EUR 390 billion comprises the budget for the EU’s Cohesion Policy for the years 2021 to 2027. For what? Exactly. Most people do not know what cohesion policy means. This should be changed by the European Regions’ Week 2021, but the event mainly highlighted the distance between the EU and its citizens despite the huge amount of money that goes into regional projects.
17,600 participants from all over Europe, 1261 speakers and moderators – these statistics concerning the 19th European Week of Regions and Cities, that took place as a foremost virtual event in Brussels from 11 to 14 October 2021, are supposed to tell a success story: A bigger audience than ever, lively debates and thus a bright spotlight on the important topic of how the EU is locally supporting cohesion, green and digital transition as well as citizens’ engagement.
As a participant of the Youth4Regions programme that is attached to the EU Regions’ Week and gives aspiring journalists from Europe and beyond the chance to connect with other journalists and learn about the EU’s cohesion policies, I cannot avoid questioning this positive conclusion, mainly for two reasons.
European Cohesion Policy remains invisible
Without doubt, the numerous events around projects that support environmental protection and regional progress, co-financed by the EU, provided interesting input and it is important to make them known to a wider public as was the purpose of the EU Regions’ Week. But this goal was not achieved. What are 17,600 participants (accumulated!) compared to more than 400 million people living in the EU? Especially considering that most of the viewers might have been journalists or people involved in the projects, so that it is unlikely that the event week substantially increased the awareness of the EU’s contribution to local development.
Staying in the Brussels’ bubble
Besides, the disparity between talk and action was very present during the week. How credible are European values of cohesion if this cost-intensive event week only reaches people within the Brussels bubble? How credible is the mantra of the Green Deal if the lunch boxes for the participants of the journalism programme contain plastic cutlery and food in separate plastic containers? If the boxes are finally collectively disposed of despite the existence of a waste sorting system in Belgium?
The world I discovered during the EU Regions’ Week was very far away from my own everyday life and the presumed normality of local project workers. Even the “citizens’ dialogue” with the European Commissioner for Cohesion and Reforms, Elisa Ferreira, was based on prepared questions and did not include ordinary citizens. Sitting in the studio audience of this event, a hygiene mask with the EU logo over mouth and nose, I could not help feeling like part of a great show: Beautiful script, great actors, but that’s it.
The marketing problem is real
Of course, publicity and representation always cost money, and with only 41% of Europeans knowing about any EU cohesion project in their surroundings[1], the EU’s regional engagement should become more present in the public awareness. Because if people do not know that they benefit from their EU membership in their everyday life, the UK may not be the last country to leave the Union. Unfortunately, the framework of the EU Regions’ Week preferred to tell a genuine success story instead of discussing that ordinary citizens apparently did not take note of the Regions’ Week at all. Thereby, cohesion might rather decline than grow.
How to become more credible for local citizens
As citizens of the regions were seemingly not involved in the events of the EU Regions’ Week, replacing the talks about local project initiatives with visits on-site is recommended, like the one project visit that was already included in the journalism programme schedule.
But even with more lively debates in person, talking is not enough. In my opinion, a European Week of the Regions and Cities requires “real” citizens as participants. Inviting 50 aspiring journalists to Brussels and streaming scripted talk shows is neither sufficient nor convincing without local newspapers reporting and without the target group, the average citizen, on-site. Instead, the robustness of the Brussel’s bubble became evident. This comfort zone must be abandoned, because credibility requires recognition by average citizens whose reality occurs outside Brussel’s congress centres.
