By Kirsti Kierulf, Managing Director, Norwegian Association of Municipal Engineering
I am often struck by how strong the emotions are surrounding municipal buildings, especially schools. When people march in protest to save a school, it says something important about Norway.
It is often said that Norway is at a crossroads, and this is not just a cliché. At the Norwegian Association of Municipal Engineering (NKF), we experience this every day in our dialogue with municipalities across the country. While national debates tend to dominate public attention, it is at the municipal level that democracy is actually exercised. This is where reality is felt first.
In large parts of the country, the number of children is declining. This means fewer pupils in schools, while many municipalities still have a building stock designed for completely different demographic conditions. This is not politics – it is statistics.
When realities change this fundamentally, local politicians must be given the opportunity to adjust the school structure. Not because they want to close schools – no one does – but because they must ensure that the municipality can continue to deliver good services to all residents, also in the future. We must dare to make long-term decisions, not only popular ones.
I am often surprised by the strength of the emotions connected to municipal buildings, particularly schools. The engagement is enormous, and I see it in everything from public meetings to torchlight marches. And let me be clear: I understand it. A school building is not just walls and a roof; it is identity, community, and history.
When people march to protect a school, it says something important about Norway. It actually makes me proud of the sector I am part of, and of the members of the Norwegian Association of Municipal Engineering who work every day to take care of these buildings and the values they represent.
At the same time, we must not forget who holds the formal responsibility for the municipality: the politicians elected by the citizens, and the employees who manage public services. They understand the consequences, the finances, the capacity, and the needs of their municipality. When they propose structural changes, it is never done lightly. It is done with a heavy heart, but also with a commitment to securing the municipality’s future.
We must dare to make long-term decisions, not only popular ones. We must be open about what is no longer sustainable. And we must be willing to stand in change, even when it is uncomfortable.
Because this crossroads is not about preserving as much as possible of what once was. It is about ensuring that municipalities can remain strong local communities – with good services, competent operations, and room for development.
The changes are real. The challenges are significant. But I still believe that local democracy is robust enough to handle them, as long as we dare to combine public engagement with trust.
Link to Original Article From NKF
#Other