Relatively new but rapidly growing, cyber-violence against women is an emerging form of gender-based abuse. From doxxing to deepfake technology generating non-consensual intimate or manipulated images, it can have devastating effects on victims. Dr Eleonora Esposito, a researcher and gender-based violence expert, spoke to EESC Info about the legal tools available to EU legislators to tackle perpetrators and the obligations that should be placed on social media platforms to tackle such abuse at its root.

Cyber‑violence against women is a relatively new dimension of gender‑based abuse. In your view, how has its rapid expansion reshaped the everyday lives and safety strategies of women around the globe?

Most forms of cyber-violence against women and girls operate along a continuum between digital and physical spaces, where harm that begins online can spill over into victims’ professional, social, or personal lives. 

For example, doxxing, the publication of private information such as a home address or phone number, can expose victims to stalking, harassment or threats in the physical world. Also, the non-consensual dissemination of intimate or manipulated images can quickly circulate online but can also affect employment prospects, educational opportunities and personal relationships. Victims frequently report needing to change jobs, move homes, or withdraw from public activities as a result.

Cyber-violence produces a chilling effect. Women increasingly adopt protective strategies such as limiting personal information online, adjusting privacy settings, moderating their presence on certain platforms, or avoiding controversial topics altogether. This dynamic is particularly visible in fields such as politics, journalism and academia, where public engagement is part of professional life.

In turn, when women observe the scale and intensity of abuse directed at others, they often choose to self-censor and disengage from online discussions. The result is not only individual harm but also a broader democratic consequence: the narrowing of the range of voices able to participate safely in digital public spaces.

Deep‑fake technology using AI now allows perpetrators to generate non‑consensual intimate imagery from a single photograph. Are there practical measures that you think could curb this alarming trend in the short term?

In the EU context, the Digital Services Act (DSA) already requires Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) to implement effective measures to address illegal and harmful content. In particular, VLOPs are required to assess systemic risks, including those affecting fundamental rights, and to adopt proportionate mitigation measures, such as improving content moderation systems. In addition, the DSA obliges all platforms to provide user-friendly notice-and-action mechanisms for reporting illegal content and prioritises reports from trusted flaggers. Together, these provisions create a framework that pushes platforms to strengthen detection and removal systems, including automated tools where appropriate.

The AI Act also introduces transparency obligations for synthetic content and requires that AI-generated or manipulated content, including deepfakes, be clearly disclosed or labelled as artificial. To support implementation, the European Commission is developing a Code of Practice on the marking and labelling of AI-generated content.

Explicitly criminalising non-consensual intimate imagery, including AI-generated content, helps close existing gaps in legal systems across the EU and provides a stronger deterrent. At EU level, the new Directive on combating violence against women and domestic violence is particularly relevant, as it introduces EU-wide criminalisation of certain forms of cyber violence, including the non-consensual sharing of intimate material.

Closer cooperation between platforms, law enforcement and trusted organisations is the most effective way to accelerate detection, takedown processes and the preservation of evidence, reducing the harm caused to victims.

You were Project Manager of the 2022 EU‑wide ‘Cyber‑Violence against Women and Girls’ initiative at the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), which helped build a continent‑level measurement framework. Which indicators or methodological steps proved to be most decisive in mapping the problem?     

Across the EU, legal and statistical definitions vary significantly. Establishing common conceptual categories is a key step in enabling more comparable data collection across Member States. 

The framework relies on sex-disaggregated data and a gender perspective in data collection. Recording the sex of both victims and perpetrators, as well as the relationship between them, allows researchers to identify patterns of gender-based violence in online abuse. 

A multi-source methodology has proven necessary. Surveys, police records, social services data, and academic studies each capture different aspects of the phenomenon. Surveys are important because cyber-violence is often under-reported, meaning administrative data alone would underestimate the scale of the problem. Combining these sources helps build a more accurate picture of prevalence and impact. 

Finally, the framework follows victim-centred and intersectional principles. Data collection needs to account for the diverse experiences of women, including those facing multiple forms of discrimination, and to capture the continuum between online and offline violence. Recognising these intersections helps ensure that measurement reflects the real dynamics of digital gender-based abuse rather than treating it as a purely technical issue. 

The project's policy brief offers evidence‑based recommendations for online platforms. What are the most impactful changes you would like to see from social media companies, and how can their compliance be monitored within the EU framework?

The most impactful change would be a shift from reactive moderation to prevention by design. Platforms should build stronger safeguards against gender-based abuse into their systems from the start, better detection of coordinated harassment, faster removal of non-consensual content, stronger protection for repeat targets, and safer default settings for privacy and contactability. 

As for monitoring compliance, the EU now has a more concrete toolbox than before. Under the DSA, compliance can be scrutinised through risk assessments, transparency obligations, independent audits and data access powers, thanks to enforcement by the European Commission and national Digital Services Coordinators. These authorities can request information, inspect compliance and impose sanctions where platforms fail to meet their obligations. 

Dr. Eleonora Esposito is a Researcher at the Institute for Culture and Society (University of Navarra, Spain) and currently serves as a Seconded National Expert at the European Commission (Unit F3 - Protection of Minors and other Societal Risks, DG CONNECT). In this role, she contributes to the enforcement of the Digital Services Act and acts as Team Leader for work on gender-based violence as a systemic risk under the DSA. Prior to joining the Commission, she worked at the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) as a researcher in the Gender-Based Violence Unit, where she served as Project Manager for the portfolio on cyber violence against women and girls.

Europe cannot afford to treat biodiversity as a secondary issue. The Kunming‑Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework set ambitious global targets, but ambition alone will not restore degraded ecosystems or protect collapsing species. Delivery, not declarations, will determine whether 2030 marks a turning point or another missed deadline.

At the centre of the debate is the emerging concept of 'nature credits', market-based tools designed to attract private investment into ecosystem restoration. The EU has committed to halt and reverse nature loss by 2030, but the funding gap for biodiversity remains large, the EESC stressed in an opinion adopted in its February plenary.

Stable and sufficient funding, including from the EU budget, is essential, while harmful subsidies, such as those for fossil fuels, should be phased out. Private finance can help, but it cannot replace public responsibility.

'Nature credits cannot replace stronger ambition', said the opinion’s rapporteur, Arnaud Schwartz.

Nature credits could contribute to closing the funding gap, but only if they are inclusive, science-based and fair, said co-rapporteur Teppo Säkkinen.

Above all, nature must not be commodified. Land grabbing and speculation must be prevented at all costs. Nature credits should prioritise ecological integrity over short-term profit. Benefits must be distributed fairly, helping to reduce rather than deepen inequalities.

The EESC advises against rushing into heavy legislation. Nature credits should remain voluntary and tightly regulated, without undermining ambitious national initiatives. Alignment with other EU policies, from agriculture to the circular economy, must be clarified to avoid unnecessary burdens, especially for small-scale practitioners. Exporting a European-designed system abroad may also prove complex, as governance models developed in Brussels may not easily translate to different contexts. Generating nature-positive impacts in global value chains will require responsibility and sensitivity.

This opinion was among the first examined under the EESC’s EU Youth Test, a mechanism integrating young people directly into EU policymaking. Youth representatives contributed to the drafting process, highlighting concerns about environmental integrity, fairness and long-term impacts for future generations. (ks) 

Under the heading Meaningful Connections, Active Participation and Democratic Engagement, this year’s of YEYS is welcoming secondary school students aged 16-18 and young adults aged 18-25 from EU Member States, candidate countries and the United Kingdom. Chosen through an open call for their motivation and civic engagement in their communities, the participants bring a vibrant mix of backgrounds and perspectives.

Over two days, more than 100 young participants are taking part in networking activities, interactive workshops and plenary discussions. Working together in facilitated groups, they are identifying key issues that matter to them and are developing recommendations for strengthening youth participation in Europe. Their recommendations will feed into the Committee’s advisory work on the next EU Youth Strategy. 

EESC members step up their involvement in YEYS

In the lead-up to the event, EESC members visited the schools taking part in YEYS. Between 4 February and 16 March, members travelled across Europe to meet students, introduce the themes of the event and spark early conversations about participation and engagement. These visits helped set the tone for Brussels, giving the young people a chance to start reflecting on the issues before joining the discussions at the event.

These visits were not limited to the EU Member States. EESC members also travelled to EU candidate countries – from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Albania to Georgia, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Türkiye and Serbia – meeting students and setting the stage for the discussions in Brussels.

One visit stood out in particular: a trip to the YEYS school in Kyiv, where an EESC member met students face‑to‑face in the Ukrainian capital. Given the current context, this gesture carries real weight. It shows the EESC’s determination to keep the conversation with young people going and to stand firmly for democratic values, civic participation and European engagement – even when the circumstances are anything but easy.

Now in its 17th year, YEYS is introducing a new element: the active involvement of EESC members throughout the event. This year, members didn’t just visit participating schools across Europe; they are also taking part in networking sessions and workshops, sharing their expertise, giving feedback on young people’s ideas and helping them turn these ideas into detailed, actionable proposals.

This new approach gives participants direct access to the knowledge and experience of EESC members, who represent Europe’s diverse civil society. At the same time, it offers members a chance to learn from the young participants, hear their concerns first hand and better understand how to make their voices heard through the Committee’s work.

YEYS remains one of the EESC’s flagship initiatives for engaging younger generations, creating a space where young people can share ideas, connect with peers and decision-makers, and contribute to the Committee’s work on youth empowerment. (kk)

Progress on the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Europe has stalled, according to the Europe Sustainable Development Report 2026 (ESDR) released by the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). The report highlights stagnation and in some cases reversal on key environmental and socio-economic targets, alongside a declining political focus on the SDGs within EU policy-making.

The 7th edition of the report, presented on 26 February at an event co-organised by the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and SDSN, assesses SDG performance in 41 European countries, including the EU Member States, the candidate countries, the EFTA members and the United Kingdom.

Although several European countries still rank among the global leaders on sustainable development, no country is currently on track to achieve all 17 SDGs by 2030. Major challenges remain, particularly in areas such as climate action, biodiversity, sustainable consumption and agriculture. The report also highlights growing socio-economic inequalities and a rise in material deprivation in some countries.

Nordic countries — including Finland, Sweden and Denmark — continue to lead the European SDG Index, but they also face significant environmental challenges.

The report warns that political commitment to the SDGs is weakening, with references to the 2030 Agenda largely absent from recent European Commission work programmes.

'At a time when the United States is openly challenging the SDGs and UN-based multilateralism, Europe must assert an independent foreign policy - one rooted in peace, partnership, and sustainable development in a multipolar world,' said Guillaume Lafortune, Vice President of the SDSN and one of the lead authors of the report. 

'By harnessing the strength of its internal market and mobilising investments in green and digital technologies, the EU can reaffirm its commitment to the SDGs and build new alliances. The SDGs remain our most powerful framework for securing a future that is just, peaceful, and sustainable,' Mr Lafortune said.

'With less than five years remaining until 2030, Europe cannot afford complacency. Amid growing geopolitical instability and increasing social and environmental pressures, the 2030 Agenda must remain our guiding compass. The SDGs offer a vital framework to enhance policy coherence, rebuild trust in multilateralism, and renew political ownership at both EU and national levels,' concluded Stoyan Tchoukanov, EESC member and its NAT section president. (ks)