Overview
Montenegro is a Balkan country in Southeastern Europe. It is situated along the Adriatic Sea and is bordered by Croatia to the west, Bosnia and Herzegovina to the northwest, Serbia to the northeast, Kosovo to the east, and Albania to the southeast. It spans an area of 13,812 square kilometres, making it one of Europe’s smaller countries. Montenegro’s geography is marked by dramatic contrasts, from its picturesque Adriatic coastline and the Bay of Kotor, one of the world’s most indented bays, to rugged mountainous interiors intersected by fast rivers. The Tara River Canyon, part of the Durmitor National Park, is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and one of the deepest river valleys in the world.
The population predominantly consists of Montenegrins, Serbs, Bosniaks, Albanians, and Croats. Montenegrin is the official language, while Serbian, Bosnian, Albanian, and Croatian languages are also in official use. Cyrillic and Latin letters are equally used.
Montenegro is a parliamentary republic with a government structure comprising executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The President serves as the head of state, elected through direct elections, while the Prime Minister heads the government and is responsible for executing domestic and foreign policy. From 1945 until 1991, Montenegro was one of the six constituent republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Afterwards, it was part of a federation with the Republic of Serbia, until the referendum for Montenegro’s independence in 2006. Since restoring its independence, Montenegro has made European Union membership its main foreign policy goal. In 2017, Montenegro became a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
The country’s aspirations to join the European Union have significantly influenced Montenegro’s policy and reform agenda. The country officially became a candidate for EU membership in December 2010, and negotiations commenced in June 2012. A new approach has been initiated in the EU’s negotiations with Montenegro, where among the first chapters opened were Chapter 23 – Judiciary and Fundamental Rights and Chapter 24 – Justice, Freedom, and Security, and these will remain open until the end of the negotiation process. In June 2024, Montenegro received a positive Interim Benchmark Assessment Report (IBAR) for these two chapters, confirming progress on key rule-of-law benchmarks. So far in the negotiation process, talks have been opened in all 33 chapters, of which seven have been provisionally closed: Chapter 25 – Science and Research (2012), Chapter 26 – Education and Culture (2013), Chapter 30 – External Relations (2017); in December 2024, Chapters 7 – Intellectual Property, 10 – Information Society and Media, and 20 – Enterprise and Industrial Policy; and on 27 June 2025, Chapter 5 – Public Procurement. The most recently opened chapter was Chapter 8 – Competition, which opened on 30 June 2020. Throughout the negotiation process, the focus has largely been on areas such as judiciary reform, anti-corruption measures, and enhancing administrative capacities. The most pressing challenges remain in the spheres of public administration reform and the rule of law.
Montenegro’s economy is characterised by its service sector, which dominates the GDP, largely due to its over-reliance on the tourism industry. The Montenegrin coast, historical sites, and national parks are central to its tourism appeal, driving development policies, and investment programmes to focus predominantly on this sector. However, this dependence makes the country highly vulnerable to external shocks, such as global economic crises or disruptions in travel, like those caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, economic activities in the northern, mountainous regions lag behind those in the coastal areas, exacerbating regional disparities in development and income.
General information
| Name of country | Montenegro |
| Capital, population of the capital (2023) | Podgorica , 179,402 (Statistical Office of Montenegro) |
| Surface area (2022) | 13810.00 km² (World Bank) |
| Total population (2024) | 623831.00 (World Bank) |
| Population growth rate (2024) | 0.05% (annual %) (World Bank) |
| Population density (2022) | 46.36 inhabitants/km² (World Bank) |
| Degree of urbanisation (2025) | 32.9% (European Commission) |
| Human development index (2023) | 0,862 (Human Development Reports) |
| GDP (2024) | 8069536125.80 (current US$) (World Bank) |
| GDP growth (2024) | 3.04% (annual % growth) (World Bank) |
| Unemployment rate (2024) | 14.1% (World Bank) |
| Land use (2018) | 1,96% Artificial surfaces 0,32% Arable land & permanent crops 15,75% Pastures & mosaic farmland 62,20% Forests and transitional woodland shrub 8,09% Natural grassland, heathland, sclerophylous vegetation 8,88% Open space with little or no vegetation 0,90% Wetlands 1,90% Water bodies (European Environment Agency) |
| Sectoral structure (2023) | agriculture: 5.5% industry: 12.5% services: 62.2% (Central Intelligence Agency) |
To ensure comparability between all country profiles, the tables were prepared by the ARL.
Administrative structure and system of governance
Montenegro is a unitary state. The Constitution guarantees the right to local self-government, identifying municipalities as the basic form of local self-government. Until recently, Montenegro had 21 local self-government units and two urban municipalities, which were subdivisions of the capital city of Podgorica. Between 2013 and 2022, four new municipalities were created, meaning that today there are 25 local self-government units in Montenegro: the capital city of Podgorica, the historical capital of Cetinje, and the municipalities of Andrijevica, Bar, Berane, Bijelo Polje, Budva, Danilovgrad, Gusinje, Herceg Novi, Kolašin, Kotor, Mojkovac, Nikšić, Petnjica, Plav, Pljevlja, Plužine, Rožaje, Šavnik, Tivat, Tuzi, Ulcinj, Zeta, and Žabljak.
The territory of a local self-government unit consists of settlements, as determined by the Law on the Territorial Organisation of Montenegro (Parliament of Montenegro 2011a). A settlement is a part of the local self-government unit’s territory where facilities for housing or economic activities have been developed, along with the basic communal infrastructure and other facilities necessary to meet the needs of the local population and economic production. According to 2023 data, the local self-government units contain 1,462 settlements (Monstat 2023). Montenegrin legislation does not divide the country into regions, except for statistical purposes. The Law on Regional Development (Parliament of Montenegro 2011b) outlines three regions (central, coastal, and northern) that have no legislative or executive powers but serve as an outline for achieving a more even economic development across the local self-government units. However, with serious economic and social inequalities between the northern, central, and coastal regions and without any real administrative or legislative power at the regional level, this basic statistical division has not significantly contributed to addressing these discrepancies. Since there is no administrative division into regions in Montenegro, the Nomenclature des Unités Territoriales Statistiques drew upon the EU regulation on NUTS classifications to determine the statistical regions for Montenegro as a candidate country of the EU. As a state with a small population, Montenegro matches the criteria for statistical distribution at all three levels (NUTS 1-3). Municipalities correspond to the LAU-1 level, while the settlements correspond to the LAU-2 (Monstat 2010).
The Law on Local Self-Government (Parliament of Montenegro 2018) specifies the structures, decision-making procedures, functions, and tasks of the municipalities. According to this law, local self-government is based on the principles of democracy, equality, decentralisation, depoliticisation, autonomy, legality, professionalism, the efficiency of local self-government bodies’ work, and cooperation between the state and the municipality. It allows citizens and local government bodies to manage and regulate certain public and other affairs at the local level based on their own responsibility and for the benefit of the local community. It operates under the framework set by state law and the statutes of the individual municipalities.
The functions and tasks of local self-governments include enacting statutes and general acts that govern local affairs, proposing and managing their budget and financial accounts, fostering the conditions for entrepreneurship and managing local economic resources (e.g. agricultural land), regulating and maintaining communal infrastructure (which includes roads, public transport, and utilities), ensuring environmental protection, managing waste, and maintaining water systems. Local self-government regulates housing relations and establishes the conditions for the maintenance of residential buildings, as well as support for the parts of the population in need of social housing. Local authorities handle an array of other responsibilities in many other domains, including social services, cultural and recreational activities, public health and safety, emergency services, and community engagement, in accordance with state legislation.
This structure should support the decentralisation of power, as stipulated in Article 3 of the 2018 Law on Local Self-Government. However, it is important to note the resources that local governments have at their disposal differ greatly across different regions of Montenegro: small and mostly rural municipalities in the north face economic difficulties and demographic crisis, as the youth moves to the central and coastal regions in pursuit of education and job opportunities (see Monstat, 2024, p. 223-4). These constraints impact the local municipalities’ ability to effectively exercise their statutory powers at the local level. Moreover, when it comes to urban and spatial planning, the authority of local self-governments is severely limited. It is reduced to the development of only one type of planning instrument, the urban project, which is a local-level plan of a lower order, usually developed for specific or significant local areas. Local self-governments used to have broader powers in this domain, but that changed in 2017 with the adoption of the new Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (Parliament of Montenegro 2017). This legislation took the spatial and urban planning competences away from the local authorities and gave them to the state government, i.e. to the competent ministry at the state level. With this, the spatial planning system in Montenegro became entirely centralized, and the tools with which local communities could plan and develop their territories in accordance with their own priorities were, in essence, taken away.
Figure 1: Administrative structure of Montenegro
Levels of Governance
According to the 2007 Constitution, Montenegro is a civic, democratic, ecological, and social justice state based on the rule of law, with a republican form of government. The political system is organised around the principle of the separation of powers into the legislative, exercised by Parliament; executive, exercised by the government; and judicial, exercised by the judiciary. The relationship between powers is based on balance and mutual control, while their authority is limited by the Constitution and the law. Montenegro is represented by the President.
The Parliament of Montenegro (Skupština Crne Gore) is the unicameral legislative body responsible for the governance and legislative framework in Montenegro. It is composed of 81 deputies who are directly elected by the citizens of Montenegro based on universal and equal suffrage through secret ballots, with each deputy representing 6,000 voters. Montenegro functions as a single electoral unit, with deputies elected from party electoral lists, coalition electoral lists, and electoral lists of groups of citizens. The mandate of the Assembly lasts for four years and can end prematurely, by dissolution, or a shortening of the term.
The primary role of Parliament is to enact legislation and oversee the government, ensuring that the laws and regulations align with the interests and needs of the citizens. Within its legislative function, Parliament passes laws, constitutional amendments, budgets, and final budget accounts. It is responsible for approving the spatial plan of Montenegro, as well as the special purpose spatial plans for the areas of particular importance. Parliament ratifies international treaties, reinforcing Montenegro’s international obligations and relationships. In terms of governance oversight, Parliament has the authority to initiate proceedings to verify whether the President of Montenegro has violated the Constitution and can vote to remove the President based on the findings of the Constitutional Court. It conducts votes of confidence in the government and has the power to enact state borrowing and call referendums.
Parliament appoints significant positions within the government and judiciary, including the President and members of the government, judges of the Constitutional Court and other courts, and the State Prosecutor. It can grant amnesty for criminal offenses. Parliament reviews and considers reports from major national institutions such as the Central Bank of Montenegro, the Supreme State Prosecutor, and regulatory agencies. In order to ensure transparency and accountability, the parliamentary sessions are broadcast live, and reports and strategic documents are made publicly available. Parliament supports public participation in governance by encouraging collaboration with the civil sector, allowing public attendance at committee sessions and access to parliamentary documentation.
The Government of Montenegro serves as the highest executive authority and is responsible for implementing legislative decisions, managing the internal and foreign affairs of the state, and overseeing administrative functions across various sectors. The government is composed of the Prime Minister, who leads and represents the government; one or more Deputy Prime Ministers; and ministers. These members are appointed by the Parliament of Montenegro, reflecting a system of accountability where the government must answer to Parliament for its actions and adherence to the law.
The government conducts the country’s domestic and foreign policy and implements laws, regulations, and acts passed by Parliament. It negotiates and enters into international treaties and decides on diplomatic relations with other countries. The government proposes the state budget and final budget accounts. It is responsible for proposing a development plan and spatial plan for Montenegro, as well as strategies for national security and defence. The government decides on the recognition of other states and the establishment of diplomatic and consular relations with other countries, proposes appointments of ambassadors and diplomatic representatives abroad, and performs other duties determined by the Constitution or law.
Montenegro’s spatial planning and urban development policy is governed by the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Urbanism and State Property. This ministry works on creating and supervising the laws and regulations concerning spatial planning, urbanism, and construction. It manages state property and the legal relationships related to property, which includes surveying and maintaining the property cadastre. The ministry also oversees legalisation processes and supervises inspections to ensure compliance with building and urban planning regulations.
Judicial power is exercised by the courts. The courts are autonomous and independent and adjudicate based on the Constitution, laws, and ratified and published international treaties. The judicial system includes misdemeanour courts, basic courts, high courts in Bijelo Polje and Podgorica (for the northern and southern parts of the country, respectively), the Higher Misdemeanour Court, Commercial Court, Appellate Court, Administrative Court, and the Supreme Court. A constitutional court is not part of the ordinary judicial system but is separate, as it adjudicates on constitutional matters and fundamental rights.
The Human Rights and Freedoms Ombudsman of Montenegro is an independent and autonomous institution that takes actions to protect human rights and freedoms. The Ombudsman operates based on the Constitution, laws, and ratified international treaties, adhering to the principles of justice and fairness. The Ombudsman is appointed for a six-year term and can be dismissed under circumstances prescribed by law.
Figure 2: System of powers in Montenegro
Spatial planning system
Historical development of the planning system
The historical development of the planning system in Montenegro shows a gradual evolution from early urban plans in coastal towns to comprehensive spatial planning frameworks emerging only in the second half of the twentieth century. This process mirrors the country’s transition from a predominantly rural society to one facing rapid urbanisation and industrialisation, which required and developed more sophisticated planning mechanisms as part of post-World War II Yugoslavia.
Throughout this territory’s history, its coastal towns were the most developed and well-connected; unsurprisingly, that is where the first urban plans were introduced as well, in Budva in 1708 and Kotor in 1775 (Doderović/Ivanović 2012). The first regulatory plan was created for the town of Nikšić, one of the larger inland settlements, in 1883 (Doderović/Ivanović 2012). However, comprehensive spatial planning processes and documents were not created until the mid-20th century, when it became imperative to create planning knowledge, resources, and instruments that could respond to the demands of post-war industrial and urban development.
The first Law on Regional Urban Planning was adopted in 1964, the same year as the first Regional Spatial Plan for the Montenegrin Coast was developed, while the first Law on Spatial Planning was adopted in 1971 (Parliament of Montenegro Research Centre 2023). In terms of setting the foundations and developing expertise in spatial planning and urbanism, the creation of the first Regional Spatial Plan for the South Adriatic and the General Urban Plan for the Bay of Kotor was very important. The South Adriatic plan, developed in 1969 by the Urban Institute of Croatia, the Republic Institute for Urbanism of Montenegro, and the Urban Institute of Bosnia and Herzegovina, covered the coast and the central part of Montenegro, as well as parts of territories of the then-Yugoslav republics of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina (Parliament of Montenegro Research Centre 2023). Evidently, the inter-republic cooperation in spatial planning and the regional approach to countering the challenges it presented were important dimensions of the process during this period. While the plan for the South Adriatic covered the area comprising nine southern and central municipalities, the 1972 Regional Spatial Plan for Northern Montenegro was adopted for the territory of eleven northern municipalities (Ivanović 1979). These plans marked the beginning of a more integrated approach to spatial planning in Montenegro and included ambitious projects like the development of an adequate transport network and environmental protection measures.
The first Spatial Plan for the Socialist Republic of Montenegro, which was valid until 2000, was adopted in 1986, in the aftermath of the 1979 earthquake, and was thus developed by the Republic Institute for Urbanism of Montenegro, the UN Centre for Human Settlements (UNCHS), and the UN Organisation for Disaster Relief (UNDRO). This plan was the first to set the general basis for the spatial organisation and planning of the Republic’s territory as a whole. It was amended twice, in 1991 (amendments and additions to the road network) and in 1997 (to reflect ideological, economic, social, and spatial changes following the breakup of Yugoslavia), and it remained foundational for the subsequent strategic spatial plans at the state level (Parliament of Montenegro Research Centre 2023).
The adoption of a new Spatial Plan for Montenegro in 2008, the first since the country declared independence in 2006, aimed to address the period until 2020. The process faced challenges such as a lack of reliable data and insufficient coordination among planning actors. The resulting plan was criticised by civil society organisations for being insufficiently protective of the public interest and devoted to sustainable spatial development principles. Researchers pointed to these shortcomings as well, underlining the importance of improving the institutional framework for spatial planning, securing greater public involvement, democratising the decision-making processes, and reintroducing the regional level of planning, which has been almost completely neglected in recent decades (Doderović/Ivanović 2013). Meanwhile, detailed planning remained insufficiently developed; according to Müller and Ljesković, in the mid-2000s, detailed plans were available for only about one-third of the territory (2007, in Tsenkova 2012).
The responsible authorities attempted to address these issues by making the spatial planning system more centralised, which was most evident in the 2017 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (Parliament of Montenegro, 2017). Prior to this, from the beginning of the 1990s, the legal basis for spatial planning in Montenegro changed frequently. The Law on Spatial Planning and Development (Parliament of Montenegro 1995) was followed by a new iteration ten years later (Parliament of Montenegro 2005), which was soon replaced by the Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (Parliament of Montenegro 2008). Throughout this time, the deeply rooted challenges of developing local capacities and decentralising spatial planning persisted. Namely, many of the local self-governments – especially in the underdeveloped northern region of the country – have historically struggled to produce local-level planning documents, even during the second half of the twentieth century. After 1990, the local institutional settings and knowledge that were developed during the Yugoslav period did not easily transfer to the new socio-economic framework, as the local public planning agencies were dismantled or privatised (Bojović 2024). The 2008 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction allowed commercial planning bureaus to take over the production of spatial plans from the local planning institutes, which did not help in developing the planning capacities of the local public bodies. In 2009, the ministry in charge of planning initiated the Land Administration and Management Project (LAMP) with support from the World Bank, in an effort to enhance the efficiency of granting building permissions and property registration thus furthering the government strategy for improving the business environment (Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism 2016). In practical terms, this entailed producing the planning documents for municipalities that struggled with spatial planning on their own. Through this programme, nine spatial urban plans and 22 detailed urban plans were created for the less developed municipalities of the northern and central regions; however, the issue of the local self-governments’ ability to plan for themselves was not adequately addressed, even though the authorities at the local level continued seeking government support to improve their capacities in this domain (Union of Municipalities 2009). After almost a decade of gradually centralising certain aspects of the spatial planning process through a series of amendments to the 2008 Law, the new Law on Spatial Planning and Construction was adopted in 2017. According to this new regulation, local self-governments lost most of their powers in this area, and the responsible ministry took charge of spatial planning at all administrative levels (for a more detailed analysis, see Dragović 2021).
In early 2025, a new set of laws – the Law on Spatial Planning (Parliament of Montenegro 2025a) and the Law on Construction (Parliament of Montenegro 2025b) – was adopted, after a prolonged period of drafting the legislation that could support the necessary improvements of the Montenegrin planning system. The new Law on Spatial Planning reintroduces local-level planning documents alongside state-level ones, thus attempting to reverse the full centralisation introduced by the 2017 Law. It defines both state (i.e., the Spatial Plan of Montenegro, spatial plans for areas of special purpose, and detailed state-level regulation plans) and local planning documents (i.e., the spatial-urban plan of a local self-government, local detailed regulation plans, and urban projects) as planning instruments. Importantly, the law stipulates that spatial planning documents must be prepared by entities established by public authorities, either by the Government (for state-level plans) or by local self-governments (for local-level plans). The new regulation allows the municipalities the possibility to form joint entities, which can be understood as an attempt to encourage regional cooperation and address long-standing issues of insufficient local capacity. The law also introduces urban land consolidation as a tool to rationalise and reorganise construction land in accordance with planning documents. The accompanying new Law on Construction further reintroduces the requirement for obtaining a building permit prior to construction, replacing the notification system established by the 2017 Law. While local governments are now again responsible for issuing most building permits, the Ministry retains authority over projects of national interest or significant scale, such as large tourism facilities and public infrastructure. Together, these laws indicate a move toward partial decentralisation and the rebuilding of local planning and construction governance. However, transitional provisions stipulate that procedures initiated under the previous legal framework will continue under those rules, meaning that the full effects of the new regulations will only become visible once their implementation begins in practice. As was the case in the past, implementing the new legislation will likely depend on political will, institutional capacity, and the extent to which local governments can rebuild the expertise and resources necessary for effective spatial governance.
Legal basis/constitutional framework of spatial planning
The legislative framework regulating spatial planning in Montenegro comprises:
- Law on Spatial Planning and Law on Construction (Official Gazette of Montenegro, No. 19/25)
- Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (Official Gazette of Montenegro, No. 64/17, 44/18, 63/18, 11/2019 – correction, and 82/20)
- Repealed Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (Official Gazette of Montenegro, No. 51/08, 34/11, 35/13, and 33/14)
- Law on Marine Goods (Official Gazette of Montenegro, No. 14/92, 59/92, and 27/94; Official Gazette of Montenegro, No. 51/08, 21/09, 73/10, and 40/11).
Given that the new set of laws (adopted in 2025) and the planning instruments they introduce are still in the early stages of implementation, and that both state and local authorities have a deadline of 20 and 22 months, respectively, to adopt the planning documents required by the new legislation (Law on Spatial Planning 2025, Article 141), this section will primarily focus on the previous legal framework, which defines the spatial planning instruments currently in use, and which continues to shape the current realities of spatial planning in Montenegro. This framework relies on the legislation adopted in 2008 and 2017.
Although the 2008 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction was repealed with the adoption of the 2017 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction, some of its provisions remained in effect until the new planning instruments introduced by the 2017 Law were adopted. This has increased the complexity of the spatial planning process while decreasing its effectiveness. To help explain this, the main characteristics of and differences between these two laws are summarised below.
2008 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction
The law outlined a traditional hierarchical structure between the local and state-level planning documents, defining separate municipal and state-level procedures for adopting them. It allowed for more autonomy at the municipal level, with local self-governments leading the process of creating municipal planning documents. The public consultations were organised and administered by the local authorities. The local planning documents were required to be in accordance with central-level planning documents, so they had to be submitted to and approved by the responsible ministry to ensure legal compliance and harmonisation across different levels.
2017 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction
The law marked a decisive shift towards centralisation by taking important instruments of spatial self-governance away from local authorities and introducing a centralised spatial planning system in which the entire Montenegrin territory would be planned and regulated through two main planning instruments created and adopted by the central government. This has significantly limited the ways in which local self-governments can influence the spatial planning process, reducing them to observers in planning procedures. Local self-governments can propose solutions and participate in deliberations, but cannot veto the plan for their territory, which is always adopted by the state parliament. This law has also introduced new actors into the spatial planning process, such as the Authority for Technical Requirements and the Council for the Revision of Planning Documents, further complicating the process and potentially sidelining local inputs.
The 2017 Law eliminated the traditional classification and hierarchy of local- and state-level spatial plans, determining that the former implementation instruments were to be replaced by a new General Regulatory Plan, which was to be adopted no later than three years after the Law of 2017 entered into effect. Until then, all the existing implementation plans (at the local and state level) were to be kept in effect and, if necessary, altered and renewed in accordance with the new law – with the responsible ministry leading the process. This transition period, marked by new regulations and the prolonged use of the old plans, persists until today. The General Regulatory Plan has proved to be difficult to develop, even after several extended deadlines. In 2023, the ministry announced that work on this plan would not be continued and that new regulations are underway (Milićević 2023). Meanwhile, the 2017 Law is still the main pillar of the legislative framework regulating spatial planning. Largely due to its effects, local-level plans are dated and inadequate for the contemporary challenges of urban development, local authorities have no powers to amend the current situation, and the responsible ministry struggles with developing local-level planning documents in a timely and satisfactory manner.
Spatial planning authorities
Over the past two decades, Montenegro's spatial planning responsibilities have been shuffled among various ministries, reflecting a fragmented and inconsistent administrative approach. Initially managed by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Spatial Planning, these duties were later transferred to the Ministry of Economic Development, followed by the Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism, then to the Ministry of Ecology, Spatial Planning and Urbanism, and currently reside with the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Urbanism and State Property. This frequent reallocation has contributed to a lack of continuity and clarity in spatial planning policies.
The Ministry is tasked with developing and adopting planning documents, establishing methodologies for their preparation, and prescribing their content and format. It maintains the national planning document registry, submits annual reports on spatial organization to the government, and oversees the issuing and revoking of licences for the preparation and revision of planning documents. Additionally, the Ministry exercises inspectional supervision over the application of spatial planning and construction legislation.
However, according to the European Commission's 2024 report on Montenegro, the country is "moderately prepared in the area of public administration reform," with "limited progress" made, and a need for improvements in the accountability of administration. This assessment also points to the recent major reorganisation of some state administration bodies, which took place without prior analysis. The government's fluctuating structure illustrates this: for example, the number of ministries expanded from 12 in the 42nd government to 25 in the current 44th government. Such volatility has led to inefficiencies and coordination challenges within public administration. The OECD's 2024 report further highlights that Montenegro's public administration reforms have been inconsistent, emphasizing the necessity for a more stable, effective, and better-coordinated governance framework.
According to officials involved in spatial planning processes over recent years, the responsible Ministry coordinates with other sectors of government through planning committees and by seeking approvals and guidelines while developing planning policy. The level and quality of intersectoral cooperation are influenced by the internal structuring of the government; certain forms of coordination, for example, with tourism or state property management, have reportedly been more effective when located within the same administrative body. Ministry representatives have also emphasized that the fragmented institutional legacy and the persistent marginalisation of spatial planning have hindered the development of a coherent and enforceable planning system. These systemic issues contribute to the spatial challenges that Montenegro is currently facing. The recent adoption of new laws in early 2025 aims to address some of these issues by reintroducing local level planning documents and decentralizing certain responsibilities. However, the effectiveness of these reforms will largely depend on the government's ability to establish a stable and coordinated administrative structure that can consistently implement and uphold spatial planning policies.
Spatial planning instruments
Even though the Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (Parliament of Montenegro 2017) defines only two main planning instruments, it also retains the plans defined by the repealed law (Parliament of Montenegro 2008), which remain in effect until the new instruments are developed. It also allows for the existing plans to be altered and renewed in accordance with the new procedures, led by the responsible ministry. Therefore, all of the following instruments are still in use. The law defining each of them is marked in brackets, by year of adoption.
Spatial Plan of Montenegro (the 2017 Law)
The Spatial Plan of Montenegro is a comprehensive strategic document and a general basis for the country’s spatial planning, adopted by Parliament for a period of 20 years. It defines the general goals and measures for spatial organisation, in accordance with Montenegro’s overall economic, social, environmental, and cultural-historical development. The plan delineates policies for land use, infrastructure development, and the integration of Montenegro’s spatial development opportunities within its regional setting. It addresses long-term development strategies, strategies for settlement networks, environmental preservation, cultural heritage protection, disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, energy efficiency, concession areas, and the utilisation of renewable energy. This plan is envisioned as the foundational document for organised, sustainable spatial development and includes guidelines for implementing its strategies.
General Regulation Plan of Montenegro (the 2017 Law)
The General Regulation Plan of Montenegro is envisioned as a detailed planning document aimed at guiding the spatial and urban development of the entire country, adopted by Parliament for a period of ten years. The plan is supposed to cover the northern, central, and coastal regions (as defined by the Law on Regional Development 2011), national parks, and UNESCO-protected areas. As a detailed implementation plan, it should define land use, the conditions for construction, infrastructure corridors and capacities, the boundaries of construction areas within and outside of settlements, the boundaries of urban regeneration zones, as well as the boundaries for which detailed planning solutions need to be elaborated. The General Regulation Plan should contain rules for zoning, construction and parcelling, and guidelines for urban regeneration and the development of urban projects. It should define guidelines for environmental protection, cultural heritage preservation, disaster risk management, climate change adaptation, energy efficiency, and the use of renewable energy, among other guidelines for its implementation. At the same time, this plan is supposed to contain a detailed urban solution for central areas of every local municipality, as well as the basis for planning in rural areas.
According to the Law of 2017, the General Regulation Plan of Montenegro is supposed to be adopted for ten years. However, after several extensions of the timeframe within which this plan was supposed to be created (originally defined as 36 months after the adoption of the Law), the government announced that this plan would not be produced, and the legal basis would be amended to define other planning instruments.
Urban project (the 2017 Law; the only local-level planning instrument from the 2008 Law preserved by the new law)
An urban project is an implementation instrument for the area defined by the General Regulation Plan, and more specifically for areas where significant and complex construction is imminent or which represent particularly distinctive units, areas devastated by illegal construction, and settlements and parts of settlements that constitute immovable cultural assets of international and national importance. It is proposed by the local self-government and adopted by the local parliament. An urban project contains a planning solution that defines the spatial arrangement of buildings, the dimensions of buildings, landscaping and basic infrastructure, in accordance with the guidelines defined by the General Regulation Plan of Montenegro.
Special Purpose Spatial Plan (the 2008 Law)
A special purpose spatial plan is an implementation plan with a regional dimension, adopted by Parliament. It is developed and adopted for areas across one or more local self-government units that share significant natural, regional, or other features of special importance to Montenegro. These areas, which might include national parks, coastal regions, natural reserves, or cultural-historical areas, require a special regime for their organisation and use. The plan integrates a wide range of elements, such as assessments of the current state of spatial organisation, economic and demographic analyses, development directions, usage regimes, protective measures for environmental and cultural heritage, and measures for energy efficiency and for the use of renewable energy. It also contains guidelines for the development of a state site study, as well as the urban and technical guidelines for construction, spatial organisation, usage, and the protection of space for which the development of a state site study is not foreseen. Finally, the plan identifies concession areas and objects of public interest, provides economic and market projections, and outlines implementation guidelines.
Detailed Spatial Plan (the 2008 Law)
A detailed spatial plan is a state-level plan issued for specific areas requiring the construction of facilities deemed important either for the state of Montenegro or because of their regional dimension, i.e. their significance across one or more local self-government areas. It is adopted by the government. This type of plan targets a variety of areas including those intended for state, industrial, recreational, and tourism developments, as well as projects concerning infrastructure, concession zones, and coastal strips. This type of plan outlines the use, organisation, and development of these areas through comprehensive planning that includes land use strategies, economic and demographic analyses, infrastructure strategies, environmental and heritage protection measures, and energy efficiency strategies. The plan also includes the urban and technical conditions or guidelines for construction; the land parcelling plan; the areas and objects of public interest; economic and market projections; and the methods, phases and dynamics of the plan’s realisation; as well as the guidelines for its implementation.
State Site Study (the 2008 Law)
A state site study is a detailed analysis and planning document for areas within the scope of a special purpose spatial plan requiring further elaboration not provided by the initial plan. This study, adopted by the government, sets specific construction and development conditions for these areas, ensuring that development aligns with broader special purpose objectives. It contains a detailed land use plan, economic and demographic analyses, a parcelling plan, the urban and technical conditions for construction, and guidelines for infrastructure development. The study outlines the architectural and urban design guidelines and provides instructions for the implementation of the plan. It also addresses environmental protection, cultural heritage conservation, landscape preservation, and the integration of energy efficiency and renewable energy practices. A state site study bridges the gap between broad spatial planning and detailed development requirements, focusing on specific locations within areas of special state or regional interest.
Spatial Urban Plan of the Local Self-Government (the 2008 Law)
The Spatial Urban Plan of Local Self-Government outlines the goals and measures for the spatial and urban development within a municipality in accordance with the broader objectives and regional specifics defined in the Spatial Plan of Montenegro. The development of this type of plan used to be initiated by the executive body of the municipality; after being approved by the responsible ministry, the plan was adopted by the local parliament. Following the adoption of the 2017 Law, this process was overtaken by the ministry.
The Spatial Urban Plan of Local Self-Government contains a detailed assessment of the current spatial organisation, development strategies in relation to other municipalities, and a basic strategy for land use, infrastructure development and space utilisation. Specifically, the plan contains projections for the spatial organisation, with estimated needs and possibilities for land use, especially for the municipal centre and, if necessary, for other settlements within the area. It includes guidelines for the creation of other local plans (detailed urban plans, urban projects, and local site studies), as well as the construction guidelines for areas not covered by more detailed plans. The plan includes infrastructure networks with connection requirements, as well as the networks for public service facilities (education, science, healthcare, culture, social protection, etc.). It also provides urban and technical conditions or guidelines for the construction of infrastructural and communal facilities of special interest to the local self-government. The plan includes an economic and demographic analysis, the guidelines for landscape design, environmental protection, cultural and natural heritage preservation and regeneration, disaster risk management, as well as housebuilding strategies and parameters, and measures for the implementation of energy-efficient and renewable energy initiatives. Finally, this type of plan also outlines economic and market projections along with the methods, phases, and dynamics of the plan’s realisation and guidelines for its implementation.
Detailed Urban Plan (the 2008 Law)
A Detailed Urban Plan is a local-level implementation plan that specifies the conditions for construction in settlements within the area of the Spatial Urban Plan of the Local Self-Government. If specified by the Spatial Urban Plan of the Local Self-Government, a Detailed Urban Plan must be adopted.
The plan defines the area’s boundaries, up-to-date cadastral plans, land use intentions and guidelines as defined in the Spatial Urban Plan of the Local Self-Government, detailed land use, economic and demographic analyses, land parcelling plan, construction index, occupancy index, and specific urban and technical conditions for construction and spatial design. It contains criteria for the integration of energy-efficient solutions and renewable energy sources and provides detailed information on parcelling sizes and building regulations. The plan outlines the routes of infrastructure networks and roads, guidelines and conditions for the construction of infrastructure and communal facilities, and points and requirements for connecting buildings to these networks and facilities. A detailed urban plan also contains environmental protection guidelines, along with measures for urban and architectural design, landscape protection, and cultural heritage preservation. It includes economic and market projections, as well as the methods, phases, and dynamics of its realisation.
Local Site Study (the 2008 Law)
For areas covered by the Spatial Urban Plan of the Local Self-Government, where the development of a detailed urban plan and urban project is not intended, a Local Site Study can be adopted. The Local Site Study determines the conditions for the construction of buildings within the area of the Spatial Urban Plan of the Local Self-Government, in accordance with the guidelines and criteria provided by that plan. The Local Site Study includes elements of the State Site Study, which is the most detailed state-level planning document.
Interdependencies and mutual influences between planning levels
As the decisions related to all planning levels have until recently been made by the responsible ministry, the ministry was formally in charge of ensuring that planning solutions are harmonised across different levels. As explained above, the Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (2017), which remained in force until March 2025, abandoned the traditional hierarchy of state- and local-level spatial plans, aiming instead for a unified and centralised planning framework. Put simply, the fact that the ministry was in charge of developing all planning documents, for all levels of planning, should have ensured the harmonisation. However, due to persistent implementation challenges and delays in developing the planning instruments envisaged by the 2017 Law, the reality on the ground diverged significantly from its formal provisions. In practice, older planning documents continued to be used, the planning hierarchy remained relevant, and lower-order plans (often amended through the procedures outlined in the 2008 Law) still needed to align with higher-order ones. Yet, this harmonisation has often failed to materialise.
The reasons are manifold. Almost a decade-long overlap and uncertainty between the frameworks introduced by the 2008 and 2017 laws created a fragmented legal environment, while the 2017 Law’s full centralisation of planning authority placed an unsustainable burden on the ministry - an institution frequently reshaped through successive governments and not equipped with the capacities needed to assume responsibility for every planning document in the country. At the same time, municipalities - stripped of planning authority - lacked the resources, expertise, and institutional infrastructure to participate effectively in planning processes or advocate for their spatial needs. These institutional weaknesses have led to serious consequences: spatial development in Montenegro has frequently been inconsistent, poorly coordinated across levels of governance, and vulnerable to legal uncertainty and investor-driven interventions. In some cases, planning paralysis or uncoordinated urbanisation has undermined the protection of public interest and long-term development goals. The inability to ensure vertical harmonization of plans seems to have motivated the most recent reforms (the laws of 2025), which seek to reintroduce clearer institutional roles and more balanced responsibilities between the national and local levels.
Figure 3: Planning system in Montenegro
Planning practice
Practical examples of the planning processes
Spatial planning processes in Montenegro are organised, overseen, and led by the responsible ministry. For a detailed elaboration of the process, see the fact sheets on the Spatial Plan of Montenegro until 2020 (national level), the Special Purpose Spatial Plan for the Coastal Area of Montenegro (regional level), and the Spatial Urban Plan of the Capital City of Podgorica until 2025 (local level). The last example refers to a municipal planning document adopted by the local self-government, which was the usual practice before the 2017 change in legislation transferred spatial planning powers to the state level of decision-making, i.e. the responsible ministry.
While spatial plans are the planning instruments through which spatial planning policy is envisioned and implemented, the plans and strategies for specific sectors such as tourism, agriculture, or energy production have an important spatial component. They are usually developed by the relevant ministries or agencies, include market and environmental analyses, and are taken into account when developing spatial plans. Another important regulatory instrument is the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which is required for all projects (construction, infrastructure, exploitation of natural resources, etc.) likely to have significant environmental impacts. It involves analyses through which potential impacts can be measured and assessed, as well as mitigation measures and monitoring plans.
The spatial planning system of Montenegro is highly formalised through spatial plans and therefore does not encourage the use of ‘soft planning’. As this analysis demonstrates, planning has become even more centralised over the last decade through the state authorities’ attempt to gain and retain control over all aspects of spatial planning. Despite these efforts, informal and unsanctioned construction has not been adequately addressed (there are an estimated 100,000 illegally constructed buildings in Montenegro) and continues to pose a challenge to spatial organisation and regulation. However, spatial plans can be changed following a private initiative, and it is often the case that plans stay in use for much longer than originally intended, but with regular updates and amendments proposed by either the public authorities or private investors. Currently, many of the spatial plans in Montenegro are outdated, largely due to the administrative difficulties posed by the 2017 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction, which put the responsible ministry in charge of adopting and amending planning documents at all administrative levels.
Influence of EU legislation and policies
The EU integration process requires the adoption and implementation of EU standards across various sectors, which influences the spatial planning framework. Policies concerning environmental protection, sustainable development, and territorial cohesion are especially important, as well as an integrated approach to spatial planning. According to the Draft Spatial Plan of Montenegro until 2040 (Ministry of Spatial Planning, Urbanism and State Property 2024), which is the most important strategic plan, the continuation of reforms within the process of European integration is one of the vital planning goals. The Draft emphasises the importance of respecting the principles of the European Charter of Spatial Planning, which points to the need for the spatial integration of cities and regions. Insufficient integration of spatial planning is a pressing issue for the system of spatial organisation in Montenegro, and has contributed to disparities in the development of regions and municipalities. The Draft Spatial Plan of Montenegro until 2040 recognises that intermunicipal cooperation has not been sufficiently achieved and that significant progress can and should be made on this front, as well as in cross-border cooperation.
The strategy for Montenegro’s future spatial development rests on a ‘sustainable development scenario’, described in the Draft Spatial Plan of Montenegro until 2040 as a scenario for more intense development based on the ‘green economy’ policy, which is spatially, economically, and environmentally acceptable. It anticipates economic growth based on its own resources and assistance from European development funds and counts on institutional support in achieving the European development policy goals of economic, social, and territorial cohesion.
The main spatial planning challenges and issues
Montenegro faces many pressing challenges in spatial planning. The specific problem areas are neatly summarised in the Draft Spatial Plan of Montenegro until 2040, based on sectoral analyses. The key issues include insufficient infrastructural connectivity, insufficient spatial integration, inadequate integration of tourism and agriculture, the expansion of urban areas, insufficient support for the development of rural areas, conversion of agricultural land into construction land, insufficient protection of cultural heritage, illegal settlements, and limitations due to demographic trends: low natural increase rates or negative rates in the northern region, the depopulation of rural areas, and increasing pressure on urban centres. Furthermore, there are many zones of potential conflict in the use of space, where valuable agricultural land and protected areas are endangered. The problems include polluting industries, landscapes disturbed by mines and quarries, unregulated landfills, polluted waters, and the deterioration of old towns and atmospheric rural areas.
The existing legislative framework and policy instruments have proven insufficient to counter these and other more systemic spatial planning issues. The centralisation of spatial planning decision-making has overwhelmed the capacities of the responsible state government authorities while disregarding the potential for establishing regional planning levels and instruments and stifling local capacities for developing and implementing spatial planning regulations. This has resulted in a prolonged period of reliance on inadequate and outdated spatial planning instruments, while the most important newly introduced instrument – the General Regulation Plan – has never been completed and its development was actually abandoned in 2023, six years after being introduced by the Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (Parliament of Montenegro 2017). The challenge of addressing regional disparities and enabling balanced and sustainable development remains, as well as the issue of designing appropriate spatial planning instruments that will help establish and promote comprehensive, participatory, transparent, and sustainable spatial planning processes in Montenegro.
Planning culture
Planning culture, understood as the combination of formal rules and procedures and informal standards, values, and practices that shape how planning is thought about and enacted (Othengrafen & Reimer, 2018), has been evolving in Montenegro under conditions of ongoing instability. The past two decades have been characterized by frequent changes in the legal framework and administrative responsibilities for spatial planning. While laws have increasingly centralized planning processes, government restructurings have often reassigned the responsibility for the spatial planning domain, placing it in ministries in charge of economic development, tourism, ecology, and, most recently, state property. Such institutional setting, in concert with successive economic crises, overreliance on tourism, and inherited regional disparities, contributed to a fragmented planning environment and a planning system driven more by short-term, investor-driven interventions than by long-term, public interest-oriented spatial development strategies.
The Law on Spatial Planning and Construction (2017) centralized the planning authority at the national level, with a justification that local governments lack the capacity to develop and enact spatial plans at the local level. This legislative change disrupted the traditional planning hierarchy between local and national spatial plans, effectively removing local governments from key decision-making processes and creating an even deeper disconnect between formal responsibilities and practical capabilities. While the central administration struggled to manage the vast scope of its new responsibilities, municipalities were neither empowered nor supported to improve their capacities for spatial planning. Ultimately, this attempt at centralization led to the prolonged overlap between the 2017 and 2008 planning laws (since many provisions of the 2008 law continued to apply), which made harmonization between planning documents and levels difficult and resulted in spatial development to proceed in an uncoordinated, legally ambiguous, and investor-driven manner.
Such a state of affairs has repeatedly sparked reactions from civil society, which has often stepped in to protest controversial projects; a paradigmatic example was the 2018/2019 “Cypress Revolution,” in which the citizens in the coastal city of Bar organized against the decision to remove century-old cypress park to make space for a new public facility (see Vujošević & Dragović, 2019). Overall, public participation in spatial planning has remained weak due to the general lack of a framework that would support this process (e.g., plans presented in a widely accessible format, longer review periods, public presentations outside of working hours, etc.) and planners' limited receptiveness and readiness to engage with input from the critically inclined public, such as environmental NGOs and activist initiatives. Still, there is a recurring assumption among planners and decision-makers that public review alone legitimizes a spatial plan, which reflects a limited understanding of their own responsibility to safeguard and promote the public interest. Public consultations are often dominated by landowners and investors seeking to maximize development potential, while broader community needs (e.g., public services, infrastructure, and long-term livability) are underrepresented. This imbalance results in spatial plans shaped by private interests; however, once these plans are implemented and their shortcomings become apparent, they are often justified by pointing to the formal completion of the public review process (see, for example, PG Biro, 2020). The fact that the new Spatial Plan of Montenegro (Government of Montenegro, 2025) was adopted hastily, amid accusations of breaching legal procedures and stern reactions from civil society (CZIP, 2025), further highlights the tensions surrounding transparency and the need for broad societal dialogue within the spatial planning process.
Finally, the enduring presence of fundamental spatial challenges, consistently identified in the 2008 Spatial Plan of Montenegro (until 2020) and again in the newly adopted national Spatial Plan (until 2040) (Parliament of Montenegro, 2025), offers valuable insights into the country’s planning culture. Over the course of almost two decades, unresolved issues such as a lack of reliable data, inadequate intersectoral coordination, administrative inefficiency, widespread illegal construction, regional disparities, and weak environmental protection have persisted and accumulated. This suggests a planning culture characterized by formalism, lack of interinstitutional communication, and a reactive approach to spatial governance. The planning system is defined through certain norms, but their implementation is negotiable, oversight is weak, and strategic plans serve more as symbolic gestures than actionable guides for achieving more coherent and sustainable spatial development.
The recent adoption of the new Law on Spatial Planning (2025) represents an attempt to rebalance national and local responsibilities in spatial planning, following the prolonged disruption caused by the 2017 Law on Spatial Planning and Construction. However, structural deficiencies across the planning system remain unaddressed. Without a more purposeful effort to change the existing, deeply rooted practices and administrative routines, the dangers of reproducing past dysfunctions persist.
Planning education
Formal education in spatial planning in Montenegro remains limited in scope and fragmented across academic institutions. The Faculty of Architecture at the University of Montenegro offers undergraduate, specialist, and master’s programs primarily focused on architecture, with only a handful of courses addressing spatial or urban planning. As such, students may not receive sufficient instruction on the broader policy and the legal, environmental, economic, or governance dimensions of planning, which may limit their understanding and capacity to engage with the full complexity of contemporary spatial development challenges.
A parallel pathway exists at the Department of Geography at the Faculty of Philosophy in Nikšić, where the master’s program includes some urban planning content. Graduates are expected to be qualified for positions in public administration, statistical and environmental agencies, national parks, and institutions related to urban planning and spatial design. However, this orientation is generalist in nature and does not substitute for a comprehensive, transdisciplinary planning education. Existing research suggests that Montenegro’s academic institutions should develop integrated, transdisciplinary study programs in architecture and urban planning (Perović, 2013). While such ambitions are articulated at the conceptual level, they remain largely unrealized in practice.
The gap between educational preparation and professional requirements is also evident in the new 2025 Law on Spatial Planning, which stipulates that a licensed planner must be educated as either a spatial planner or an architect, have at least five years of relevant experience, pass a professional exam, and be registered with the Chamber of Engineers. For the position of responsible planner, the requirements are more demanding, with either ten years of experience and a level VII1 qualification, or seven years of experience and a level VIII qualification. These criteria emphasize the importance of practical experience, which is understandable given that current educational pathways do not seem to provide sufficient professional training in the field. Without an explicit effort to establish robust, practice-oriented, and interdisciplinary opportunities for studying spatial and urban planning, Montenegro is likely to continue facing shortages in qualified personnel and a disconnect between its planning ambitions and institutional capabilities. Addressing these structural weaknesses in planning education is of utmost importance for supporting the implementation of the new legal framework and for building a decentralized, resilient, and professional planning system.
Further literature
- Nedović-Budić, Z.; Cavrić, B. (2006): Waves of planning: a framework for studying the evolution of planning systems and empirical insights from Serbia and Montenegro. Plan Perspect, 21(4):393-425. https://doi.org/10.1080/02665430600892146.
- Potsiou, C. (2012): Study on illegally built objects and illegal development in Montenegro. Accessed at: http://users.ntua.gr/cpotsiou/books/1_5.pdf (26 June 2024 ).
- Tošić, B.; Živanović, Z. (2019): Comparative analysis of spatial planning systems and policies: Case study of Montenegro, Republic of North Macedonia and Republic of Serbia. Zbornik radova – Geographic faculty of the University of Belgrade, 67(2):5-19. https://doi.org/10.5937/zrgfub1902005T.
- Dragović, S. (2021): The volatile policy framework of spatial planning in Montenegro: Will the centre hold? In Berisha, E. et al. (eds.): Governing Territorial Development in the Western Balkans: Challenges and Prospects of Regional Cooperation, 131-151.
- Berisha, E., Čolić Marković, N., Cotella, G., & Nedović-Budić, Z. (2024): Potential future enlargement: Spatial planning in the Western Balkans. In V. Nadin, G. Cotella, & P. Schmitt (Eds.), Spatial Planning Systems in Europe (pp. 216–245). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Important stakeholders
| Institution/stakeholder/authority | Special interest/competences/administrative area |
|---|---|
| Ministry of Spatial Planning, Urbanism and State Property | The ministry is in charge of policies regulating planning and construction. It carries out tasks related to the development and adoption of planning documents, sets the methodology for drafting these documents, and prescribes their content and format. It submits an annual report on spatial organisation to the government for approval, maintains the planning document registry, where planning documents are recorded and published, and issues and revokes licences for the preparation and revision of planning documentation. It undertakes inspectional supervision over the application of laws, subordinate legislation and other regulations in the field of spatial planning and construction. |
| Head of spatial plan development | The head of spatial plan development oversees the creation of planning documents. They are an expert in spatial and urban planning with at least 15 years of working experience. They are proposed by the minister responsible for planning affairs and appointed by the government. They are responsible for ensuring that plans comply with the Law on Spatial Planning and Construction, and are in charge of appointing and leading an expert team approved by the ministry, tasked with developing spatial plans. |
| Local self-government units | Local self-government units propose a set of guidelines for developing the strategy for spatial plans in their area to the ministry; submit an opinion on initial and final draft plans to the ministry; delegate at least one representative to the expert team tasked with developing spatial plans for their area; propose and adopt urban projects. |
| Sectoral authorities | Sectoral authorities are any governmental (state or local) or legal entity in charge of overseeing sectors such as environmental protection, transport, tourism, and infrastructure, among others; they determine the necessary sector-specific framework, assessments, approvals and other documentation required for spatial planning and construction processes. |
| Council for the revision of spatial plans | A group of experts with at least 15 years of work experience in spatial and urban planning, which is appointed by the government and tasked with reviewing the draft planning documents submitted by the ministry. The Council also provides its opinion on the public consultation report submitted to it by the ministry. |
| Ministry of Tourism, Ecology, Sustainable Development and Northern Region Development | This ministry looks after the administration, monitoring and strategic planning for tourism, ecology, sustainable development and development in the northern region. |
| Ministry of Transport and Maritime Affairs | This ministry manages and monitors the road infrastructure and railway, air, road and maritime transport. It drafts laws, determines transport policies, and prepares and assesses investment projects in this sector. |
| Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management | This ministry formulates development policies in the agricultural sector and develops regulations related to agricultural production, forestry, and rural areas. |
| Ministry of Energy and Mining | This ministry oversees the sectors of energy, mining, geology, and concessions. It drafts laws, regulates the industry, determines energy policies, and supervises mineral resource exploitation and geological exploration. |
| Ministry of Economic Development | This ministry has powers related to economic development, competitiveness, industry, and entrepreneurship. |
| Ministry of Culture and Media | This ministry regulates the domain of culture, including the development of the creative industries and the protection of cultural heritage; provides input for urban project design briefs; and approves draft urban projects. |
| Chief State Architect | The Chief State Architect is an architect with at least ten years of work experience in the field of urban planning and architecture. They are recommended by the ministry and appointed by the government, and provide input for urban project design briefs and approve draft urban projects. |
| Chief City Architect | The Chief City Architect is an architect with at least ten years of work experience in the field of urban planning and architecture. They are appointed by the local self-government and are tasked with creating the design brief for urban projects. They may assume some of the duties of the Chief State Architect at the local level. |
| Licensed commercial firms authorised to produce technical planning documents (planners) | These firms develop urban planning projects and perform other tasks related to developing technical documents in spatial planning and construction, as prescribed by the Law. |
Fact sheets
-
Fact Sheet_Montenegro_National_level.pdf (815.71 KB)
-
Fact Sheet_Montenegro _Regional_level.pdf (923.26 KB)
-
Fact Sheet_Montenegro_Local_level_Podgorica.pdf (722.81 KB)
List of references
Bojović, M. (2024): ‘Utopijska svijest i energija bile su pokretačka snaga’ (‘Utopian consciousness and energy were the driving force’). Available at: https://www.vijesti.me/kultura/695532/utopijska-svijest-i-energija-bile-su-pokretacka-snaga (20 April 2024).
CZIP (2025, June 25). Agencija za zaštitu životne sredine saučesnik u nezakonitom usvajanju Prostornog plana Crne Gore [The Environmental Protection Agency complicit in illegal adoption of the Spatial Plan on Montenegro]. CZIP. https://czip.me/2025/06/25/agencija-za-zastitu-zivotne-sredine-saucesnik-u-nezakonitom-usvajanju-prostornog-plana-crne-gore (Accessed: June 29, 2025)
Doderović, M.; Ivanović, Z. (2012): Uvođenje reda u prostor Crne Gore (Introducing order to the Montenegrin space). Matica, 13(49):101-120. Available at: http://www.maticacrnogorska.me/files/49/04%20ivanovic,%20doderovic.pdf (13 April 2024).
Doderović, M.; Ivanović, Z. (2013): Prostorni plan Crne Gore (Spatial Plan of Montenegro). Matica, 14(54):505-530. Available at: http://www.maticacrnogorska.me/files/54/21%20m.%20doderovic,%20z.%20ivanovic.pdf (13 April 2024).
Dragović, S. (2021): The volatile policy framework of spatial planning in Montenegro: Will the centre hold? In Berisha, E. et al. (eds.): Governing Territorial Development in the Western Balkans: Challenges and Prospects of Regional Cooperation, 131-151.
European Commission (2024): Montenegro 2024 Report. Available at: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/2024/Montenegro%20Report%202024.pdf (9 April 2025).
Government of Montenegro (2025, June 27). Donešen Prostorni plan Crne Gore do 2040. godine [Adoption of the Spatial Plan of Montenegro until 2040]. Gov.me. https://www.gov.me/clanak/donesen-prostorni-plan-crne-gore (Accessed: June 29, 2025)
Ivanović, Z. (1979): Razvoj nekih urbanih naselja u SR Crnoj Gori (The development of some urban settlements in Montenegro). Geogr Slov, 10:85-91.
Milićević, Lj. (2023): ‘Plan generalne regulacije se neće raditi: Ministarstvo objašnjava da se pripremaju novi propisi’ (‘The general regulation plan will not be developed: The ministry explains that new regulations are being prepared’). Available at: https://www.vijesti.me/tv/emisije/676898/- (26 April 2024).
Ministry of Spatial Planning, Urbanism and State Property (2024): Nacrt Prostornog plana Crne Gore i Izvještaj o strateškoj procjeni uticaja na životnu sredinu (Draft Spatial Plan of Montenegro and Report on Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment). Available at: https://www.gov.me/clanak/prostorni-plan-crne-gore (27 April 2024).
Ministry of Sustainable Development and Tourism (2016): Najava: Konferencija povodom završetka LAMP projekta (Announcement: Conference on the Completion of the LAMP Project). Available at: https://www.gov.me/clanak/158130--najava-konferencija-povodom-zavrsetka-lamp-projekta-projekat-zemljisne-administracije-i-upravljanja (22 April 2024).
MONSTAT – Statistical Office of Montenegro (2010): Proposal of Statistical Regions of Montenegro in Accordance with NUTS Classification. Available at: https://www.monstat.org/userfiles/file/klasifikacije/statistical%20regions%20.pdf (5 April 2024).
MONSTAT – Statistical Office of Montenegro (2023): Spisak naselja (List of Settlements). Available at: https://www.monstat.org/uploads/files/klasifikacije/spisak%20naselja/spisak%20naselja%20cg%202023.pdf (4 April 2024).
MONSTAT – Statistical Office of Montenegro (2024): Statistical Yearbook. Available at: https://monstat.org/uploads/files/publikacije/godisnjak2024/GODISNJAK%202024_30.12..pdf (7 April 2025).
Müller Y, Ljeskovic S (2007): Illegal construction in Montenegro. Paper presented at the FIG Commission 3 Workshop “Informal Settlements — Real Estate Markets Needs Related to Good Land Administration and Planning.” Athens (28-31 March).
OECD (2025): Public administration in Montenegro 2024. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2025/01/public-administration-in-montenegro-2024_c2dea1af/6b3dec38-en.pdf (9 April 2025).
Othengrafen, F. & Reimer, M. (2018). Planning culture. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0156-559916025.
Parliament of Montenegro (1995): Zakon o planiranju i uređenju prostora (Law on Spatial Planning and Development). Official Gazette of Montenegro.
Parliament of Montenegro (2005): Zakon o planiranju i uređenju prostora (Law on Spatial Planning and Development). Official Gazette of Montenegro.
Parliament of Montenegro (2008): Zakon o uređenju prostora i izgradnji objekata (Law on Spatial Planning and Construction). Available at: https://www.gov.me/dokumenta/af90b848-854b-44ff-bb5f-457fb82c8461 (13 April 2024).
Parliament of Montenegro (2011a): Zakon o teritorijalnoj organizaciji Crne Gore (Law on the Territorial Organisation of Montenegro). Available at: https://me.propisi.net/zakon-o-teritorijalnoj-organizaciji-crne-gore/ (4 April 2024).
Parliament of Montenegro (2011b): Zakon o regionalnom razvoju (Law on Regional Development). Available at: https://wapi.gov.me/download-preview/88597c9c-f382-46a5-a734-7b1cdb9c1f74?version=1.0 (4 April 2024).
Parliament of Montenegro (2017): Zakon o planiranju prostora i izgradnji objekata (Law on Spatial Planning and Construction). Available at: https://www.gov.me/dokumenta/1603a1b7-1090-4e00-b7fd-e5e97607f030 (11 April 2024).
Parliament of Montenegro (2018): Zakon o lokalnoj samoupravi (Law on Local Self-Government). Available at: https://www.gov.me/dokumenta/b2130e85-1a91-47a4-9cc6-7080295727c4 (5 April 2024).
Parliament of Montenegro (2025a): Zakon o uređenju prostora (Law on Spatial Planning). Available at: https://www.ingkomora.me/cms/public/dokumenta/ea9eae2a3ea965026e487ac407d53344.pdf (9 April 2025)
Parliament of Montenegro (2025b): Zakon o izgradnji objekata (Law on Construction). Available at: https://www.ingkomora.me/cms/public/dokumenta/4f29bd8696e93e5c9ebaea0fc7c6e8a1.pdf (9 April 2025)Parliament of Montenegro Research Centre (2023): Prostorno planiranje u Crnoj Gori: kratka informacija (Spatial planning in Montenegro: Brief information). Available at: https://api.skupstina.me/media/files/1675768265-prostorno-planiranje-u-crnoj-gori.pdf (20 April 2024).
Perović, Svetlana K. (2013). The Levels of Integrality in Architecture and Urbanism Studies at the University of Montenegro. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 93. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.256.
PG Biro. (2020, October 28). Vuković na Zabjelu: Stavljanjem van snage DUP-a ‚‚Zabjelo-Ljubović'' nastavljamo da radimo u interesu građana i budućnosti naše Podgorice [Vuković in Zabjelo: By repealing the DUP “Zabjelo–Ljubović,” we continue to work in the interest of citizens and the future of our Podgorica]. Podgorica.me. https://starisajt.podgorica.me/vijesti/483 (Accessed: June 24, 2025).
Tsenkova, S (2012): Urban planning and informal cities in southeast Europe. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 29(4):292-305
Union of Municipalities (2009): Pregled problema u primjeni Zakona o uređenju prostora i izgradnji objekata (Overview of the problems in the implementation of the Law on Spatial Planning and Construction). Available at: http://uom.me/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Pregled-problema-u-primjeni-Zakona-o-uredjenju-prostora-i-izgradnji-objekata.pdf (22 April 2024).
Vujosević, M. & Dragović, S. (2019). Cypress Revolution: The importance of public participation in urban planning decision‑making processes in Montenegro [Conference paper]. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference on Environmental Impact of Illegal Construction, Poor Planning and Design. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/97338458/Cypress_Revolution_The_Importance_of_Public_Participation_in_Urban_Planning_Decision_making_Process_in_Montenegro.
