As a new policy phase begins, economists and policymakers debate whether competitiveness and resilience can anchor Europe’s growth in an unsettled global economy.

Europe enters the new year in a reflective, unsettled mood. The departure of Mario Draghi from the center of the economic debate he once dominated has left more than a symbolic void. For over a decade, Draghi’s presence — first at the helm of the European Central Bank and later as a guiding voice in continental reform discussions — embodied a certain clarity of direction in moments of crisis. Now, as 2026 unfolds, Europe faces a set of economic uncertainties that no single figure appears ready to resolve.

At the heart of the debate lies a deceptively simple question: can Europe remain competitive while also becoming more resilient? For experts across finance, industry, and public policy, the answer will shape the continent’s economic trajectory in the years ahead.

The post-Draghi landscape is defined less by immediate emergency and more by structural tension. Inflationary pressures have eased compared to the shocks of the early decade, but growth remains uneven. Northern economies continue to outperform their southern counterparts, while industrial powerhouses wrestle with energy costs, supply chain realignments, and slowing global demand. The sense of crisis has softened, yet uncertainty has not disappeared — it has merely changed form.

Competitiveness is the first major unknown. European firms operate in an environment where global rivals benefit from cheaper energy, lighter regulation, and aggressive state support. The United States has doubled down on industrial policy, while China continues to leverage scale and strategic coordination. Europe, by contrast, often appears caught between its market-driven ideals and its regulatory instincts.

Business leaders warn that without a clearer strategy, Europe risks falling behind in critical sectors such as advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence, and clean technologies. Productivity growth remains modest, and investment levels, while stable, are widely seen as insufficient for a genuine leap forward. The challenge is not only financial, but political: aligning national priorities within a fragmented union remains a delicate task.

At the same time, resilience has emerged as an equally pressing concern. The past years exposed vulnerabilities in Europe’s economic model — from dependence on external energy suppliers to fragile global logistics networks. In response, policymakers have embraced the language of strategic autonomy, diversification, and risk reduction. Yet translating these concepts into effective policy has proven complex.

Economists note that resilience carries costs. Building redundancy into supply chains, investing in domestic production, and safeguarding critical infrastructure can weigh on short-term efficiency. The central question is whether Europe can absorb these costs without undermining its competitive position. Some argue that resilience, properly designed, can become a source of strength rather than a burden — but only if accompanied by innovation and scale.

Fiscal policy adds another layer of uncertainty. As emergency spending fades from view, governments are under renewed pressure to balance budgets while still funding ambitious transitions in energy, defense, and digital infrastructure. The debate over common European financing mechanisms remains unresolved, and national debt levels continue to constrain policy choices in several member states.

Markets, for their part, appear cautiously attentive rather than alarmed. Investors recognize Europe’s institutional stability and deep capital markets, but they are increasingly selective. Confidence now hinges less on central bank intervention and more on credible long-term strategies. In this environment, communication and coordination among European institutions will be tested.

What is missing, many observers suggest, is a unifying narrative. Draghi’s influence extended beyond policy tools; he offered reassurance that Europe could act decisively when necessary. In his absence, leadership is more dispersed, and consensus harder to forge. This does not imply paralysis, but it does mean that progress may come incrementally rather than dramatically.

As January advances, Europe’s economic outlook for 2026 remains open-ended. Competitiveness and resilience are not opposing goals, experts insist, but reconciling them will require political courage, sustained investment, and a willingness to rethink long-held assumptions. The coming months may not deliver definitive answers, but they will reveal whether Europe is prepared to navigate uncertainty without the steadying presence of its most influential economic steward.