Schengen municipality: From citizens' lists to party politics? An analyse at the horizon of the 2029 municipal elections

Fernand Weimerskirch

Introduction

Schengen is more than just a small town on the Moselle – it is a European symbol of openness, cooperation and the dismantling of borders. But while big politics has long since put the municipality's name on the world map, a very different but no less exciting question is being asked locally: How will local democracy be shaped in the future? Will the municipality continue to be characterised by citizens' lists that operate independently of party structures, or will municipal party politics increasingly prevail, transferring national programmes to the local level?

The 2029 local elections will be a crucial moment for highlighting these trends.

Citizens' lists: local roots and pragmatism

Citizens' lists have a long tradition in Luxembourg. They usually arise from the direct involvement of local actors who have no party political ties but stand for election in 'their' municipality out of personal conviction.

Their strengths lie in their proximity to the population: candidates are often well-known figures who are visible in community life, in the neighbourhood or in everyday working life. This results in a political style that relies heavily on trust, pragmatism and direct problem solving. This is particularly attractive in small communities, where politics is not driven by grand ideologies but by very concrete issues such as road construction, school organisation or community support.

However, citizens' lists also have clear weaknesses. They often lack programmatic continuity across election cycles. New constellations can lead to erratic decisions because there is no overarching guideline that permanently binds all candidates together. The question of resources also plays a role: while parties can draw on nationwide structures, expertise and financial support, citizens' lists are heavily dependent on voluntary commitment in their work.

Parties: institutionalisation and political affiliation

In contrast, political parties offer a more institutionalised form of politics. They present clear programmes that are not only valid for one legislative period, but also formulate longer-term goals. In this way, they provide voters with guidance and comparability.

Another advantage is access to resources and networks. Candidates who run through a party can count on support from national politics and administration, which can be particularly advantageous when it comes to more complex issues such as spatial planning, cross-border cooperation or environmental policy. In addition, party politics promotes better integration between the different levels: decisions in the community are not isolated, but embedded in a larger political structure.

But there are disadvantages here too. Parties tend to make lines of conflict more visible, as they have to take clear positions in the competition for votes. What contributes to political clarification in national debates can easily lead to polarisation and deadlock at the local level. In addition, local concerns can sometimes take a back seat to overarching party political interests . A local council that is disciplined in terms of party politics has less leeway to seek pragmatic solutions "beyond the line".

Schengen in a special context

The municipality of Schengen is a special case in many respects. Its location in the border triangle makes it a community that is particularly strongly influenced by cross-border mobility and cooperation. This calls for pragmatism and a problem-solving approach – a classic field in which citizens' lists can score points.

At the same time, Schengen lends its European symbolic power. This charisma also makes the municipality attractive to parties that want to show their roots here and benefit from the symbolism. Younger generations in particular, who become involved in parties at an early age, could see Schengen as a stage where local politics meets the European dimension.

Added to this is socio-demographic change: the population is growing, and new residents bring with them different expectations. As structures become more complex, there is a greater need for institutionalised organisation – an area in which parties have an advantage.

Development prospects until 2029

Schengen's development can be described along three possible scenarios:

Status quo: Citizens' lists maintain their strong role. Politics remains local, person-oriented and little influenced by party programmes.

Hybrid model: Citizens' lists and parties compete in parallel and work together – out of necessity – in coalitions. This could lead to a pluralistic but at the same time more complex local politics.

Party dominance: Parties prevail in the long term, citizens' lists lose importance. The municipality would be more closely tied to national political lines, but would lose some of its local autonomy.

Given the current dynamics, a hybrid model seems most likely: citizens' lists remain present, but parties continuously expand their influence.

Final consideration

The shift from citizen list-oriented local politics to a more party-political organisation is not an either/or situation, but a continuous process of negotiation. Schengen will be an exciting example of this: a municipality with European symbolism, but very concrete local challenges.

The real challenge lies in combining the best of both worlds:

-       The down-to-earth nature and proximity of the citizens' lists.

-       The professionalism and resources of the parties.

If this succeeds, Schengen could remain not only a symbol of open borders, but also of a modern, balanced form of local democracy that preserves citizen proximity while utilising the institutional advantages of party politics.