TED Policy Brief "Democracy Under Pressure: Supporting Civic Space & Local Democratic Governance"

Drawing on a comprehensive mapping of EU and TED Member States' support for civic space and local democratic governance, the Team Europe Democracy (TED) Policy Brief "Democracy Under Pressure: Supporting Civic Space and Local Democratic Governance" (December 2025, available for download at the link below) demonstrates that European democracy support is operating in an increasingly complex environment characterised by democratic backsliding, shrinking civic space, reduced development finance and growing geopolitical competition. While EU and TED Member State policy frameworks consistently recognise civic space and local democratic governance as fundamental to democratic resilience, human rights and sustainable development, implementation remains uneven and insufficiently adapted to rapidly evolving political realities. Yet these pressures have also prompted important innovation across the EU and TED Member States. The mapping therefore points not only to growing constraints, but also to a rich body of practical experience that can inform a more coherent, adaptive and operational European response.

Across both thematic areas, a consistent pattern emerges. The principal challenge is no longer simply the existence of restrictive environments, but whether European democracy support can adapt its operating model to increasingly complex political contexts. Successful examples identified throughout the mapping demonstrate how the EU, EU Delegations and TED Member States increasingly combine political dialogue, flexible funding, local partnerships, digital governance, human rights mechanisms and long-term institutional support. Rather than relying primarily on formal institutions, established civil society organisations or government-to-government cooperation, these approaches adopt more flexible, politically adaptive and multi-level partnerships that connect civic actors, local authorities, independent institutions, the private sector and international actors. Rather than treating civic space, local democratic governance and sectoral cooperation as separate policy domains, these approaches reinforce democratic resilience by linking governance, development and investment objectives.

The research highlights numerous practices that already offer valuable models for wider uptake. TED Member States increasingly support civil society as an actor in its own right through more flexible partnerships and direct engagement with local organisations. France and Germany demonstrate the value of localisation and direct support to local actors, Ireland and Switzerland illustrate the benefits of predictable, long-term partnerships, while Sweden places civic space and democratic governance at the heart of its development cooperation. Belgium's integrated multi-level governance approach, the Netherlands' sustained investment in local democratic governance, Finland's partnership-based programming and municipal cooperation, and Denmark and Austria's growing attention to digital governance all demonstrate that innovative and context-sensitive approaches are already being implemented across Europe.

Rapid-response and resilience mechanisms, including support for Human Rights Defenders through emergency funding, legal assistance, relocation, psychosocial support and digital protection, enable quicker reactions to democratic openings and restrictions while strengthening the long-term resilience of civic actors. Increasing attention is also being paid to bridging the longstanding divide between online and offline civic space, recognising that digital surveillance, online restrictions and disinformation increasingly shape democratic participation. At the same time, the mapping highlights the importance of engaging youth movements, informal organisations and other emerging civic actors alongside established civil society organisations, reflecting the evolving nature of democratic participation. City-to-city cooperation and municipal partnerships have likewise proven to be among the most resilient forms of democratic cooperation, sustaining dialogue and peer learning even where national political space becomes increasingly constrained.

The country case studies further illustrate how these principles are already being translated into practice. In the Philippines, democratic engagement is integrated into trade and digital cooperation through structured dialogue with civil society, local authorities and the private sector. Senegal demonstrates how systematic co-creation can place civil society at the centre of Global Gateway implementation, while Colombia illustrates how investment partnerships can become vehicles for democratic participation by broadening engagement beyond traditional stakeholders. Across these diverse contexts, successful approaches share common characteristics: early stakeholder engagement, long-term partnerships, structured dialogue, co-creation and the integration of civic space and local democratic governance into broader development and investment strategies rather than treating them as standalone governance interventions. Together, these experiences demonstrate that democratic values and economic cooperation are mutually reinforcing rather than competing objectives when governance, participation and accountability are embedded from the outset. They equally provide practical lessons for implementing the Global Gateway more consistently across diverse political and development contexts.

The analysis also confirms that civic space and local democratic governance should be understood as mutually reinforcing pillars of democratic resilience rather than separate policy domains. Active civic participation strengthens the accountability, legitimacy and oversight of local institutions, while responsive local governance creates practical opportunities for citizen engagement, participation and trust, particularly where engagement with central governments becomes politically difficult. Experiences from both EU programming and TED Member States demonstrate that combining these dimensions through integrated, multi-actor and multi-level approaches produces more coherent, sustainable and context-sensitive interventions, particularly in fragile and politically restrictive environments. Integrated approaches therefore represent not simply better coordination, but a more effective model for sustaining democratic governance under pressure.

For Team Europe, the findings point towards a clear opportunity. At a time of shrinking resources and increasingly complex democracy support challenges, Team Europe represents less an additional coordination mechanism than a necessary operational response. Building on successful examples of cooperation, including through the TED Initiative itself, its comparative advantage lies not simply in improving coordination but in transforming proven national and EU practices into joint operational approaches. Existing experience with flexible funding, rapid-response mechanisms, municipal partnerships, knowledge-sharing platforms and political dialogue already provides a strong foundation. The next step is to scale these experiences through shared programming, pooled expertise, complementary financing, collective political engagement and risk management, enabling Team Europe to move beyond coordinating activities towards jointly designing and delivering democracy support programmes. In particular, coordinated Team Europe approaches can strengthen support for civic actors and local authorities, facilitate systematic knowledge exchange and maximise collective leverage in fragile and politically restrictive contexts.

The Global Gateway is similarly important. Its founding principles of democratic values, good governance, transparency and equal partnerships already provide a normative basis for integrating civic space and local democratic governance. However, the research also highlights that these principles have yet to be translated systematically into operational practice. The lessons emerging from successful country experiences suggest that Global Gateway can strengthen democratic resilience when civic actors and local authorities are involved from project design onwards, when structured dialogue becomes a core implementation mechanism and when investments are embedded within broader governance processes rather than treated primarily as infrastructure projects. Rather than adding governance components after programme design, democratic participation should become an integral feature of Global Gateway implementation across sectors.

The mapping also demonstrated that Europe already possesses an extensive knowledge base on what works. Innovative practices developed by EU institutions, TED Member States, Switzerland, EU Delegations and the wider TED Network provide a strong foundation for mutual learning and continuous adaptation. Future effectiveness will depend not only on financial resources but also on strengthening institutional learning, knowledge management and operational guidance. Strengthening peer learning, staff capacities and operational guidance, while encouraging greater exchange across governance, infrastructure, digital, trade and investment communities, can help ensure that successful experiences move beyond isolated examples to become part of a more systematic European approach to democracy support.

Ultimately, the findings suggest that the future of European democracy support will depend less on developing entirely new instruments than on making better use of existing experience. By scaling proven practices, strengthening mutual learning and embedding civic space and local democratic governance across external action, the EU, TED Member States, Switzerland and Team Europe are well placed to respond more coherently to democratic backsliding and increasing geopolitical pressures. The evidence gathered through this mapping shows that many of the necessary approaches already exist. The challenge now is to connect, scale and operationalise these experiences through stronger partnerships, coordinated action and values-based implementation, moving beyond project-based democracy support towards integrated, adaptive and operational partnerships that bring together civic space, local democratic governance, investment, diplomacy and development cooperation. In an era of democratic backsliding and constrained resources, this integrated approach offers the strongest prospect for reinforcing democratic resilience while ensuring that European external action remains both principled and effective.