Author: George HACERIAN, Research Analyst, Green eDIH
In the past two decades, the European Union has become one of the most active promoters of the transition to a low-carbon economy. Strategies such as the European Green Deal and legislative packages including sustainability standards for companies, emissions taxation systems, and decarbonisation plans for key sectors have made environmental policy a central pillar of European development.
However, in 2025, a series of signals point to a slowing in the pace at which these policies are being formulated and adopted. One of the most visible examples is the delay in the proposal to set the Union’s climate target for the year 2040, which had been expected in the first quarter of the year. Although this delay does not mean a retreat from climate commitments, it reflects a shift in tone and increased attention to other emerging priorities.
This rebalancing does not reflect a change in paradigm but rather a natural reaction to external pressures such as geopolitical instability, rising spending on security and energy, or the need to maintain competitiveness in an unpredictable global context. In this landscape, the question is increasingly being asked whether the Union can continue the green transition without affecting other public policies or the economic and social balance. Although the answer is not simple, it is clear that a period of adjustment lies ahead—of both the timeline and the tools through which the goals will be achieved.
Security and Sustainability: a Balancing Act
In a context marked by geopolitical instability and multiple pressures on public budgets, spending on defence and security has increased significantly in many Member States. This shift in priorities influences the allocation of resources and draws attention to the need to protect critical infrastructure and strengthen response capacity. In this framework, climate policies are not being abandoned, but are increasingly integrated into a broader strategic approach that seeks to balance the green transition with short-term stability. The result is an adjustment in implementation stages and an adaptation of existing tools in order to maintain a sustainable direction in a dynamic and complex landscape.
As the political and economic context evolves, there are growing discussions about redefining sustainability to include dimensions related to security. The possibility that such spending could be included in sustainable investment strategies raises questions about the legitimacy of these approaches and the transparency of their reporting. Such an expansion of the Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) concept may be a necessary adaptation, but it involves risks regarding the coherence of standards and the emergence of disguised forms of greenwashing. To maintain public trust, climate policies must remain anchored in clear, verifiable objectives that are transparently assumed, even in a landscape with multiple priorities.
Also in this context, the European Commission has approved the launch of strategic mining projects in 13 Member States, including Romania, to ensure access to necessary raw materials. The initiative aims to reduce dependence on imports and support strategic industries, such as the automotive and energy sectors, as an important step in implementing the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA). Although supported for economic and security reasons, the opening of new mining operations raises questions about environmental impact and the balance between climate goals and industrial development.
More Streamlined or Simply More Limited Regulations?
Another sign of the slowing pace of climate policies is the recent effort to simplify the European legislative framework. In 2024, the European Commission proposed a package of measures aimed at reducing the administrative burden on companies, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises. Known as the “Omnibus” package, it includes, among other things, changes to sustainability reporting requirements and delays in compliance deadlines.
One of the most discussed components of this process is the revision of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). Adopted to increase transparency regarding the environmental, social, and governance impact of companies, the CSRD was considered an important step toward holding the business sector accountable. However, the complexity of the requirements and the lack of preparedness of many organisations have raised concerns about their actual capacity to implement them, especially in the current economic context.
The proposed adjustments may offer a useful reprieve for companies facing operational and financial challenges, given the complexity and costs associated with sustainability reporting. At the same time, there is a risk that this relaxation may affect the transparency and comparability of data, allowing selective disclosure of information or delays in compliance, which could deepen the gap between organisations actively engaged in the green transition and those less involved.
This raises the question of whether simplifying regulations is a step toward efficiency or a risk of weakening environmental commitments. It all depends on the balance between clarity and flexibility, without losing sight of the fact that administrative efficiency should not replace responsibility. In order to keep the transition on track, even in an adapted context, clear guidelines, good practices, and constant dialogue between institutions, the economic sector, and civil society are essential.
Can the Union Stay the Course?
European climate policies must take into account the delicate balance between environmental ambition and economic realities. In a global context where standards vary from one region to another, companies in the Union must comply with strict regulations while also maintaining competitiveness. For industries with energy or logistics intensive processes, the transition involves significant investments in technology, production upgrades, and the reorganisation of value chains, transformations that can be difficult to sustain without external support. In this context, there is a risk of economic polarisation, where large companies move forward more quickly thanks to financial resources and available expertise, while small enterprises or those in less developed regions fall behind, limited by lack of capital and administrative difficulties.
Although some legislative processes have slowed down or been adjusted, the overall direction of European climate policy remains oriented toward sustainability. The goals related to emissions reduction, energy transition, and the circular economy are still in place, but the pace of change is being adapted to economic and geopolitical realities. This adjustment does not mean abandonment, but reflects the need for environmental policies to be integrated into a broader framework of priorities, through calibrated measures that avoid social imbalances and implementation blockages.
The Union’s ability to stay the course depends largely on the trust it builds among citizens and the economic environment. If climate policies are perceived as realistic and fair, they can receive broad support; without this support, they risk being seen as mandates that create instability. Equally important is the institutional capacity to adapt policies in real time, through consultation mechanisms, involvement of local actors, and the use of reliable data, so that implementation remains relevant and flexible.
It is also important for long-term objectives to be supported by concrete initiatives at the local and regional level. Sustainable infrastructure projects, support schemes for a just transition in areas affected by industrial restructuring, or investments in research and innovation can have a major impact in maintaining the overall trajectory. In this shifting landscape, climate leadership is measured not only by the ambition of the targets, but also by the ability to adapt them to current realities without compromising their core. If the Union manages to maintain this balance, it can preserve its role as a promoter of the green transition, offering a model that combines sustainability with resilience.
Green eDIH in the Context of Supporting the Sustainable Transition
In a context where European climate policies are being adapted to new economic and geopolitical realities, initiatives that facilitate the adoption of green technologies become essential. Green eDIH is such a digital innovation ecosystem, supporting the transition to sustainability through tailored solutions, local expertise, and strategic partnerships.
In this regard, Green eDIH supports, for example, the implementation of the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) only in parallel with the application of Industry 4.0 principles—especially the digitalisation of value chains, traceability of critical raw materials, and resource optimisation through advanced technologies. Through its expertise, Green eDIH contributes to the development of resilient ecosystems, in which industrial competitiveness is strengthened through sustainability and digital innovation. This approach integrates technological efficiency with environmental responsibility, supporting the transition toward a more autonomous, greener, and safer European economy.
