities are carried out in German municipalities.

Focussing on the influential position of mayors in the German political system and applying the theoretical approach of political leadership this paper offers relevant insights to understand the performance of municipalities in times of polycrisis. It further connects the theoretical framework of intergovernmental relations (IGR) to examine the cooperation of mayors with other political tiers within the multi-level framework.

Empirically, the research is based on a large-scale survey of mayors undertaken at the Ruhr-Universität Bochum (together with Jörg Bogumil and David Gehne) in 2023 including every municipality over 20.000 inhabitants in Germany and a sample of smaller municipalities with a response rate of 49% (n=974; N=2.001). Hence, it will depict the perception of their position in the polycrisis as head of the administration, political player towards the council and representant within IGR.

Even though the mayor’s impact within IGR is limited, he can try to exert influence and shape the relationship. Especially during the last years, many crises unfolded on the local level and left the mayor in charge of coordination while concurrently being dependent on decisions made on higher levels e.g. providing appropriate housing for migrants and refugees or implementing certain covid restrictions. Thus, this paper aims at presenting research-based insights on the IGR through the lenses of mayors, how they prioritise policies and verbalise certain demands and criticism.

Even though some scholars used the term of leadership regarding mayors in Germany (e.g. Heinelt et al. 2018; Egner 2017), the profound discussion of the theoretical approach vis-à-vis mayors like David Sweeting, Robert Hambleton amongst others presented for the British case has not reached the German discourse on mayors yet fully. Hence, this paper offers an innovative access to mayors in Germany.

Leadership as an interactional approach evolves around the relationship between a leader and his followers. Due to the theoretical openness and connectivity of leadership as a concept, multiple aspects of the IGR can be included since it incorporates not only institutional and formal but also informal relations which can be assumed to be even more relevant in the polycrisis because many decisions are time sensitive and informational relations are assumed to be relevant. In times of crisis, a powershift towards the executive can be seen (Bogumil/ Holtkamp forthcoming) which can also be applied to mayors since the decision making within the council tends to take longer than executive decisions made in the mayor’s office.

In conclusion, this paper will offer empirical and research-based arguments on how mayors participate in IGR under the conditions of the polycrisis and link it to the theoretical approach of political leadership deriving insights on mayoral leadership in Germany. Hence, it aims at adding to theoretical understanding of the position of the mayor as representative of the municipality within the IGR but also to academic discourses on political leadership in times of crisis followed by critical reflections what this means for local democracy.

The study of intergovernmental relations (IGR) has emerged significantly in all sorts of political systems, especially given that policies increasingly require shared programs, joint financing schemes, and fiscal transferences (Hueglin and Fenna 2015). In this context, an increasing body of literature focuses on non-federal countries. One advantage of incorporating these countries is to emphasize the “in-flux” nature of IGR and to address concerns regarding its influence on the effectiveness of government (Bergström, Kuhlmann, and Laffin 2022). However, IGR on non-federal countries can pose challenges to democratic legitimacy and accountability that are critical. This paper reflects on the case of the Netherlands, where the challenges posed by the Security Regions (SR) to democratic accountability and legitimacy can be analyzed under the lens of IGR theory, while also comparing with other countries, particularly Italy, and by recourse to semi-structured interviews with key actors.

One issue that arises is the problematic relationship with municipalities, in the context of crisis management (Andeweg, Irwin and Louwerse 2020). This led to a strengthening of the municipal (or regional) executive, which is not adequately balanced out by representative institutions, particularly city councilors. Accountability mechanisms for the decisions of the SR are very limited and were rarely used during the Covid-19 crisis (Szmulewicz 2022).

In addition to this, there is evidence that the workings of the so-called “Safety Council”, que body reunion of the Chairperson of the 25 SR, may have a significant impact on regionalisation and IGR in the Netherlands, performing a sort of regional coordination role and advisory to government measures (Boonstra 2020), which while not under its formal prerogatives is probably explained because of the lack of a middle level government powerful enough to assume crisis coordination governance (OECD 2014). In fact, some reports call for a stronger and more formalized position of the Safety Council, without entirely changing the coordination and policy-defining role assigned to the central authorities (Evaluatiecommisie Wet veiligheidsregio’s 2020). However, without an adequate and clear legal framework, this de facto coordination role can lead to ambiguities, uncertainties and opens the administrative structure to criticisms of opacity and lack of democratic legitimacy (Loof et al. 2021; Congress of Local and Regional Authorities 2021). Yet at the same time, one needs to wonder if this sort of formalization of existing practices of governance would impact on the need for urgent and rapid responses in terms of crisis management. One might even say that the lesser necessity of detailed written rules speaks about the trust and confidence in government as a general feature of political culture in the Netherlands, at least as compared with other countries, like Italy.

Overall, two features appeared from the Dutch experience so far. First, the change in balance within subnational institutions, with the executives now playing a larger and stronger role, and the city council less involved in determining policies. Even with respect to their controlling role the real accountability practices by city councils and city councillors have been limited. Second, the transfer of powers from local municipalities to safety regions through the extensive and prolonged application of the SR, as well the de facto transfer of powers from the safety regions themselves to the central government and the extensive reliance on the Safety Council, which emerges as a powerful player in IGR.