Futures of the West Balkan Countries Six in 2035
Note: this is a fictional scenario. Imagine yourself in this fictional scenario in 2035 and provide your answers to our survey from this particular perspective.
Scenario 3: „Looking Beyond EU Borders“
Wandering the streets of Sarajevo these days in 2035, one can hear occasional chats in Russian and Mandarin. According to data published by the Confucius Institute, the number of students in the Western Balkans that have taken Mandarin language classes have risen steadily since 2026. The increased geopolitical influences from China and Russia can be traced back to the lax accession process exercised by both an increasingly fragmented EU and by subsequent global orientation by several governments in the Western Balkan economies.
The deadly COVID-22 pandemic from 2026 to 2028 put the resources of all countries so much under pressure, that EU enlargement was not considered a priority. The resulting power vacuum and lack of perspective for EU accession in the foreseeable future was taken advantage of by Russia, China, and Turkey whose governments signed a variety of treaties that removed tariffs for a selection of Balkan goods and boosted trade with the countries. At the same time, the EU’s political appeal has declined.
In addition, military agreements of some countries with Russia and of other WB6 countries with USA and Turkey were further undermining regional stability and cooperation. Initiated by these new military agreements, a few Western Balkans’ companies could profit from subcontracts in military R&D.
The 2033 OECD’s Government at a Glance indicators for public administration reforms underlines that in comparison to the 41 OECD countries, the WB6 score rather poorly in terms of transparency, efficiency, and accountability. Although levels of corruption remain difficult to pinpoint, pressure groups such as Transparency International or CIVICUS lament the comparatively high figures, calling it “endemic for the region”. A representative survey by Eurobarometer among youngsters in the diaspora lamented the “kleptocracy” and the “high levels of corruption” as the primary reasons that prevent them from returning to the region. Also entrepreneurship suffered from the resulting low levels of trust in government and doing business.
Although foreign direct investments remain erratic due to weak implementation of the rule of law, some companies from the WB6 have taken quickly advantage of opportunities arising from easier access to new markets to meet the demands of 1.5 billion consumers that have among others developed a taste for Balkan wine, food and tobacco. Nevertheless, SMEs that are slow to adapt the growing internationalisation struggle to integrate into global value chains.
Digital infrastructure and digitalisation are in the hands of private companies. The ICT-sector showed during the last 15 years until 2035 the highest growth rates. While digitalisation efforts prompted by market players were very beneficial for urban areas, this further widened the connectivity gap between rural and urban areas. Some firms exploit digital opportunities and innovate, although most innovation in WB6 occurs from the adoption of foreign technological ideas. However, digital government and e-citizenship received little attention, preventing reforms in the public sector.
The pattern of investments in infrastructure is the result of geopolitical interests. Some countries in the region have seen an increase of investments in infrastructure from major global players. These focus on areas with attractive resources, from raw materials to skilled labour. In other areas, the situation is deteriorating. The low political capacity to invest on a long-term basis remains a major deterrent for other foreign investors. Investments in the green economy sector and the healthcare sector remained comparatively low.
The fact that extreme weather events cause droughts, floods, water shortages, crop failure, etc. does not remain unnoticed. However, a systematic and preventative policy response remained fragmented. In case of emergencies, sporadic help was provided by foreign partners (China, Arabic countries and others).
The energy transition throughout the EU did not spill over to the WB6. However, the energy sector remains also in 2035 an important economic sector. The widespread demand from society for sustainable and renewable technologies, did not translate to political will. Meaningful measures would require concerted actions and an active governmental involvement. Some greening effects were mainly limited to the tourism industry, where foreign tourists demand sustainable facilities and operations.
Non-European governments such as Turkey, Arabic countries and China have increasingly invested in private institutions in the educational and vocational sector, which offer high-quality courses to those able to pay the required tuition fees. The accompanying privatisation within the education sector further aggravated the social segregation of pupils and students.
RTI cooperation between the EU and the WB6 cooled down noticeably since the EU stopped granting rebates to finance the WB6 countries‘ participation in the 11th European Research Framework Programme, which started in 2034. The difficult negotiations on this, which also have to do with the insufficient implementation of the European Research and Higher Education Area in the WB6, are also the reason why the WB6 have not completed any association to the 11th Research Framework Program by 2035.
Meanwhile, however, the WB6 research organisations have expanded and intensified research co-operation and exchanges with partner institutions in non-European countries, such as Russia or China, while trying to maintain the already developed connections with the EU. This has opened access to foreign funding for some institutions with a focus on defence technologies, seed research, pharmacy-based and agriculture-based biotech and physics. Nevertheless, this trend was accompanied by a reduced interest in other domains and to an additional brain-drain of talented researchers from the WB6.
Around 2035, the population of the WB6 countries stabilises at a low level as the EU has severely restricted access to the common EU labour market for foreigners, leading to strong return migration. In addition, the high death toll caused by the previous COVID-22 pandemic could partly be balanced through sparse immigration (mainly from Russia, China, and Turkey). The ever-closer ties to non-EU countries such as Russia or China have incentivised parts of the WB6’s population to consider pursuing better working conditions beyond the European continent. Cultural centres such as Confucius Institutes in Belgrade and Novi Sad University as well as China’s intensified links with the region through the “One Belt, One Road (OBOR)” initiative have convinced that the future of top-notch research infrastructure is to be found further east.
© ISF – International Service Facility
