Antwerp summit signals Europe’s deep economic challenges as global paradigms crumble and competitiveness indicators decline.
The Crumbling Global Economic Order
The summit takes place as previous paradigms of the global economy begin to crumble. The world Europe is accustomed to is breaking into spheres of influence. Access to raw materials, energy, technology, markets, and skilled labor is no longer a given but a function of strength and capability. This is also the moment when Europe must abandon entrenched thinking.
Regulatory Burden and Competitiveness
Numbers leave no room for doubt. A Deloitte report shows a 42% increase in regulatory burden over the past five years and an over-subscription of the Innovation Fund exceeding 500%, clearly indicating a problem with financing investments. As many as 83% of competitiveness indicators monitored under the Antwerp Declaration have not improved or have worsened. This is not a cyclical slowdown but a signal of deep weakening of the European economy.
Energy Costs and the ETS Dilemma
The most direct and tangible burden remains energy costs and the CO2 emission pricing system. In its current form, the ETS has ceased to be solely a transformation instrument and has become a factor eroding competitiveness. The planned revision of the ETS this year is the last bell to decide whether Europe wants to keep its industry or reconcile itself with its progressive relocation.
Words vs. Actions in Policy
The second problem is the belief that regulations can shape reality. The effect is well known: on one hand, ambitious political declarations about industrial sovereignty and strategic projects, on the other, bureaucratic decisions and uncompromising regulatory requirements that prevent their implementation. If actions and projects considered strategic cannot move forward, it means a gap has emerged between words and deeds that must be filled.
European Money Not Working for Europe
The third element is money—European money that does not work for Europe. The public procurement market in the European Union accounts for about 12-14% of GDP, or 2-2.5 trillion euros annually. This is the largest single demand instrument available to the Union, and at the same time a tool that is today used to a minimal extent strategically. Meanwhile—as Mario Draghi pointed out—10-11 trillion euros of European savings remain frozen on low-interest accounts or go to American markets, often indirectly financing acquisitions of innovative companies in Europe by US entities that use these funds to build their own technological advantage.
Leveraging Public Procurement Strategically
This combination speaks for itself: we have money, but systemically it is not being activated for the benefit of European industry, innovation, and economic security. The public procurement market is a natural testing ground for the concept of European preference. It is not about closing the market or crude protectionism, but about shaping criteria—also non-price ones—so that public demand strengthens European value chains, production, innovation, and jobs, rather than remaining defenseless against global competition.
Balancing Openness with Pragmatism
Of course, introducing European preferences requires a careful, sectoral approach. Overly complex criteria risk paralysis, while overly simple ones risk shortages, increased costs, or favoring a narrow group of entities. These risks are real and must be taken into account. However, they cannot become an excuse for inaction, especially since other economies have for years used local preferences as one of the key tools of industrial policy. Public demand should act as a shock absorber for the challenges facing the European economy.
The world is actively supporting its own economies. Europe cannot remain the only player that believes that openness alone is sufficient. Openness must be reconciled with a wise, pragmatic industrial policy. It is precisely this dilemma—and its resolution—that will define the axis of European political debate this year.
The meetings in Antwerp and Alden Biesen will not solve all problems. But they must be the moment when Europe stops pretending that old rules still work—and starts using the tools it has in hand.
