Antonios Nestoras / Oct 2025
Photo: European Union, 2025
By translating Mario Draghi’s competitiveness agenda into measurable benchmarks, the European Policy Innovation Council’s Draghi Observatory has brought data to Europe’s reform debate. Far from deepening euro-pessimism, it offers policymakers a clear compass for progress, accountability, and renewed political momentum.
One year after Mario Draghi’s landmark report on Europe’s competitiveness, a single number captured Brussels’ attention: 11 percent. According to the Draghi Observatory’s Implementation Index, developed by the European Policy Innovation Council (EPIC), only 11 percent of the report’s 383 recommendations have been implemented. Within days, the figure was echoing through parliament corridors, LinkedIn feeds, and media headlines. It put a number on what many in Brussels were already thinking: a lack of urgency.
The Observatory did not set out to make headlines. It was created as a transparent, evidence-based tool to track how closely EU initiatives follow the competitiveness agenda Draghi outlined. Yet the results touched a nerve. Some hailed the Index as a wake-up call and the first attempt to hold Europe accountable to its own reform promises. Others dismissed it as premature or politically naïve.
Criticism has come from two directions. One is analytical: that no index can capture the complexity of European policymaking, that aggregation hides nuance, and that measurement so early risks distortion. The other is political: that by publicising a low figure, the Observatory fuels euro-pessimism and discourages momentum. These are legitimate concerns, but they also reveal something deeper about Europe’s relationship with measurement itself.
A continent uneasy with measurement
Europe has always been uneasy about quantifying its progress. The act of counting achievements implies accountability, and accountability implies pressure. Yet without measurement, ambition drifts into abstraction. The European Union has long excelled at setting goals but often struggled to monitor their delivery. Without the discipline of data, strategy becomes sentiment.
The analytical concerns are familiar. Europe is indeed too complex to fit neatly into an index. The Draghi recommendations span fiscal policy, capital markets, energy, digitalisation, and defence: different areas that evolve at different speeds and depend on both EU and national action. But the alternative to measurement is not nuance, it is opacity. Without a structured framework such as EPIC’s Draghi Observatory, every institution can claim success on its own terms, and the debate on competitiveness risks dissolving into anecdotes.
Another objection concerns timing. One year, critics say, is too soon to draw conclusions. True, if measurement is mistaken for judgment. The Index does not close the discussion; it opens it. It establishes a baseline, a reference against which acceleration or stagnation can later be measured. Europe’s policy cycles are long, and the Observatory’s work mirrors that rhythm. What matters is not the score in the first year, but the trajectory over time.
A third concern is subjectivity. Expert assessment always involves interpretation. But so does policymaking. The strength of the Draghi Observatory lies not in eliminating judgment, but in standardising it through coding, peer review, and transparency. Its method draws on well-established research in comparative government, where scholars in Canada, Australia, and the United States have long measured the implementation of political pledges. EPIC’s approach follows that tradition, adapting it to the European institutional landscape. No indicator can replace political will, but it can reveal, with evidence rather than intuition, where that will is missing.
Making progress visible
If the analytical critiques focus on method, the political ones question impact. Some argue that publicising a low number risks reinforcing a sense of failure. Europe is often its own harshest critic. But transparency does not create underperformance; it exposes it. Visibility, however uncomfortable, is the precondition for accountability. When political systems stop measuring their promises, they drift. When they measure, they begin to move.
Others fear that even a neutral instrument cannot escape politicisation. In an age when every statistic is interpreted ideologically, neutrality itself is contested. Yet neutrality is not indifference; it is discipline—the commitment to evidence over opinion. EPIC’s Draghi Observatory makes its data, method, and results public, and that openness is its protection against misuse.
A further objection is that treating all recommendations equally misses priorities. But the Index is not designed to dictate priorities; it provides the map for that conversation. It helps policymakers see which areas lag, which advance, and where sequencing matters most. Prioritisation is political, but it cannot happen in the dark.
These debates expose a broader tension in European governance: between legitimacy through openness and control through ambiguity. The Draghi Observatory operates within that tension and transforms it into a source of insight.
Is 11 percent enough?
Some contend that 11 percent is, in fact, satisfactory after a single year. Much legislation inspired by Draghi’s agenda is already in the pipeline. The 2026 Commission Work Programme confirms that many of his proposals are being translated into new initiatives. Yet the pace could be faster. If the Commission wanted to accelerate, it could have presented a unified package—a European Competitiveness Act—on the model of the climate-focused Fit for 55. Such an integrated approach would have created political visibility, legislative coherence, and a shared narrative across investment, energy, skills, and innovation. It would also have allowed trade-offs to be managed together rather than separately, speeding decisions and signalling seriousness to markets. Europe is moving, but it still advances file by file instead of through a collective project.
From measurement to momentum
The purpose of the Draghi Observatory is not to grade Europe but to provide feedback. Reform momentum is not spontaneous; it must be built and communicated. The Observatory functions less as a scoreboard than as an early-warning system. It identifies where the competitiveness agenda is gaining traction and where political gravity holds it back.
What the Index already shows is that progress occurs where objectives are clear and responsibility is shared; it stalls where accountability is diffuse. This finding is not a criticism of institutions but a service to them. In a crowded policy ecosystem, the Observatory offers a single compass. By translating Draghi’s 383 recommendations into measurable clusters, EPIC makes the agenda intelligible to policymakers, businesses, and citizens alike. Measurement, in this sense, is not a constraint on politics but a form of political empowerment. It creates room for debate, pressure, and leadership. It allows governments to say, “We are on track,” or, “We are not there yet—and here is why.”
The meaning of a promise
Europe has always advanced through moments of clarity. The Single Market had 1992, which turned policy into purpose. The euro had convergence criteria, which made ambition tangible. The Draghi agenda, broader and more complex, requires a different discipline, not a finish line but a feedback loop. The Observatory provides that loop, translating aspiration into accountability and replacing rhetoric with evidence. Far from deepening pessimism, it restores Europe’s ability to speak a language of results.
If Delors had a deadline, Draghi needed a dashboard.
And there is a final reason why this matters. The Draghi Report is not a routine Brussels exercise. It was commissioned by the European Union itself, written by a statesman who personifies European integration, endorsed by the President of the Commission, and woven into the mission letters of her College. It is not merely a report but a pledge, a promise to Europe’s citizens. As such, it demands follow-through. If implementation falters, responsibility will not rest with observers but with the current Commission, on whose credibility the promise of European renewal now depends.
Antonios Nestoras is the Founding Director of the European Policy Innovation Council (EPIC) and co-Editor of the Draghi Observatory & Implementation Index.
