Social Innovation Achieved in a Development Trap: Examples of Local Efforts in Hungary

Abstract

This study explores how social innovation and multi-level governance (MLG) can enhance regional resilience and help overcome the Middle-Income Trap (MIT) through cooperative, community-driven strategies. Focusing on Hungarian self-governments, it examines twinning partnerships—formal relationships between settlements—as potential catalysts of social innovation and regional cohesion. A nationwide questionnaire survey (Number of settlements surveyed: 409; representative by settlement type) conducted between 2024 and 2025 evaluated the motivations, intensity and impacts of these partnerships. The findings reveal that intraethnic twinning networks are more socially active and locally grounded, strengthening community identity and civic participation, even though they provide limited direct economic benefits. By fostering trust, collaboration, and cross-border interaction, these partnerships act as effective platforms for social innovation, supporting more inclusive and territorially integrated development across Central and Eastern Europe.

1. Introduction

The Central and Eastern macro-region of the European Union (EU) is perhaps the most complicated formation on the continent, based on geographical factors with historical and cultural attitudes. In a geopolitical and generally political sense, the macro-region has always been historically fragmented (Akcalı and Korkut 2012; Balogh et al. 2022) and we can conclude that it is still the same even today. The history of the countries of the region over the past century has shown that border changes have mostly changed political and nation-state roles (Hardi et al. 2009), while the human and economic relations of border regions are considered permanent. The cultural capital of these areas is truly valuable (Hribar and Lozej 2013; Rechnitzer and Berkes 2021), not only because of the nationalities and traditions that live there but also because of the assimilating yet traditional inhabitants. We believe that any initiative that makes an effort to unite, think together, and act together will help to keep the region united.

In the whole region, the European Union has become the dominant factor, the operator and financing agent of external and partial internal integration (Council on Foreign Relations 2025). Regional initiatives and different funding programmes directly convey the expectations and reactions of outsiders. EU funds have not been properly absorbed in many places due to inadequate government and institutional structures (European Economic and Social Committee 2014; Finta 2024). Therefore, a priority for governance is to identify and strengthen areas that reduce dependence on external support. Developing innovation ecosystems, stimulating innovative thinking and strengthening Multi-level Governance (MLG) provide opportunities to sustain collaborations that reduce external dependencies. In the study, we will use MLG and social innovation as a response to the challenges. In all these contexts, the concept of MLG tends to refer to systems of governance in which authority is a dispersed upwards, downwards, and sideways between levels of government—local, regional, national, and supranational—as well as across spheres and sectors, including states, markets, and civil society (European Commission 2020).

The challenges facing the macro-region, in particular local, regional and national authorities, are substantial at a time of severe current crises. Now more than ever, there is a need to have a common mindset, to set up joint strategies, and to work in collaboration with each other. For years, Europe has been living with the challenges of an ageing society, labour migration, and depopulation. The demographic crisis is particularly threatening the region, as depopulation is affecting not only rural areas, but also metropolitan areas (Horeczki et al. 2025). Despite a declining population, the level of basic public services is still below the EU average across the region. The European Quality of Government Index (European Commission 2021) shows almost identical values—well below average—for the macro-region. The index captures perceptions and experiences with corruption, quality, and impartiality of three essential public services, in health, education, and policing. The performance of the region must improve not only demographically and economically, but also in terms of governance. It must be seen that the region as a whole is trapped, unable to escape the Middle-Income Trap (MIT), or only able to escape it in very exceptional cases. It is important not to fall into the trap of the average, so we are looking not only at national initiatives but also at regional and local ones. In the case of MIT, if we look at national averages, we see a levelling off (as with many other indicators), but the regional level shows a completely different picture. Democratic local and regional structures, as well as local and regional cooperation on borders with common interests, will further deepen decentralisation processes.

The further aim of the research is to prepare a common development policy proposal for the Central and Eastern macro-region, which will together manage and provide recipes for overcoming the MIT (to find an integrated government solution). According to the European Committee of Regions (2024): “territorial inequalities are increasing across Europe, while regions are facing new challenges related to the climate crisis, energy dependency, demographic change and geopolitical tensions.” The geographies of discontent (Rodríguez-Pose et al. 2023) and development traps (Diemer et al. 2022) point to many root causes of the challenges of Europe’s cohesion and can be related more directly to the questions of social deprivation that arise from rapid social change, lack of economic opportunity and alternatives, exclusion and reduced social interaction. In this paper, we describe some social innovations that are linked to the local and municipal levels and that are based on cooperation.

This paper is structured as follows: First, we provide a comprehensive review of the literature on the evolution of social innovation. Next, we conceptualize social innovation as a strategic instrument for regional development. We then present our methodological framework, which is grounded in a questionnaire-based survey conducted among Hungarian self-governments. The Findings section analyzes the survey data, interpreting twinning through five key dimensions, one of which is social innovation. Finally, we discuss the theoretical implications of the results and offer recommendations for both policy formulation and practical application.

2. Catching Up Through Social Innovation

2.1. The Development of Social Innovation

The origins of social innovation can be traced back to the early nineteenth century (Drucker 1957), emerging as a response to the profound social challenges generated by the Industrial Revolution (Godin 2012). Ogburn (1922) provided one of the earliest theoretical foundations by examining the interrelationship between social change, culture, and human nature. The author argued that innovation extends beyond the technological realm, constituting a broader cultural and social process that reshapes societal structures and value systems. From a historical perspective, Godin (2012) demonstrated that the idea of social innovation first took form within the utopian reform movements of the 1830s, which sought to promote solidarity, civic participation, and collective welfare. Throughout the twentieth century, the concept evolved from an idealistic vision of social reform into a practical framework aimed at improving institutional systems and addressing complex societal challenges (Janik et al. 2021). The contemporary interpretation of social innovation was systematized by Moulaert et al. (2014), who conceptualized it as a process grounded in collective action, social learning, and transdisciplinary collaboration. This modern view treats social innovation as both a conceptual framework and a practical instrument that fosters community resilience, inclusive development, and sustainable social transformation. In recent decades, social innovation has gained significant prominence among scholars, policymakers, and practitioners, evolving from an analytical construct into a guiding principle for development and innovation policy. Despite this growing recognition, there is still no universally accepted definition of the term. Its interpretation varies in linguistic, cultural, economic, and administrative contexts. According to the European Commission (2013), social innovation encompasses “innovations that are both social in their ends and in their means,” emphasizing that the social dimension lies both in how innovation is achieved—the process—and why it is pursued—the social and societal objectives (European Commission 2013, p. 5). In contrast, the World Economic Forum (2016) defines social innovation as “the application of innovative, practical, sustainable, market-based approaches to benefit society in general, and low-income or underserved populations in particular”. This definition encompasses a wide spectrum of activities, ranging from grassroots initiatives to novel products and services developed by private, public, or third-sector organizations, and even to systemic transformations within institutional and social structures. In this study, we adopt the World Economic Forum’s (2016) interpretation of social innovation, as it captures both the practical and systemic dimensions of innovative approaches that address social needs.

2.2. Social Innovation as a Tool for Regional Development

In the field of regional development, we can observe that the analysis of endogenous local factors has come to the foreground (Berki and Halász 2014)—the examination of factors such as the expectations and active participation of the local community (bottom-up organization), the condition and education of the population (human capital), the spatial structure and settlement network (as agglomeration advantages). In order to compensate for socio-spatial inequalities, development policy can be based on community strengthening and community-led development (Dale and Onyx 2005). Thus, social innovation is based on social life (Portes 1998), social networks and norms (Putnam 2000), social organizations and the trust associated with them (Newman and Dale 2007), which can be considered an innovative, repetitive activity (Woolcock 2004). Networks, new types of internal connections and new nodes in society can lead to innovation. Any new idea generated by social interactions can be considered a social innovation (Rodek et al. 2024). This process develops innovative activities and new services that have not been used before, in response to the needs and demands of the local community and civil society. In all circumstances, the purpose is to achieve advancement and development, as innovation, as a process or result, must be more efficient and effective than existing alternatives (Phills et al. 2008). Particularly in the Hungary and the neighborhood countries, the dimension of sustainability must be added to the component of development and progress, and the new solutions created must be based on innovation that is viable in the long term. The macro-region also struggles with social problems (low psychological well-being and quality of life, low levels of community relations and general trust, mental health problems, etc.) which, if improved, could increase the well-being of individual communities, consequently addressing regional inequalities and leading to the integration of communities through new approaches (WHO 2021).

To realize the full potential of social innovation, a framework is needed that supports public, non-profit and private actors to collaboratively design and implement socially innovative solutions to respond to regional inequalities (Castro-Spila et al. 2025 referred as a social innovation cycle). Approached from the perspective of municipalities and municipal leaders, social innovation can also be seen as a practice generated by collective, specific, and goal-oriented actions aimed at ensuring social change (Cajaiba-Santana 2014; Szörényiné Kukorelli 2015).

3. Materials and Methods

In our study, we consider twinning as a fundamental element or a potential basis for social innovation. These relationships connect with settlements, and exploiting the potential of twinning can bring about a few local or regional benefits, which, in the best scenario, can be perceived by both partners. Depending on the depth and content of the cooperation, different types of social innovation can result.

In previous data collection, in addition to exploring the twinning structure of Hungarian self-governments, the (primary) nature of the relations was also a central issue. A study based on a questionnaire survey (Giczi and Sik 2009) examined the reasons for the establishment of twinning, thereby also shedding light on the intended nature of the hoped-for relations. Based on their survey of 736 cases, which was representative in terms of region, settlement size, and status, we have information on the primary reason the twinning of 322 settlements. According to this, the relations were inspired by culture and traditions (44 cases), economy (29), history and politics (11), education, youth relations (9), tourism and travel (5), and other aspects that cannot be classified into these (2).

The Foundation for the Development of Democratic Local Public Administration (DHFKA) and the Hungarian National Association of Local Authorities (TÖOSZ) surveyed the twinning relations of Hungarian settlements and counties in 2018. They combined the data obtained in this way with data from other sources (data from the Ministry of the Interior, information from settlements’ websites) and created an online database. In this database, we can access information on 3716 twinning relationships for a total of 3177 Hungarian municipalities (settlements, counties, and capital districts) although we cannot find such data for 1687—and in these cases it is also not clear whether the given settlement does not have a twinning relation or the data was simply not provided. In addition to the name and country of the twinned town or twinned county, the database also provides information on the status of the relation (whether a written contract was concluded), the year of the agreement, and the content of twinning (general, cultural, economic, educational, etc. cooperation). Due to the significant data gap, which is partly due to the uncertainty of data provision and partly due to incomplete responses, the database is only of limited use for in-depth analyses.

This fact, as well as the considerable time that has passed since 2018, prompted us to attempt to conduct a broad-based questionnaire survey suitable for characterizing the twinning relations of Hungarian municipalities. The responses received in several waves between 2024–2025, ultimately resulted in nearly 500 completions, of which 409 valid responses remained after cleaning (

Table 1. Distribution of municipalities participating in the survey.

Settlement Types	Our Sample
	N	%
Cities with county rights	12	2.93
Capital districts	7	1.71
Other towns	74	18.09
Large villages	25	6.11
Villages	291	71.15
Total	409	100.00

). We used IBM SPSS Statistics 22 (New York, United States) software for the analysis.

In addition to the basic characteristics of twinning, the questionnaire also assessed the reason for establishing the relationship, the identity of the initiating person/institution/organisation, the activity of local participants, the local/regional impacts, and the factors that hinder cooperation in each relationship. We asked about the future twinning plans of the settlements in addition to the existing ones, and whether those that do not currently have a cooperation are open to establishing twinning relations. In addition to twinning, the questionnaire also collected information about other international relationships and municipal project experiences.

The settlements in our database have a total of 629 twinning relations. According to our survey, only a small part of local governments (12.1%) had not yet cooperated. These settlements are typically villages (98%). 20.0 percent of local governments have one, 18.4 percent have two, and another 14.3 percent have three relations, but the proportion of settlements with more than ten connections also reaches 6.0 percent. The average number of twinning relations increases proportionally to the size of the settlement: in the case of cities, the average value is 7, and in the case of villages, 2 cooperations. The most common twinning relationships were established with Romania (190 cases), Slovakia (130 cases) and Germany (77 cases).

In our research, we call a twinning relation “intraethnic” if the respondent indicated in the motivation for the cooperation that establishing contact with the Hungarian community abroad or with the kin state of a nationality living in the settlement. Interpreted this way, 35.5 percent of our 409 cases are intraethnic, of which 27.1 percent are tied between Hungarian communities and 8.4 percent between nationalities and kin states. Intraethnic relations are more intense than relations based on other motivations (74.6% vs. 63.2%), and they activate different local groups (mayor, local and minority self-government, ethnic civil organizations) better. All this suggests that the actors are (understandably) more motivated in these relations, and this is also coupled with stronger local effects. Although intraethnic relations bring fewer economic benefits, they have a stronger impact on shaping the society of settlements into a community. Since the contracting actors in intraethnic relations are mutually interested in establishing/maintaining the partnership, and a common language also simplifies communication, fewer obstacles arise in the field of maintaining relations.

4. Results

Before the regime change in 1989/90, twinning relations were centralized (Süli-Zakar and Czimre 2007; Fabry 2019), but since the establishment of local government autonomy in 1990, a significant part of the relations have been established on internal initiative, spontaneously, and built from the bottom up, and the directions of relations have rarely been shaped by state or other external institutional pressure, from the top down (Brucker and Zsibók 2025). Of course, this does not mean that the state does not try to manage relations indirectly; there are still incentives and subsidies, especially since the establishment of the Orbán government in 2010, that direct municipalities in the desired direction, but these are more opportunities than obligations.

The government has supported the establishment and maintenance of Hungary–Hungarian twinning relations as an integral part of its national policy since 2015. Thus, in Bethlen Gábor Fund Management (BGFM) Hungarian settlements can apply, on the one hand, to establish new twinning relations with a settlement inhabited by Hungarians living in the Carpathian Basin, and on the other hand, to develop their already established twinning on an intraethnic basis, exchange experiences, create joint programs, and thus contribute to the well-being of Hungarians living abroad in their homeland, to the promotion of relations with the kin state, and to the strengthening of Hungarian national identity. Since its launch this year, the 10-year twinning programme has contributed to the establishment or strengthening of more than 1100 twinning relations (Portfolio 2025). Support for Hungarian nationalities (except for the Roma), which were previously more closely linked to the government in terms of organization, has also been in the hands of the BGFM since 2018. The aim of supporting the twelve nationalities—Armenian, Bulgarian, Croatian, German, Greek, Polish, Romanian, Ruthenian, Serbian, Slovak, Slovenian and Ukrainian—is to provide resources to these communities to nurture their language, cultural traditions, intellectual and material heritage in a dignified manner, and thereby contribute to the preservation of Hungary’s cultural diversity (BGAZRT 2025). Within the framework of the so-called nationality support, applications can be made for support for ethnic civil organizations, budget support for ethnic cultural initiatives and ethnic camps, while the basic funding for the tasks and operations of local nationality self-governments belongs to the Fund. Thematic grants are intended to implement local cultural programs that contribute to the visibility of ethnic communities and the nurturing of intraethnic relations, including their twinning relations with the kin state.

As mentioned earlier, and the composite indicators (

Table 2. Relations * between intraethnic relations and some indicators.

Intraethnic Relation	Activity Indicator (1 = Always)	Impact Indicator (1 = Not at All)	Lack Indicator (1 = Yes)
yes	2.37	3.49	1.78
no	2.52	3.15	1.73
Total	2.46	3.29	1.75

* The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

) created from the individual questions also clearly show, that identity-based relationships result in the involvement of broader segments of society in twinning cooperation, and these relationships can integrate most deeply into local society.

An active local society also handles the emerging difficulties better, and accordingly—in addition to the lack of resources generally characteristic of local governments—it also perceives the inhibiting factors less. And the existence of relations clearly brings greater benefits to these settlements. The twinning or sister city relationships can be seen as networks and best practices that can be considered one of the key factors of social innovation in Central and Eastern Europe. In the most successful cases, this is not just a formal cooperation, but a process that can transform and strengthen local communities, local nationalities, and ethnic minorities (if the relationship was established on their initiative), and can also improve the problem-solving capabilities of self-governments.

We based our examination of the twinning town network as a social innovation on five main factors:

• The emergence of new social interaction and new forms of cooperation that transcend traditional hierarchical institutional frameworks (cooperation between Volunteer Firefighter Network around Carpathian-basin);
• When the twinning relationship is based on value creation and the goal is resource sharing (whether physical or human/cultural resources), it is mostly social best practices that are shared or cultural capital that is exchanged (the establishment of Bulgarian horticultural tradition in Hungary is an excellent example of the transmission of agricultural traditions, which is maintained by twinning arrangements);
• Social innovation occurs when new approaches are sought to solve local social problems: when external actors join in, objective factors can often be identified that can help local governments solve problems. A city struggling with emigration can learn from a sister city that has successfully implemented a program to attract young people. Or a sister city in another country may have already found a solution to a city’s environmental-social-geopolitical problems, such as flash flooding in mountainous areas or the integration of digitalization techniques into everyday life; changing geopolitical situations, security policy factors and refugee.
• The greatest benefit of social innovation is widespread social involvement, bringing the population into direct contact with other cultures and perspectives, which creates opportunities to strengthen trust, break down stereotypes, increase the sense of European identity, and stimulate social learning. These initiatives mainly cover active platforms where people actively participate and learn from each other e.g., the cases of European Capital of Culture titled cities network.
• When traditional frameworks are no longer sufficient: bottom-up, economically profitable initiatives, where the initiator is not the local government but a civil association, business, or individual local resident. This horizontal, network-like governance model can also function as part of social innovation, mobilizing structures that break through established frameworks.

4.1. Cross-Border Civil Society Cooperation

The Carpathian Basin Volunteer Firefighter Network has been operating since 2014, with hundreds of volunteers working under a common umbrella. In addition to the Hungarian Firefighters Association, the Transcarpathia Volunteer Firefighter Network, the Vojvodina Settlements Association, and the Szeklerland Volunteer Firefighters Network have also joined. The purpose of network cooperation is to ensure that, in the event of fires, floods, mass accidents, or industrial disasters, the member organizations of the network can be mobilized immediately and provide assistance in coordination with professional units. Organized cooperation in emergency situations is based on mutual assistance. Cooperation enables the proper performance of tasks in prevention and damage control, the development of network resources, the training of new recruits, and the preservation of traditions. The collaboration between the Szeklerland Firefighting Associations and the civil organizations of their sister cities serves as a prime example of a mutually beneficial partnership that is characterized by excellence and significance. In the case of Odorheiu Secuiesc, this connection is much more than just an official protocol; it is based on practical cooperation, professional exchange, and human relationships. For this reason, it is possible that it has established a wide range of sister city relationships, mainly with other Hungarian cities (13), one Ukrainian, one Polish and one Slovak connection. These collaborations have three main objectives: (1) Professional development: overcoming professional isolation and acquiring new knowledge. (2) Equipment development: obtaining technical and financial support. (3) Strengthening volunteerism: increasing motivation among local volunteers. Financial and technical cooperation is provided in collaboration with the National Strategy Research Institute (NSKI 2025): equipment donations are made once a year, cooperation agreements are signed for the following period, and joint tendering activities are carried out. They are jointly applying for EU funding for a project that supports cross-border cooperation and the development of disaster management. The funds from the grant will be used to purchase new equipment, educational materials, and conduct joint exercises.

This type of cooperation offers an opportunity for participants to ensure both professional and municipal development along common interests. Essentially, such a relationship is a strategic partnership at the level of fire services. The Szeklerland firefighters and all those involved will not only receive symbolic support, but will also gain access to a supranational, cross-border professional network, knowledge, and resources. And for the sister city fire department, it is a meaningful and visible international cooperation that provides an opportunity for development and motivation for its own volunteers. The twinning database shows that these Szekler-Hungarian twinning relations were established quite early between 1992–1997. Many of the relations have stagnated at the level of formality, but there are always initiatives, mainly civil actors, which try to give them substance. These associations have been given a prominent role in twinning networks due to the preservation of cultural heritage (mainly Hungarian), and for this reason we considered that, as a best practice, the firefighter network operating throughout the Carpathian basin can be seen as a real social innovation.

4.2. The Case of Bulgarian Gardeners—Transmission Traditions Through Borders

Twinning partnerships function as instruments of social innovation that strengthen local communities through collaboration, knowledge exchange, and the preservation of shared cultural heritage. A notable example of such partnerships can be found in Bulgarian–Hungarian twinning relations, many of which are rooted in historical connections established through migration and agricultural exchange. As in these cases, they are the relations between the settlements that received Bulgarian gardeners who arrived in Hungary in the 19th and 20th centuries and the settlements that sent them out. Domestication of Bulgarian horticulture itself was also associated with innovation and the transfer of good practices in both agricultural production and workplace organization (Bódi and Savova 2018). The successful adaptation is also proven by the fact that the so-called Bulgarian-system horticulture farms based on the Bulgarian model appeared one after another in Hungary, and also by the fact that the farms continued to operate even after the Bulgarians (temporarily or permanently) moved home—now in Hungarian hands, with Hungarian workers—and in some cases still operate today as outstanding enterprises of Hungarian agriculture.

A twinning relation based on a Bulgarian horticultural past can be demonstrated in the relations of Halásztelek—Polikraiste, Halásztelek—Nikopol, Felsőzsolca—Draganovo, Szigetszentmiklós—Gorna Orjahovica, Zugló—Veliko Tarnovo, and Szentes—Sevlievo. The initial period is also decisive even in the case of twinning relations that have developed along ethnic lines but are even closer than the local ethnic community—kin state relationship, as the formalization of the cooperation and the intensity and depth of the relations depend on mainly the local governments. A more recent cooperation (Szentes—Sevlievo) shows a period of framework development, which is still limited to annual official meetings and visits by local government delegations. Where relations date back to earlier times (Szigetszentmiklós—Gorna Orjahovica, Halásztelek—Polikraiste), the experience is that the role of the minority and local governments is more significant in initiating the processes. Later, these actors are only present as catalysts in the development of further relations, which exist independently of them, and even separately from the Bulgarian horticultural past, in the form of direct contacts. However, even in these cases, the role of the official framework in the background is important, without which the relations established in other areas fade and wither. Typical areas of cooperation are sports, children’s camps, twinning performances, and exchange visits of various professional and artistic groups, but in the case of Szigetszentmiklós we can also report on the submission and implementation of a joint twinning application.

The preservation of the Bulgarian horticultural past is reflected in the life of the settlements, and sometimes even in the settlement cooperation itself. The tribute to the Bulgarian horticultural traditions and the recollection of this past are exemplified by the tomato growing competition (Szigetszentmiklós), the seed donation from Sevlievo (Szentes), but of course the works of art, symbols, and public sculptures found in the former Bulgarian horticultural settlements can also be included here.

4.3. New Approaches to Solving Local Social Problems

Transcarpathia, which is a multi-ethnic region but has a strip with the majority ethnic Hungarian population along the Ukrainian-Hungarian border, was annexed to Czechoslovakia after the First World War, in accordance with the so-called Treaty of Trianon, but after the Second World War it was annexed to the Soviet Union as a “gift from Czechoslovakia”, and has been part of Ukraine since its independence in 1991. The BGFM has contributed to the establishment of several intraethnic twinning relations in Hungary and Ukraine (in the initial period of the program, it entered into official contact with, for example, Héhalom and Tiszacsoma, Zirc and Dercen, Ásványráró and Tiszaásvány). The twinning relations established with Transcarpathian settlements are fundamentally about helping the region, which is in a more difficult situation than the Hungarian average, and about transferring experiences and good practices. The cooperations established with the help of the grant manager’s resources are the result of the period after 2015, which also means that the relationships were established during a difficult period (i.e., after 2014), aware of the existing difficulties. Since 2022, when the war entered a new, invasion phase, these relations with Hungary (and obviously other countries) have become more valuable, and represent the hope for various forms of assistance both locally and in the twin settlements. In 2022, monetary and material donations to Ukraine, and especially to Transcarpathia, became more active also along the Hungarian twinning relations, and they played a role in helping refugees, providing temporary or permanent accommodation, and organizing periodic programs (e.g., camps for Ukrainian children). Unfortunately, the general experience is that these municipal—local community actions, which were still regular in the year of the outbreak of the war, have now almost completely disappeared (maybe accepted the situation?), and (at least) news about any kind of assistance to the Ukrainian twin settlements is rare on the information channels of the municipalities.

4.4. Cross-Border Cooperation in the Field of Cultural Heritage

In 1983, Melina Mercouri, Greece’s Minister of Culture, proposed to the Council of the European Union the creation of a major cultural program. This became the European Capital of Culture program, which celebrates its 40th anniversary in 2025. ‘Culture Connects’ is the slogan of the European Capital of Culture (ECoC) program (Autissier 2018). The program aims to bring European people closer together through culture and to counterbalance the predominance of economic integration in the European project (Morvay et al. 2020). From the 2000s onwards, the project was regulated by an EU regulation, and cities were selected through an open competition, and the focus gradually shifted to urban development, community building, and cultural innovation (Liu 2014). Since 2009, two EU countries have hosted the title each year (on a rotating basis).

The European Capital of Culture (ECoC) initiative serves as a strategic instrument for urban and regional development. Its influence extends beyond immediate cultural activities, functioning as a catalyst for multi-stakeholder collaboration that includes partnerships between public and private sectors, interregional cooperation, and enhanced civic engagement (Liu 2014). In addition, the ECoC represents a unique transnational framework that simultaneously encourages local and regional networking while fostering cross-border European cooperation (Németh 2016). Great examples for this are the cases of Pécs (ECoC titled in 2010) and Veszprém with the Balaton-Bakony region (ECoC titled in 2023). Pécs as a county seat of Baranya county has fourteen official sister cities: Arad and Cluj Napoca (Romania), Osijek (Croatia), Fellbach (Germany), Graz (Austria), Istanbul and Kütahya (Turkey), Lahti (Finland), Lyon (France), Novi Sad (Serbia), Seattle and Tucson (USA), Shiraz (Iran) and Terracina (Italy). In 2010 Pécs together with Essen (Germany) and its sister city, Istanbul (Turkey) was titled ECoC. Veszprém as the county seat of Veszprém county has ten official sistercities: Ottignies Louvain la Neuve (Belgium), Gladsaxe (Denmark), Tartu (Estonia), Rovaniemi (Finnland), Bottrop and Passau (Germany), Tirat Carmel (Israel), Tarnów (Poland), Sfântu Gheorghe (Romania) and Nitra (Slovakia). Among these Tartu from Estonia was the title ECoC in 2024.

In addition to twinning arrangements, ECoC winners are part of the UNESCO Creative Cities Network and other associations: the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, the Healthy Cities Network, University City Associations, and the Association of County-Level Cities, all of which support each other, primarily through the exchange of human capital, the transfer of experience, and the dissemination of the results of programs implemented in the cities concerned. Cities belonging to these networks—like Pécs and Veszprém—participate in joint applications: Interreg, URBACT, and Horizon programmes; the main topics: liveability, sustainability, green transition, human capacity building, and lifelong learning programmes.

The two Hungarian ECoC winner achieved and claimed in title a different way—Pécs focused mainly on investments, aiming to achieve developments that would make the city a cultural capital again. For this reason, only civil organizations and companies were involved in the programme that promoted and reinforced this main goal (Füzér 2018). The concept of ECoC in Veszprém and Balaton-Bakony region was consistently applied throughout both the application process and implementation, with the main ideas being connections, the exploitation of synergies, and sustainability. Committed to the long-term development of the region, the goal was to build a unique regional model that, based on the region’s exceptional natural and cultural assets and with a strong emphasis on culture, would result in noticeable change. The preparation of the application and the implementation of the programs took place on three different levels of cooperation: the city of Veszprém, the Balaton Uplands (Balaton-Felvidék), and the immediate surroundings of Veszprém, and the Balaton resort area (Kővári et al. 2022). The main objectives of the ECoC programme were to strengthen the community in the given region (population retention) and to create opportunities for these communities to demonstrate the cultural richness and attractiveness of the region to each other and to Europe through their own values. Separate programs and grant opportunities were available for the renewal of the city’s infrastructure, the participation of volunteers from the immediate area, the expansion of cultural opportunities in small villages (barn programs), and the coordination of public transport throughout the entire program area. Efforts were made to involve key decision-makers from all areas in the bid book preparation process, then during implementation, and now in the aftermath. Thinking within these territorial frameworks and cooperation networks has resulted in Veszprém-Balaton being awarded the title of European Region of Sport for 2026.

This type of title and network connection is a chance for city governments, civil organizations, and private people to get involved in different ways. In Veszprém, the aim was to build regional cooperation and use existing network connections, which they did successfully. The creation and operation of this new type of cultural region can be considered a social innovation.

4.5. Social Innovation Can Facilitate Local Economic Development

During the 2022 census, more than 142,000 people declared themselves German nationality in Hungary, representing 1.5% of the population. Baranya County is a particularly multicultural county with a significant Croatian (1.79%) and German/Swabian (5.6%) and other (Greek: 0.05%, Polish: 0.06%, Romanian: 0.08%, Serbian: 0.17%) population (Tóth 2025). The ethnic diversity of the population plays a prominent role in Baranya county, with 40 settlements in Baranya having sister settlements in Germany, according to the TÖOSZ database, primarily those settlements where a significant German minority still lives today. Twinning relationships already existed in the early 1990s, most of which were maintained through family ties. The ancestors of the region’s German (Swabian) population came to Hungary during the settlement period following the Turkish occupation. They were given the opportunity to settle in villages and received support, similar to the Romanian-Hungarian border region (Barakonyiné Winiczai 2001; Dragan et al. 2024). The existence of a common language and the values associated with Swabian culture have led to the identification of certain settlements in the region (Tomay and Ragadics 2025). These settlements have, through local initiatives, succeeded in establishing economic cooperation, creating employment opportunities and generating economic prosperity. The peripheral location on the border has been identified as a key factor contributing to its status as a non-typical destination for foreign direct investment. Nevertheless, numerous small and medium-sized German companies have established operations in the county, not only in the county seat (Pécs), but also in smaller towns (Mohács, Komló, Bóly) and villages with populations of around 1000 (Szederkény, Ófalu etc.). Numerous economic ties resulted from cultural cooperation between the twin towns and the dedicated work of committed individuals. Swabian cultural attitudes (diligence, discipline, awareness) can still be found among the inhabitants of this town today. The local government and the entire population also benefit from these initiatives (due to job opportunities and taxes, public utilities, infrastructure developments, and corporate social responsibility), yet they are linked to individuals and individual economic interests. In the case of Bóly, for example, the local government supported the process by building an industrial park and providing public utilities, while in the case of Szederkény, it also supported the process by reducing business tax and developing the public infrastructure.

Social innovation in these settlements, similarly to the previous ones, is motivated by the presence of local minorities, is a bottom-up initiative, and is not linked to central resource allocation or location policies.

5. Discussion

5.1. Theoretical Implications

In the concept of social innovation, the commitment and participation of local communities strengthen collective problem-solving capabilities. Communities that take an integrated approach to individual well-being, community cohesion, and the interests of future generations, as emphasized by these principles, are not only more liveable but also more competitive on a global level. It is important to note that programs work effectively when the community has a vision for the future, wants to change its situation, and is able to mobilize its own resources to do so.

When two or more communities work together on a long-term basis, through new relationships, on a participatory basis, creatively solving common challenges and creating shared values, this can be defined as social innovation. The sister city movement is therefore not merely a protocol gesture or cultural supplement, but a practical tool for transforming and strengthening local societies in a globalized world.

5.2. Practical Implications

Despite the significant restructuring of relations between MLG levels, diplomatic activity remains associated with state operations, while numerous other actors (including civil society, businesses, multinational organizations, and local and regional governments) have emerged as direct participants in the international arena.

Identification of development traps and definition of bottlenecks remain largely at the national level (European Commission 2024), and the application of MLG can facilitate the delegation of problems to the level at which they can be solved most effectively. When addressing territorial inequality, it is evident that local initiatives and solutions, when they are successful in practice, have the potential to achieve their objectives at the global level. Twinning is a paradigmatic example of this phenomenon. In this context, various municipalities, civil society organizations, and individuals across different countries assess a given problem from multiple perspectives and endeavour to alleviate it with a variety of solutions. Consequently, this initiative facilitates collaborative support among sister cities, even those in third countries. In an era characterized by multiple crises, a successful local initiative has the capacity to set a positive example and provide motivation.

6. Conclusions

This study demonstrates that twinning functions as a dynamic platform for social innovation, fostering regional cohesion and community resilience. These relationships strengthen local identity, enhance civic participation, and generate social capital—key ingredients for overcoming the Middle-Income Trap. While traditionally perceived as symbolic or cultural gestures, these partnerships increasingly serve as functional arenas of collective learning, enabling local actors to co-create solutions to social, economic, and environmental problems.

Through diverse examples of social innovation—from the Carpathian Basin Volunteer Firefighter Network to Bulgarian-Hungarian horticultural heritage and the European Capital of Culture initiatives—the study illustrates how twinning can act as a transformative social innovation system. These cases demonstrate that innovation arises not only from technological or financial inputs but also from relational capacities, shared cultural heritage, and collaborative governance. Even when the economic outcomes are modest, the long-term social dividends—enhanced participation, strengthened networks, and mutual learning—contribute to a more integrated and inclusive regional development paradigm.

The article emphasizes that twinning partnerships represent a participatory and bottom-up model of MLG, wherein municipalities, civil society organizations, and citizens collaboratively reshape the frameworks of local governance. By integrating innovation into routine collaborative practices, these networks transcend the realm of symbolic diplomacy, operating instead as enduring mechanisms of territorial cohesion and drivers of inclusive, community-orientated development throughout Central and Eastern Europe.

6.1. Limitations

Within the scope of this study, we only reviewed those twinning partnerships related to social innovation that have significantly transformed the life (culture, society, economy) of the given municipality. We have disregarded partnerships that involve traditional cooperation or do not fall into the five main categories that we consider to be typical examples of good practice. In the paper, we considered the Hungarian context as the primary basis for comparison, which demonstrates several good practices, but obscures factors that could provide an opportunity to explore the entire network of twin towns.

6.2. Future Research Directions

In future research, particular attention will be paid to the theoretical connections between the changing power centers of MLG (nationalism, regionalism, localism) and the international activities of local governments. The prevailing assumption is that there is a diminution of rivalry between levels of government, a reduction in the separation of competences, and an augmentation of collaborative governance. This provides a novel theoretical framework for the interpretation of sovereignty, subsidiarity and legitimacy. In addition to twinning, we examine multilateral relations, all those that can influence the collaboration of local governments beyond Hungarian-Hungarian and other intraethnic relations.

In the subsequent phase, primary data will be collected on sister-towns and twinning settlements, and interviews will be conducted to identify types of social innovation that are already in operation. This will be facilitated by individual regions and groups of settlements.