It has revolutionised the way we communicate, access information, conduct business and interact with the world, offering enormous opportunities for progress and transformation in virtually all areas of our lives. In order to strengthen cooperation in the region, Dr Emilija Stojmenova Duh, minister of digital transformation, will host a meeting of ministers in charge of digitalisation from Croatia and the Western Balkan countries in the framework of the Bled Strategic Forum 2023 international conference. The aim of the meeting is to present the role of the state in shaping the environment for an effective digital transformation of society, to showcase the benefits of digitisation as a development paradigm and to gain insights into opportunities for strengthening cooperation in the region. The meeting will focus on the role of the state in promoting digital progress and implementing the “Digital First” concept as well as on the digital performance in the Western Balkan region in the areas of connectivity, human resources, digital inclusion and digital public services.

These challenges permeate every single aspect of our societies and cut against the grain of institutional and organised life in the twenty-first century. Every new crisis in the last decade, and in particular the COVID-19 pandemic, brought new strain to the existing, rules-based international system. Populism, nationalism, and autocratic regimes continue to gain strength – and they will continue to do so unless new and fresh ideas for the future are brought forward.

Indeed, our sense of security was crucially diminished with the Russian aggression on Ukraine, which challenges the geopolitical reality of Europe. In parallel, our basic security has been compromised and many of our needs have been hijacked and weaponised; climate, food, water, energy and human security are under threat.

How do we ensure security in these times? How do we ensure safe access to food and energy, not just in Europe but in the entire world, especially in the developing and least developed regions? How do we address factors that present themselves as obstacles to food and energy, in particular climate change and conflicts with climate-induced economic motivations? How do we ensure that these factors are addressed in a way that does not put into question values that we take for granted: human rights and fundamental freedoms?

The contemporary international community affords itself too many fragmentations, too much protectionism, and too little will to cooperate and realign. Much has changed since the end of the Cold War. However, we must adjust the current multipolar geostrategic environment in order to support and not hinder effective global governance. In this respect, it is essential that Europe accept its own share of responsibility. If it wants to be a beacon of change and burden carrier, that is.

The establishment of international institutions aimed at ensuring global peace, security and prosperity. At the time of fall of the Berlin Wall, the Westphalian world was still in full swing. Decades later a rapid transformation in the distribution of power and global goods around the world has occured. Power politics is on the rise. Trust in multilateral institutions is on the decline. The international rules-based system is regarded as à la carte. The world is becoming essentially more multipolar and less multilateral. Global power is shifting – from West to East, from North to South. In the formation of the new world order, one country stands out. Trans-border threats and challenges – weapons of mass destruction, pandemics, climate change, digital transformation, future technologies, cybersecurity – profoundly adding to the complexity of this equation. The relevance of non-state actors is increasing dramatically. Private businesses such as the Big Five tech companies are shaping our future. Influencers are in free fall. Unjust distribution of the world’s wealth is bringing citizens around the world to rebel. To keep the balance, critical thinking, sensible leaders and an informed society will be needed. Agreed global principles and strong institutions will be crucial. If the UN fails to evolve, humanity will lose and some other form will seize the potential to rise. A new era will begin. AI will rule. Welcome to the Matrix prequel!

Why does the current multilateral system seem to be losing out? Will the decline continue? How much is due to the growing multipolarity and individual interests of global super powers? How can we re-establish global trust and goal alignment? Are the states undermining the influence of emerging new types of non-state actors? Who will be the true players to reckon with in the new world order? What could the globally agreed key principles and institutions be? Is AI a viable alternative or a future risk? What should Multilateralism 2.0 fit for the new era look like? Is the UN up to the job? Are the P5 states even interested in the UN reforms?  What can we expect from the UN Secretary-General’s vision ‘Our Common Agenda’ and the approaching Summit of the Future? Are we heading towards collective salvation or a breakdown? Is there still a place for the universal values and the will to invest in peace?

As the world faces pressing climate and environmental challenges, Europe is taking proactive measures to foster a greener, more resilient, and economically prosperous future in line with achieving climate neutrality by 2050.

The overall objective of EU policy must be to secure European leadership in clean energy technologies and improving Europe’s existing industrial base while assisting in its transformation to produce high quality jobs and economic growth. To achieve this, the EU must take measures to accelerate production capacities for affordable, secure, and clean energy intended for use by industry and to increase energy savings and energy efficiency measures.

Strong partnerships are necessary to achieve these common objectives. However, climate change is usually seen as an area of international cooperation, but it is also becoming a source of international competition, while countries are offering incentives to promote domestic clean energy industries. Moreover, technological leadership has become a central dimension of geopolitical power. The emergence of new global economic powers has posed challenges to the EU’s industrial competitiveness. Given the intense competition from other global players, particularly in emerging markets, will Europe remain a leader in sustainability, innovation, and industry? Will EU succeed to attract the investment in clean technologies and prevent industrial production moving overseas, instead of decarbonising? How can we better stimulate the adoption of already scalable technologies to support breakthrough innovation?

These impacts need to be analysed from a global perspective, merging considerations on open strategic autonomy, critical technologies, critical raw materials, sustainability and economic efficiency.

That is why to better understand the role of politics in today’s economy we must debunk public vs. private sector myths and better appreciate how the public and private sectors work hand in hand in delivering economic development and transformational changes.

Investment in research, development and innovation is today more needed than ever if we want to achieve a just and sustainable green and digital transformation of our economy and society. In this process, an industrial transformation is essential to address the challenges of climate change, pollution and limited resources. By embracing innovation, collaboration and a holistic approach, industries can become more resilient, competitive and aligned with the needs of a sustainable future.

In what ways can we leverage transformation as an opportunity to create a better future? How can we encourage a culture of innovation to enable a climate-neutral, circular and competitive economy? How can we steer public finances that will assure long-term structural changes for a successful, just economy for the public good?

What is and is not sustainable? Is the term itself being exploited? The issue will be addressed both from the perspective of  chefs and gastronomy leaders as well as producers and farmers, and will encompass everything from sourcing local and organic, accessibility of produce, green stars and other awards for sustainability, as well as plant-based menus and longevity of fine dining.

For example, young people have been vocal about climate change and the need to address it for decades. However, while their voices and protests have been recognised by world leaders, they have not yet played a decisive role in global policy-making. Climate change and its consequences are only one of the issues that can be used to highlight the problems and dilemmas that young people face and are concerned about today. As they are at the beginning of their independent adult lives and professional careers, they are particularly exposed to socio-economic issues, even in the local context.

The questions addressed during the session,focusing on the youth brain drain, are: How do young people think about the future (their own, their country’s, the region’s and Europe’s) and how is the future connected or not with their country of birth? Are EU-funded policies and reform programmes appropriate and sufficient to effectively address problems  that may affect the youth, such as corruption, poverty and inequality of opportunity, and the importance of political affiliation rather than meritocracy for access to jobs for young people? What would need to change and how, so that in 2040, today’s youth, who will be at the top of their careers and have children of their own, will be willing to return to their countries of origin?

From the methodological point of view, the session will address the situation through a case study of the youth brain drain. As already indicated, various factors contribute to it, and they may not be connected solely to poor economic performance of their countries of origin. For example, young people may receive and are susceptible to a systematic and systemic nationalist education that promotes a mono-dimensional view of the past and a nation-centred view of the present. Their concerns seem yet another example of the failure of captive states to deliver the public good. The reflections and conclusions from the panel may well be relevant both for regions in Europe and worldwide.

This trend continued in 2022. This exponential growth in the number of cyber incidents led many to argue that cyberspace is the Wild West of the 21st century. Europe has seen how far ill-intentioned actors will go in the aftermath of the Ukraine invasion in February 2022, as well as with the attack on Albania in early autumn 2022. In both instances Europe and NATO allies acted rapidly, efficiently, and displayed solidarity. Yet more remains to be done. Cyberattacks continue to rise in their numbers, sophistication and targets. With greater integration of the EU countries in their critical infrastructure, such as energy, the threat of cross-national spillover is also heightened. Malicious actors seek out the weakest links, which they may also find in countries that are aspiring to become members of NATO and the EU. How should the West prepare, respond and act in an environment of persistent and ubiquitous threat? How can we engage with adversaries in cyberspace? And how should the West aid Ukraine and the Western Balkans in their respective cybersecurity endeavours?

Its complex decision-making process has been under scrutiny for a long time and subject to several adjustments in the past. The last decade of crises has proven yet again that the EU is much more resilient than expected, but also too slow and cumbersome in tackling strategic challenges. The debate on the need to reform its decision-making process has been going on for a while, showing that, while there is agreement on the need for the EU to become more flexible, quicker, resilient and transparent, there is no agreement on how to arrive there.

Some of the current ideas and suggestions, such as extending the qualified majority voting within the existing legal framework, have been met with scepticism and reservation, especially in smaller Member States, which have always been strong proponents of unanimity and consensus. The call to change the Treaties has also been met with different reactions from various institutions and Member States. What is actually the most realistic scenario when it comes to reform of the EU decision-making process? Standing still, while everything else is shifting and changing, is probably the least desirable option. On the other hand, is now really the right time to have a lengthy and demanding discussion on changing the Treaties? Is reaching a consensus of Member States on changing the Treaties a realistic option at all? Another very important question is whether any future enlargement of the EU is possible without internal reform first? Drawing on the experience of the Conference on the Future of Europe, what form of citizens participation would be appropriate for deliberating these fundamental institutional questions?

With ongoing wars, the climate crisis spiralling out of control and historic inflation and price explosions, the world is set to continue this catastrophic trajectory of food insecurity in 2023. While fragile and conflict-affected countries continue to be hit unabated, entire countries such as Haiti and Sudan are tipping, while instability spills over as we have seen from the Sahelian into the coastal countries of West Africa. Even the most advanced economies are not spared, with prices rising dramatically and increasing the pressure on the most vulnerable people across Europe and North America. In the polycrisis, only one thing is certain: that the impacts of climate change will worsen. Arable land is lost, and farmers are pushed out of production. To address the interconnected food, climate and poverty crises, local food systems must be profoundly adapted and transformed to ensure that food is available, affordable and sustainable. At the same time, those producing the food we consume must be able to earn a dignified income.

But what would such a transformation and adaptation mean for food and development policy? What are the geopolitical implications? And what new leadership would it call from the world´s largest food producers?

Through the power of law and repression, they impose censorship and limit freedom of expression. However, the (in)dependence of the media and journalism is also influenced by other factors, apart from the state: interests of private media owners and market pressures, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), and coordinated social media campaigns, which often specifically target women journalists and minority members. Some new trends have emerged alongside the direct attacks on the work of journalists. Big social platforms have become the key “information gatekeeper” that, based on internal regulations and computer algorithms, decides which posts will be deleted and which will reach a great number of users. While respecting freedom of speech, we must also take into account freedom of reach, which enables the media to inform the public.

It is not only big digital platforms that limit access to the public. More and more journalism organisations report that their journalistic work and the investigative stories reach only small audiences despite the apparent freedom, as they cannot really compete with the much stronger public or commercial media. In addition to attacks on the media and on journalists, attacks on the concept of journalism have been on the rise as well. This concept is based on the existence of credible and verified information, which is obtained and made meaningful through journalistic work. Instead, journalists have to work in environments where everyone is entitled to their own facts, which encourages more and more politicians and public figures to take pre-emptive measures to protect themselves from unpleasant media attention.

This may start to change. The gap between water availability and water demand is increasing; by 2030, it may reach 40 per cent if we do not change our current water use patterns. Two thirds of the global population live in areas where water resources cross boundaries. Many transboundary basins do not have cooperative agreements in place, especially on transboundary aquifers. Consequently, the competition for this limited and non-replaceable source will continue to grow, triggering tensions between different users and countries. Several early warning tools for water conflicts have been developed, facilitating their prediction. Preventing conflicts is, however, a much bigger challenge. Water diplomacy has its work cut out.

How can we develop contextualised interventions that comprehensively address all the underlying causes and triggers, including water scarcity, of potential conflicts? How do we establish the right entry points for water diplomacy to help establish trust and cooperation, thus preventing conflicts? How do we influence entrenched narratives that hinder trust and cooperation?

Indeed, it is a combined impact of new technologies, digitisation and automation of business, the transition to a low-carbon economy, globalisation, changing society and the ageing of the population. The effects of many changes have posed the greatest challenge to us, the whole world and Europe; namely, how to effectively adapt the labour market and meet the needs for new workforce skills and competences for future green and digital jobs.

Tourism is also facing a shortage of skilled workforce. The tourism sector is an important creator of jobs and prioritises the traditional value, hospitality. Will we be able to use the potential of technology and digitisation in education and work (while maintaining this unique value/skill)?

Companies in the industry are looking for employees with quality knowledge and a high level of soft skills. Working conditions in tourism may not always seem attractive; therefore, young people often choose another career path. How to attract new, young talent to work in tourism by taking a proactive approach.

Predictability is diminishing, trust is vanishing, dialogue is silencing. Divisions are growing, multipolarity is picking up speed, threats increasing. Globalisation is adapting. Are we?

The contemporary challenges have shaken the existing security architecture: its foundations, laid decades ago, have been losing their reliability and inbuilt trust. The Bretton Woods, Washington and Helsinki frameworks have been (intentionally and) seriously threatened and undermined. The conventional war in Ukraine – with many UN Charter rules broken by a P5 member – is a disgrace of the 21st century; but it is also a stress test of our preparedness and resilience: while a sobering reminder of an unfit multilateral security system, it is forcing us to re-evaluate our priorities, our values and what really matters in our lives. Insecurity, caused by fear, leads to different – less rational – decision-making and behaviour.

What makes us feel secure? Is investing in deterrence enough in the contemporary world? Are we more secure as members of the organisations or alliances even if they do not function efficiently? Does security exist without allies or partners? Can we rebuild or renovate the existing security architecture or does it need to be undertaken from scratch? Can the liberal-democratic model duly compete? Should we build security with or against Russia and China?

lifting approximately 1.5 billion people out of extreme poverty, and sustaining peace and prosperity around the world. Today, as the world becomes increasingly fragmented due to a confluence of geopolitical and sociopolitical forces, the concept of globalisation has come under strain. For many, globalisation is in retreat or even dead given the growing emphasis governments and companies are placing on national security concerns, supply chain risks, and trade restrictions. However, with global crises ranging from inflation and sovereign debt to climate change and food security continuing apace, now more than ever, shared commitment on the part of the international community and multilateral action are needed, whereas a widespread backlash against globalisation is militating against economic integration and international cooperation.

Looking forward, will globalisation be able to reconcile the seemingly irreconcilable forces manifested by what is widely referred to as “politics is local” and “economics is global” and how? What exactly will deglobalisation entail, and what will its consequences be? How will world powers including China, the United States, and the European Union balance competition and engagement, and how will governments across the world find ways to adapt to the new geopolitical reality?

Such capabilities already pose a range of risks to critical infrastructure, communications networks, human security, and political stability – in peacetime, as well as wartime. We can expect advanced artificial intelligence to enter the fray before too long and change the calculus once again. As our economies become increasingly digital, the tech sector has a critical role to play, which includes the responsibility to detect and defend against a range of cyber threats around the world.

What are the latest developments from the digital frontlines? What can Europe learn from the experience in Ukraine? How can we strengthen our societies against cyberwarfare and foreign influence operations? How can leaders from the private sector, governments and civil society proactively collaborate to prevent future hybrid conflicts?

Yet almost 80 years after the Nuremberg Trials, such despicable acts, including crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide, are repeated in different parts of the world. States, as holders of sovereign rights and obligations, should ensure that perpetrators are punished, victims protected and a just world of coexistence of all established. Condemnation of atrocities and support for the fight against impunity are notions often used in political statements. However, they are only credible when backed up by functioning instruments and empowered state bodies that are carrying out investigations and establishing criminal responsibility. The MLA Convention provides a legal framework for genuine international judicial cooperation, as atrocities invariably have international elements and their prosecution requires the cooperation of several states. It allows for the effective exercise of states’ national competences and actual delivery in the fight against impunity.

How do States implement their claimed willingness to fight impunity? What do the authorities directly involved in the process of establishing criminal responsibility need to carry out their tasks effectively? Which milestone will end the tolerance of impunity and violations of law and human rights?

including climate change, conflicts and socio-economic inequalities. Anchored in human dignity, the session emphasises the significance of trust, inclusion and aligning priorities with what matters to people and the planet. This collaborative and interactive dialogue will bring together global governance institutions, civil society organisations and thought leaders to explore the integration of human dignity and social accountability into global governance frameworks. Participants will engage in in-depth discussions and develop actionable plans. The outcome will include the publication of an op-ed and a comprehensive article in reputable journals, articulating the insights, recommendations and strategies garnered through this engaging dialogue. Through this session, the aspiration is to cultivate an adaptable, resilient and effective global governance structure that is firmly anchored in principles fostering equitable, sustainable and just outcomes for all.

In those 20 years we have seen fundamental changes in geostrategic reality in Europe and elsewhere, we have witnessed military aggression on European soil and yet it feels that relations between the region and the EU are standing still in a stalemate, oblivious to the outside world. Sometimes there is a spark of hope that things could be different, that the geopolitical moment could be captured and understood, but it disappears in the complicated corridors of the enlargement process or in the corridors of the WB government buildings just as quickly as it appeared. That’s a pessimist talking.

An optimist would say that things are moving forward – BiH has been granted candidate status, Albania and North Macedonia have started negotiations (almost), and Kosovo and Serbia have reached an agreement, waiting for its full implementation. The people of the Western Balkans want a change for better. So, what can a realist say? Can this “progress” be viewed as a success? Have we come any closer to irreversibly bringing the region under the strategic influence of the EU? Where are we after 20 years of auto-pilot enlargement? Is there a possibility to do something differently?  Is there a chance to leverage this European and global (re)adjustment in order to adapt enlargement policy to the geostrategic reality? We simply don’t have another 20 years to make this right…

Eighty per cent of the world’s worst food crises are driven by war, persecution and conflict, and nearly 60% of the world’s hungriest live in conflict-affected areas. Food insecurity results from, as well as contributing to, recurring conflict in many places, which can reduce the amount of food available, limit peoples’ access to food preparation facilities and disrupt access to nutrition. Simultaneously, food insecurity may contribute to sustaining conflict or hinder post-conflict recovery efforts.

For instance, in the Karamoja Cluster – a cross-border area spanning Kenya, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Uganda – the impacts of conflict undermine livelihood security, drive food insecurity and environmental degradation, and hinder the communities’ adaptation to climate change. Such intertwined challenges also occur in other locations such as the Sahel and the MENA regions and require comprehensive solutions.

This session explores practical and holistic solutions to these challenges by identifying ways to enhance resilience against climate change, hunger and conflict. The focus will be placed on identifying and developing policy options and recommendations to promote climate-resilient and conflict-sensitive food systems and raise global awareness on the links between climate, food security and peace.

How do communities cope with food insecurity, adverse impacts of climate change and conflict? What role can peacebuilding approaches play in re-shaping food security and climate adaptation efforts? How can governments and regional organisations be supported to define strategies that recognise and address the relationship between climate change, food insecurity and conflict? How can the Slovenian government be a champion for innovative approaches to food security, climate change and conflict prevention, including at the UN Security Council?

Culture is the backbone of any society, with art, music, and literature as the soul breathing life and well-being into our everyday lives. It is the source of creativity, innovation, inspiration, social comment and criticism that a democracy needs to thrive. The right to freely express oneself is immanent in maintaining a democracy. However, when cultural expression is stifled by government interference, economic pressures, polarisation or challenges related to the digital age, can we truly say that we are living in a free and democratic society? How do we respond when the notions of culture and art are hijacked, reframed and weaponised by populists with authoritarian ambitions? To ensure that artistic freedom is protected, we must ask ourselves some tough questions. Is it enough to simply defend the right to self-expression, or must we actively promote cultural diversity as an essential component of a healthy democracy? What about the power structures that often dominate our cultural landscape – do they reflect the full spectrum of society, or do they perpetuate exclusion and repression? These are challenging questions, but they are crucial to the ongoing struggle for cultural and political freedom in our societies. Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach involving collaboration between artists, policymakers, civil society and the public. This roundtable is aimed at identifying new ways to increase solidarity and to protect and promote freedom of artistic expression as one of the indicators – and the driving forces – of democracy. We must act boldly, embrace diversity, celebrate creativity and foster meaningful engagement to ensure that democracy survives and flourishes.

While strengthening the transatlantic alliance, it has also exacerbated the divide between the big powers and the alliances forming around them. Beyond severe implications for regional security, the aggression has impacted on food security, energy security, cybersecurity, and the information environment. The obvious lesson learned from the war is the presence of multiple simultaneous threats, not just in traditional military domains, but across all domains. We are witnessing the application of all instruments of hard and soft power. Recent activities from the battlefield in Ukraine show that future wars will be a combination of traditional and modern weapons.

NATO and the EU have supported Ukraine from the beginning of Russia´s premeditated aggression, unequivocally condemning this act of unjust violence. Both have been staunch supporters of the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and its right to self-defence. The aggression instigated by President Putin, partially based on the narrative of a NATO threat, led to a historic NATO enlargement and has irreversibly brought the EU and NATO closer together.

A new security architecture is emerging from this crisis, but what place will Ukraine have in it? Is there a possibility for NATO membership for Ukraine? What alternative peace deal is possible? How is the war changing the arms race? How it is changing warfare as such?

What are the implications for regional security in the Baltics, Black Sea, Mediterranean, and Western Balkans, and will EU and NATO’s unprecedented unity withstand external pressures and internal disagreements?

We could argue that the EU has been lucky in the past, since crises came in a sequence and allowed a more or less coherent response from the Union. Today we live in a world of polycrises, where we need simultaneously to deal with security, food, water, climate, energy, migration and ultimately economic crises (on the horizon). Since the Russian aggression on Ukraine, the attention (and the resources) of the EU are understandably focused towards the East.

In consequence we are witnessing a diminishing EU influence in the Southern Mediterranean. The structured approach towards the Southern partners, inspired by the Arab Spring, has in the past few years been challenged by instability in the region.  The Arab Autumn caught the EU unprepared, with tools and instruments which are outdated, unused or simply are not working – in parallel with a lack of vision. There is a profound need to discuss the future of relations between the EU and its Southern Neighbourhood and above all to find a way to to embark on the efficient implementation of the existing policies embodied in the New Agenda for the Mediterranean by promoting a partnership-based positive approach. In the global geostrategic reshuffling the EU cannot afford to further alienate the neighbours of the Southern Mediterranean, which because of migrations, energy and security are fundamentally important for the stability and prosperity of the European continent. Is there a need for a more inventive EU policy towards the South? What would that entail? Is there a dissonance between the Member States on how to take these relations further?

However, geopolitical trends and global events, from aggression in Ukraine to Covid-19, demonstrated that the EU needs like-minded and strategic partners. Thus, the EU stands to benefit from the transatlantic partnership, in particular committing to digital openness, raising competitiveness and enhancing productivity and prosperity.

Evidence shows that certain EU countries are already ahead of the curve – higher growth rates for capital invested in startups in northern Baltic countries are observed, while the highest valuation-to-investment ratio for unicorns lies in Central and Eastern Europe. These countries, poised to make the most of the emerging technologies, are often overheard in the EU and are the ones most afraid of the regulations that could stifle innovation and depress economic activity.

The panel will address how smaller EU countries can have a bigger say in shaping future EU regulations. How are the emerging technologies going to shape our future and impact our economy? How can we avoid overregulation? How can transatlantic cooperation help the EU achieve its goals? How will an economically successful digital EU also be a resilient Europe?

In Slovenia, transport emissions accounted for 42.7% of total CO2 emissions in 2018, surpassing the EU average. To achieve a sustainable future, the European Green Deal aims to reduce transport emissions by 90% by 2050. This requires a shift towards affordable, accessible and eco-friendly alternatives.

Promoting clean vehicles and alternative fuels is a crucial objective. By 2025, the EU will need around 1 million public charging and refuelling stations to support the anticipated 13 million zero- and low-emission vehicles on the roads.

Europe has made progress in sustainable mobility. In Slovenia, the Recovery and Resilience Plan focuses on reforms and investments in sustainable transportation and alternative fuel infrastructure. This includes co-financing 482 publicly accessible charging points for zero- or low-emission vehicles. Rail transportation has also seen an increase, with one-third of inland freight now being transported by rail.

However, there is still room for improvement. What further steps are needed to improve the transition to sustainable and smart mobility? How can we enhance multimodal transport, connected and automated mobility and urban aviation space to maximise the utilisation of sustainable transport options?

It can be a result of either extreme weather events or slow onset events, such as sea level rise. On the one hand, loss and damage could be economic, meaning, for example, the costs of rebuilding infrastructure damaged due to flooding. On the other hand, non-economic loss and damage are negative impacts to which we cannot assign an exact monetary value, such as a loss of community due to displacement of people resulting from the impact of climate change.

At COP27 in Sharm El Sheikh, the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) determined a way forward on the decades-long conversation on funding for loss and damage. This is a starting point for addressing the consequences for communities whose lives and livelihoods have been ruined by the very worst impacts of climate change.

The COP27 decision establishes new funding arrangements and a fund for assisting developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change to address loss and damage. To this end, new and additional resources will be mobilised that will complement and include sources, funds, processes and initiatives under and outside the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. For suggesting the modalities of the operationalisation of the new funding arrangements and the fund, the Parties decided to establish a transitional committee.

How can effectively addressing loss and damage ensure security in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change? What are some of the possible new, additional, predictable and adequate financial resources that could generate additional funding for loss and damage? How can we assure their mobilisation? How can we appropriately address and evaluate non-economic loss and damage?

Facing full-scale war at its borders, the EU had to fundamentally adjust its security policy and take strategic decisions related to its Eastern Neighbourhood. The most important one was granting candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova, and potential candidate status to Georgia. After decades of trying not to upset the big neighbour in the East, EU leaders found the strength to invite the trio to become future members and to upgrade bilateral relations with all countries of the Eastern Partnership (except Belarus).

Although the geostrategic circumstances have changed, the big question still remains: Where does the EU go from here? Granting candidate status is an important step, but, as enlargement with the Western Balkans countries shows, it does not guarantee a smooth and transparent process towards EU membership. As Ukraine pushes for the opening of accession talks by the end of this year, is it ready for an incremental, gradual integration while fighting a war? Will Moldova sustain its political stability and resilience amidst increasing hybrid threats from Russia and a protracted conflict with Transnistria? How will the Eastern Partnership adjust to such differentiation among its participants, and to persistent tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan? How can the EU expand its engagement as a geopolitical actor in this region, providing more security and incentives for expanding trade, connectivity, and regional cooperation? What is the role of the United States and China, and of rising regional powers such as Turkey?

technological advancements and ethics, new diseases and pandemics. Digital technologies offer significant potential to overcome global challenges. However, their accessibility and equitable distribution are crucial. Moreover, due to a lack of digital skills and knowledge, the benefits of digital transformation do not reach all communities, particularly those that are marginalised or have limited access to technology. Poor digital literacy also exposes people to risks related to the ‘dark side’ of connectivity – cyberattacks, disinformation or harmful content. Therefore, it is essential to provide individuals with the necessary digital skills and competences. Skilled citizens enjoy not only better job opportunities but also broader possibilities to engage fully in society, thus improving the quality of life for all.

How can we bridge the skills gap and foster digital inclusion? What strategies should be adopted to upskill and reskill staff and what skills are relevant for the needs of the labour market? How can we attract, recruit and retain IT experts in public administration? What steps do leaders need to take to equip their teams with skills that can drive a sustainable business? How do different initiatives, such as the European Year of Skills, empower citizens to develop digital skills for life?

And by all appearances, the European Union has never been so unsure about its place in the world as it is today.

The all too commented on trip to China of France’s President Macron in April 2023, on the return journey of which he stated that Europe should not become “America’s followers” and strive to become a “third superpower”, left many leaders across the bloc bewildered, if not dismayed altogether. Meanwhile, the uncertain outcome of the next US presidential election casts further doubts on the future of US-EU relations.

But whether the EU decides to uphold the transatlantic community in spite of future political odds in Washington, or opt for a more independent course, can it really afford the luxury of “picking up its crises”? The Russian war on Ukraine has but further highlighted the EU’s inability to play any transformative role in the defence of its very neighbourhood; meanwhile, the exceptional speed at which AI is developing (e.g. ChatGPT, etc.) has highlighted how advanced the US and China were in the development of a technology that will determine the balance of global power for the next century, and the passing of the Inflation Reduction Act in the US has taken the EU aback in the face of a new US protectionist Green Deal.

Can the EU carve out its own model of power in a time of increased geopolitical competition? Can the bloc become a “third global power” while remaining committed to the transatlantic relationship as we currently know it? And does it have the right policy frameworks in place to lead in innovation and not just in regulation?

Energy prices have fallen significantly (although they remain above the long-term averages), gas stores are at record levels and imports of energy from Russia are at historic lows. The outlook for the coming winter looks less grim. However, experts warn there are many unknowns that can tip a fragile balance in any direction. The rebound of the Chinese economy could again result in soaring prices. The continuation of the war in Ukraine could trigger new, asymmetric global economic shocks. Negative weather patterns could hamper the production of the European electricity system. It is crucial that Europe (re)define its short- and long-term energy security approach. This goes both for affordability and availability of energy sources. Europe is already strong in its regulatory response, but is lagging in some areas such as finance and innovation. Future efforts will need to couple the energy security issue with the green transition, and forge new global, regional and local (!) partnerships. It will need to make some irreversible decisions and trade-offs, without jeopardising its founding principles.

What are the main energy security topics the EU should address? How should it position itself in the international environment? How should the EU balance its environmental and energy objectives? Which are the main elements of physical security?

Climate impacts on human security are already visible today. They threaten food and water resources, and the lives of people not only in the Global South but also in EU Member States and the SEE region. These effects additionally fuel and exacerbate conflicts within and between states. The climate crisis must also be seen as a social crisis. Deprived groups are more at risk of suffering from its impacts and are less resilient. The social cohesion in our societies, and ultimately the credibility of our democratic systems, is threatened if we fail to develop policies to limit the climate crisis and its impacts, which ensure that vulnerable groups are not “left behind”.

But there is still room for optimism: Numerous best practice projects from around the globe show that environmental and social transformation can go hand in hand, because oftentimes the best solution from an environmental point of view is also the best solution from a social point of view. In our interactive panel, we will discuss such solutions with a special focus on international cooperation and foreign policy with distinguished guests – and with you!

While the main rationale of economic activity amongst the actors of the Industrial Revolution was mostly about unleashing the power of capital to increase productivity and global output, the climate and biodiversity crises have come out as brutal reminders that there is no such thing as limitless growth.

Since 1971, the annual resource consumption of humanity has not only been chronically exceeding the Earth’s capacity to regenerate those consumed resources, but has dramatically accelerated. Indeed, while researchers estimate that this “overshoot day” was reached shortly before the end of December 1971, it is now forecasted to be reached globally in July. In other words, we will live under a regime of resource depletion for the remaining five months.

Against this backdrop, a new generation of activists have been taking to the streets across the Global North and South to demand a radical shift in political economy, one that would update the very raison d´être of socio-economic activity: a change in the way we produce, we consume, and we measure progress. Meanwhile, the irresistible rise of AI is casting a growing shadow on the future of work, and calls indeed for a radical rethinking of the very foundations of the market economy, one that would provide every human being with the opportunity to be fulfilled in a given occupational activity while ensuring the protection of nature and sustainability of biodiversity.

Are we seeing the end of the market economy as we know it? Can there be progress without growth? Can a new economic paradigm advance global peace and stability or could it rather pose a threat to peace? And what would a radical socio-economic transformation of our societies mean for global governance and partnerships?