Europäische Union

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2025 - EP

Progress on SDG 6 — ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all — remains critically off-track. With none of its eight targets on course to be met by 2030, this commentary argues that the shortfall reflects not merely implementation failures, but a deeper conceptual problem: water governance frameworks rely on a homogeneous, techno-centric understanding of water that ignores its multiple social, cultural, political, and ecological dimensions. We introduce the concept of "waterS" (plural, capitalised) to foreground this multiplicity. Drawing on the Spanish aguas, the term captures the diverse forms, values, and meanings water holds across different communities and contexts — from a measurable substance (H₂O) to a spiritual entity, a living being, or the foundation of social and hydrosocial relations. This stands in contrast to SDG 6's universalist framing, rooted in Western modernist traditions, which reduces water governance to engineering, hygiene, and risk management. Through empirical examples — from peri-urban water use in India, desalination conflicts in Antofagasta, Chile, and infrastructure-led rural water projects in Telangana, India — we demonstrate how standardised technical approaches perpetuate inequities in access, marginalise Indigenous and local governance systems, and reproduce power imbalances in participation and decision-making. We further critique the commodification of water, the limits of market-based governance, and the inadequacy of current monitoring frameworks that rely on aggregate national data while overlooking lived local realities. Looking ahead to the post-2030 agenda and the 2026 UN Water Conference, we propose a paradigm shift toward power-sensitive, pluralistic governance frameworks. Key recommendations include community-led participatory planning, legal recognition of customary water rights, equity-based financial models, citizen-science data collection, and rights-based approaches that centre marginalized groups — especially women, youth, and Indigenous Peoples — in water decision-making.

Progress on SDG 6 — ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all — remains critically off-track. With none of its eight targets on course to be met by 2030, this commentary argues that the shortfall reflects not merely implementation failures, but a deeper conceptual problem: water governance frameworks rely on a homogeneous, techno-centric understanding of water that ignores its multiple social, cultural, political, and ecological dimensions. We introduce the concept of "waterS" (plural, capitalised) to foreground this multiplicity. Drawing on the Spanish aguas, the term captures the diverse forms, values, and meanings water holds across different communities and contexts — from a measurable substance (H₂O) to a spiritual entity, a living being, or the foundation of social and hydrosocial relations. This stands in contrast to SDG 6's universalist framing, rooted in Western modernist traditions, which reduces water governance to engineering, hygiene, and risk management. Through empirical examples — from peri-urban water use in India, desalination conflicts in Antofagasta, Chile, and infrastructure-led rural water projects in Telangana, India — we demonstrate how standardised technical approaches perpetuate inequities in access, marginalise Indigenous and local governance systems, and reproduce power imbalances in participation and decision-making. We further critique the commodification of water, the limits of market-based governance, and the inadequacy of current monitoring frameworks that rely on aggregate national data while overlooking lived local realities. Looking ahead to the post-2030 agenda and the 2026 UN Water Conference, we propose a paradigm shift toward power-sensitive, pluralistic governance frameworks. Key recommendations include community-led participatory planning, legal recognition of customary water rights, equity-based financial models, citizen-science data collection, and rights-based approaches that centre marginalized groups — especially women, youth, and Indigenous Peoples — in water decision-making.

Progress on SDG 6 — ensuring availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all — remains critically off-track. With none of its eight targets on course to be met by 2030, this commentary argues that the shortfall reflects not merely implementation failures, but a deeper conceptual problem: water governance frameworks rely on a homogeneous, techno-centric understanding of water that ignores its multiple social, cultural, political, and ecological dimensions. We introduce the concept of "waterS" (plural, capitalised) to foreground this multiplicity. Drawing on the Spanish aguas, the term captures the diverse forms, values, and meanings water holds across different communities and contexts — from a measurable substance (H₂O) to a spiritual entity, a living being, or the foundation of social and hydrosocial relations. This stands in contrast to SDG 6's universalist framing, rooted in Western modernist traditions, which reduces water governance to engineering, hygiene, and risk management. Through empirical examples — from peri-urban water use in India, desalination conflicts in Antofagasta, Chile, and infrastructure-led rural water projects in Telangana, India — we demonstrate how standardised technical approaches perpetuate inequities in access, marginalise Indigenous and local governance systems, and reproduce power imbalances in participation and decision-making. We further critique the commodification of water, the limits of market-based governance, and the inadequacy of current monitoring frameworks that rely on aggregate national data while overlooking lived local realities. Looking ahead to the post-2030 agenda and the 2026 UN Water Conference, we propose a paradigm shift toward power-sensitive, pluralistic governance frameworks. Key recommendations include community-led participatory planning, legal recognition of customary water rights, equity-based financial models, citizen-science data collection, and rights-based approaches that centre marginalized groups — especially women, youth, and Indigenous Peoples — in water decision-making.

Applauded for its eloquence and timeliness, Carney’s speech at Davos may be bookmarked as a defining moment that marks the end of the liberal world order as we know it and signals a new global order looming on the horizon, with stronger emphasis on “value-based realism.” I disagree with pessimistic accounts that dismiss such a foreign policy, that is both principled and pragmatic, as a contradiction. My research shows that transparent communication of strategic interests may pay off in the Global South countries and increase trust in the West again. Also, accounts that underestimate the leading role middle powers can play in establishing a new global order are missing the mark. It was, after all, not just the US hegemony, but middle powers like Canada that helped build the liberal institutional order brick by brick.

Applauded for its eloquence and timeliness, Carney’s speech at Davos may be bookmarked as a defining moment that marks the end of the liberal world order as we know it and signals a new global order looming on the horizon, with stronger emphasis on “value-based realism.” I disagree with pessimistic accounts that dismiss such a foreign policy, that is both principled and pragmatic, as a contradiction. My research shows that transparent communication of strategic interests may pay off in the Global South countries and increase trust in the West again. Also, accounts that underestimate the leading role middle powers can play in establishing a new global order are missing the mark. It was, after all, not just the US hegemony, but middle powers like Canada that helped build the liberal institutional order brick by brick.

A delegation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) will visit Podgorica and Tirana from 16 to 18 February, led by Committee Chair David McAllister (EPP, Germany).
The visit will enable AFET MEPs to evaluate the state of play of accession negotiations and outstanding reform priorities in each country and reaffirm Parliament's commitment to supporting both countries on their European paths.
Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

A delegation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) will visit Podgorica and Tirana from 16 to 18 February, led by Committee Chair David McAllister (EPP, Germany).
The visit will enable AFET MEPs to evaluate the state of play of accession negotiations and outstanding reform priorities in each country and reaffirm Parliament's commitment to supporting both countries on their European paths.
AFET Missions
Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

We replied to citizens who took the time to write to the President (in French and English):

English Current EU legislation

A 2023 European Union (EU) law ensures that products containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are clearly labelled.

Agreement on new genomic techniques

On 4 December 2025, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU reached an agreement on the European law governing products derived from new genomic techniques (NGTs).

The agreement stipulates that products derived from plants considered comparable to natural or conventional plants (known as NGT1) will be exempt from the GMO labelling requirements for consumers. However, labelling will remain mandatory for seeds, allowing farmers to make an informed choice.

Plants with more complex modifications (referred to as NGT2) will remain subject to the existing GMO legislation requirements, including mandatory labelling for all derived products.

Plants that have been modified to tolerate herbicides or produce an insecticidal substance will be classified as NGT2. No NGTs will be allowed in organic production.

The agreement allows NGTs to be patented, except for traits or sequences that already occur in nature or are produced organically. Safeguards will be put in place to prevent the market from being dominated by a few firms and keep seeds affordable and accessible to farmers.

Next steps

The law will enter into force after formal approval by the Parliament and the Council (representing the governments of EU countries).

French Législation européenne en vigueur

Une loi de l’Union européenne (UE) de 2003 assure que les produits contenant des organismes génétiquement modifiés (OGM) soient clairement étiquetés.

Accord sur les nouvelles techniques génomiques

Le 4 décembre 2025, le Parlement européen et le Conseil de l’UE sont parvenus à un accord sur la loi européenne qui régira les produits dérivés des nouvelles techniques génomiques (NTG).

L’accord prévoit que les produits dérivés des plantes considérées comparables à des plantes naturelles ou conventionnelles (dénommées NTG 1) seront exemptés de l’obligation d’étiquetage des OGM pour les consommateurs. Cependant, l’étiquetage restera obligatoire pour les semences, afin de permettre aux agriculteurs de faire un choix éclairé.

Les plantes dont les modifications sont plus complexes (dénommées NTG 2) resteront régies par les règles actuelles applicables aux OGM, ce qui implique un étiquetage obligatoire pour tous les produits dérivés.

Les plantes modifiées pour tolérer les herbicides ou produire une substance insecticide seront considérées NTG 2. Aucune NTG ne sera autorisée dans la production biologique.

L’accord autorise les brevets pour les NTG, à l’exception des caractères ou séquences présents dans la nature ou produits par des moyens biologiques. Des garanties sont prévues pour empêcher la concentration du marché et pour garantir que les semences restent abordables et accessibles aux agriculteurs.

Prochaines étapes

La loi entrera en vigueur après l’approbation formel du Parlement et du Conseil (représentant les gouvernements des pays de l’UE).

Background

Citizens often send messages to the President of the European Parliament expressing their views and/or requesting action. The Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (AskEP) within the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) replies to these messages, which may sometimes be identical as part of wider public campaigns.

Die Abgeordneten fordern die EU auf, ihr politisches Engagement sowie Finanzierung und Koordinierung für die vollständige Umsetzung von Europas Plan gegen Krebs zu erneuern.

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

Parliament strongly condemns all violence against civilians in north-east Syria and calls on all parties to abide by the ceasefire.
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Parliament strongly condemns all violence against civilians in north-east Syria and calls on all parties to abide by the ceasefire.
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Am Donnerstag forderte das Parlament mehr Mittel und eine bessere Koordinierung zur Bekämpfung von Armut und sozialer Ausgrenzung in der EU.
Ausschuss für Beschäftigung und soziale Angelegenheiten

Quelle : © Europäische Union, 2026 - EP

On Thursday, Parliament adopted three resolutions on the human rights situations in Iran, Türkiye and Uganda.

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

As the battlefield stabilizes, a window for negotiations opens

On Thursday, Parliament adopted new measures to protect European farmers from unfair trading practices by buyers of agricultural products.
Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Speaking at the Leaders’ retreat on competitiveness, President Metsola said that there was “a narrow window of opportunity” to do the necessary to push Europe forward.

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP

Deutschland wird allein mit europäischen Partnern nicht schnell genug verteidigungsfähig. Südkoreas starke und exportorientierte Rüstungsindustrie könnte zügig helfen, meint Eric Ballbach.

DRAFT OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing the European Competitiveness Fund ('ECF’), including the specific programme for defence research and innovation activities, repealing Regulations (EU) 2021/522, (EU) 2021/694, (EU) 2021/697, (EU) 2021/783, and amending Regulations (EU) 2021/696, (EU) 2023/588, (EU) [EDIP]
Committee on Security and Defence
Riho Terras

Source : © European Union, 2026 - EP