In theory, individualization is seen as a driver of creativity, motivation, and a sense of responsibility. People who are free to express themselves often contribute more passionately and innovatively. But in practice, the picture is more complex: while many organizations successfully combine personal autonomy with a strong sense of community, others struggle – an overemphasis on personal interests can lead to fragmentation, isolation, and a gradual loss of belonging. The challenge lies in balancing freedom with a sense of shared purpose.

This shift is happening in an already complex cultural landscape across Europe. In many Northern European countries, individualism has deep historical roots. In contrast, more collectivist approaches to work still prevail in parts of Southern and Eastern Europe. European companies, therefore, operate in a field of tension: they must navigate diversity while also creating common ground for collaboration – across national and cultural boundaries.

Another factor is the changing nature of teams themselves. The classic notion of a team – as a tightly-knit group interacting daily – is losing relevance. Today, teams often consist of geographically dispersed individuals working flexibly and frequently remotely. What used to emerge naturally through shared spaces, rituals, or spontaneous conversations must now be intentionally cultivated. Without that social glue, teams risk becoming loose networks with diminishing cohesion. The meaning of shared work can then feel abstract and hard to grasp.

This is precisely why organizations must develop a new understanding of “community”. The answer does not lie in reverting to rigid structures or homogenizing individual differences, but to actively engage with and embrace diversity. Organizations need individuals – with different personalities, perspectives, and ideas. This diversity is not a disruption; it is a strength but it only becomes a real asset when united by a clear and shared framework of values.

Organizations should not view personal freedom as the opposite of teamwork, but as a vital element of collective intelligence. In other words, individual autonomy is not a barrier to collaboration – it is a resource that, when properly integrated, can become a driver of innovation and shared achievement. The prerequisite, however, is a stable cultural framework that does not restrict personal growth but channels it toward a greater good.

A vivid example of this is the European Union. It brings together a wide variety of cultures, languages, interests, and traditions. Its goal is not to eliminate these differences, but to build unity through shared values – such as the idea of a unified Europe, human rights, the rule of law, and cooperation. This principle can also be applied to organizations: different personalities, working styles, and viewpoints don’t need to be standardized – but they do need to be aligned toward a shared purpose.

However, this collective foundation must not remain purely theoretical. It must be felt in everyday work life – through clear values, visible rituals, and spaces for genuine exchange. This reinforces a sense of belonging and sends a powerful message: even if everyone follows their own path, they are working toward the same goal. This gives rise to a new understanding of what a team is: not a rigid unit, but a dynamic, intelligent network that does not just tolerate diversity, but thrives because of it.

In this way, individualism does not undermine teamwork – it becomes its evolution. In a modern, diverse working world, success no longer depends on everyone thinking or acting the same way. What matters is that people are guided by shared principles – and that they not only understand the purpose of their work but experience it through collective action.

The most successful organizations of the future will not choose between individuality or community. They will know how to weave both into a cohesive whole. Only those that celebrate diversity while anchoring it in a strong collective culture will thrive in an increasingly complex and interconnected world.

Author: Elisabeth Ulshöfer, Senior Manager at Vindelici Advisors AG & Young Leader at United Europe e.V.

Elisabeth Ulshöfer was part of the United Europe Mentoring Program 2024/25: “The mentoring program by United Europe offered me valuable perspectives from an experienced manager outside my own industry. Our insightful discussions opened up new ways of thinking and served as a catalyst for my personal and professional development. The exchange provided both clarity and inspiration, and I can wholeheartedly recommend applying for the next round of the mentoring program.”

The rise of digital tools, such as chat-interfaced LLMs, spreading across the world, not only in personal settings but also at the workplace, raises an important question:
How can anyone keep up with technological advancements as developments are happening ever more rapidly?

Especially in the European industry, where increasing costs of resources (including energy) put pressure on both incumbent players and rising startups, there is a need for companies to become more data-driven in order to stay globally competitive. However, this trend is not just limited to the industrial sector. Policy-makers and the public at large also stand to gain from becoming knowledgeable about data and algorithms. AI is based on data and in any machine learning pipeline, the majority of time is spent on preparing the data. The basis for understanding and using AI systems successfully thus lies in achieving data literacy. 

But how can the aforementioned stakeholder groups become more data-driven, when talent is scarce and the willingness to adapt to new technologies low?

On a strategic level, the answer is to foster a data culture within organizations. As the term suggests, it requires a cultural change, accompanied by change management. On the other hand, people need to acquire technological skills to the extent that their current or prospective role requires them. Data culture is hereby a means to achieve data literacy. 

To support the cultural shift, the AIDA model from marketing research can be a helpful framework. Originally developed to describe the phases a customer passes through before making a purchase, AIDA (Attention, Interest, Desire, Action) can also be applied to achieve buy-in for reskilling initiatives.

First, awareness must be raised about the urgency and benefits of learning data skills. This can be achieved through the communication of successful and relatable examples of data-driven applications. These examples can spark an interest in data topics, as individuals begin to see the relevance and potential impact. This interest may then lead to the desire to learn and keep up-to-date with these trends, especially if individuals are motivated to contribute to similar success stories. 

Finally, with the support of organizational incentives, such as opportunities for on-the-job training, people are more likely to take action by participating in reskilling programs focused on data literacy. 

When looking at concrete data skills, there are two pathways to achieve data literacy depending on the organization’s industry and the current skill set of its members. Upskilling refers to the augmentation of existing roles to improve efficiency and/or effectiveness, therefore increasing productivity. This can be achieved through modular short-cycle courses and learning formats which flexibly adapt to the needs and progress of the learners. 

When traditional job roles receive major changes or even become obsolete, upskilling alone is not enough. Early exposure to new projects and a learning roadmap for transitioning into possible new roles is crucial to take these people along. In general, the larger the change in role and responsibilities, the earlier and more accompanied this reskilling effort needs to be.

Outside of organizations, the promotion of life-long learning in informal settings requires a concerted effort by governments and education providers, going beyond the traditional school and university systems. People need to be provided with offers that reach them where they are, in a format which fits their individual life designs.

The responsibility for creating a data culture lies not just within industry, with NGOs or other similar organizations, but also with national governments and EU institutions. They should take measures to drive this change, such as promoting the dialogue between organizations requiring reskilling and institutions providing education. This might happen through tailored platforms and public-private partnerships, which create accessible formats for knowledge exchange and reflection, integrated into the places where people work and live. Additionally, financial incentives for organizations to invest more in upskilling and/or reskilling their workforce (e.g. reskilling training budgets and paid-time-off for upskilling) can accelerate this change.

Instilling a data culture into every European citizen, whether they are participating in the workforce or not, is crucial for ensuring the competitiveness of Europe in a rapidly changing world. Besides keeping up with technological advancements and supporting the willingness to learn, achieving data literacy helps organizations comply with the EU AI Act (ref. Art. 4 on AI literacy), increasing the speed for introducing new tools into their organization as well as create resilience and adaptability within their populations.

Author: Felix Rank, Young Leader at United Europe e.V.

Felix Rank was part of the United Europe Mentoring Program 2024/25: “The mentoring program by United Europe gave me not only valuable insights into the learnings of a manager from my industry, but also the opportunity to reflect on topics surrounding my career decisions. The regular meetings helped me identify new angles to my questions in a trusted setting. I am grateful for this experience and can only recommend to apply for the next round of the program.”

Impulse by Professor Volker Wittpahl, „AI, Disinformation and Stargate – What Global Threats is the European Economy facing?” In 2022, a fake video call between the mayors of Kyiv and Berlin, orchestrated by a comedian using deepfakes technology, exposed the vulnerability of even high-level officials. In another case, an AI-generated avatar duped a company into transferring USD25million to a fraudulent account. These are not just examples of online disinformation – they are indicators of a much broader threat.
AI operates on pattern recognition. Today, self-learning algorithms with feedback loops are becoming increasingly powerful due to the data they are fed.

From an economic perspective, the most valuable subject to monitor is the buyer – people themselves. Human behavior forms the most interesting and profitable dataset. Data brokers play a central role in this ecosystem. Acxiom, for example, reportedly held 3000 attributes on 7 million individuals across the US, Europe and beyond. Oracle, as of 2017, claimed to manage 30,000 attributes on 2 billion consumer profiles globally.

The data marketplace once known as Xandr (acquired and renamed by Microsoft) offered detailed customer profiles for hyper-targeted advertising. Even after the name disappeared in 2022, the business model persisted. Data brokers enrich profiles by purchasing information from various companies, including those within the EU. One common method of data collection is through mobile apps: upon installation, apps share a so-called “advertising ID” with data brokers. Firms like Data Stream aggregate this data and sell access – for instance, a €14,000 monthly subscription grants live data streams from over a million ad IDs.
A sample purchased from one of these brokers allowed investigators to trace employees from the BND (Germany’s federal intelligence service), Bundeswehr (military), and even members of parliament – identifying their home addresses, routines, and online habits. This is not a dystopian prediction; it’s a reality we’ve been living with for the past decade.
Every digital interaction – clicks, visits, likes, comments – is tracked, locked, and analyzed. This profiling determines not only the ads you see but potentially your access to services like insurance. A poor health profile may lead to denial of coverage.

AI introduces a new age of automated influence. Algorithms can now manipulate public opinion – pushing individuals toward belief in conspiracy theories or pulling them back from the brink. In controlled studies, fact-based chatbots have even managed to change the minds of conspiracy theorists.

This raises grave concerns for democracy. The tools of manipulation are becoming more refined. Trust in digital media is eroding. With AI, it is now possible not only to create fake news, but also to propagate it across hundreds of fabricated websites – making fact-checking virtually impossible. Meanwhile, phishing scams and spam emails are becoming indistinguishable from legitimate communication, escalating the threat.

We are not simply facing a technological shift, we are facing a fundamental transformation in how truth, influence, and privacy operate in society.

Q&A

What are the risks of not investing in AI and how can we counteract disinformation created by it?
Significant progress has been made. Large Language Models (LLMs) are now available as open-source tools, offering enormous potential – but also considerable risks. We must think carefully and strategically about where and how we deploy these technologies. China’s “DeepSeek” model has demonstrated that more efficient AI systems are possible, signaling the need for Europe to stay competitive and vigilant.

The developments in AI raise ethical and societal questions. Privacy might become something we must consciously pay for to protect ourselves and credible sources of information.

The Pandora’s box has been opened – we cannot go back. So how can we remain competitive, knowing the world is fundamentally changing?

Many tasks will be automated by AI. However, human centric roles – like caregiving and nursing – are unlikely to be fully replaced. Trust will gain new importance, and we may see a shift back to offline and personal interaction in certain domains.

From a strategic perspective, what must the EU prioritize to ensure economic stability and protect democratic institutions amid AI’s rapid evolution?
We need a more unified Europe – politically and digitally. Despite a common feeling of being “European”, national identities still dominate. Politicians often avoid deeper integration, fearing loss of sovereignty. Yet, without a stronger European identity and government, we will continue to struggle with 27 member states negotiating individual interest instead of pursuing shared goals. Bureaucracy must be reduced and our common values must be strengthened.

What can individuals do when facing massive data brokers and BigTech? Are regulations excessive or finally adequate?
I’ve learned a lot through self-experimentation and expert coaching. I wanted to understand: Can I make independent decisions about hardware, operating systems, and software? Is it feasible in daily life?
The answer is: yes – but it requires behavioral change. Using open-source tools helps tremendously, but privacy also depends on personal habits. With awareness and discipline, individuals can regain some control over their digital footprint.

LLMs are trained in unregulated settings. What happens when misinformation from platforms like X or Reddit becomes the “truth” in training data?
This is a real threat. Disinformation, if not addressed, could become the foundation of future AI models. The EU has already taken steps, but more must be done – both technologically and politically.

On the regulator side, we need to influence user behavior. Just like with junk food, harmful content may remain available – but we must educate and create responsible consumption habits.
On the tech side, the race will never be fully won. Therefore, trust and verified communication channels are crucial, especially in business. If internal communication with suppliers and partners becomes untrustworthy, the global economy could face collapse. In emergencies, secure communication must fall back on personal verification of trusted third parties. A “zero-trust” scenario must be considered.

Given our reliance on foreign providers for digital infrastructure, can we truly speak of European sovereignty?
There are already European solutions. The problem is that we still invite companies like Google and Microsoft to the table. An open-source path could be the “European way”. In the Baltics, this is already reality. In Germany only one federal-state – Schleswig Holstein – has moved toward open-source systems.

Open source is more than ideology; it offers resilience. Even if a provider disappears, the code remains usable. Europe should develop an open-source ecosystem – not 27 fragemented ones, but a single unified system.

What medium-term threats do we face from non-state actors? Foreign governments often use proxies – hacker groups that operate under the guise of cybercriminals. These actors carry out sabotage and espionage, especially targeting sectors like biotech. This is documented, for example, in Germany’s BSI reports. While labeled “cybercrime”, these are often acts of political and economic warfare.

—————————————

The Impulse “Estonia: Creating a Start-Up Ecosystem for European Innovation in Tech” by Mats Kuuskemaa,  Country Director e-Residency Estonia, guided the participants through Estonia’s recent history, its start-up ecosystem, and the concept of e-Residency. Over the past two decades, Estonia has developed a unified digital system that enables citizens to interact with the state for government services with remarkable efficiency.

In the early 1990s, Estonia faced a unique challenge: the economy was in a dire state, and the country needed to catch up with its more prosperous neighbor, Finland. The population was motivated and hungry to build new institutions and systems, drawing inspiration from global best practices. In this context, Estonia saw an opportunity to leap ahead.

By contrast, in Germany, there appears to be a lack of urgency or ambition. The system works, so there is little drive for improvement. But Estonia’s experience shows that adversity can foster innovation. Our legal system is based on German law, and our economic model was shaped by the IMF. In just three years, Estonia transitioned from full-scale communism to a free-market economy. While many businesses failed during this time, the economy eventually saw 7.7% growth sparring a dynamic business environment.

One area where Estonia could not copy others was digitalization. What began as a bold idea – to bring all government services online – was gradually implemented. E-tax systems were introduced, followed by digital elections, which have increased liberal voter turnout and boosted participation among younger generations.
It’s important to note that digitalization does not mean replicating bureaucratic processes online. It means rethinking systems from the ground up to make them more efficient. Civil servants in Estonia now focus on meaningful work instead of paperwork. Estonia even established an e-notary system and a data embassy in Luxembourg, ensuring access to national data even in times of crisis.
Estonia also has a unique corporate tax system: profits reinvested into the country are tax-free, which supports small business growth. The tax system is simple and time-efficient, allowing entrepreneurs to focus on building rather than compliance.

What is e-residency? E-Residency is a government-backed initiative that opens Estonia’s digital ecosystem to people around the world. It was initially envisioned as a tool for security and trust, and every applicant undergoes a background check. Today, roughly half of the e-Residency community comes from EU countries. It offers a streamlined way for entrepreneurs to quickly establish cross-border businesses and collaborate across ecosystems.
Estonia is one of the easiest countries in which to launch a company. In our start-up ecosystem, it is standard practice to grant employees stock options – something rarely feasible in many other EU countries. Without this, people often work for years in start-ups and leave with nothing, which is a lost opportunity.
Flexible labor laws are also crucial for start-ups and SMEs. They reduce hiring risks and allow companies to adapt quickly, which contributes to Estonia’s low unemployment rate. These conditions also make it easier for international talent to relocate.
In Estonia we’ve developed laws tailored to start-ups, including regulations for AI and venture capital. Investing in Estonian companies is straightforward, transparent and digital. Today, Estonia boasts around 10 unicorns – among them Wise, Bolt, Zego, Glia, Gelato and Skype. In comparison, a larger and wealthier city like Hamburg has only two.

This suggests that “hunger” and a low cost of failure are key ingredients for entrepreneurial success. As an e-resident, you can start your company immediately.

Estonia’s main competitors in ease of business formation include the US (especially Delaware) and Portugal. However, tax complexity in these countries can be a major deterrent. The time spent on tax compliance is time not spent on business development. Estonia’s system, by contrast, is fast and efficient. Our global e-Residency community has added significant diversity and innovation to the country.

Q&A

Success often invites criticism, especially from geopolitical adversaries. In 2007, Estonia experienced a large scale cyberattack that served as a wake-up call. Since then, NATO has established the Cooperative Cyber Defense Centre of Excellence in Tallinn. What is the scale of cooperation between Estonian startups and the government in the sphere of cybersecurity and cyber-resilience. How can Estonia improve the security situation for Europe in the Cyber-domain?

Estonia now maintains a high level of cyber-resilience and has developed a private-sector cyber army capable of responding to attacks in real-time. The country prioritizes cybersecurity at both governmental and business level. Our use of physical e-Residency ID cards and verification codes has helped reduce identity theft significantly.

Why haven’t other countries adopted e-Residency?

Some countries have begun to explore similar models – Dubai and Portugal, for example. However, Estonia’s program remains unique in that e-residents do not need to live in Estonia to benefit from its services. While other initiatives exist, Estonia retains first mover advantage and global recognition for its e-Residency concept.

Do you think that the mindset in Estonia is different from the mindset in for example Germany?

Culture and mindset play a significant role. Estonia wants Germany to thrive -our neighbor’s success is linked to our own. While Germany is making progress in digitalization (e.g., e-prescriptions), efforts are fragmented due to the federal structure, resulting in data silos and inconsistent integration.

True digital transformation must start with the user experience. Legislation should be designed with users in mind. Unfortunately, in many countries, the debate is overly focused on data protection at the expense of usability. Until decision-makers shift their perspective, true progress will be limited.

 You can view the full seminar here. We thank Professor Wittpahl and Mats Kuuskemaa for their participation.

Keynote by Patrick Lobis, Head of Representation at the European Commission in Austria: “The European Union and Global Challenges”
Patrick Lobis emphasized during his keynote, the importance of listening to the perspective of Young Europeans to better inform the political process in Brussels. He encouraged young leaders to voice their opinions, as dialogue is essential, especially in turbulent times where the rule-based international order is under threat.

Europe is facing a dramatic transformation of its economic and geopolitical model. The old approach – importing security from the US and cheap energy from Russia, and cheap labor from China while exporting high-quality goods and services – is no longer sustainable. The Russian threat marks a pivotal moment with no return to the old status quo.

The response must be collective, as no European nation-state can tackle these crises alone. The EU single market remains fragmented, and greater integration is needed, particularly in areas like military procurement, R&D, and technological innovation. Economies of scale are crucial if Europe wants to be rule-maker rather than a rule-taker.

Efforts are underway to reduce bureaucratic burdens to support innovation, especially in tech and green sectors.  Regarding EU unity, it is under pressure from external actors and internal populism. Russian propaganda and automated trolls pose significant risks to democracy. Europe must enhance its resilience through both technical solutions and strategic communication.

On the economic front, there is concern about the impact of the US elections and potential trade tensions. The EU opposes tariffs and advocates for diversified trade partnerships, remaining a stable and predictable market. Strengthening the single market remains a top priority to facilitate seamless business across member states.

Impulse by Christian Mandl, Head of European Policy Coordination Department at the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber (WKO): “Europe’s Resilience and Competitiveness in Geopolitics”

As geopolitical tensions intensify and economic landscapes evolve, Europe finds itself at a crucial turning point. In his presentation, Christian Mandl, Head of European Policy Coordination at the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber (WKO), outlined the challenges facing Europe’s competitiveness and resilience, and proposed policy directions to secure its future.

The European Union’s Competitive Struggles:

While Europe remains a strong economic force, Mandl warned that its future is uncertain. Asia’s continued rise, especially China’s technological advancement and strategic assertiveness, threatens Europe’ economic position. Countries like Austria and Germany have shown signs of economic stagnation over the past decade. Austria, deeply dependent on Germany (which absorbs 30% of its exports) suffers from economic downturns in its larger neighbor.

Protectionism is also on the rise globally. While the EU remains committed to open markets, it is increasingly vulnerable in a world where the US and China shield their economies. Europe’s dependency on imported raw materials and its soaring energy costs – exacerbated by the shift from pipeline gas to more expensive LNG – put it at a significant disadvantage.

Innovation and Capital: Europe’s Missing Pieces
A critical gap lies in Europe’s fragmented capital market. Startups and tech unicorns often relocate to the US due to easier access to seed and venture capital. Despite being on par with the US in terms of patent output, Europe trails significantly in commercializing innovation. Just 4 of the world’s 50 largest tech companies are European.

Internal Friction: Bureaucracy and Incomplete Integration

Mandl highlighted the paradox of the EU’s internal market – its greatest asset – being incomplete particularly in services. Excessive regulation, especially in sustainability and ESG standards, creates major burdens for businesses. Multiple EU directorates impose overlapping rules, leading to what Mandl called an “ESG Jungle”.

This complexity not only strains EU companies but also alienates international partners. For countries like Indonesia, Europe’s regulatory demands are seen as neo-colonial – imposing European values without offering incentives. This may push such partners towards less restrictive trading alliances.

A New Geopolitical Era

Mandl described a shifting global order, where the world is dividing along geopolitical lines. China’s alliance with Russia poses a strategic challenge to the West. The rise of BRICS+ -now including major energy exporters – signals the emergence of a potential new energy bloc (energy cartel) led by China, undermining the influence of the G7.
Meanwhile, the WTO’s relevance is fading as countries increasingly violate its rules with reciprocal tariffs and trade wars. The US and China’s decoupling is accelerating, with trade rerouted through intermediary countries like Mexico and Vietnam.

The EU’s Response: Reform and Strategic Investment

To address these challenges, the EU has launched initiatives such as the Competitive Compass and the Omnibus package, aiming to reduce bureaucracy, enhance regulatory coherence, and unlock the full potential of the internal market. Simplifying compliance – such as extending reporting intervals for SMEs – could alleviate some off the burdens that currently hinder innovation and growth.

On the Security front, initiatives like ReArm Europe and Readiness 2030 reflect a growing recognition that resilience requires not just economic strength but also military preparedness. However, financing remains a challenge: a quarter of the EU’s future budget is earmarked for paying back debt from the COVID-era Resilience Fund.

CONCLUSION: Europe’s Strategic Dilemma

Mandl’s message was clear: Europe must move faster, become more flexible and focus on completing its internal integration. It must strike a smarter balance between regulation and competitiveness and take concrete steps to strengthen its capital markets and innovation ecosystem.

In a world increasingly shaped by strategic competition and shifting alliances, the EU must define its role – not just as a regulator or a market, but as a geopolitical actor with the agility and unity to shape its own destiny.

Q&A

“What can Europe do to catch up?”

The United States and China are significantly ahead in many areas. However, there are niche sectors – such as quantum computing – where the EU still has the potential to compete. Europe should focus on its strength rather than attempting to rival global leaders where they already dominate. For instance, Austria’s Zeilinger, exemplifies Europe’s excellence in cutting-edge research. Building on such assets could help position the EU more strategically in the global tech landscape.

“Will defense and trade become more interconnected?”

Yes, this trend has already begun. Security concerns are increasingly linked to trade policies, even without new formal competences granted to the EU. Traditional notions of neutrality no longer suffice in aa world where defense capability underpins geopolitical influence. The UK’s departure from the EU was regrettable, as it – alongside France- was one of the Union’s few members with substantial military power. Without credible defense backing, trade positions lack weight on the global stage. However, it’s unlikely that member states will relinquish sovereignty over defense to the European Union in the near future.

“How can Europe remain open and competitive in the face of protectionism?”

Many countries, such as those in Mercosur, are still eager to pursue mutually beneficial trade agreements. Europe must avoid imposing its values in a way that feels like neo-colonialism. Instead of exporting a rigid value system, the EU should engage in partnerships based on mutual respect and pragmatism. While China will continue to seek deeper economic ties with Europe, such cooperation should be approached with strategic caution.

Impulse by Michael Saxl, Trade Policy Advisor at the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber (WKO): “Trade Wars, Sanctions & Tariffs: How can Europe reduce vulnerabilities to external pressures”

What has changed in the U.S. mindset?

The United States is increasingly looking to the past for answers to today’s economic challenges. The U.S. embraced tariffs as a central policy tool to address trade imbalances – particularly its persistent trade deficit.

How is the EU responding?

In contrast, the EU is pursuing a more cooperative approach, seeking to redefine and rebalance transatlantic trade relations through negotiation. While the situation is complex and lacks a single solution, a range of countermeasures is being considered. Some retaliatory, others strategic.

One major counter-strategy involved diversifying trade partnerships, particularly Asia. There is growing momentum behind the idea that the future of EU trade policy lies in stronger ties with Asian economies. India, for example, has shown considerable ambition in trade relations with Europe. However, negotiations remain technically challenging due to differing regulatory frameworks, particularly around the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), deforestation rules, and Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapters, areas where many Asian partners have different priorities.

Progress in EU-Asia Trade Agreements

Despite these challenges, the EU continues to advance trade negotiations across the region. Agreements with Vietnam have already proven successful, generating further interest in EU partnerships. Ongoing negotiations with Thailand and Indonesia look promising. Japan and South Korea serve as strong examples of well-functioning EU-Asia trade relationships, highlighting the potential of such partnerships when aligned on key issues.

The EU-Mercosur Agreement

Meanwhile, the long-anticipated EU Mercosur Free Trade Agreement remains in limbo. The final decision lies with the European Parliament and the Council. Austria currently opposes the agreement, and Italy may become the pivotal voice. As a qualified majority is required, the outcome is uncertain but the decision-making process remains transparent.

Q&A

“Can Europe remain a credible geopolitical actor if it takes 24 months to respond to trade coercion, while others retaliate within 24hrs?”

Clearly nt. In today’s fast-paced geopolitical environment, speed is critical. The EU must become significantly more agile in responding to external pressure. While the Treaty of Lisbon served its purpose when adopted in 2007, the world has changed dramatically. The institutional framework needs to evolve accordingly to enabler quicker, more decisive action on trade and foreign policy matters.

“What challenges lie ahead for candidate countries in terms of economic and industrial transformation?”

The EU has become more cautious about enlargement to 20, 25 years ago. While the long-term political will to expand remains – especially in Brussels – there is a growing preference for a measured, merit-based approach. Austria has traditionally been a strong advocate for EU enlargement, particularly in the Western Balkan. However, some member states now favor a model where all candidate countries join simultaneously, which risks delaying progress. A more pragmatic approach would be to “unbundle” the Western Balkans and allow countries like Albania and Montenegro – who are significantly ahead in their reforms – to join individually, based on their own merit and readiness.

The seminar will begin with a keynote address by Mag. Patrick Lobis, M.P.P., Head of the Representation of the European Commission in Austria. This will be followed by presentations on Geopolitics, Tariffs and Trade from Mag. Christian Mandl (Head of EU Policy Department) and Mag. Michael Saxl (Policy Advisor) from the WKO (Austrian Federal Economic Chamber). Professor Michael Landesmann, Scientific Director at the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, will then explore Europe’s industrial policy in the evolving geo-political and geo-economic environment.

Iris Marlovitz, Head of Communication at the Enterprise Europe Network, will offer an insightful impulse on the European Network for SMEs. We will then welcome former Vice-Chancellor and current Chairman of GLOBSEC, Wilhelm Molterer, who will discuss how to finance competitiveness and defense.
After lunch, the participants will gain insights into Europe’s Sovereignty in the digital realm. Professor Volker Wittpahl will address global threats to the European economy, followed by Mats Kuuskemaa who will present Estonia’s successful tech start-up eco-system.
United Europe Board Member Barbara Tasch-Ronner will interview Danai-Magarita Budas, Deputy Director International Relations and Markets at the Austrian Federation of Industries (IV) on the occasion of the WTOs 30th anniversary and its ongoing crisis. The Seminar will conclude with a workshop led by Professor Paul Timmers and Georg Serentschy @WeltWert, focusing on the highly relevant topic of Eurostack – building a European alternative for technological sovereignty.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. To apply please send your CV and a cover letter to events@united-europe.eu. The deadline for applications is March 27, 2025. To be eligible for travel and accommodation reimbursements, a United Europe membership is mandatory.

We look forward to welcoming you!

Panelists:

• Steffen Kampeter, CEO of the Confederation of German Employers’ Association
• Michael Bültmann, Managing Director at ABB E Mobility
• Dr Tobias Zimmermann, Head of Insights and Creation at The Stepstone Group

Moderator:
Dyria Sigrid Alloussi, Program Director at United Europe

Key Skills for Europe’s Competitiveness:
To remain competitive globally, Europe needs to foster problem-solving, collaboration, and teamwork skills. Businesses must tailor their strategies to their particular needs, as there is no silver bullet to solve the crisis. A shift towards fewer hierarchies and a focus on proactive problem-solving is essential. The term “war on talent” was first coined in Silicon Valley and indicates an emphasis on quality and the need for investment into talent.

Europe’s Standing:
A recent survey indicates that Europe has a strong foundation in attracting talent, with Germany ranking among the top five countries worldwide. However, countries like Canada, the US and Australia are taking a more active approach, positioning Europe as reactive in this global talent race.

Addressing the Workforce Gap
A compelling European narrative is needed to unify and attract talent to the European economy. While immigration is one tool, it won’t fully solve the problem. The panel emphasized the importance of mobilizing Europe’s existing workforce, enhancing productivity through AI, and encouraging flexibility and adaptability in the labor market.

Innovation Challenges
Innovation thrives with diverse leadership and access to capital, but Europe’s regulatory environment often hampers progress. While the US fosters a more open environment for technology driven innovation, European start-ups face challenges due to regulatory restrictions and risk aversion in venture capital markets. Innovation and necessary regulation should be harmonized to ensure both safety and space for technological progress in Europe.

Regulation vs Business Needs
For business innovation, governments should establish a balanced regulatory framework that minimizes risk without overreach. The panel noted that heavy regulation in Europe creates barriers for start-ups. However, countries like France and the Baltics are making strides by creating a more business friendly environment within the European regulatory framework, which other European countries could emulate.

Welcoming Culture and Integration
A welcoming culture is essential for integrating skilled migrants. Germany however, has a long certification process and lacks sufficient childcare and family support structures. Multinational companies are setting examples with their onboarding programs, which SME businesses could follow. 

Skills-based Hiring vs Certification
While global trends lean towards skills-based hiring, Germany’s job market remains highly certificate-driven. The panel suggested that while changing this culture will take time, skills-based hiring is gaining traction, especially with support from AI and specialized recruitment agencies.

Creating a European Narrative
The concept of a unified European narrative akin to the American Dream was discussed as an ideal rather than an imminent reality. While some leaders advocate for a renewed European spirit, the movement lacks widespread support. On a practical level, multinational businesses are contributing solutions to Europe’s workforce challenges, despite limited policy-level initiatives.

 We thank the BDA, Confederation of German Employers’s Association, Steffen Kampeter and his team for the successful seminar, support and collaboration.  

The rising threats to unity: why the answers about the role of AI and digital technology are not always clear-cut

The digital world is increasingly intertwined with political processes, for better or worse. AI, in particular, is altering the way we interact with information, and its potential impact on democracy is two-fold. On one hand, AI tools can help broaden our reach, enabling us to connect with more people, spread ideas faster, and bring about a renewed sense of engagement. 

However, there is a darker side to this digital transformation. We live in a time when polarisation is intensifying, and many argue that technology is only deepening these divisions. 

“The situation is mixed”

Social media platforms, which utilise AI algorithms to amplify content, often reward the most polarising voices. This creates echo chambers where individuals are exposed only to viewpoints that reinforce their pre-existing beliefs, making it harder to foster constructive dialogue across ideological lines.

“My impression is that the use of AI in media and digital spaces comes with both benefits and drawbacks. We are concerned about the impact of AI, as well as misinformation and cybersecurity challenges, particularly in the context of elections. The situation is mixed. There are clear instances where these technologies pose a threat and have been misused,” Prof Dr Paul Timmers, research associate at the University of Oxford, Oxford Internet Institute, and professor at KU Leuven and European University Cyprus, explained. 

Dr Timmers believes that on the other hand, media and EU institutions may also increase visibility around facts and truth, empowering people to create better explanations with the help of AI. “We are slowly starting to develop a balanced view, but I think there is a deeper, more systematic risk to democracy posed by AI and cybersecurity,” he added.

Regulatory measures are key to mitigating these risks. This includes implementing strict data privacy laws, enhancing cybersecurity protocols, and holding tech companies accountable for the societal impact of their platforms. At the same time, fostering digital literacy among the public is essential to ensure that citizens can critically engage with the content they consume and protect themselves from disinformation.

Dr Timmers also brought the example of hybrid threats. “Currently, Russia is active in combining cybersecurity with physical sabotage to undermine Europe’s infrastructure. This puts immense pressure on governments and essential services like healthcare and energy, threatening their ability to deliver in times of crisis. Such incidents not only disrupt society but also democracy itself. AI can be part of these disruptions, especially when used improperly by public administrations, leading to unfair treatment of individuals and eroding trust in government institutions,” researcher emphasised. 

He predicts that in the short term, we are learning how to deal with AI-driven cyberattacks and phishing attempts. However, the long-term effects of cybersecurity threats and AI on the credibility of democratic systems are not fully addressed yet. 

How to ensure that governments and big tech will work together?

Dr. Patryk Pawlak, Project Director at the Global Initiative on the Future of the Internet, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, has outlined key trends in digital and technological transformation during the presentation in 2024 Summer School for Journalists and Media Practitioners at the European University Institute. 

The digital world is evolving rapidly, and without clear policies, key areas like privacy, security, and fundamental rights could be compromised. “We need to understand the underlying issues and policy dilemmas to ensure that governments and companies adopt and implement adequate policies, such as those related to human rights online, internet shutdowns, criminalization, and the use of spyware,” he noted. 

This year, the UN will adopt the “Pact for the Future,” which addresses the risks posed by Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and AI. One fundamental approach is the continued upholding of international law, particularly the United Nations Charter. Ensuring that all states adhere to norms, rules, and principles of responsible behaviour in the cyber domain is essential. 

Should Europe invest in its own digital infrastructure?

The major players – Microsoft, Meta, Apple, and TikTok – are all based outside the EU, in the United States and China, leaving Europe vulnerable to external disruptions. This dependency became glaringly evident during the recent global IT outage. 

Building a comprehensive, EU-based digital infrastructure from scratch would require massive financial investment, extensive technical expertise, and time.

“The general opinion is that Europe should focus its resources on future technologies, such as AI and quantum encryption, where we can still develop autonomy. Instead of spending too much on alternatives for cloud infrastructure, we could explore other paradigms, like edge computing, which runs on individual devices. We need to be selective about where we invest,” Dr Timmers explained.

Europe would still need to cooperate with other global tech leaders in areas like AI, cybersecurity, and cloud services, where innovation is highly collaborative and difficult to isolate by region. Tech development is often driven by international cooperation, and shutting out global players could hinder Europe’s competitiveness and slow innovation.

“I am concerned when politicians promise that Europe will become a leader in everything- from AI and quantum technologies to electric vehicles. It’s unrealistic and potentially dangerous to set such broad goals. We need to be realistic about where we can actually make significant progress,”  Dr Timmers reasonably added.

In the end, Europe may find that a balanced approach is the most viable path forward. As the digital world continues to evolve, Europe’s ability to adapt and innovate will determine its role on the global stage. 

Author: Olga Konsevych, Young Leader at United Europe e.V. 

The seminar will kick off with a keynote address by Steffen Kampeter, CEO of the BDA (Die Arbeitgeber), who will provide valuable insights on the Labor Crisis in Europe from employers’ perspectives.

In the first half of the seminar, Prof Dr Stefan Liebing, CEO of Conjuncta and former Chairman of the German-African Business Association, will lead a workshop titled “Skilled Workforce Development in Africa”.  Following this, Henrik Schönsted, HR Director at GMH Group, will offer a practical perspective on the challenges the steel industry faces in recruiting workers both within Europe and globally. Next, Dr Tobias Meier, Co-Lead at the Department for Qualification, Professional Integration and Employment at BIBB, will discuss “Future occupations: Demand, Trends and Labour Supply Expectations.”  Dr Leonard Fox from the Fraunhofer Institut, who oversees Corporate Culture and Transformation, will then conduct a workshop on “Causes, Impacts, and Cooperation Strategies to Address the AI Skills Shortage”.

In the second half of the seminar Sophie Röpke, CEO and Founder at HR Connectum will present the “Self inflicted dilemma: women and the skilled labor shortage in Europe.” This will be followed by Nasim Ebert-Nabavi, Corporate Lawyer and Lecturer at the Administrative Academy Berlin, who will delve the complex legal challenges surrounding the skilled labor shortage. Key topics include immigration regulations, recognition of foreign qualifications, labor law frameworks, and the structural issues in the education system and European mobility. Lastly, Fabian Goslar, Founder of Genintelligence will emphasize the crucial role of better integrating older workers to address the skilled labor shortage.

The day will start at 9:00 AM and conclude at 06:00 PM with the Panel Discussion: “Closing the Workforce Gap: How to keep Europe Competitive, Innovative and Cosmopolitan?” featuring Steffen Kampeter, CEO at BDA (Die Arbeitgeber) und Tobias Zimmermann, Head of Insights and Creation at Stepstone. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. We anticipate receiving comprehensive applications at events@united-europe.eu. Please include a CV and concise cover letter.
The deadline for applications is September 30, 2024.

We look forward to welcoming you!

Our recent Advocacy Seminar “What’s happening with AI?” took place at Microsoft Berlin on Mai 13, 2024, where over 30 Young Leaders from across the European continent discussed the impact of AI on various aspects of politics, economy and society:

“Balancing Act: The Path to Responsible AI in Europe” by Martin Hullin, Director Digitalization and the Common Good at Bertelsmann Foundation.
Martin Hullin explained that while society is currently reacting to AI advancements by regulating, there is a need to focus more on societal aspects to harness AI for the common good. Greater knowledge and awareness among system designers, civil society, and programmers are essential. The ongoing regulatory arms race between regulation and innovation creates tension. To navigate this, building trust in AI technologies is crucial. Regulation alone is insufficient; capacity building is equally important for implementing protective measures.
In this context, Martin Hullin emphasized that the AI Act aims to ensure that AI respects citizen rights and public safety while fostering innovation and trust. It adopts a risk-based approach with stringent regulations for high-risk applications and bans certain uses, such as real-time biometric identification in public spaces.

“AI-powered disinformation as a threat to the integrity of elections” by Markus Oermann, Professor of Digital Ethics and Media Law at Technical University of Applied Sciences Würzburg-Schweinfurt (THWS).
Professor Oermann highlighted the threat AI-powered disinformation poses to election integrity, especially in 2024, a super election year with 33 executive and legislative elections worldwide. AI has already been used in various countries’ elections, with examples including deepfake videos and robocalls aimed at manipulating voter behaviour.

Professor Oermann emphasised that democratic elections rely on the free formation of opinions, which requires trustworthy information. Disinformation (e.g., deepfakes), malinformation (e.g., hate propaganda), and deceptive communication threaten this integrity. He highlighted industry initiatives like labelling and flagging on social media and the Munich Security Conference Tech Accord as well as political actions including the G7’s Hiroshima Process, the Council of Europe’s draft framework on AI and the EU’s Digital Services Act. Providers of information infrastructures play a crucial role in ensuring equal access to reliable information, a core value of democratic public discourse. Rather than focusing solely on market logic, they should prioritize effective, value-based R&D from the outset, Oermann concluded. He urged Stakeholders to establish and uphold an effective ethos for responsible AI R&D, ensuring it serves as a robust information infrastructure.

“Opportunities for the European economy in applying AI” by Harmen Zell, Public Policy Manager at Meta and Christoph Stephan Meister, Policy Experiences Lead at Meta.
The workshop showcased how Meta’s AI innovations and open research approach can significantly impact the European economy by democratizing access to advanced AI tools.

Meta, through its Facebook AI Research (FAIR) established in Paris, is at the forefront of advancing AI with a commitment to open research. The application of AI in Europe presents numerous opportunities across various sectors. Meta’s advancements in AI tools and platforms can drive innovation, enhance productivity, and foster economic growth across the continent. Recent innovations presented during the workshop included:

• LLAMA: The next generation of open source large language model, available for free for research and commercial use
• Seamless Expressive: An AI tool that translates recorded videos into other languages
• Segment Anything (SAM): An AI tool that precisely targets components in images, proving useful in fields like radio oncology and manufacturing.
• Smart Glasses with AI Capabilities: Featuring an integrated AI system that serves as an everyday AI companion.
  AI Studio: An open-source platform for developing and fine-tuning AI tools. By making AI tools accessible and easy to use, Meta is helping to level the playing field, enabling smaller businesses and research institutions to leverage cutting edge technology for their benefit.

“Opportunities in Sustainable AI” by René Delbé, Climate Pact Lead at Microsoft and Alperen Can, IT Lead at Mercedes Benz AG.

Alperen Can presented the Green Machine project and demonstrated how intelligent Algorithms and data driven approaches can significantly enhance manufacturing efficiency and sustainability. As environmental awareness grows, the industry seeks sustainable ways to save energy. The project focuses on optimizing existing production plants through intelligent data analysis rather than purchasing new components, which can waste resources. By collecting comprehensive information about production plants, self-learning algorithms can automate optimizations. “Industry accounts for nearly 45% of electrical power. Enhancing efficiency and sustainability is crucial for companies, particularly in the manufacturing industry, where machine tools consume significant energy.” Alperen emphasized.

At the workshop’s conclusion, René Delbé introduced Microsoft’s Co-Pilot AI Assistant. This innovative app distinguishes itself by facilitating easy verification of answers through clearly indicated sources and citations. René Delbé underscored the critical importance of verification when utilizing AI tools. Additionally, the Co-Pilot app offers the capability to generate royalty-free images, highlighting its versatility and utility.

“Digital Sovereignty: A robust Strategy for Europe” by Professor Key Pousttchi, founder of the wi-mobile Institute for Digital Transformation.
Professor Pousttchi’s talk highlighted three major issues surrounding AI:
1. Understanding: There is a widespread desire for AI, but few truly understand it.

2. Truth: AI cannot determine truth; it operates on probabilistic models. For instance, while ChatGPT can describe calculations, it doesn’t understand them.
3. Policy: Many policy decisions about AI are made by individuals lacking deep technical understanding, often lawyers rather than mathematicians or programmers.

Pousttchi stressed the need for policymakers to understand inductive statistics and the complex, multidimensional nature of AI models. Without thorough evaluation and real knowledge, public discourse on AI often resorts to shortcuts and superficial statements, lacking serious in-depth analysis.

AI is redistributing power among individuals, companies, industries and world powers. The leading entities in data and usage, Apple, Google, Meta, Amazon, and Microsoft as well as their Chinese counterparts – are set to dominate the AI landscape. The key to power lies in owning customer data, impacting everything from smartphones and cars to smart cities, homes, and future technological augmentations of the human body.

Pousttchi highlighted that Europe’s role has diminished from a player to a playing field. To regain influence and ensure European values are considered in shaping the future, Europe needs to make significant contributions. This requires substantial efforts, akin to the “airbus” task, to engage on an equal level in the global AI arena.

You can watch the full seminar on YouTube.

*We would like to thank Jennifer Pernau, Manager at Microsoft, and Felix Klein, Consultant at Vindelici Advisors for their contributions to the seminar. Jennifer Pernau was part of our Mentoring Proogramme 2023/24 and Felix Klein was part of our Mentoring Programme 2022/23. Jennifer and Felix are two active members of United Europe’s Young Leaders Advocacy Network.

DATE: Monday, 13th May
TIME: 16h00 – 17h30 CET
LOCATION: Berlin

Our panel of speakers include:
1. Wolfgang Dierker, General Manager at Microsoft
2. Semjon Rens, Public Policy Director at Meta
3. Deniz Özcan, General Manager at GMH Systems, GMH Gruppe
4. Marco-Alexander Breit Breit, Deputy Director General for AI at the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action

The distinguished panel will explore the intricate relationship between AI, regulation, and geopolitics, with a particular focus on the implications of the EU AI Act on economic growth. From industry perspectives to governmental insights, this discussion promises to offer a comprehensive view of the current landscape and the road ahead.

Your presence and participation will greatly enrich this discussion.

Please RSVP by May 7th to confirm your attendance at events@united-europe.eu and secure your place at this event. Should you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact us.

We look forward to welcoming you!

Our seminar will commence with a presentation by Markus Oermann, Professor of Digital Ethics and Media Law at Technical University of Applied Sciences Würzburg-Schweinfurt (THWS). Mr Oermann will shed light on AI powered disinformation as a threat to the integrity of elections.
To dive deeper into understanding opportunities based on AI, Harmen Zell, Public Policy Manager at Meta, will conduct an industry workshop titled “Opportunities for the European economy in applying AI”. A second perspective will be introduced by René Delbé, Climate Pact Lead at Microsoft, who will host a workshop on “Opportunities in Sustainable AI”. Subsequently, a policy workshop on “Digital Sovereignty: A robust Strategy for Europe” will be led by Professor Key Pousttchi, founder of the wi-mobile Institute for Digital Transformation, discussing strategies for Europe to maintain sovereignty in AI successfully.

The day will start at 9:00 AM and conclude at 5:30 PM with a Panel Discussion: “AI between regulation and geopolitical tensions – How the EU AI Act impacts economic growth” featuring Wolfgang Dierker, General Manager at Microsoft, Semjon Rens, Public Policy Director at Meta and Marco-Alexander Breit, Deputy Director General for Artificial Intelligence at the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action.

📧 To apply please send your CV to events@united-europe.eu. We are looking forward to receiving your application!

While government support and European programs have traditionally been primary sources of funding for universities, there is room for improvement, especially in terms of engaging the business sector. European universities have set exemplary practices in this regard compared to their counterparts in the Western Balkans, including Albania. Albanian universities having more than 30 years functioning under democratic principles, still face the challenge of strengthening their financial capabilities by tapping into the business sector.

The business sector and academia often seem isolated from each other in terms of funding and collaboration, which is likely a reflection of their historical separation: To bridge this gap, universities, especially in Albania, must develop their strategies to proactively engage the business sector. While there may not be a legal mandate enforcing this approach, it should be a smart institutional strategy to secure long-term results in research and innovation.

European practice demonstrates that some companies provide consultations on EU law and regulations, and they can be valuable partners in connecting universities with the business sector. Albanian universities should seek to

understand these structures’ mission and vision, which can help them prepare their own strategies. Additionally, universities can encourage the Ministry of Education t

o strengthen business ties, rather than solely relying on governmental support. This might involve involving the Ministry in the process of establishing and developing relationships between universities and businesses by also involving the scheme into the national strategies or relevant documents in this regard.

Universities can play a pivotal role in attracting business investments by fostering collaboration and involvement of the business sector in research and development projects. In the past decade, Albanian universities have been primarily focused

on accessing EU funding schemes for research and innovation, neglecting potential opportunities with the business sector. Many EU grant programs promote collaboration between academia, communities, and government, and while these programs may offer limited opportunities for business sector involvement, universities may need to take calculated risks during the application process.

Adding business sector participation as an eligible component in grant programs like Horizon Europe, EU for Europe and Marie Skodowska Curie would encourage closer collaboration. To enhance collaboration, universities can explore models like SPARK and Dr2Consultants, companies that offer consultancy services related to EU law implementation for business stakeholders. Albanian universities can establish collaboration agreements with these entities to gain updated insights in this area. The Albanian National Institution for Research and Innovation (AKKSHII) can provide a list of EU programs that promote business involvement in academia and university development, particularly those focused on entrepreneurship. The potential benefits of such collaboration are numerous, including offering new forms of support, advancing technology and innovation, facilitating recruitment of graduates into businesses, and bridging the gap between theory and evidence, thereby creating a steady pipeline of talent and mentoring future data storytellers.

As Albania moves closer to EU integration, the imperative to engage more effectively with the business sector is evident, aligning with the EU’s strategic goals. The concept of University Business Cooperation (UBC) is gaining attention at the European Commission, and although it remains a relatively underdeveloped area, there are promising practices emerging. European universities have already demonstrated the value of forging collaborations, and there is no need to wait for a formal EU policy document to drive such initiatives.[1] The absence of such an EU policy document, should not be viewed as a void hindering universities and the business sector from independently cultivating collaborative relationships. On the contrary, the absence of a dedicated EU-level policy on UBC has not deterred these entities from forging their own collaborations. Yet, considering the potential impact and recognition such a policy could bring, it becomes apparent that having a specific document addressing UBC at the EU level would significantly elevate its importance. This could catalyze increased attention and commitment from both universities and the business sector towards fostering sustained collaboration.

The current ambiguity in the position of UBC within European policymaking diverges from the successful initiatives undertaken by numerous European universities, which have proactively established diverse levels of collaboration. A brief exploration of websites belonging to well-known European universities reveals an abundance of exemplary practices in this arena. This wealth of examples negates the necessity of awaiting national, regional, or European documents explicitly addressing university-business collaboration. Instead, universities can take the lead as initiators in bridging the gap with the business sector, contributing to the enhancement of capacity building, research, and innovation.

Turning our focus to Albania, still on the path of EU integration, there are valuable hints and tips that warrant promotion and spotlighting:

1. Annual Progress Reports on Integration highlight the potential to align business development with research and innovation, presenting an opportunity for academia and business sector collaboration.
2. INSTAT (Institute of Statistics) should provide data correlating business development with academia, shedding light on how many graduates are employed in the business sector and the extent of collaboration between businesses and universities.
3. The National Strategy of Education emphasizes the need for cooperation between business associations and universities, with the aim of aligning curricula and qualifications with market needs.
4. The National Plan of EU Integration (2022-2024) can potentially incorporate indicators that encourage the implementation of University Business Cooperation (UBC), even though it may not be a formal requirement.
5. The National Agency of Research and Innovation has already taken steps to support UBC projects, with a focus on community development, SMEs, environmental issues, and technology research.
6. Regional collaboration as seen in the Stars EU Alliance, offers opportunities for universities to engage with international partners and explore best practices for UBC.

In conclusion, the collaboration between universities and the business sector is not solely dependent on national policies but also on the proactive efforts of universities themselves. Albanian universities should work toward pushing the government to diversify and enhance instruments for promoting UBC. They must also craft their strategies to leverage national resources and engage with EU and regional structures. While the European Commission’s attention to UBC is increasing and certainly more is needed regarding specific EU programmes, waiting for formal EU policies is not necessary. Albanian universities can take the initiative in building stronger ties with the business sector, which will benefit academia, business, and the broader community in the long run.

We would like to thank the author, Olta Quejvani, for her contribution and participation at the United Europe Mentoring Program (Class 2022/23).

Moreover, urban areas, often overlooked in

discussions about climate change, are not immune to its effects. The rise in temperatures has transformed some cities with little vegetation into heat islands. By storing and amplifying heat from the sun and other sources, these so called “heat islands” are endangering public health and increasing mortality rates (during 2022, heatwaves in Europe were responsible for at least 20,000 deaths). Periods of heat and drought are often followed by heavy rain, and the improper absorption of heavy rainfall due to impermeable surfaces (roads, parking spaces, etc.) prevent the correct reabsorption of said water. 

All this takes place in a context in which green space is increasingly commodified and associated with status, as “leafy suburbs” are considered a marker of prosperity, whereas poverty is frequently characterised by urban spaces dominated by impermeable surfaces with very little greenery.

In this context, a separate issue is the problem of food deserts within urban areas (i.e. areas within cities with limited or no access to nutritious food options). As such, the frequent lack of alternatives to a poor supply chain condemns certain neighbourhoods and citizens to unhealthy food.

A positive development could be the use of flora for carbon sequestration. Improving the livability of cities within the context of a changing climate has garnered greater attention as a potential solution, with a particular emphasis on the pivotal role of urban parks.

These elements are often approached separately, resulting in ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration being seen as most relevant to rural areas. Reinforcing natural ecosystems in urban areas in the way to generate them is rarely discussed.

This is hampered by the prevailing tendency in urban design, using construction of infrastructure that involves “soil sealing” under impermeable surfaces such as tarmac or concrete.

This process eliminates biodiversity by reducing plant cover and preventing soil from carrying out its ecosystem services, such as sequestering carbon and retaining water.

Policy Objectives: 

The main goal of this policy proposal is to reestablish a harmonious relationship between natural and urban environments, moving away from their current isolation. 

Several specific objectives contribute to this overarching aim:

1. Increase carbon sequestration within urban areas.
2. Reduce impermeable surfaces and combat the heat island effect.
3. Prepare urban areas for extreme weather events.
4. Promote citizen involvement in the management of urban green spaces.
5. Combine carbon sequestration with increased local food production inside urban areas.

The policy proposal aims to obtain a greater combination of carbon sequestration, microclimate stabilization, and food production in urban areas. By reducing impermeable surfaces and addressing the heat island effect, the initiative seeks to pave the way for a more resilient urban landscape.  

Furthermore, this proposal acknowledges the importance of democratizing access to green spaces, ensuring that all citizens can participate in their creation, utilization and maintenance. By implementing this proposal, cities and their residents can actively contribute to addressing climate-related challenges rather than being passive victims of them. 

While the proposal seeks to enhance the integration of urban agriculture with green space, it is not intended to compete with large-scale conventional agriculture. Instead, the policy proposal will prioritize poly- and permaculture, both of which align with reinforcing ecosystems and improving biodiversity in urban areas. Simultaneously, it aims to foster better access to healthy food for underprivileged areas and citizens.

Democratizing the accessibility and oversight of green space is key to ensure they are not confined to affluent areas. Citizens who are concerned about these changes should have a direct voice in the development of these green spaces, and actively engage in their use and maintenance. 

As a result, citizens can not only enjoy the benefits of these green spaces, but also embrace the responsibilities that come with them, thereby having the opportunity to take ownership of their environment.

Moreover, this policy proposal presents an opportunity to implement the concept of ecosystem services while also advancing the democratization of green spaces in cities. By doing so, cities and citizens can actively contribute to tackling climate-related challenges, rather than merely exacerbating, and succumbing to them.

This shouldn’t be looked at as merely a means of increasing the number of gardens in cities, it should be regarded as an invitation for modern cities to embrace their identity as integral parts of nature.”

Over the course of 10-20 years, the policy proposal aims to achieve a meaningful reintegration of human spaces with nature. Throughout history, as humanity transitioned into a sedentary species, and especially during the industrial revolution, there has been a growing tendency to exclude nature from human spaces. Unfortunately, this has resulted in a gradual detachment of humans from the natural world, rather than fostering a harmonious integration of human structures within the broader natural environment.

Examples of existing policies that aim to provide a framework for addressing related issues, such as soil degradation and the increasing imbalances in land use to the detriment of natural spaces can be found in the endnotes of this paper.

Challenges:

The proposal must overcome several challenges that are inherent to urban environments. One major challenge involves determining costs, as different cities have diverse climates and terrains, making it difficult to provide generic pricing for the proposal’s implementation. Additionally, different plants also require different levels of maintenance, which entails considerable investment in expertise and materials. Varying soil conditions and the presence of industrial pollution may require extensive and time-consuming decontamination entailing high costs.

Furthermore, navigating relationships with local communities and authorities is crucial. Public engagement and support are essential for the success of the proposal, but existing conflicts or distrust between certain segments of society and authorities may hinder progress. 

The proposal’s potential impact on commercial food producers due to the urban agriculture element may also raise concerns, necessitating clear communication about the initiative’s objectives, which are not meant to compete with large-scale agriculture but rather to provide nutritious food to underserved communities. The structure of land ownership in urban areas must also be carefully reviewed to avoid proposals being blocked since in cities with a large proportion of private land ownership resistance could be greater resulting in a smaller workable area.

Another concern could be mobility within cities and the need to guarantee both individual mobility and supply chains. As such an initiative would mean a considerable reduction in impermeable surfaces in and around urban areas, this could result in initial difficulties for traffic flows. It is therefore necessary to evaluate what transport options are available and how supplies reach businesses in these cities to avoid disruption that could generate opposition to the proposal.

Solutions on the horizon

To address the challenges, the policy proposal outlines several stages, building on successful restoration projects.

Identifying suitable sites (I.e., strategic areas such as riverbanks, obsolete infrastructure, etc.), involving verified experts in each city and engaging citizens and local authorities will pave the way for successful implementation: Biologists or botanists must be consulted to determine the appropriate flora to survive in the area in question. That would help to understand which plants are more likely to thrive during the initial phase of their life and seamlessly integrate into the ecosystem shaped by the area’s unique climate and topography.

Once feasible areas have been identified, it is imperative to engage in consultations with citizens, local authorities and experts to establish a consensus for this proposal. Subsequently, the focus shifts to determining the viability of providing essential guidance to interested citizens, enabling them to actively participate in the maintenance of these green spaces.

If the above criteria is fulfilled, local authorities, experts and citizens can deliberate on the nature and timing of works to implement these environmental changes. Lastly, the stakeholders can then develop the necessary bodies charged with managing the ecosystem and training citizens to take care of it.

Learning from past restauration projects, like the Cheonggyecheon river restoration in Seoul, South Korea, as well as the renaturation (process of restoring an ecosystem to its original state) projects concerning the section of the Manzanares river that passes through Madrid, can offer valuable insights into best practices: 

The Cheonggyecheon river restoration has certain flaws that should not be repeated, such as a concrete riverbed which stops natural purification of the water. Nevertheless, it has succeeded in encouraging the return of biodiversity to the area and lowering the surrounding temperature by as much as 5ºC. The renaturation of the Manzanares river has not only allowed the river to resume natural flows and sedimentation processes (and therefore a partial restoration of the native ecosystem), but also allowed for better management of extreme temperatures as well as rare but violent flood events.

In practice: the Brussels Capital Region

As an illustrative example, the Brussels Capital Region showcases potential applications of the policy proposal. With an unequal distribution of green space and high percentages of impermeable surface in certain areas, this region can benefit from targeted efforts to address environmental disparities:

The Western flank of the Brussels Capital Region exhibits dense population concentrations, accompanied by higher levels of economic hardship and a significant proportion of impermeable surfaces.

Given this context, directing attention towards plants that occupy minimal space but actively contribute to reducing impermeable surfaces can serve as a starting point to address the inequality in coverage. This approach would enable these areas to benefit from the advantages offered by essential ecosystem services.

Despite the challenges posed by high building and population density, the presence of abandoned structures further compounds the issues in Brussels. These structures frequently remain vacant for extended periods, posing risks to both people and the environment.

Abandoned buildings that do not receive the necessary repairs and reconversion could be dismantled to create more green spaces and/or communal gardens for local food production. 

This would allow the terrain to resume a productive purpose while contributing to supporting biodiversity, reducing the area’s impermeable surfaces, and delivering ecosystem services.

Moreover, reviving the Senne river and the Brussels-Charleroi canal presents opportunities to restore natural flows and interactions with living ecosystems in the city center, thereby increasing resilience to climate change: As the canal within Brussels is no longer necessary for large-scale economic activity, an attempt can be made to identify sections of the Senne river that can be restored above ground, and sections of the canal that can be renatured to improve the area’s adaptability to a changing climate.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the proposed policy seeks to achieve a transformative paradigm shift in how we approach urban planning and climate change mitigation. By integrating urban areas with nature, fostering community involvement, and promoting sustainable agriculture, cities can become more resilient and livable in the face of climate change. 

humanity’s ongoing concentration in cities is set to continue hence urban spaces urgently need to be made more resilient to climate change to remain livable otherwise more people could suffer severe harm. It is crucial to remember that the cost of inaction will be far greater than the investment required for implementing resilience measures.

As urbanization continues, the urgency to reconnect cities with nature grows stronger. The proposed policy aims to create cities that understand themselves as part of nature, not apart from it. 

Addressing the climate crisis entails addressing the inequitable access to green space and their ecosystem services within cities, while also striving to reintegrate citizens with nature and empowering them as stakeholders in its well-being and maintenance.

Implementing such measures can also foster contemplation on food production and consumption, presenting an opportunity for a fraction of city residents’ fruit or vegetable intake to originate within the urban areas, consequently bridging the gap for populations excluded by high retail prices and providing them with access to fresh produce.

These measures should build upon prior expansions of urban green space and nature restoration, acting as a catalyst for a transformative paradigm shift. They must signal the end of piecemeal approaches aimed at reducing human artificialization of ecosystems, while incepting a unified movement to seamlessly integrate urban spaces with nature and reintroduce humanity to the natural world.

As with all other measures associated to climate change, though the cost of action may seem high, the cost of inaction will be catastrophic.

We would like to thank the author, Luca Contrino, for his contribution and participation at the United Europe Mentoring Program (Class 2022/23).

Recently, the introduction of the digital euro, has been the focus of much discussion and analysis within the European Union. The digital euro represents an advance in the field of currency and finance. Unlike physical bills and coins, the digital euro would exist solely in digital form and be stored in electronic wallets and accounts. By integrating cutting-edge technologies such as blockchain or distributed ledger technology, the digital euro promises to ensure secure and transparent transactions. It opens a new frontier in the development of modern currencies and could even be equipped with programmable functions that enable smart contracts and automated payments.

Given the increasing digitalization of the economy and the financial sector, the move to the digital euro is seen as necessary to ensure that this development is managed efficiently and securely. The digital euro aims to leverage the advantages of the euro as a stable currency while providing consumers and businesses with a fast, secure, and cost-effective payment method.

Particular attention is being paid to payment security in the introduction of the digital euro. The European Central Bank (ECB) aims to ensure that the digital currency is at least as secure as the physical euro. To this end, the digital euro will be built on a secure infrastructure and equipped with advanced security measures to prevent manipulation and fraud. Blockchain technology or distributed ledger technology offer revolutionary security systems that can help increase payment security within the European Union. This could also reduce the use of cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and other virtual currencies, which are often associated with fraudulent activities.

However, there are also some challenges and potential difficulties with the introduction of the digital euro. One potential consequence could be an increasing reliance on digital payments and related infrastructure. In this case, a targeted but also untargeted disruption of electronic payments, through e.g. cyberattacks, operational disruptions or natural disasters, could have a severe impact on the economy and consumers. This would pose a risk to financial stability and undermine confidence in digital currency. In addition, the traceability of transactions and the resulting limited privacy is often criticized, as some consumers have concerns about governments monitoring their transactions. In addition, the Russia-Ukraine war has changed the view of intense economic interdependence, as Burkhard Balz, a member of the Deutsche Bundesbank’s Executive Board, noted in a presentation delivered at Andrássy University in Budapest. Trade, he said, is no longer a guarantee of peace, and too much dependency, including and especially with regard to critical infrastructure, could pose significant problems.

Despite these potential challenges, the digital euro is expected to bring numerous benefits, including above all the reduction of transaction costs and the facilitation of cross-border payments. Much has already happened since the launch of the “Investigation Phase” in October 2021, and the goal and standards of a digital euro have been further elaborated. This year’s goals for 2023 include the development of compensation models, access to the digital euro ecosystem, prototype results, completion of user requirements, and preparations for the project implementation phase. In addition, a decision document will be prepared with advice on the possible issuance, design, and implementation of the digital euro. In October 2023, the next milestone is due, namely a decision by the Governing Council on the possible launch of the next phase. In the next phase, the ECB would further develop and test the technical solutions and business arrangements. A possible Governing Council decision on the issuance of a digital euro would be taken only after the adoption of the legal act.

Overall, the digital euro is expected to be an important step toward a digitized economy and a secure payment environment. It will usher in a new era of digital transformation and offer a wide range of benefits and opportunities.  The efficiency of the digital euro would revolutionize the way we conduct financial transactions, making our daily interactions smoother and more accessible by leveraging modern technologies. This offers the potential for more programmable features and smart contracts, providing a multitude of opportunities for financial innovation and automation. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected and digitized, the digital euro is a forward-looking and indispensable step toward a more inclusive, efficient, and resilient financial future. However, the ECB must ensure that the digital euro is secure, reliable, and beneficial to all stakeholders.

Ultimately, the introduction of the digital euro should take place in at least two phases in order to do justice to its dual focus. In the first phase, the immediate impact on capital markets, banking systems and their business models must be carefully assessed and managed. The introduction of the digital euro could lead to changes in financial behavior and alter the dynamics of money management and investment strategies. Banks and financial institutions may need to adapt their services and infrastructure to accommodate the new digital currency. At the same time, the second phase must focus on understanding the broader implications for financial transactions involving non-financial firms, governments, and households. The introduction of digital currency will change the way transactions occur across sectors and introduce new payment methods and business models. The non-financial industry will need to integrate the digital euro into their operations, while governments will need to address the regulatory and legal implications.

We would like to thank the author, Fabio De Santis Gomez, for participating at the United Europe Mentoring Program (Class 2022/23).