Who are the stakeholders in the URBACT Local Groups of the Remote-IT project?
The beginning of the project last year marked the establishment of the ULGs (URBACT Local Groups) in all partner cities—an essential step for the success of any URBACT project. This process involves gathering key stakeholders whose input will be collected and integrated into the cities' Integrated Action Plans (IAPs) over the next two years. However, this critical step is not always simple. It requires the inclusion of relevant experts who can contribute to the discussions and ultimately to the creation of the action plan. Both the public and private sectors must be engaged, as change cannot be solved with just one side involved. Heraklion emphasizes that they took the creation of an optimal ULG seriously from the start, involving 34 stakeholders from all relevant sectors. However, large stakeholder groups can present challenges in practice, as not all participants may be able to voice their opinions. The URBACT methodology helps significantly by providing a clear process for guiding stakeholders throughout the process.
Tartu found an effective method for increasing the productivity of their meetings by splitting the ULG into two groups—inner and outer circles—who meet periodically. The importance of active public sector involvement, particularly from city administration, was recognized in Murcia, where the engagement of local authorities helped identify two main project goals: 1) How can Murcia attract digital nomads and remote workers? and 2) The potential for implementing hybrid and remote work within municipal departments, as well as the digitalization of city services. Murcia underscores the value of combining various expertise and sectors to achieve a holistic approach and the best possible outcomes. Dubrovnik also highlights the collaboration between the public and private sectors, noting that the engagement of the Deputy Mayor’s office during the COVID pandemic was a key factor in accelerating the work of their ULG.
Challenges in creating ULGs
It’s important to recognize that forming ULGs, and more importantly defining the concrete direction each partner city wants to take, is a lengthy process that lasts as long as the project (and even beyond its official end). Since the project spans multiple years and requires numerous meetings with stakeholders to create a concrete and effective IAP, it’s common for stakeholders to experience fatigue and frustration, especially due to the lack of short-term results. Brindisi’s approach stands out, as they used one of their key stakeholders, Case di Quartiere, as an intermediary in communication between other stakeholders and sectors—specifically digital nomads, remote workers, and users of co-working spaces. This method allows other stakeholders to gain insight into the real situation on the ground and exchange concrete experiences.
To prevent stakeholder burnout, data can be a helpful tool. Tartu realized this early on, redirecting the focus of their ULG after receiving data directly from the city’s workforce. Ultimately, for active engagement, each stakeholder needs to see the benefits for themselves and how the project’s outcomes can improve their situation. For cities like Dubrovnik or Heraklion, for example, the private sector, which is less represented in ULG meetings, needs to understand the direct benefits digital nomads bring to their businesses. This can be difficult to grasp, especially in the absence of short-term results.
Who are digital nomads/remote workers? How to collect data on them?
When we look at the work of ULGs over the past year and a half, we can see that certain issues and uncertainties are common among many partners. Partners focusing on digital nomads have consistently highlighted the challenge of defining who digital nomads actually are. Many partners approached the issue academically, consulting scientific literature, expert opinions, and online sources. Exercises like creating "personas", in which stakeholders imagine a typical digital nomad, have proven useful but often lead to inconclusive outcomes, as these profiles sometimes reflect the stakeholders' wishes or biases more than the actual reality. This is where data becomes crucial, as it can provide clearer answers.
Many cities face difficulties in collecting data on digital nomads, as their presence is often not fully regulated or documented. Tirana, for example, sees the solution in organizing activities and events specifically for digital nomads, such as the Digital Nomad Festival. Several other partners have come up with alternative methods, with Tartu's Welcome Centre serving as a model. This centre is the first point of contact for new arrivals (whether digital nomads, remote workers, or regular workers), providing essential information and a friendly introduction to the city. This approach not only gathers valuable data but also facilitates integration into the local community. Similarly, Brindisi views volunteers as a key resource for engaging with digital nomads, helping them with daily tasks. Dubrovnik emphasizes the need for a digital nomad coordinator, while Camara de Lobos is planning a "remote-work-friendly" stamp with a QR code linking to a list of remote-friendly businesses in the area. They also plan to educate business owners and employees through workshops and visual materials to raise awareness about what it means to be "remote-work friendly."
Advantages of cities in attracting digital nomads/remote workers and the challenges they face
Many cities in the network highlight the advantages of living in areas that could appeal to digital nomads. These cities, many of which reflect the Mediterranean lifestyle, offer beautiful nature, rich cultural and gastronomic heritage, and a sense of community that can make newcomers feel like locals. Heraklion, for example, meets many of these criteria but still asks: Why are we not yet an attractive destination for digital nomads? The ULG attributes this to factors like inadequate transport infrastructure, lack of services, insufficient digitalization, and limited accommodation options. One solution they suggest is establishing connections with other Greek cities and the digital nomad community in Greece to gain an outsider perspective and help define specific actions Heraklion needs to take.
Similarly, cities like Dubrovnik, Camara de Lobos, and Brindisi offer appealing lifestyles for digital nomads. Brindisi, however, goes further by leveraging its coastal location to create a unique niche for digital nomads, promoting activities like diving, swimming, and sailing along with excellent transport connections. Bucharest, while different from its Mediterranean counterparts, offers relatively low accommodation costs, excellent internet, and vibrant co-working culture. The main challenge is the concentration of co-working spaces in small business zones, which can be addressed by investing in infrastructure, improving transportation, and focusing on residential areas where remote workers are lacking amenities.
Like Brindisi, Murcia seeks to capitalize on its strengths—such as its climate, economic stability, and culture—to attract digital nomads, especially from Northern and Central Europe. Murcia's goal is to become a national center for the audiovisual sector, with initiatives like the Murcia Film Office and tailored services, aimed at attracting digital nomads and remote workers, particularly freelancers in the creative industries. Dubrovnik, on the other hand, aims to become an attractive destination for digital nomads during the low season, contributing to a more sustainable tourism model, improving the quality of life for local residents, and enhancing the experience of tourists, digital nomads, and other visitors.
