How should Pinneberg deal with heat and heavy rain?
In Pinneberg, a Citizens’ Jury on climate adaptation has developed recommendations on how the city should deal with heat, heavy rainfall and other consequences of climate change. Around 30 randomly selected residents deliberated over two weekends in September. The result is 15 concrete recommendations and nine goals for the city’s climate adaptation strategy. Some proposals could subsequently be put to a vote of all eligible voters.
Pinneberg has a problem
Pinneberg has a problem that almost every German city now knows. When it gets hot, streets and buildings heat up. When heavy rain falls, the water has to go somewhere. More greenery, unsealed surfaces, green roofs and façades, or the sponge-city principle can help. But all of this costs money – and, above all, space. If an area is intended to absorb rainwater, it may no longer be available as a road, parking area or building site.
It was precisely these kinds of conflicts that around 30 residents of Pinneberg deliberated on 11 and 12 September and again on 25 and 26 September. Experts first provided them with information, after which the randomly selected participants discussed the issues with one another and formulated recommendations. The question was no longer whether Pinneberg needs to adapt to the consequences of climate change. It was how – and what the city is prepared to change in order to do so.
A “Mini Pinneberg”
The 30 members were not elected, nor could they simply sign up. At the end of April, the city contacted 1,500 residents randomly selected from the population register. Of these, 154 said they were willing to take part. A further selection was then made from this group to ensure that the participants reflected the city’s population as closely as possible in terms of age, gender, educational attainment and migration background.
Mayor Thomas Voerste called the result a “Mini Pinneberg”. He said the composition provided a good basis for developing “viable proposals for Pinneberg’s climate adaptation”. At the same time, he associated the process with a democratic hope: “The entire process can strengthen the democratic process in our society.”
Natalina di Racca-Boenigk, chairwoman of the city council, described the idea even more vividly. In the Citizens’ Jury, “a female lawyer can sit next to a female hairdresser, or a trans person next to a conservative” – people, in other words, who might never have entered into conversation with one another in everyday life. She saw precisely this as the strength of the process. Participants were not supposed to argue along political dividing lines, but to look for solutions together: “This is democracy in action.”
Climate adaptation starts on the ground
What the 30 people deliberated on may initially sound technical. But Milan Bogojević of Pinneberg’s Urban Development and Climate Unit made clear how quickly climate adaptation becomes a question of distribution. Many measures involve construction and cost money, he said – money “that municipalities hardly have today”. There are also competing demands on public space.
One example is unsealing surfaces. Asphalted or paved areas can absorb very little rainwater. If they are unsealed, water can seep into the ground, be retained during heavy rainfall and evaporate again through plants and soil. But an unsealed area may then no longer be available for a road or another use. According to Bogojević, this is precisely where resistance from individual groups begins.
Pinneberg is already trying out some approaches. In one construction project, the city is using elements of the sponge-city principle: rainwater is not simply channelled into the sewer system, but stored in green spaces, where it can evaporate while also helping to cool the surroundings. Other measures include green roofs and façades, a drinking fountain and a map showing cool places where people can seek refuge during periods of extreme heat. Private individuals can also do their part, Bogojević said – for example, by “doing without a gravel garden” and planting greenery instead.
More greenery, more shade, fewer sealed surfaces
The results of the deliberations are now clear. The Citizens’ Jury adopted 15 concrete recommendations and identified nine goals to guide the city’s climate adaptation strategy. In addition, the mini public developed proposals for questions that could become the subject of a later local referendum.
Three recommendations received the greatest support:
- greening city-owned buildings and unsealing public spaces, particularly schoolyards
- providing more shade in public spaces
- creating more greenery in and around the city centre
Among the nine goals, the main priorities were a coherent overall strategy, giving priority to protecting particularly vulnerable groups, and preserving and expanding existing green spaces.
The complete Citizens’ Report is due to be presented to the Pinneberg City Council on 8 October 2026 and published afterwards.
From the Citizens’ Jury to a local referendum
In this sense, the actual democratic experiment only begins after the four days of meetings. The recommendations will first undergo expert and legal review. In December, the City Council is expected to decide on the next steps and whether a local referendum will be held. This could take place alongside the Schleswig-Holstein state election on 18 April 2027.
Unlike the recommendations of the Citizens’ Jury, the outcome of such a referendum would be binding. Deliberations among around 30 randomly selected people could thus lead to a decision by all eligible voters in Pinneberg.
Regardless of this, the Citizens’ Jury’s recommendations are to feed into the city’s climate adaptation plan, which is currently being developed by specialist consultancies. It is therefore already clear that the impact of the results will not depend solely on whether a referendum actually takes place.
The question of binding decisions
This is at the heart of the “Klima trifft Kommune” (“Climate Meets Municipality”) pilot project, run by Mehr Demokratie and the Gesellschaft für Klima und Demokratie. Alongside Pinneberg, Flensburg, Osterburg in Saxony-Anhalt and Marzahn-Hellersdorf in Berlin are taking part. The processes combine deliberation by randomly selected citizens with a subsequent political or public decision on the recommendations.
Steffen Krenzer, project manager of “Klima trifft Kommune”, sees precisely this combination as a response to a weakness of many participation processes. “Climate adaptation measures affect the entire population,” he said before the Citizens’ Jury began. Involving people at an early stage could not only lead to better solutions, but also allow those solutions to be adopted in a binding form afterwards. “Participation creates legitimacy and facilitates implementation.” This approach, he said, could help address particularly difficult issues, such as conflicts over the use of scarce space.
Pinneberg thus touches on a longstanding debate surrounding Citizens’ Assemblies: What happens to their recommendations? Randomly selected citizens can spend considerable time informing themselves and deliberating – but if their proposals are merely received afterwards, disappointment may follow. In Pinneberg, the subsequent process has been clear from the outset: Citizens’ Report, expert and legal review, City Council and possibly a local referendum.
A recommendation does not automatically become a referendum question, however. The City Council retains a decisive role. In December, it will decide how to proceed with the results and whether individual questions will be put to citizens for a vote.
“I would like to see Citizens’ Assemblies used for other issues too”
Initial reactions from members of the Citizens’ Jury have been positive. One participant said she had entered the process with curiosity but also scepticism and was now surprised “that such great, positive things have come out of it”. Another participant emphasised that the process had brought people into conversation who would probably never otherwise have met.
Another participant drew a broader conclusion: “I would like to see the Citizens’ Jury format used for other issues too.” A further participant highlighted the sense of cohesion and the respectful, open way in which people interacted with one another.
Mayor Thomas Voerste also gave a positive assessment of the deliberations. People with different perspectives had come together to discuss how Pinneberg should adapt to climate change. He said he was now looking forward to the further discussion of the Citizens’ Jury’s recommendations and ideas.
A decision with a backstory
The fact that Pinneberg is pursuing this path at all was by no means politically inevitable. On 10 October 2024, the City Council voted by 23 votes to 16 to participate in the pilot project. The process was originally due to take place considerably earlier, but the timetable was subsequently postponed. What began as the broader subject area of climate protection and climate adaptation has since become a Citizens’ Jury explicitly focused on adapting to the already tangible consequences of climate change.
Voerste had described the mini public early on as an opportunity to involve people more closely in local decision-making. The climate targets could only be achieved “if we bring citizens along with us in the best possible way”. The Citizens’ Assembly, he said, could be “an important building block” in this process.
There is a certain political subtlety in the focus on climate adaptation. Abstract emissions targets can easily become the subject of fundamental political disputes. With an overheated public square, a flooded basement or a tree providing shade, climate policy becomes concrete. Yet the conflicts do not disappear. Anyone who unseals surfaces, changes parking arrangements, redesigns streets or spends money on greenery is redistributing scarce resources.
Now it is the City Council’s turn
The Citizens’ Jury has now completed its part of the process. The initially open question of how Pinneberg should deal with heat, heavy rainfall and other consequences of climate change has resulted in 15 recommendations, nine goals and proposals for possible referendum questions. On 8 October, the City Council will receive the complete Citizens’ Report.
That is when the political part of the experiment begins. Following the expert and legal review, the City Council must decide how to deal with the proposals – and whether the people of Pinneberg will be allowed to vote on individual questions themselves in April 2027. Only then will it become clear what path the recommendations will take from the two weekends of deliberation into the city’s concrete climate adaptation policy.
Clarify the referendum timelineTighten repetitive passages