'It is time to take a concrete step forward from the Draghi Report before it vanishes in the corridors of politics. We need good strategists and policymakers capable of moving beyond this report and developing strategies for EU industrial policy', says Croatian entrepreneur and scientist Stjepan Orešković.  Together with Jörn Fleck, senior director at the transatlantic think tank institute Atlantic Council, he presented the ambitious "Future 500" initiative at the public international conference Conclave II in Brussels. Part of the broader Atlantic Council's platform SEEUS Futures, 'Future 500' aims to identify and support 500 European companies poised for substantial growth and global impact. The goal is to support Europe's new entrepreneurs in competing globally, bolstering Europe's presence on the international economic stage. Stjepan Orešković told us more about the project.

Can you briefly present the core idea of 'Future 500' project?

Drawing on insights from important reports on the future of Europe—prepared by Draghi, Letta, and Heitor—and analysed through the dual lens of scientists and entrepreneurs, the initiative raises several critical questions: Who will execute these competitiveness plans, and the newly published Competitiveness Compass? What mechanisms will be used? What costs will be incurred? And what returns can be expected compared to those of recent high-growth U.S. companies? The "Future 500" project is a cornerstone of the SEEUS platform, representing the U.S., EU, and Southeast Europe, and aims to boost visibility and cooperation among these regions. It is strategically designed to address Europe's pressing need to nurture a dynamic environment that elevates local companies to leaders on the global stage. The initiative focuses on providing venture capital, strategic guidance, and international networking, learning from experts like Harvard University's Dani Rodrik and EBRD's Beata Jaworcik to develop 21st century industrial policies that significantly enhance our competitive position.

Do you already have potential candidates for the 500 companies you plan to select? What are the basic requirements a company must meet to be chosen?

While no specific companies have been chosen yet, 'Future 500' will target entities with scalability and rapid growth potential. The process will be open and continuous, and prioritise economic promise, innovation, and strategic importance within their sectors. We will also seek to establish partnerships with multilateral development banks and investors that are already supporting companies in becoming a competitive force. The focus is on companies that already demonstrate robust growth path, innovative capabilities, and the ambition to scale globally. This ensures that the companies are not only market leaders but also trailblazers in technology and business models. We will build on the experiences of great projects like Scale-Up Europe, which bring together founders, investors, executives and scientists with the mission of making Europe a home for tech champions. For EU candidate countries, these potentially selected companies are especially crucial—they will embody the principles of the new economy and serve as role models for ambitious, internationally competitive firms that do not mostly rely on national taxpayer funding.

How optimistic are you about Europe's global competitiveness potential?

There is significant optimism about Europe's ability to strengthen its global competitive position moving away from prevailing attitudes of self-pity. Eurozone’s stock benchmark total returns, since this bull market began in late 2022, overperformed S&P 500, if we take Nvidia out. European social and health systems are keeping people healthy and active for longer periods at a much lower cost, and have a positive impact on the productivity and competitiveness of our economy on a global scale.

We are trying to echo Immanuel Kant's notion of "genuine enthusiasm" which he mentioned in the context of the French Revolution. Such a mindset can transform challenges into a motivational force, leading to seemingly invincible determination. We need fewer fat cats and puppy dogs—wealthy, complacent elites and overly obedient, unambitious followers—who have been favored in the last two decades. Instead, we need more 'hungry young men'—driven, ambitious individuals ready to take on challenges.

The 'Future 500' initiative aims to proactively address chronic issues flagged in competitiveness reports, such as the need for bold innovation and the scaling of enterprises. Europe's global standing will heavily rely on its ability to integrate advanced technologies, nurture entrepreneurial talent, and refine industrial policies to support inclusive growth. By leveraging its well-educated workforce, rich innovative heritage, and traditional and new industrial sectors—and addressing issues like regulatory fragmentation and market imbalances—the initiative strives to create a fertile environment for business leaders and innovators.

In a nutshell, the "Future 500" initiative marks an important step in testing Europe's economic landscape, positioning the continent as a global competitor by fostering high-potential companies and strengthening the entrepreneurial ecosystem. There is no chance of winning in competition without knowing who our competitors are.

Dr Stjepan Orešković is a scientist and entrepreneur. He is a member of the European Academy of Science and Arts and a founder of Bosqar Invest. Under his family leadership, Bosqar Invest grew its workforce from 300 to over 16,000 employees within five years, showcasing a formidable scale-up strategy that integrates science, technology, investments from pension and other funds, and entrepreneurial courage—a vital approach advocated by Draghi's report. This strategic emphasis likely influenced the Atlantic Council's initiation of the Future 500 project he is talking about.

13-14 March 2025

Your Europe, Your Say! 2025

17-20 March 2025

Civil Society Week 2025

18 March 2025

ECI Day 2025

26-27 March 2025

EESC plenary session

A package of legislative reforms on corporate reporting duties, known as the ‘Omnibus Package’, will soon be unveiled by the European Commission.  The package aims to simplify and streamline sustainability regulations, making reporting obligations more straightforward for businesses. Since its announcement in November, it has sent shockwaves across the EU, sparking much debate and pushback from various groups. Civil society organisations (CSOs), trade unions, businesses, investors, lawyers and scholars have all raised concerns about the Omnibus Package’s potential to lead to deregulation, urging the Commission to protect, rather than weaken, those instruments.  Andriana Loredan of the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) explains what is at stake and why CSOs like ECCJ oppose the Omnibus Package.

Competitiveness used as a pretext for deregulation of much-needed sustainability regulations

The Omnibus Package focuses on three key sustainability instruments at the heart of the European Green Deal, namely the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and the Taxonomy Regulation. This package is a direct result of the new Commission’s shift in direction, which began with Mario Draghi’s report on the Future of European Competitiveness in September 2024. Draghi’s report partly attributes the stagnation of EU markets to excessive regulatory burdens for businesses, while conveniently overlooking other key factors, like oil, gas and food inflation driven by speculation by multinational companies. According to Draghi’s report, the EU’s sustainability reporting and due diligence framework is a major source of regulatory burden. Without evidence linking sustainability legislation to the perceived lack of EU competitiveness, this narrow perspective has become a pretext for potentially dismantling sustainability legislation altogether.

With this particular Omnibus Package, the Commission intends to simplify some of the most critical instruments recently adopted to address big businesses’ impacts on people and the environment. This includes the CSDDD, which was adopted only last year and has yet to be implemented.

Any discussion of Omnibus’ content remains speculative for now. However, one of the most significant risks associated with Omnibus is the legislative reopening of sustainability instruments, which could result in the renegotiation of key provisions (like civil liability or climate transition plans under the CSDDD). ECCJ strongly opposes reopening previously agreed-upon sustainability legislation. This would increase regulatory uncertainty, jeopardise businesses’ respect for human rights and the environment and penalise first movers.

Disproportionate business influence in the midst of a flawed consultation process

The announcement of the Omnibus Package and the Commission’s development of its proposal have been conducted with a total lack of transparency and with no regard for EU treaty law or the Commission’s own procedural rules.

The Commission intends to present its Omnibus initiative within a very short timeframe, which does not allow for an adequate impact assessment and public consultation. This approach is incompatible with the right to participate in EU decision-making processes, a democratic principle protected by EU treaty law. It also contradicts the Commission’s own Better Regulation Guidelines, which require broad and transparent stakeholder consultation during the Commission’s policymaking process.

Instead, in February 2025, the Commission held a semblance of consultation, a so-called ‘reality check’, with a small, selective group of stakeholders, primarily large companies and business associations. Many of these companies are currently facing legal action for human rights or environmental abuse in their own operations or value chain. Thus, they have a vested interest in weakening sustainability legislation, at the expense of workers, local communities and the climate. Furthermore, the disproportionate representation of large businesses contrasted sharply with the underrepresentation of civil society. CSOs, trade unions and small businesses were only symbolically represented, while victims of corporate abuse and businesses advocating sustainability regulations were completely excluded from the conversation.

Omnibus Package: a potential threat to ambitious climate policies

President Ursula von der Leyen and Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis, who oversees the entire ‘simplification’ drive, appear to be aligning with the agenda of the largest, most powerful corporations. In particular, the Commission’s key partners during the so-called reality check included companies whose business activities significantly contribute to climate change and who have an interest in reducing climate obligations, such as companies in the oil, gas, petrochemical, automotive and financial sectors. Given the current climate crisis and its adverse impacts on people and the environment, this raises concerns about whether the Omnibus Package will be a step backwards for climate policies.

The Commission’s priority should be implementation rather than deregulation

If the Commission is truly concerned with competitiveness and a reduced regulatory burden, as well as human rights and climate justice, it should consider how to effectively implement sustainability instruments. This can easily be done by developing guidelines to assist companies and Member State authorities, as specified in the CSDDD, as well as developing funding and capacity building. This approach would address the Draghi report’s criticism of a lack of guidance to facilitate the application of EU sustainability legislation.

Ultimately, secretly rewriting crucial sustainability regulations behind closed doors, with some of the world’s largest corporations, is hardly the path towards achieving genuine competitiveness. 

Andriana Loredan is a policy officer at the European Coalition for Corporate Justice (ECCJ) and has been involved in advocacy on the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive since the proposal was first published in 2022. She previously worked on the topic of business and human rights from a forced labour perspective, at Anti-Slavery International.