Strategic Dialogues, the European Commission’s latest effort to engage stakeholders, target contentious issues like the green transition and agricultural reform. It is a promising step — but risks falling flat without deeper reform.
To avoid becoming a missed opportunity for EU democratic strengthening, these dialogues must embrace greater inclusivity, transparency, and genuine deliberation. With key initiatives ahead, the Commission now has a chance to turn them from symbolic exercises into meaningful democratic tools.
Since 2023, the European Commission has launched several Strategic Dialogues to involve stakeholders in shaping EU policies on critical issues — from the future of agriculture and the clean industrial transition to the car and metal industries.
The pace has picked up in 2025, with further dialogues planned.
These dialogues hold real promise. Research consistently shows that public participation — especially when introduced early — can improve the quality of policies and boost their legitimacy.
The 1998 Aarhus Convention, a cornerstone of environmental democracy, makes this clear: involving the public at the agenda-setting stage is crucial. Strategic Dialogues could offer just that — a way to open up EU policymaking before decisions are set in stone.
But for that promise to translate into real impact, quality matters. Effective participation requires three things: broad and balanced representation, transparency and accountability, and space for meaningful discussion.
So far, Strategic Dialogues have fallen short on all three fronts — undermining both their credibility and their potential.
First, stakeholder representation has been strikingly unbalanced. Industry voices have dominated the discussions, while civil society organisations and independent experts have been sidelined. As a result, the dialogues have missed the opportunity to fully reflect the public interest and integrate scientific evidence.
Second, the process has lacked transparency and accountability. Most dialogues have taken place behind closed doors, with minimal public information about the agenda, participants, or outcomes. With no detailed records and no clear reporting, the public is left in the dark — unable to follow discussions or assess how stakeholder input shapes EU strategies.
Third, genuine debate has been largely absent. Many dialogues have been one-off events with little room for interaction. Rather than fostering two-way deliberation, they have operated as a one-way input collection exercise. This undermines their potential to strengthen policy quality, encourage dialogue between opposing views, and build consensus.
One exception proves what is possible.
The 2024 Dialogue on the Future of Agriculture offered a more balanced, transparent, and deliberative model. It included a wide range of voices, unfolded over multiple meetings, and resulted in a largely consensual and generally well-regarded final report. Yet, despite its success, it has not been used as a blueprint for future Dialogues — a missed chance to institutionalise best practices.
Poorly-executed Strategic Dialogues risk turning into what critics call 'participation washing': using stakeholder engagement as a symbolic gesture to legitimise pre-decided outcomes. Without a real commitment to meaningful participation, these dialogues become tools for optics, not substance.
Their true value lies in filling a gap — bringing in early public input where it is often lacking in EU policymaking.
But if they are used to justify political decisions retroactively, or worse, to bypass established mechanisms like the commission’s public consultations or proper impact assessments, they risk eroding trust instead of building it.
A recent example highlights this concern.
The commission’s legislative proposal to relax CO₂ standards for cars referenced a preceding Strategic Dialogue that had produced no agreed outcome. Meanwhile, the commission ignored its own Better Regulation Guidelines by skipping both broader consultations and an impact assessment. It is little wonder this raised suspicions of undue industry influence and damaged the proposal’s credibility.
For Strategic Dialogues to fulfil their potential, the EU Commission must clarify their purpose and process.
Vague formats and unclear roles discourage meaningful engagement and risk turning participation into a box-ticking exercise. By specifying how these dialogues complement existing mechanisms and committing to robust participation standards, the commission can enhance public trust and its credibility.
The commission now has a chance to integrate Strategic Dialogues with its broader participatory agenda, including initiatives like the European Democracy Shield and the "EU Strategy to support, protect and empower civil society”. A commission communication, based on thorough public consultations, could provide the foundation for transforming these dialogues into a real asset.
Done right, Strategic Dialogues could become a vital tool for inclusive, solution-oriented engagement and a powerful driver of deeper EU democracy — both symbolically and substantively.
This year, we turn 25 and are looking for 2,500 new supporting members to take their stake in EU democracy. A functioning EU relies on a well-informed public – you.
Lea Schewe is a researcher at the Brussels School of Governance / Vrije Universiteit Brussels, where Simon Otto is also a researcher and Sebastian Oberthür is director of the Research Centre for Environment, Economy and Energy.
Lea Schewe is a researcher at the Brussels School of Governance / Vrije Universiteit Brussels, where Simon Otto is also a researcher and Sebastian Oberthür is director of the Research Centre for Environment, Economy and Energy.