Resilience 2.0: Empowering the EU to Thrive amid Turbulence and Uncertainty

The EU’s 2025 Strategic Foresight Report focuses on resilience, dealing with the increasing levels of uncertainty in its environment.  It begins with a discussion of global megatrends and specific issues affecting the EU, before identifying eight key areas for action.

The report introduces the notion of “resilience 2.0”, arguing that the scale, complexity, diversity and persistence of challenges ahead require moving beyond a series of reactive approaches to a “transformative, proactive and forward-looking” one. It builds on previous work, notably the European Preparedness Union Strategy and consultations , discussions with EU institutional partners such as the European Strategy and Policy Analysis System (ESPAS), the foresight network of the decentralised EU agencies, think tanks, and Member States through the EU-wide Foresight Network.

A resilient EU in 2040 is defined as delivering:

• Peace through European security: a combination of military strength, whole-of-society preparedness, and strong global standing and diplomacy; combined with partnerships with like-minded countries

• The values of democracy, human dignity, freedom, equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights: with effective governance through democratic institutions

• People’s well-being: covering the economy, sustainability, health, quality food and education.

There are three global megatrends identified in the report:

• security demands: geopolitical turmoil has shown that everything can be weaponised - supply chains, migration, trade, humanitarian aid, space and information; a “grey zone” between war and peace can create attribution ambiguity

• the erosion of the rules-based international order and fracturing of the global landscape:  the UN, WTO etc are under stress, destabilising the EU economy; a return to the status quo seems unlikely

• The impacts of climate change are worsening: causing economic losses and declining biodiversity and ecosystem services (eg clean water), while political momentum for climate change mitigation is weakening.

The report also identifies several EU-specific issues:

• The simultaneous quest for economic competitiveness and strategic autonomy: shielding the EU from external shocks and dependencies, whilst driving the innovation and economic strength needed to adapt, lead, and thrive in a rapidly changing world, the need to reduce dependence on other countries especially for digital services and critical raw materials.

  
  

• Exploiting the transformative power of technology, whilst crafting well-targeted safeguards to avert potential systemic risks - strengthening the EU values-based innovation model, as opposed to the US market-driven or the Chinese state-driven ones

  
  

• People’s well-being and societal resilience are under pressure: although many EU countries are among the world’s happiest places to live, equality remains uneven, and full inclusion is still out of reach; demographic changes mean an ageing population and fewer people of working age; managing regular and irregular migration in a politically charged debate is becoming more challenging

• Democracy and fundamental values are under threat: disinformation, foreign electoral interference, polarisation.

In response, the report proposes eight “key areas for action”, in addition to some structural reforms, such as a multi-level institutional set-up to take bold decisions and a more focused, simpler and impactful Multiannual Financial Framework. It is here that the weaknesses in the report begin to appear.

1. DEVELOPING A COHERENT GLOBAL VISION FOR THE EU.

   “The EU needs to be clearer about what it stands for and more assertive in standing up for its distinct model. This requires the development of a clear EU strategic concept, consisting of fundamental principles for shaping internal policies, navigating the global arena and bolstering the international rules-based system.”

   What does this really mean? The report suggests EU enlargement, and a new rule-based global order (reforming the UN and WTO), despite having earlier suggested that a return to such a position was unlikely.

2. AMPLIFYING INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL SECURITY:

   “develop a technology-savvy approach”, capitalising on civil-military synergies.  This involves “streamlined decision-making”, enhancing infrastructure, and, probably controversially,  pooling of procurement in the security domain. Existing foresight capacities should be strengthened – well, of course.

3. HARNESSING THE POWER OF TECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH:

   Shaping global governance and guardrails. “[The EU] should position itself as a global leader in shaping ethical and safe AI innovations—promoting transparent, accountable, and human-centric AI, systematically assessing and mitigating systemic risks of misuse, malfunction or misalignment of the most advanced AI models.” This sounds worthy, but unlikely to stand up against US and Chinese aggressive AI developments. Few positive “harnessing the power” proposals are made, though several challenging technology areas requiring collaboration (eg advanced ocean exploration, solar radiation modification) are identified.

4. STRENGTHENING LONG-TERM ECONOMIC RESILIENCE AND PREPARING FOR LABOUR MARKET UPHEAVALS.

   This involves strengthening supply chains, building capacity (including skills) and preparing for labour market disturbances. The report also suggests decarbonising the economy and building a circular economy – fine, but how exactly? They also suggest that a true Savings and Investments Union is essential to channel European savings into strategic investments – the tensions with Member States’ policies are evident.

5. SUPPORTING SUSTAINABLE AND INCLUSIVE WELL-BEING.

   This requires a shift in taxation away from taxing labour towards taxing negative externalities. The report champions the development of “well-being indicators” (“beyond GDP”) to help promote healthier lifestyles.

6. REIMAGINING EDUCATION.

   Responding to new technology means developing lifelong learning, preparing citizens not only for specific jobs but for multiple transitions across their lifetimes. The report talks about both preparing for a service and care economy as well as enhancing STEM skills – that there may be a trade-off is not acknowledged. The challenges of disruption from AI are presented as “an opportunity for greater equity, empowerment, and intergenerational solidarity”.

7. STRENGTHENING THE FOUNDATIONS OF DEMOCRACY AS A COMMON GOOD

   To counter disinformation and polarisation, the EU should address media literacy (through work in schools) and build community engagement (“including participatory territorial development instruments” - ??).  “The Commission and other EU Institutions should develop a clearer communication strategy to better inform European citizens and businesses about the EU and to maintain their understanding and support.”  - something that surely should have been in place from the start?

8. ANTICIPATING DEMOGRAPHIC TRANSFORMATION AND STRENGTHENING INTERGENERATIONAL FAIRNESS

   This means ensuring that decisions taken today do not harm future generations, dealing with issues like climate change, the provision of basic services, access to healthcare and long-term care, and social inclusion.

CONCLUSIONS – THEIRS AND MINE

“The EU will need to address the consequences of various long-term global developments and its own specific challenges.... This requires thinking beyond the short- and mid-term political cycles and adopting a perspective that better appreciates the long-term impacts of policies initiated today, as well as their robustness under divergent future scenarios”. Integrate foresight tools into policy making so that policies are more impactful and future-informed.

It’s hard to avoid the feeling that the political challenges of co-ordinating 27 (or more) countries’ policies when facing huge, possibly existential change are too great for a foresight report. Probably good ideas get submerged beneath a deluge of verbiage designed not to upset anyone.

This highlights the limits of foresight and the boundary between analysis and political action. The megatrend analysis is fine (there could be more of it), but the move into policy recommendations inevitably becomes more contentious, and requires a deeper participatory approach.

Written by Huw Williams, SAMI Principal

The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily of SAMI Consulting.

Achieve more by understanding what the future may bring. We bring skills developed over thirty years of international and national projects to create actionable, transformative strategy. Futures, foresight and scenario planning to make robust decisions in uncertain times. Find out more at www.samiconsulting.co.uk.

If you enjoyed this blog from SAMI Consulting, the home of scenario planning, please sign up for our monthly newsletter at newreader@samiconsulting.co.uk and/or browse our website at https://www.samiconsulting.co.uk

Image by Manfred Antranias Zimmer from Pixabay