A new political reality is emerging in Europe. Following post-elections, progressing with the Green Deal seems even more ambitious than when it was first introduced. Internal and external challenges are shaping a new European agenda focused on security and competitiveness. However, success in these areas is impossible without progressing the Green Deal, pushing for deeper, systemic reforms over short-term fixes, and actively addressing the green transition’s trade-offs.
The state-of-play
The rise of populism and far-right movements is reshaping the political landscape, as evidenced by the European parliamentary elections, which saw significant gains for right-wing politicians. After snap elections, France's government has weakened, while the upcoming 2025 German elections may follow its own far-right trend. At the same time, geopolitical tensions are escalating— with the war in Gaza and the war in Ukraine—placing the EU at heightened security risks. A potential Trump victory would only intensify these risks for the EU, particularly given his selection of J.D. Vance as Vice President, a staunch opponent of Ukrainian aid and champion of ‘America First’ ideology. Further compounding these challenges is the politicisation of climate and environmental issues that has, in part, contributed to a green backlash in the agri-food, mobility and residential sectors, spurring blocked, watered-down, or stalled initiatives.
Amidst a backdrop of discontent, the release of the EU's strategic agenda and Von der Leyen’s Political Guidelines for the 2024-2029 institutional cycle, leaves one crucial question unanswered: where exactly is the Green Deal? In a landscape where security and competitiveness have understandably surged in importance, they haven't just risen—they have taken centre stage. The focus has shifted, and the once-ambitious Green Deal now seems sidelined, raising concerns about where environmental and climate priorities fit into the broader European project.
The paradox of inaction
Despite the apparent shift in priorities, scaling back the Green Deal is not an option; the risks and costs of inaction on climate change are too high. In 2021 alone, heavy flooding in Belgium and Germany resulted in EUR 44 billion damage and over 200 deaths. As the fastest-warming continent, Europe will increasingly face more climate risks, with alarming impacts on our society, ranging from water and food insecurity, to threats on financial markets and escalating geopolitical tensions— for all of which the EU is direly underprepared.
Continuing the Green Deal amidst the EU’s balancing act is even more imperative, given the clear paradox the EU faces. Due to the interconnectedness of our ecosystems and livelihoods, a single climate-related disaster can trigger cascading effects, further undermining the security and competitiveness of the Union. As a result, failing to address climate change now will only make meeting other essential needs more challenging, if not impossible.
The EU’s climate equation
To overcome this challenge, the EU must adopt a strategy based on the systemic effects of environmental breakdown. This strategic vision is essentially a three-part equation. First, there is a need to lean into policy synergies to maximise budget and political resources. The second part involves complementing these synergies with a push for systemic change, moving beyond a business-as-usual approach. Third and finally, there is a need to acknowledge and address the unavoidable trade-offs that come with this deeper change. Taking stock of where the EU stands with this equation reveals a gap requiring attention.
Policy synergies
Von der Leyen's political guidelines read like an attempt to play into this first part of the equation, integrating the Green Deal into broader policy areas. Issues like water management and climate resilience are framed as security issues, while the Clean Industrial Deal (CID) is introduced as a pathway for both decarbonisation and industrialisation. The CID even aims for 90% emissions reduction by 2040 which, if successful, could help dispel the false dichotomy between competitiveness and climate action. However, its simultaneous focus on cutting red tape and boosting industry when the EU isn’t even on track to meet 55% reduction by 2030 is concerning. Specifically, discussing the Green Deal through economic and security lenses may signal watered-down ambitions, aimed at making these initiatives more palatable to certain audiences rather than reflecting genuine synergies. The European People’s Party’s reluctance towards a green agenda only bolsters this concern given their weight in European Parliament. This brings us to the second part of the equation: a need for deeper reform.
Deeper reform
Climate change requires deeper systemic change, but the EU has yet to adopt it. For instance, while efforts towards renewables have increased, they haven't been matched by a complete phase-out of fossil fuels. In 2022, all member states continued fossil fuel subsidies, totaling EUR 123 billion. There has also been an inability to connect policy goals with necessary behavioral shifts. For example, while adoption of EVs is positive, it must be paired with a broader shift towards reducing overall reliance on cars and ensuring access to affordable and clean public transportation. Likewise the Critical Raw Materials Act, EU Ecodesign standards and proposed Circular Economy Act must be paired with a broader shift from an over-consumption society to a well-being economy, particularly as the EU works to home-shore strategic supply chains as much as possible.
Addressing trade-offs
Though the green transition is necessary, trade-offs are inevitable. These include job shifts, business transformations, legislative burdens, and rising household costs. While transitional costs are lower than inaction, the Green Deal's success hinges on mitigating and compensating costs where possible, while fostering an open and honest dialogue, ensuring stakeholders are part of Europe’s collective future, not just recipients of top-down decisions that seem to be made at their expense. Given the EU’s green backlash, this area requires focused attention.
Closing the gap
The gap between the EU’s policy agenda and the systemic changes needed results from a complex mix of challenges. For example, ambitious legislation like those for circular economy are novel with impacts yet to fully realise. Other challenges include proper and timely policy implementation, the European Commission’s monitoring capacity, as well as the persistence of business-as-usual practices and the related difficulty of securing and maintaining public buy-in and political will.
Steps should be taken to address these challenges. To begin with, the EU must better utilise windows of opportunity, like the energy crisis, replacing short-term responses with long-term reforms. For this, better coordination is needed between Directorates-Generals to maximise policy overlap and impact. Long-term reform also cannot be achieved without accurate mapping against specific milestones and indicators. EU institutions must collect comprehensive data to underpin these policy moves. Lastly, there needs to be a priority of helping member states and stakeholders implement the policies in place, while also putting greater emphasis on transparency. This will aid officials and civil society to ensure standards and accountability.
Another key focus must be on securing public buy-in. For this, communication is paramount. The Green Deal and green transition must be made less abstract by clearly framing policy targets, highlighting the varied benefits across policy areas, outlining the costs of not meeting these targets, and providing an honest assessment of current progress. Additionally, it requires transparency with the public on hard decisions and expected costs, with citizens engaged in decision-making. Though just one part of the puzzle, exercises like strategic dialogues can foster better policy solutions and trust, helping address trade-offs and green discontent. Von der Leyen lauded citizen involvement in her political guidelines, but these exercises must be seen at the EU and member state levels.
For transitional costs, responses must also work towards long-term solutions. Initiatives like the Social Climate Fund and those targeting energy poverty are primarily short-term relief that, though important, fail to address the deeper structural issues exacerbated by this transition. Moving beyond temporary alleviations must be a priority for the incoming Commission. This requires focused social policies and greater funds. While the political guidelines indicate a desire to increase funding for a just transition, specifics on how much and through what mechanisms are needed. The newly introduced EU Anti-Poverty Strategy is a step towards deeper reform, but more clarity is needed on what initiatives will follow, and on what timeline and budget.
Lastly, ambition and political will are critical. The EU is behind schedule , and failure to reach these goals will result in costly and deadly harm. There is a moral imperative to reflect this urgency within policies and communication more generally. Simultaneously, the EU must not waver or pander to business-as-usual interests, seen with the labelling of natural gas as a green energy source under the EU Green Taxonomy.
Towards a strategic vision
Climate change is not a future issue; it is a present-day crisis that will only escalate across all sectors of society. As the IPCC states, the decisions made this decade will have an impact on the earth's trajectory for the coming centuries. While the EU is facing several pressing issues, deprioritising the Green Deal is not an option.
Achieving these goals is not about passing more legislation for its own sake. It is about ensuring legislation is ambitious enough while also being purposefully aligned with other policy areas, like security and competitiveness. It is about robust and transparent implementation of the policies in place. Success across the EU's policy domains hinges on its ability to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Without the successful implementation of the Green Deal, this will be impossible. Now is not the time to stall; efforts must be ramped up and a strategic vision applied that leverages synergies and addresses the trade-offs while ensuring policies are geared towards long-term reform.
Brooke Moore is a Policy Analyst in the Sustainable Prosperity for Europe Programme at the European Policy Centre.
Johanna Härtner, Intern for the Sustainable Prosperity for Europe Programme
The support the European Policy Centre receives for its ongoing operations, or specifically for its publications, does not constitute an endorsement of their contents, which reflect the views of the authors only. Supporters and partners cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
