“Low scores” for Corfu municipalities in Ministry of Interior evaluation

The overall picture of Corfu’s municipalities in 2026 emerges within a different institutional evaluation framework compared to 2025, a fact that does not allow for direct comparison in terms of “ranking,” but instead highlights individual problem areas more clearly. In 2025, the Ministry of Interior carried out, for the first time, a nationwide assessment based primarily on citizens’ opinions, which produced an overall ranking of municipalities and placed the Corfu municipalities—Central, North and South Corfu—low on the list, particularly due to serious deficiencies in infrastructure and the road network.

In 2026, instead of this one-off evaluation, a new continuous monitoring mechanism is being implemented through the digital platform deiktesota.gov.gr, which is based on quantitative indicators drawn from administrative data and covers multiple areas of municipal operations, without resulting in a single overall ranking.

Under this system, Corfu’s municipalities no longer appear as specific positions in a table, but as sets of performance indicators with distinct characteristics. The overall picture remains comparable to that of 2025 in terms of level: all three municipalities continue to record shortcomings in critical areas such as waste management, infrastructure maintenance and technical capacity, confirming that the core problems have remained stubbornly unchanged for years.

However, unlike the previous year, the new methodology allows internal differences to be distinguished. The Municipality of Central Corfu shows relatively better administrative and operational capacity due to its size and concentration of services, but continues to face strong pressure in day-to-day issues, especially waste management. The Municipality of North Corfu displays greater weaknesses in technical services and infrastructure, something linked to its geographical extent and the dispersion of communities. The Municipality of South Corfu records overall lower performance, particularly in social and basic municipal services, placing it in the weakest position on the island in terms of administrative effectiveness.

The key difference, therefore, is not that Corfu has significantly improved its standing, but that in 2026 the evaluation shifts from a comparative “scorecard” approach to a more analytical mapping of performance. Where in 2025 Corfu’s municipalities simply appeared low on a list, in 2026 it becomes clearer that the problem is multifaceted and varies among the three municipalities. In other words, the overall lag persists, but it is now documented more precisely as the result of structural weaknesses in infrastructure, organisation and available resources—something the new system makes more visible and measurable than in the past.

GIORGOS KATSAITIS