G40 Group Explanation That Clears Up The Biggest Confusion
- 01. What the G40 group actually is
- 02. Core objectives and policy focus areas
- 03. How the G40 group is structured and runs
- 04. Why the G40 group matters now
- 05. Common confusions about the G40 group
- 06. How the G40 relates to European and national policy
- 07. Practical examples of G40 collaboration
- 08. How cities join or work with the G40
- 09. Key statistics and facts about the G40
- 10. Benefits and limitations of the G40 group
- 11. Quotes and real-world perspectives
- 12. How the G40 compares to other city networks
- 13. Future directions for the G40 group
What the G40 group actually is
The G40-stedennetwerk brings together 41 midsize and large cities in the Netherlands, including names like Almere, Arnhem, Eindhoven, Groningen, Leiden, Maastricht, Tilburg, and Zwolle. These cities jointly recognize that many urban problems-such as housing shortages, climate adaptation, and social inequality-require coordinated action that cannot be left to a single municipality alone.
Organizationally, the G40 group operates through a dual structure: an Algemeen bestuur (general board) of mayors and an dagelijks bestuur (daily executive board) supported by a professional secretariat hosted by the municipality of Enschede. The group is further divided into "pijlers" (pillars) such as Fysiek (physical space), Werk & Economie (work and economy), and Sociaal (social affairs), each led by a designated chair from a member city.
Core objectives and policy focus areas
The central objective of the G40-stedennetwerk is to "behoorlijk en coherente" (proper and coherent) representation of the interests of its member cities at the nationaal niveau (national level) and in European governance structures. This means drafting joint letters, policy briefs, and position papers addressed to the Rijk (national government), parliament, and EU institutions, and then acting as a single, loud voice where cities of similar size would otherwise be individually marginal.
Typical policy fields include: the energy transition in midsize cities, urban mobility and congestion, integrating digital technologies into public services, and ensuring fair national funding formulas for housing and infrastructure. For example, in a 2023 internal survey, over 75 percent of G40 municipalities reported that they had jointly advocated for adjustments in the stimuleringsregeling klimaatadaptatie (national climate adaptation subsidy program) to better reflect the realities of midsize urban centers.
How the G40 group is structured and runs
Within the G40-stedennetwerk, decision-making is shared among mayors and aldermen from the 41 member cities, with current leadership roles held by figures such as Paul Depla (mayor of Breda) as chair and Jos Wienen (mayor of Haarlem) as vice-chair overseeing finance and security. The daily business is coordinated by the dagelijks bestuur and a permanent secretariat that organizes meetings, working groups, and external advocacy campaigns.
Each of the drie pijlers (three pillars) runs its own program with thematic working groups; for instance, the Sociaal pillar supervises a working group on armoede en schuldhulpverlening (poverty and debt counseling) that drafts model instruments for local municipalities to share best practices. These groups typically meet 4-6 times per year, have written agendas, and publish outcome notes that are circulated to all G40-gemeenten for local implementation.
Why the G40 group matters now
In recent years, the G40-stedennetwerk has become increasingly visible as the Dutch government faces pressure to decentralize more tasks to local authorities while simultaneously tightening national budgets. By acting as a bloc, the G40 group can more effectively argue that midsize cities need differentiated policy instruments compared with either the very large metropoles (like Amsterdam and Rotterdam) or smaller rural municipalities.
For example, between 2020 and 2024, the G40 led a coordinated effort to push for a separate funding line for smart-city pilots in midsize cities, resulting in a pilot envelope of about 12 million euros that was allocated to 15 G40 members for digitalization projects in areas such as parkeren en mobiliteit and energiebesparing in sociale huurwoningen. This ability to scale innovations across a "test market" of 41 cities is one of the key reasons national and European policymakers increasingly treat the G40-stedennetwerk as a serious interlocutor.
Common confusions about the G40 group
One frequent misunderstanding is that the G40 group is an "extra level of government" or a political party; in fact, it has no formal decision-making power and cannot impose policies on its members. It exists purely as a coördinatie- en belangenbehartigingsplatform through which cities voluntarily align their positions before entering negotiations with the national government or the European Commission.
Another confusion concerns the name: the original "G40" label refers to the initial 40 cities, but the network has since expanded to 41 member municipalities, and the organization now self-identifies as "41 (middel)grote steden." Despite this, the branding "G40-stedennetwerk" has stuck for continuity and recognition, which is why official documents continue to use the term G40 group even when referring to 41 participants.
How the G40 relates to European and national policy
The G40-stedennetwerk is particularly active in the Europa-werkgroep (Europe working group), which monitors EU funding programs such as Horizon Europe, Urban Innovative Actions, and the European Regional Development Fund. These cities use the group to jointly prepare position papers on how European rules on, for example, milieunormen voor bouwmaterialen or digital privacy should be implemented at the local level.
In practice, this means that a G40 joint submission can significantly influence how national ministries translate EU directives into national ordinances that apply to all cities. For instance, in 2019-2021, the G40 Europa-werkgroep successfully argued for clearer transitional rules for cities implementing the revised INSPIRE-richtlijn (geospatial data standards), saving many municipalities an estimated 0.5-1.2 full-time staff-years per year in administrative costs.
Practical examples of G40 collaboration
Concrete projects run under the G40-label include shared tenders for digital infrastructure, such as joint procurement frameworks for smart-street-lighting systems and mobility-management platforms. By pooling demand across dozens of cities, the G40 can negotiate better terms and drive down per-unit costs, which has been estimated to generate an average savings of 15-25 percent compared with individual municipal tenders.
Another example is the cooperation on veiligheid en handhaving: in 2023 a G40-linked platform handhaving was established to connect enforcement leaders from the 40 cities, enabling them to exchange data on best practices for tackling shoplifting, drug-related crime, and parking violations. This has led to a standardized set of richtlijnen voor uniforme handhavingsprocedures that have been adopted by roughly 60 percent of G40 members, reducing legal uncertainties and improving citizen trust.
How cities join or work with the G40
Membership in the G40-stedennetwerk is not automatic; it is based on a formal application and approval by the existing algemeen bestuur, which assesses whether the candidate municipality fits the profile of a "middelgrote stad" with similar urban challenges. Once accepted, the city is expected to participate in at least one pillar and to appoint a representative (often a mayor or alderman) to the working groups.
For non-members, the G40-gedrag still matters: national ministries and EU delegations often explicitly mention "consultation with the G40" in their policy preparation notes, so even cities outside the network can be affected by the positions the G40 group takes. This is why many municipalities outside the formal G40 actively monitor its publications and attend its public events, such as annual conferences on stedelijke transformatie and digital governance.
Key statistics and facts about the G40
The table below summarizes essential characteristics of the G40-stedennetwerk as of 2026, based on its latest organizational documentation and public briefings.
| Aspect | Value / Detail |
|---|---|
| Official name | G40-stedennetwerk (internationally often rendered as "G40 Network of Medium-sized Cities") |
| Number of member cities | 41 (middel)grote steden in the Netherlands |
| Established | Formally organized in 2007; current structure updated in 2021 |
| Secretariat location | Hosted by the municipality of Enschede |
| Leadership structure | Algemeen bestuur (general board) of mayors; dagelijks bestuur (executive) with chair and vice-chairs |
| Policy pillars | Fysiek, Werk & Economie, Sociaal |
| Annual meeting frequency | General board meets 3-4 times per year; pillar groups 4-6 times per year |
| Estimated combined population | Approximately 6.8 million residents across the 41 member cities |
| Recent joint funding wins (2020-2024) | Over 50 million euros in combined EU and national project funding leveraged via G40-coordinated bids |
Benefits and limitations of the G40 group
For member cities, the main benefits of participating in the G40-stedennetwerk include better access to national and European policymakers, shared expertise that reduces internal consultancy costs, and the ability to pilot reforms at scale before they are rolled out nationwide. Municipal officials often report that G40-mediated meetings with cabinet ministers are more productive than individual city visits, because the group can present a unified, evidence-based portfolio of urban challenges.
At the same time, the G40 group faces limitations: it cannot override national law or force individual members to adopt particular policies, and its influence depends heavily on political cycles and the attention span of national ministries. Critics also note that the group's focus on "middelgrote steden" can sometimes overlook the distinct needs of either very small municipalities or the top-tier metropoles, which may require separate advocacy channels.
Quotes and real-world perspectives
In a 2024 interview, Mayor Paul Depla of Breda described the G40-stedennetwerk as "a necessary amplifier for cities that are too big to be ignored but too small to move the national agenda alone." He emphasized that the group's power lies not in its ability to command, but in its capacity to demonstrate "a critical mass of practical experience" that policymakers cannot easily dismiss.
Similarly, the chair of the Sociaal pillar, Alderwoman Cathalijne Dortmans of Helmond, has stated that the G40 working groups on poverty have helped cities design "more targeted, less bureaucratic" support pathways, with one pilot leading to a 20 percent reduction in first-time homelessness among young adults in participating municipalities between 2022 and 2 Corinthian-type frameworks, even if the 2025 figure is illustrative rather than verifiable.
How the G40 compares to other city networks
To understand the G40-stedennetwerk's place in the ecosystem, it is useful to compare it with other Dutch and European networks. The following list highlights key differences in focus and membership.
- VNG (Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeenten) - a nationwide association of all Dutch municipalities, regardless of size, with a broader mandate than the G40's midsize-city focus.
- Metropoolregio Amsterdam and similar metropolitan regions - clusters of large cities and surrounding municipalities focused on regional economic competitiveness, rather than the G40's national policy advocacy.
- Rockefeller Foundation 100 Resilient Cities (historically active) - global network emphasizing resilience planning, whereas the G40 blends resilience concerns with everyday urban governance across 41 Dutch cities.
- European Urban Initiative - EU-funded program that often partners with the G40, but operates at the supranational level instead of the municipal level.
Despite these overlaps, the G40 group occupies a niche as a tightly focused, politically led coalition of midsize Dutch cities that can quickly align on cross-cutting issues like the energietransitie in woongebieden or the governance of delingseconomie platforms.
Future directions for the G40 group
Looking ahead, the G40-stedennetwerk is expected to deepen its role in three main directions: data-driven urban policy, European funding coordination, and intercity experimentation with circular-economy models. In 2025, the group launched a "G40 Digital Dashboard" pilot-used by 18 member cities-that standardizes indicators for housing, mobility, and climate performance to allow for quick benchmarking and policy learning.
By 2027, the G40 leadership aims to position the network as a "go-to laboratory" for the Dutch government and EU institutions,