What does it take to build a healthy and active city when space is scarce, financial resources are limited and urban pressure keeps growing? In Sliema, Malta, this question is anything but theoretical. During the opening session of the ESWAM city visit on 5 October 2026, local representatives offered European colleagues something more valuable than a polished presentation: an honest look at the opportunities, limitations and everyday realities of governing one of Malta's most densely developed urban communities.
Sliema is home to approximately 27,000 permanent residents, but during the summer months its population can exceed 45,000. Tourism brings energy and economic opportunities, while simultaneously placing enormous pressure on public space, mobility and infrastructure. Across Malta, approximately 580,000 inhabitants share the island with some 430,000 cars. In a country where land is limited and urban development continues to intensify, the question is no longer simply where to build additional sports facilities. It is how to create a healthier society within the urban environment that already exists.
The financial reality makes this challenge even more remarkable. Sliema Local Council operates with an annual budget of approximately €1.2 million and just twelve full-time employees. These resources must support a wide range of municipal responsibilities, including infrastructure, road maintenance, public spaces and community activities. Unlike many European municipalities, Sliema does not directly operate most of its established sports infrastructure. Football, swimming and water polo facilities are largely managed by other organisations. The municipality therefore faces a fundamental question: how can local government influence physical activity and wellbeing without owning the facilities or controlling the entire system?
During the opening meeting, Pierre Portelli and the local representatives introduced the delegation to these realities. Mayor John Pillow, alongside Wallace and Ryan Borg, contributed to a conversation about the responsibilities and ambitions of local government. One potentially important development is the expected redistribution of tourism-related taxation, which could provide municipalities with additional resources. Yet increased funding alone cannot overcome limited land availability, competing priorities or the complexity of local governance. For Sliema, the real opportunity lies in connecting financial resources with smarter decisions about public space, community participation and partnerships.
The discussion quickly moved beyond Malta. Representatives from European cities shared experiences that revealed remarkably similar challenges. How can municipalities reach people who are physically inactive? How do they support sports clubs struggling with volunteers, coaches and rising costs? How can they demonstrate that investments in facilities actually improve health and participation? And how can physical activity become a natural part of daily life rather than something requiring a membership, a car journey or a dedicated sports complex?
One particularly revealing discussion focused on the difficulty of reaching inactive residents. Research experiences shared by participants demonstrated that even identifying people who do not participate in sport can be surprisingly complicated. Some residents consider themselves inactive despite regularly moving through work, household activities or everyday responsibilities. Others face practical barriers, including limited time, financial constraints or a lack of suitable opportunities. Working parents, older residents, people with disabilities and neurodiverse individuals all experience the city differently. Creating an active society therefore requires a broader understanding of participation, accessibility and the environments in which people live.
This also challenges the traditional distinction between sports infrastructure and public space. A swimming pool, sports hall or football pitch may offer excellent opportunities, but streets, stairways, waterfronts, parks and neighbourhood squares can reach people who would never enter a conventional sports facility. Participants explored how cities could encourage movement through active mobility, shared family activities and better-designed public environments. The discussion was not about replacing organised sport. It was about recognising that everyday movement deserves an equally important place in urban policy.
“The future of active cities is not only about creating more facilities. It is about creating more opportunities to move.”
Financial models formed another important part of the conversation. Across Europe, the cost of developing and operating sports facilities continues to challenge local governments. One example illustrated how an investment initially estimated at €40 million could rise towards €50 million as development processes and procurement delays increase costs. Meanwhile, municipalities face difficult decisions about affordability, accessibility and operating revenues. Keeping facilities financially sustainable while ensuring that everyone can participate is a balancing act that requires creativity rather than a single European solution.
Examples from Rotterdam and Ireland demonstrated how alternative partnerships can change the equation. Private developers may contribute sports facilities as part of new urban developments, while sports clubs can take responsibility for infrastructure supported through national grants and long-term agreements with local authorities. These arrangements can reduce the direct operational burden on municipalities while maintaining opportunities for community access. However, they also require trust, clear responsibilities and a shared understanding of the public value of sport.
Perhaps one of the strongest observations concerned the position of sport within urban planning. Too often, sports facilities and opportunities for physical activity enter the discussion only after housing, roads and commercial developments have already been designed. By that stage, available land has disappeared and meaningful integration becomes difficult or expensive. The participants argued for a different approach, one in which sport, wellbeing, climate adaptation and mobility are considered from the beginning. Rather than competing for the remaining space, physical activity should help shape the city itself.
This is also where the European Sports and Wellbeing Alliance of Municipalities (ESWAM) can make a difference. The opening session introduced opportunities for knowledge exchange, future city visits and European cooperation. Initiatives involving Erasmus+ and the New European Bauhaus illustrated how municipalities can move beyond sharing inspiration towards developing projects together. From bringing outdoor sports into urban environments to reactivating vacant buildings, the ambition is to transform common challenges into practical experiments and new partnerships.
The meeting concluded with an invitation to look across Sliema before continuing the programme on foot. It was a fitting moment. From above, the density of the city becomes immediately visible. Buildings, roads and public spaces compete for every available square metre, while the Mediterranean coastline offers a different perspective on the relationship between urban life and wellbeing. What had been discussed indoors could now be explored in the streets.
Sliema does not offer a perfect blueprint for the active city. And that is precisely what makes it interesting. Its challenges are real, its resources are limited and its ambitions require cooperation across organisations and sectors. But the opening meeting demonstrated that meaningful progress begins with asking better questions, sharing experiences openly and daring to challenge conventional thinking.
For European cities facing similar pressures, the lesson is clear: the greatest limitation may not be the amount of space available, but how we choose to use it.
Ivar Pierre Portelli, Mayor John Pillow, Wallace and Ryan Borg City of Sliema