Every year, municipalities across Europe debate how much they should spend on sport. Sports facilities require maintenance, swimming pools consume energy and local clubs rely on public support to remain accessible. Yet while the discussion often focuses on the sports budget, a more fundamental question is rarely asked: what is the budget for an active society?
The distinction matters because physical activity is about much more than sport. According to the latest Eurobarometer, almost half of Europeans never participate in sport or exercise. At the same time, physical inactivity continues to place a growing burden on healthcare systems, local communities and public finances. The OECD estimates that insufficient physical activity contributes significantly to chronic diseases, healthcare expenditure and productivity losses across Europe. The challenge facing municipalities is therefore not simply how to fund sport, but how to create environments that encourage people to move more as part of their everyday lives.
The most successful examples are increasingly coming from outside traditional sports policy. Rather than investing exclusively through sports departments, leading cities and regions are combining resources from education, healthcare, urban planning and mobility to achieve the same goal. Three European examples demonstrate how this approach is already delivering results.
In Finland, the Schools on the Move programme has become one of the world's most cited examples of how education can drive physical activity. What began in 2010 as a pilot involving just 45 schools evolved into a national movement reaching more than 2.100 schools, approximately 92 percent of Finnish pupils and 93 percent of municipalities. Rather than focusing on additional sports lessons, the programme sought to reduce sedentary behaviour throughout the school day.
Schools were encouraged to redesign playgrounds, introduce active breaks, promote active travel and integrate movement into learning environments. The results were measurable. Physical activity increased during recess and throughout the school day, while sedentary time decreased among participating students. In secondary schools, activity levels during the school day increased by as much as 12 percent. More students spent recess outdoors and active commuting increased, even during the Finnish winter months.
What makes Finland particularly interesting is the funding logic behind it. The programme was not driven solely by sports policy. It gained support because research linked movement to improved wellbeing, school enjoyment and learning outcomes. Physical activity became an education investment as much as a health or sports investment. By connecting multiple policy objectives, Finland created one of the largest physical activity interventions in Europe without treating it as a traditional sports programme.
A similar shift in thinking can be found in Girona, Spain. The Public Health Agency of Girona Province, Dipsalut, supports 221 municipalities and has built its strategy around prevention rather than treatment. Instead of asking how many people participate in organised sport, the agency focuses on how communities can become healthier and more resilient through everyday physical activity.
One of its most recognised initiatives is the development of Healthy Itineraries and Urban Health Parks. More than 180 Healthy Itineraries have been created across the province, alongside dozens of outdoor exercise parks designed specifically to encourage physical activity among adults and older residents. These facilities are freely accessible and integrated into neighbourhoods, parks and public spaces. The aim is to reduce health risks and improve quality of life.
“...... leading cities and regions are combining resources from education, healthcare, urban planning and mobility to achieve the same goal.”
The rationale is supported by overwhelming evidence. According to the World Health Organization, physical inactivity is one of the leading risk factors for non-communicable diseases worldwide. By investing in walking routes, outdoor fitness spaces and community programmes, Girona treats movement as preventive healthcare. This changes the funding conversation. Instead of relying solely on sports budgets, investments can be justified through public health outcomes, reduced healthcare costs and improved wellbeing. In a period when many European healthcare systems face mounting pressure, Girona demonstrates how active living can become a health strategy rather than merely a recreation strategy.
Hamburg has taken yet another route. Through its Active City Strategy, Germany's second-largest city has adopted one of the most comprehensive physical activity frameworks in Europe. The strategy contains more than 230 individual measures and actions aimed at embedding movement into daily life across the city. Rather than focusing exclusively on organised sport, Hamburg explicitly links physical activity to urban development, public health, social inclusion, education and quality of life.
The scale of ambition is significant. Hamburg plans to develop more than 90 additional sports halls while simultaneously investing in public spaces, neighbourhood facilities, cycling routes and opportunities for informal recreation. The city has committed hundreds of millions of euros to sports and active city infrastructure over the coming years, recognising that physical activity generates benefits far beyond participation statistics.
What distinguishes Hamburg is its deliberate decision to position itself as an Active City rather than a Sports City. The terminology may seem subtle, but the implications are profound. An active city does not measure success solely by the number of sports participants. It considers whether residents can safely walk to school, whether neighbourhoods encourage outdoor activity, whether public spaces support social interaction and whether movement is integrated into everyday life. This broader perspective allows multiple municipal departments to contribute to the same objective and creates opportunities to combine budgets that would traditionally remain separate.
Taken together, these examples reveal an important lesson for municipalities across Europe. Finland used education budgets to increase movement among children. Girona used health budgets to encourage active lifestyles and prevent disease. Hamburg used urban development and public space investments to make movement part of daily life. Different approaches, different funding streams and different political contexts, yet all pursuing the same outcome.
This matters because Europe faces a growing paradox. Healthcare costs continue to rise, populations are ageing and public budgets remain under pressure. At the same time, inactivity remains widespread. The answer may not be to spend more on sport alone. Instead, it may be to recognise that physical activity contributes to objectives that already receive substantial investment across government. The cities that will succeed in the coming decades may be the cities that understand how education, health, mobility, public space and sport can work together.