In just a few years, economic security has become a central concept in European Union policymaking. Clearly, we are no longer living in the halcyon days of the 90s, when free trade was touted as an unconditional good and interdependence was something to invite, not fear.
Rather, a deep sense of insecurity has taken hold. External shocks and crises continually roil economies globally, illustrating their vulnerabilities. Value chains contract at the behest of governments, while our critical infrastructure is targeted in covert and overt attacks. Technologies once treated as commercial goods now sit at the centre of geopolitical competition. Economic security as a concept has become inescapable. Yet the appropriate policy responses are still up for debate. Something must be done, but exactly what is still far from clear.
Also in Brussels, not all European Union actors agree – even if they may recognise that collective EU policy delivers common benefits. Some member states will balk at dictates from Brussels in policy areas they see as encroaching on national security. Too much risk for one may be justifiable for another. Economic insecurity may be accepted to maintain access to cheap or cutting- edge technologies. Equally, the green transition may hinge on using tech from countries Europe otherwise distrusts.
Identifying risks is one challenge. Governing them is another. In the European Union, economic security requires coordination and unity across the Single Market. Economic security must also be baked into how Europe works with partners across the globe, many of whom share European concerns but not all European priorities.
Across the globe and beyond differing priorities policymakers, academics and other experts are trying to define economic security and how to achieve it. Yet something is missing, especially in Europe. We lack a longform, non-academic platform where experts and informed readers can explore these dilemmas in depth.
The Brussels Economic Secutity Review aims to fill this gap. It is a space for serious, accessible and policy-relevant debate on economic security and geoeconomics. It is not an academic journal, nor another outlet for short-term commentary. Its purpose is to provide room for argument and reflection, where established experts and emerging voices can test ideas and sharpen concepts.
This first issue asks a basic but difficult question: what is critical? It may look different from Brussels, Berlin or Tallinn – and different again from Singapore, Japan, India or China. We are opening a new window for exploration and expert insights to guide readers to better grasp and enable more – rather than less – economic security in our new insecure world.
Read the full first volume of the Brussels Economic Security Review here.
See also:
-
Fabian Zuleeg, Conditional openness, contingent security and wicked tradeoffs.
-
Bart Hogeveen, The critical in critical technologies.
-
Varg Folkman and Georg Riekeles, From openness to deterrence: Europe’s doctrine of reactive assertiveness.
-
Maria Demertzis, The EU’s financial security in a shifting transatlantic relationship.
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 author only. Supporters and partners cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.
