Council finally published its Conclusions on Global Gateway: a step forward, but not far enough
On Monday the Council has finally adopted its Conclusions on Global Gateway under the Cyprus Presidency. This represents the Council’s first formal collective position since the Global Gateway strategy’s launch in 2021, and comes at a crucial moment, following the European Parliament’s Report “Global Gateway – past impacts and future orientation” and amid ongoing negotiations for the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). SOLIDAR welcomes this timely intervention, particularly because Global Gateway is expected to play a central role in the proposed MFF – Global Europe Instrument, which will shape the EU’s external spending for years to come.
What do we like
At first reading, the Conclusions contain several positive elements that signal the willing of the Council to improve the Global Gateway strategy implementation.
First and foremost, the well needed reaffirmation of Global Gateway’s grounding in democratic values, and high standards, including good governance, transparency, respect for the rule of law, human rights, gender equality, environmental-social sustainability and equal and mutually beneficial partnerships driven by the needs and priorities of partner countries.
The text rightly recognises the central role of EU Delegations and Member States’ Embassies in leading political dialogue and coordinating with local stakeholders throughout the project cycle while reaffirming local ownership through alignment with partner-country priorities and continuous meaningful engagement of national, regional and local authorities, civil society, and social partners. The conclusions emphasise the need for enabling environments that foster civil society participation and strengthen local regulatory, institutional, and technical capacities. They underscore the importance of the rule of law, good governance, transparency, and accountability throughout the project cycle to ensure sustainability and lasting development impact, while also highlighting the need to invest in local skills, demands that CSOs have been pushing for a long time to make Global Gateway truly participatory rather than top-down.
Particularly encouraging are commitments to high standards via cooperation with OECD, G7 and G20 on debt sustainability, environmental-social safeguards, and financing for development, ensuring Global Gateway contributes to global public goods while integrating horizontal priorities like climate action, gender equality, health, human rights, decent work, and SDG progress, including in least-developed and fragile contexts.
The Conclusions also stress structured dialogue with partner countries and all relevant actors at every level, on Global Gateway priorities, delivery and implementation, alongside clear project selection criteria, uniform reporting, and a transparent methodology to assess development outcomes, essential accountability mechanisms we’ve long demanded to demonstrate positive measurable impact and ensure accountability.
What we don’t like
We regret that the Council Conclusions fail to fully address the critical risks of redirecting development funds for business objectives and the overreliance on private sector mechanisms, despite long-standing civil society advocacy on these issues.
Particularly concerning is the strong emphasis on creating opportunities for European companies and the central role of private sector, a narrative that perpetrates the ongoing issue of subordinating development objectives to geo-economic priorities and EU competitiveness, a red line CSOs have flagged repeatedly as it undermines partner-country ownership and the very core objective of development cooperation: poverty eradication.
While we welcome the nod to safeguarding ODA integrity, the celebration of guarantees and blending as the “central role” for mobilising investments is troubling. These instruments do not inherently guarantee sustainability and may even exacerbate debt vulnerabilities. Without binding requirements for additionality, ex-ante/ex-post impact assessments, and a true people-centered approach that can promote a just transition in partner countries, this model threatens to turn Global Gateway into a primarily commercial venture rather than a development tool.
Path Forward
These Conclusions provide a starting point to reshape Global Gateway into an accountable tool, but the EU must now implement with rigour: development-centred over geo-economic, rights-based over investment-led, inclusive over top-down.
A credible Global Gateway must be grounded in Just Transition principles, so that partner countries do not pay the price for the EU’s own transition. Instead, these investments should support fair and inclusive transitions in partner countries, ensuring mutual benefit, decent work, local ownership, environmental protection, and equitable outcomes for communities and workers.
At SOLIDAR we will keep advocating for a transparent, inclusive and accountable Global Gateway strategy, that contributes to poverty eradication, just transition and sustainable development rather than narrowly serving European economic interests.
