World trade is undergoing upheaval. The current debate in Germany and Europe more widely, however, is focused primarily on security policy and geo-economic issues or on security of supply to underpin our transformation. But despite all the rhetoric to the contrary, in fact our partner countries’ points of view are being neglected in this process of reorientation, as are robust and properly funded instruments for developing socially, ecologically and economically more sustainable economic relations. Apart from anything else, this undermines the successful conclusion of trade agreements and resilient economic partnerships. This forum is intended to tackle this imbalance and to discuss concrete ideas and examples for a progressive trade and supply chain policy for the twenty-first century between Europe and key partner regions.

The German state and society seem to be confronted by financial policy challenges at ever shorter intervals. No sooner had the problems of the 2009 financial crisis been dealt with than financial policymakers had to meet the challenges of climate change, the Covid-19 pandemic and then the so-called Zeitenwende. In this context of looming economic recession there is acute pressure to take urgent action.

While both the quantity and quality of state services and benefits appear increasingly unsatisfactory, and many people feel that they are being forced to give up a growing portion of their income to the state, the Federal Constitutional Court decided to obstruct the government coalition’s budgetary compromise with its narrowminded interpretation of the debt brake. Instead of investing in the future, proposals to cut benefits are increasingly coming to the fore.

On the other hand, doubts about the wisdom of debt brakes and rigid austerity policies are being expressed ever more widely across politics and society. While not long ago debt-brake critics were really up against it, their unease has been spreading to the business world and conservative circles. For this reason, in this forum we would like to assess the scope for action that would open up if a fairer fiscal policy was implemented, more appropriate to the economic situation, not to mention if existing possibilities for borrowing were taken advantage of. We would also like to discuss the conditions under which policymakers, business and the media would be ready, not least in their own interest, to turn away from entrenched ideological dogma.

Europe has set itself high standards as regards artificial intelligence that is »made in Europe«: European AI needs to be trustworthy, but also competitive, human-centred and committed to European values, as well as outstanding and innovative. In order to achieve these aims the EU will rely, first, on regulation (in particular the AI Act), but also on a comprehensive funding programme. But does the EU's AI policy live up to the high standards it has set itself? Is Europe really in a position to achieve sovereignty in the area of artificial intelligence, in the sense of pursuing its own path in terms of technological development and implementation – and if it is, what does it need to realise that ambition? What should Europe’s priorities (but also perhaps limitations) be when it comes to the development of AI in the economy and society?

Transformation will require massive investments to close growing emissions gaps and to remain geo-economically competitive in the value chains of the future. While the EU Member States are putting the final touches to the new fiscal rules and the recovery fund is set to expire, the task for the next EU legislature is already taking shape, namely to establish an investment agenda alongside the new debt limits. But how great are the current needs and why should we invest in transformation at European level in the single market rather than nationally? What would an EU investment capacity look like and what needs to be done politically to make it happen?

There are conflicting signals. Although some energy scenarios forecast peak oil, coal and gas use for as early as 2025, at least for the medium term the 1.5 °C target seems to be receding further and further into the future. The fear is that fossil fuel use will persist at a high level until 2030 and fall too slowly. Global energy markets have experienced significant difficulties since Russia launched its war of aggression: while on one hand renewable energies have undergone record annual expansion, on the other, new fossil fuel deposits have been slated for exploitation to meet global energy needs. In light of this complex situation we would like to discuss the following issues within the framework of the forum:

How have global energy markets developed since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine? What effects has the crisis had on the turn away from fossil fuels, above all in the Global South?

Are global energy markets »on track« with decarbonisation or are fossil fuels likely to stage a comeback?

What needs to happen to enable renewable energies to edge out fossil fuels on a global scale and thus meet the Paris climate targets? What are the fossil fuel system’s tipping points and what are Germany’s and Europe’s roles in this?

How can this transition be shaped in such a way that rising or volatile energy prices do not lead to social and economic upheaval?

It has become evident that the economic model we have built is not working for people and the planet. The incumbent economic power holders are not going to be the drivers of change. Transformation of the economy requires a democratic process that would build up the power of social stakeholders and citizens at large. In this panel we will explore the local/regional dimension of this transformation. We will look at models and tools of democratising public services, re-municipalisation and building local wellbeing economy.  Particular emphasis will be on the process of transformation, looking at the issue of power mobilisation and sharing: who can drive such transformation, what are the obstacles and how to overcome them?