REPORT on Global Gateway -– past impacts and future orientation

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on Global Gateway -- past impacts and future orientation

(2025/2073(INI))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to Article 21 of the Treaty on European Union,

- having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 208 and 322(1) thereof,

- having regard to the joint statement of 30 June 2017 by the Council and the representatives of the governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission, entitled 'The New European Consensus on Development - 'Our world, our dignity, our future'[1],

- having regard to the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid and to the humanitarian-development-peace nexus as endorsed by the Council and the Commission,

- having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument - Global Europe, amending and repealing Decision No 466/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 480/2009[2](NDICI-Global Europe Regulation),

- having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1529 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 September 2021 establishing the Instrument for Pre-Accession assistance (IPA III)[3],

- having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 25 November 2020 entitled 'EU Gender Action Plan (GAP) III - An ambitious agenda for gender equality and women's empowerment in EU external action' (JOIN(2020)0017),

- having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 16 September 2021 on the EU strategy for cooperation in the Indo-Pacific (JOIN(2021)0024),

- having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 1 December 2021 entitled 'The Global Gateway' (JOIN(2021)0030),

- having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 2 October 2024 entitled 'Building sustainable international partnerships as a Team Europe' (JOIN(2024)0025),

- having regard to the EU action plan on human rights and democracy 2020-2024,

- having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights and its importance for inclusive, sustainable and equitable economic development,

- having regard to the EU global health strategy,

- having regard to the Council Decision of 26 July 2010 establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service[4],

- having regard to the Council note of 28 October 2022 regarding working arrangements on Global Gateway governance,

- having regard to the Council conclusions of 21 June 2024 on the mid-term evaluation of the NDICI-Global Europe instrument, and of 21 November 2023 on the Team Europe approach,

- having regard to the Council Conclusions of 20 October 2025 on the implementation of the EU strategy for cooperation in the Indo-Pacific,

- having regard to the Commission proposal of 16 July 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Global Europe (COM(2025)0551),

- having regard to Opinion 03/2024 of the European Court of Auditors accompanying the Commission evaluation of the External Action Guarantee, published on 12 December 2024,

- having regard to special report 17/2025 of the European Court of Auditors of 16 September 2025 entitled 'EU aid for trade to least developed countries - Needs are being tackled, but EU funding is not on track to meet 2030 target',

- having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which entered into force for the EU on 22 January 2011 in accordance with Council Decision 2010/48/EC of 26 November 2009,

- having regard to United Nations Resolution 70/1 of 25 September 2015 entitled 'Transforming our World - the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development' (2030 Agenda), adopted at the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit in New York and establishing the sustainable development goals (SDGs),

- having regard to the Paris Agreement, adopted on 12 December 2015 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, particularly its provisions related to adaptation, resilience and support for the most vulnerable countries,

- having regard to the conclusions of the Second World Summit for Social Development, held in Doha from 4 to 6 November 2025, which reaffirmed the central importance of social development, universal social protection and the fight against poverty and inequality as essential pillars of sustainable development,

- having regard to the United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework as the primary planning and implementation instrument at country level for UN development activities,

- having regard to the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development, adopted at the Third International Conference on Financing for Development, held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 13 to 16 July 2015, and the Sevilla Commitment Outcome Document, adopted at the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development, held in Seville, Spain from 30 June to 3 July 2025,

- having regard to the draft memorandum of understanding between the EU and the Republic of South Africa on a clean trade and investment partnership, signed on 20 November 2025,

- having regard to the Memorandum of Understanding between the EU and the Republic of South Africa establishing a strategic partnership on sustainable minerals and metals value chains, signed on 20 November 2025,

- having regard to its resolution of 21 January 2021 on connectivity and EU-Asia relations[5],

- having regard to its resolution of 24 November 2022 on the future European Financial Architecture for Development[5],

- having regard to its resolution of 12 December 2023 on the implementation of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument - Global Europe[6],

- having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2024 on the security and defence implications of China's influence on critical infrastructure in the European Union[7],

- having regard to its resolution of 17 January 2024 on building a comprehensive European port strategy[8],

- having regard to its resolution of 2 April 2025 on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy - annual report 2024[9],

- having regard to its resolution 2 April 2025 on human rights and democracy in the world and the European Union's policy on the matter - annual report 2024[10],

- having regard to its resolution of 6 May 2025 on the control of the financial activities of the European Investment Bank - annual report 2023[11],

- having regard to its decision of 7 May 2025 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section III - Commission, executive agencies and the ninth, tenth and eleventh European Development Funds[12],

- having regard to its resolution of 9 July 2025 on implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2025 High-Level Political Forum[13],

- having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Development under Rule 59 of the Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the opinion of the Committee on International Trade,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Development (A10-0045/2026),

A. whereas the Global Gateway strategy was established on 1 December 2021 with the aim of becoming the EU's flagship framework for sustainable connectivity and global investment, and as an alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative, and to align with the international community's broader objective of leveraging private sector involvement to move development finance from 'billions to trillions' in order to address the costliest aspects of the SDGs; whereas it is a strategy and policy initiative, and in itself not an instrument or regulation; whereas the Global Gateway draws on the financial architecture for the EU's external action, in particular the EU's development cooperation policy and budget and specifically the NDICI-Global Europe instrument, for its legal framework and funding;

B. whereas in an environment of increased geopolitical rivalry and uncertainty, the Global Gateway strategy, if properly applied and communicated, will increase the EU's geopolitical weight and visibility in the global arena by boosting smart, clean and secure links between the EU and its partners in the fields of digital technologies, energy and transport and strengthening health, education and research systems across the world, within the framework of the 2030 Agenda and the relevant SDGs, as well as restoring Europe's industrial competitiveness, reducing its dependencies in critical sectors and counterbalancing China's growing influence;

C. whereas the EU's outermost regions and overseas countries and territories (OCTs) are located near strategic areas for the development of Global Gateway projects; whereas the development of these areas positively impacts the safety and prosperity of the outermost regions and OCTs;

D. whereas EU funding under the Global Gateway must not benefit entities that undermine European security and economic interests, including companies under EU sanctions, state-owned or state-controlled enterprises from systemic rivals, or operators involved in sanction circumvention, dual-use transfers to Russia or other hostile activities; whereas participation in Global Gateway projects should be conditional on full compliance with EU restrictive measures and on credible efforts to prevent circumvention;

E. whereas geopolitical influence and the ability to conclude long-term partnerships for mutual benefit are largely dependent on economic strength, access to markets and institutional capacity, as well as mutually agreed roadmaps; whereas Global Gateway partnership and investments should rely on reciprocity and demonstrable, concrete mutual benefit and interest; whereas evolving from donor-recipient relationships to mutually beneficial investment partnerships will require new solutions adapted to specific contexts;

F. whereas interdependence in digital, energy and supply chains creates both opportunities and vulnerabilities for the EU; whereas effective private sector involvement and project implementation, adequate financing, and strong coordination with partners, including civil society, contributes to the EU's credibility as a global actor;

G. whereas it is in the interest of the EU to promote social, economic, human and environmental development, including through partnerships with civil society, enhanced diplomacy and business cooperation;

H. whereas the primary objective of EU development cooperation, as laid down in Article 208 TFEU, is the reduction and long-term eradication of poverty, which requires investment in and cooperation on education, job creation, health and social protection, among other areas, to ensure the achievement of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs, while protecting and advancing the EU's geopolitical interests;

I. whereas the NDICI-Global Europe has clearly defined quantitative targets for human development, gender equality and climate action; whereas the Global Gateway commits to upholding high standards of human, social and workers' rights and transparency, creating equal partnerships instead of dependencies, and offering a democratic investment agenda;

J. whereas sustainable, value-driven investments in partner countries contribute to global stability and security; whereas 23 % of the world's population lives in fragile contexts; whereas it remains in the EU's strategic interest to use specific instruments to engage with fragile and conflict-affected states, including through the Global Gateway; whereas public-private partnerships and infrastructure projects in such countries can be successful and have a significant positive impact if they are rightly designed;

K. whereas the SDG investment gap in developing countries now stands at USD 4 trillion per year; whereas the commitment of the private sector to the SDGs offers the possibility of increasing the scale of development actions and their sustainability by creating decent jobs, stimulating economic growth and eliminating poverty;

L. whereas the EU and its Member States have committed to spending 0.7 % of their gross national income on official development assistance (ODA) which is intended to promote the economic development and welfare of developing countries; whereas geopolitical considerations must not override development effectiveness principles or distort the priorities of partner countries;

M. whereas lasting results cannot be achieved without a commitment by partner countries to strengthen democratic development in the long term;

N. whereas the Global Gateway's success relies on the Team Europe approach, which in the past three years has strived to demonstrate ownership, commitment, and a more unified EU voice in the world; whereas the Team Europe concept could be further improved concerning joint programming, project design, governance, decision-making and stakeholder inclusion;

O. whereas some Global Gateway flagship projects have already been identified as priorities under the G7 Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment;

P. whereas some Member States have established national partnership plans; whereas Member States are encouraged to share best practice;

Q. whereas Parliament has welcomed the Global Gateway as a concerted EU response to global challenges, while pointing out deficiencies in its governance, including alignment with the priorities of partner countries, impact, stakeholder engagement and transparency, as well as lack of regular reporting on the impact of flagship initiatives; whereas the Global Gateway decision-making process is not laid down in law but governed by the Commission's internal procedures and the Council's decisions;

R. whereas Parliament should exert its full influence in its role of democratic scrutiny in Global Gateway policy and governance, as well as in ensuring accountability in project evaluation;

S. whereas within the current Global Gateway strategy, elected bodies in recipient countries, including parliaments, as well as civil society and independent experts, have no active role in decision-making or monitoring and ensuring accountability;

T. whereas there is little public access to information on Global Gateway projects;

U. whereas targets and better monitoring and evaluation tools could help in assessing projects' contributions to development objectives and prevent detrimental impacts in recipient countries;

Stocktaking, strategic objectives and vision

1. Recalls that the Global Gateway initiative is a strategic geopolitical concept which integrates foreign, economic and development cooperation policies, including the EU's engagement in climate protection and adaptation, the digital transformation, and the health, research, education and transport sectors, aiming at establishing long-term, strategic, mutually beneficial partnerships with a particular view to building and securing sustainable supply chains and resilience in both the EU and partner countries, notably through stronger private sector involvement; underlines that the Global Gateway initiative should become a long-term strategy based on a whole-of-government model; welcomes, in this regard, the shift away from the donor-recipient model towards partnerships on an equal footing; stresses that the focus should be on smart investments in quality infrastructure, respecting high social and environmental standards and aligned with the EU's interests and values, including the rule of law, human rights and relevant international norms and standards; stresses that coordination with international institutions, private sector involvement and tailored strategic communication, including in recipient countries, are essential for the instrument to reach the desired scale;

2. Underlines that new geostrategic challenges such as the ongoing Russian war of aggression against Ukraine as well as the growing influence and assertiveness of China and Russia, the dismantling of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and deepening cuts in ODA, including in several EU Member States, have created significant financing gaps in the provision of essential public services; stresses that EU foreign and security policy and development actors must make better use of scarce resources and better coordinate their actions in order to increase leverage, the EU's presence, influence and visibility worldwide by means of mutually beneficial investments, promote sustainable and inclusive growth in partner countries, enhance equality and the livelihoods of local communities and progress towards achieving the SDGs;

3. Understands that the Global Gateway has the potential to accompany, facilitate and strengthen sustainable European investments globally, which provide partner countries with the opportunity to develop their industries and create added value and decent local jobs, and give those countries access to leading markets in the EU; underlines that the long-term partnerships offered by the EU under the Global Gateway can create a genuine alternative offer to partner countries with regard to their development and economic objectives while also contributing to the EU's overarching targets of competitiveness, resilience, diversification and strategic autonomy as well as achieving jointly agreed international goals;

4. Takes note of the political will of the President of the Commission to scale up the Global Gateway during the 2024-2029 legislative term; notes that the Council has endorsed over 250 flagship projects since 2022; further notes that EUR 306 billion had been mobilised by the end of 2024 according to the Commission; deplores the lack of clarity and transparency regarding the funding track record and how the figure of EUR 306 billion was reached;

5. Notes that project selection has followed an overly centralised top-down approach without sufficient involvement of stakeholders; notes that the concept and criteria for Global Gateway projects have remained unclear for both Member States and partner countries; underlines the importance of favouring a model in which demand in partner countries is matched with offers from European businesses, in line with EU foreign, economic and development objectives, and international commitments, notably the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement;

6. Takes note of the fact that the Global Gateway strategy is built on the NDICI-Global Europe regulation; further takes note of the Commission proposal for the new Global Europe instrument and notes that it did not seize the opportunity to include any substantive codifying provisions on the Global Gateway; states Parliament's willingness as co-legislator to come up with clarifying proposals;

7. Stresses that the Global Gateway must remain anchored in the primary objective of EU development cooperation, namely the reduction and long-term eradication of poverty;

8. Underlines that ensuring a balance between ODA and non-ODA funding is essential, while calling on the Commission to enhance coordination with non-development instruments and policies; asks the Commission to indicate if Global Gateway projects comply with ODA criteria;

9. Calls on the Commission to establish clear and transparent methodologies for assessing the development impact of Global Gateway interventions funded from EU ODA and involving EU private sector actors, and their eligibility with regard to the criteria of the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; stresses that such methodologies should be complemented by assessments of strategic relevance, taking into account trusted connectivity and like-mindedness, resilience and the long-term sustainability of projects, and calls for regular reporting to Parliament in a manner that reflects the dual development and geopolitical objectives of the Global Gateway;

10. Highlights the importance of more systematic monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of Global Gateway projects to enhance the accountability, transparency and effectiveness of the initiative;

11. Highlights that investments in female empowerment and social capital are not only in line with EU values but also economically profitable; stresses the importance of applying a gender-responsive approach in the Global Gateway programming, to ensure investments contribute to gender equality;

12. Regrets that the preference laid down in Article 12(2) of the NDICI-Global Europe Regulation for joint programming and implementation between the Commission and the Member States has not been successfully applied, and has been replaced by looser Team Europe cooperation; asks that this joint programming imperative be integrated in the future Global Europe instrument and adequately implemented, as consistently requested by Global Gateway stakeholders;

13. Calls on the Member States to carry out a comprehensive assessment of the Team Europe framework, including Team Europe initiatives, providing information on the current status of their progress, the actors involved, their financing and main development outcomes;

Geopolitical importance of the Global Gateway

14. Calls for the EU to strengthen its strategic position, partnerships and global credibility by offering, through the Global Gateway, a sustainable, transparent and democratic alternative to competing models and infrastructure initiatives, aligned with fundamental EU values; further calls on the Commission to promote the Global Gateway effectively and rapidly as a sustainable alternative to the aggressive initiatives by rivals such as China and Russia, whose support has often proven to come with severe negative effects in the long run, including huge debt dependency;

15. Underlines the importance of the Global Gateway's unique 360-degree approach, complementing investments with support for strengthening the rule of law in partner countries, including judicial independence and anti-corruption measures, as well as for accountable and democratic institutions, thus ensuring that EU-financed projects have a genuine impact and are aligned with fundamental EU values and the SDGs, and with the building of an enabling regulatory environment in line with international standards and environmental, social, and governance frameworks;

16. Emphasises that the effectiveness of the Global Gateway depends on its responsiveness to the real priorities of partner countries; calls on the Commission, the European External Action Service and the Member States to ensure that Global Gateway initiatives are as inclusive and accountable as possible, designed jointly with local stakeholders and aligned with the national and regional development strategies of partner countries in line with the principle of country ownership; highlights the need to link policy dialogue, investment, development cooperation and diplomatic action in order to ensure strategic coherence and lasting impact;

17. Invites the Commission to design Global Gateway projects to ensure strong complementarity and alignment with initiatives promoting a rules-based international order and multilateralism in the face of bloc formation and increased tensions;

18. Calls for deeper coordination with like-minded partners that are willing to uphold the aforementioned principles and seeking to diversify their relations and address development needs, going beyond transactional agreements, while being compatible with the strategic interests of the EU, including those it defends in the G7, the G20 and the UN, with a view to maximising the collective impact and ensuring coherent standards, financing and project implementation, in a competitive geopolitical environment;

19. Is concerned by reports that a number of Global Gateway projects are being implemented by Chinese companies in direct violation of the initiative's objective of presenting an alternative to the Belt and Road Initiative and creating genuine national value in partner countries; calls, therefore, for an immediate investigation into the involvement of all Chinese companies in the Global Gateway;

20. Recalls that the fundamental principle of policy coherence for development, enshrined in Article 208(1) TFEU, obliges the EU and its Member States to take into account the objectives of development cooperation in all policies that are likely to affect developing countries;

21. Calls for more effective alignment between the Global Gateway and EU common foreign and security policy, and the SDGs; calls for the EU to make greater use of its normative strength, embedding democracy, the rule of law, human rights and sustainable development as cornerstones of all Global Gateway projects, while ensuring additionality;

22. Stresses that strengthening stability and security in partner countries contributes to fostering economic opportunities, resilience and long-term sustainable development, thereby tackling the root causes of irregular migration;

23. Underlines that the integration of the policy coherence for sustainable development agenda into the EU's Global Gateway is essential for a joined-up sustainable and geo-economic development approach;

24. Calls for investments in energy, critical raw materials and the green transition to be prioritised, to reduce the EU's dependence on foreign rivals, including in renewable energy networks, clean hydrogen corridors, and sustainable transport, thereby strengthening both global sustainable development and the EU's energy autonomy; further calls for enhanced digital sovereignty and trusted connectivity, while promoting democratic digital standards at the global level;

25. Stresses the need for Global Gateway investments to be aligned with existing EU due diligence processes as well as to be open and beneficial to local and regional market actors and civil society, and to help close infrastructure and inequality gaps, including those related to digital and energy poverty, particularly in rural and peripheral areas, ensuring that benefits associated with renewable energy and mineral production, such as revenue and jobs, are felt by local communities and producer countries; calls for these gaps to be identified by partner countries in consultation with local enterprises, communities and civil society actors; stresses that these projects must come with local value creation and respect principles of universal accessibility and design for all to ensure that infrastructure does not create new barriers and encourages the full inclusion of persons with disabilities in the most vulnerable settings;

26. Emphasises that Global Gateway energy projects should be designed with sufficient flexibility to respond to changing technological and market needs in partner countries; calls on the Commission to include mechanisms for periodic review and, where appropriate, reallocation or adjustment of investments to ensure that projects remain relevant, cost-effective, and aligned with partner countries' evolving energy needs;

27. Stresses that green energy investments under the Global Gateway must be conflict-sensitive and grounded in the principles of just and transparent resource governance, particularly where the extraction of critical raw materials is involved; calls for the monitoring of potential detrimental environmental and human rights impacts, and of the risk of exacerbating inequality and conflict, including in fragile contexts; stresses, in particular, that this concerns large infrastructure projects such as hybrid power plants, hydrogen projects, lithium mining, data centres, port expansions, airports and transport corridors;

28. Stresses that growing water insecurity is starting to pose a major threat to economic growth perspectives in partner countries, suggests that Global Gateway includes water projects and policies; recognises that sustainable economic development also relies on healthy water bodies, and calls for the systematic integration of a 'blue dimension' in Global Gateway investments which underpin water security, climate resilience and long-term socio-economic development;

29. Emphasises the potential that the Global Gateway offers for climate mitigation efforts, with investments that can contribute to the generation of high-quality carbon credits in partner countries, delivering mutually beneficial outcomes;

30. Calls for clarification as to the extent to which the Global Gateway continues to be fully part of the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment, a shared G7 commitment to support public and private investments in sustainable, inclusive, resilient and high-quality infrastructure;

31. Calls for closer cooperation with like-minded partners with a view to building a resilient web of trusted connectivity, especially, but not exclusively, partners such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, India and Taiwan;

32. Highlights the need for continued cooperation and coordination with the UN and its agencies, which has the potential to improve the EU's global presence and how it is perceived abroad; therefore calls on the Commission, together with the Member States through Team Europe, and all other relevant, like-minded Global Gateway partners to build on the UN's local knowledge, technical expertise and its role in creating an enabling environment, ensuring local ownership, promoting inclusive and sustainable development and supporting partner countries in building resilient systems for health, education and social protection;

Development cooperation

33. Stresses that the EU and its Member States remain the largest providers of ODA globally; underlines that the EU also has a major economic asset in its ability to provide access to an attractive internal market, while being able to understand and respect local realities as well as to respond to needs for human development, environmental protection and local, decent job creation;

34. Underlines the potential of the Global Gateway as an impactful tool for mobilising the funds needed for achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and for responding to the interest of many partner countries in private investment and the global integration of local value chains;

35. Underlines that EU development cooperation must continue to provide support to partner countries in contexts where the Global Gateway is not an adequate answer to their needs; stresses that fragile and conflict-affected contexts require specific attention and tailored forms of investment, such as grants and concerted action among humanitarian, development and peace actors, including in the least developed countries, complementing or going beyond the Global Gateway, with a particular focus on engaging with and empowering local actors; calls for an ambitious strategy with a people-centred approach to fragile contexts in order to implement peacebuilding through the humanitarian-development-peace nexus; stresses in this context that traditional ODA should not be diverted from where it is most needed and that it must remain an essential tool for supporting sectors such as healthcare, education, local small-scale agriculture, food security, nutrition, water, adequate housing and social protection, which are prerequisites for stable, inclusive and prosperous societies, while the EU should improve monitoring to ensure that ODA is not diverted to criminal or corrupt purposes; underlines that public-private partnerships can complement but must not replace ODA for human development;

36. Calls for continued support through Global Gateway projects for strengthening global preparedness against health threats by investing in the development of prevention, preparedness and response capacities and sustainable local manufacturing and capacity-building initiatives in partner countries;

37. Recognises that a significant number of Global Gateway partner countries heavily rely on agriculture as a primary source of income, employment and food security; calls on the Commission to ensure that future strategic reviews and implementation assessments of the Global Gateway take into account the specific needs and development potential of the agricultural sector in partner countries; recognises that robust public-sector financing, supported by sustained donor commitments, is essential to achieving holistic and sustainable human development outcomes; affirms that private investment and innovative finance can play important complementary roles alongside, but not in place of, strong public funding;

38. Stresses that the 360 degree approach also implies support for the development of education and training, equality and inclusion, especially regarding youth and gender equality; notes that this requires comprehensive policy interventions and capacity building; emphasises that through this approach, the EU can create a level playing field for European businesses, especially vis-a-vis other foreign investors, while respecting local content requirements, support the development needs of partner countries and increase the visibility of Team Europe;

39. Emphasises the need for Global Gateway projects to mainstream children's rights as part of the Union's fundamental principles, ensuring protection against exploitation and child labour, as well as programmes that improve access to education, health and social protection; calls for consolidated efforts to improve the investment climate at the local and national levels in partner countries, including capacity-building to accompany reforms in areas such as investment facilitation, public procurement, competition policy and the overall business environment, and support for strong accounting systems; stresses that building stable economic infrastructure and a reliable functioning state and raising local productive capacity are important factors for the long-term eradication of poverty; recalls that local companies often face monetary and liquidity challenges due to exchange-rate instability and the limited convertibility of their currencies, which can restrict their participation in international projects and undermine their financial stability;

40. Emphasises the importance of academic and scientific cooperation as a pillar of the Global Gateway's digital and innovation agenda; calls on the Commission to leverage Horizon Europe, Erasmus+ and global exchange programmes in synergy with Global Gateway projects to allow talented students to study in Europe and increase the local expertise in partner countries, and to boost collaborative research, knowledge exchange and digital skills development; underlines that such an approach would strengthen education and research capacities globally and ensure that connectivity investments are accompanied by human capital development and technology transfer;

41. Calls for the EU to use its political and economic weight to advance a global agenda for fairness and long-term sustainability; stresses that Global Gateway investments must help reduce inequalities, support human development and promote inclusive and equitable systems that involve and reach the poorest 40 % of the population as well as those most at risk of exclusion, including persons with disabilities, women, girls and displaced populations; highlights that development cooperation should strengthen the financial systems of partner countries; underlines that such efforts should be grounded in the Global Gateway's 360-degree approach and be monitored;

42. Believes that investments should promote decent, accessible and sustainable jobs, with a particular focus on the labour market inclusion of vulnerable groups; stresses, moreover, that investments should be supported by vocational training and skills, knowledge and technology transfer with related local educational institutions and training centres, and through teacher training, foundational learning, accessible infrastructure and adapted learning materials, while ensuring that programmes are aligned with the socio-economic context of each partner country and that they strengthen the country's productive fabric;

43. Notes that many partners lack the financial resources for large-scale infrastructure projects; emphasises in this regard that the Global Gateway places a strong focus on infrastructure development and capacity-building to serve as a catalyst for sustainable growth and regional integration as well as connectivity with the EU; notes that Global Gateway flagship projects for 2023, 2024 and 2025,have had a particular focus on infrastructure, with less than 10 % addressing education and research, and a little over 10 % focussing on the health sector; highlights that higher levels of investment in health, education and research could yield higher economic and social returns than investment in infrastructure;

44. Points out that many developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, face high levels of public debt which hamper their ability to invest and to deliver social and basic services; notes that China is the largest bilateral creditor to many developing countries and that its lending practices have contributed to rising debt levels; notes that Global Gateway projects are present in several heavily indebted poor countries; underlines that Global Gateway projects should avoid worsening debt or creating new 'debt-traps'; calls for the EU and its Member States to reduce and alleviate the debt burden on developing countries, particularly those in the Global South, by supporting global debt relief and debt restructuring, taking into account the UN Conference on Trade and Development principles on promoting responsible sovereign lending and borrowing as well as the OECD debt sustainability principles; notes that the current credit rating system benefits countries in the Global North disproportionately over those in the Global South; calls on the Commission to take these higher perceived risks and borrowing costs into account; insists that the Global Gateway should offer just transition and investment swaps, debt-for-nature or debt-for-climate swaps; notes that Global Gateway green transition projects should be accounted for under Article 6(4) of the Paris Agreement for their contribution to high-quality international credits;

45. Highlights that access to financing remains a key challenge for many developing countries; welcomes initiatives that aim to support developing countries in overcoming obstacles to accessing financing; acknowledges the importance of grants in unlocking other forms of finance;

46. Urges the Commission to establish the necessary mechanisms to ensure that all partners participating in Global Gateway projects fully comply with EU legislation and relevant international standards in the fields of anti-bribery, anti-corruption and financial integrity, including integrity checks, risk assessment and management tools and monitoring systems to prevent, detect and address corruption, illicit financial flows and other forms of unethical conduct;

47. Stresses the need for early, inclusive and adequate consultation with partner countries in the framework of Global Gateway governance, before setting up projects to ensure the respect of development effectiveness principles, including local ownership;

48. Calls on the Commission to take the necessary measures to facilitate the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), including cooperatives and social economy enterprises, in the Global Gateway including by establishing streamlined processes and dedicated financial windows, targeted outreach, simplified access to tenders and support mechanisms to enhance their international competitiveness; highlights the importance of SMEs in local job creation, for local ownership and value addition, and requests that their specific characteristics, for example regarding the size and financial volumes of projects they are able to undertake and capacities for fulfilling reporting obligations, are duly taken into account; stresses that, alongside partner countries' SMEs, European SMEs are essential implementation partners for the Global Gateway; underlines that the Global Gateway should generate reciprocal benefits by creating sustainable value chains, innovation and quality jobs in the EU;

49. Asks the Commission to involve local and regional authorities more effectively and at an earlier stage in project design, decision-making and funding; highlights their dual role as implementing partners and beneficiaries; recalls that many decisions regarding the implementation of projects are taken at subnational level where citizens' interests and needs should be taken closely into account;

Governance

50. Recommends revising the Global Gateway governance structure and demands the more meaningful involvement of Parliament on equal footing with the Member States;

51. Regrets that the Global Gateway Board, despite plans for annual meetings, has only met twice so far, in December 2022 and October 2025, and with limited scope for in-depth analysis and discussion or steering of future actions and projects; calls on the Commission to ensure high-level participation;

52. Notes that the Board should function in a complementary manner to the future Global Europe Investment Board, and asks the Commission to clarify and delimit their respective mandates;

53. Asks that the method for selecting flagship projects be based on objective and qualitative criteria while avoiding the detrimental proliferation of projects, maximising overall impact and ensuring measurable success; calls for the Commission to clarify the added value of Global Gateway flagship projects compared to non-flagship projects;

54. Recommends that flagship projects be designed as ecosystems in which businesses in partner countries and in the EU can effectively operate and flourish; insists on promoting 'European content' in flagship projects and on the early involvement of partner countries, and on clearly indicating the benefits of such projects in partner countries; encourages all stakeholders to embrace long-term cooperation since investments especially in infrastructure, in energy and in mining rely heavily on long-term engagement and planning security;

55. Calls on the Global Gateway Board to consider stakeholder reports and systematically draw on statistical evidence, to be shared in a timely and user-friendly manner with Member States and Parliament, so as to guide political steering, improve coordination and adjust future programming where necessary;

56. Proposes that the Global Gateway Board become the central operational body for the implementation of the Global Gateway, especially in relation to defining the criteria for flagship projects, the selection of flagship projects and the provision of adequate framework conditions and financing for them; asks that projects and partnerships deemed 'strategic' in other contexts be aligned and made consistent with flagship projects under the Global Gateway; underlines that the composition of the Board needs to be changed to include participants competent at operational level, and that the frequency of its meetings has to be increased and its agendas oriented towards decision-making; suggests that the advisory bodies undergo the same 'operationalisation' process;

57. Holds the opinion that the approach to the Global Gateway should be changed from a top-down to a demand-driven approach; recalls that stronger European private sector involvement is at the core of the Global Gateway; suggests, therefore, ensuring the regular and transparent participation of European private sector representatives in helping to shape and further develop the Global Gateway; recalls also that the Global Gateway initiative should be partner-driven, respecting and matching national and local development plans; urges that EU Delegations and representatives of partner countries be invited to Board meetings on an ad hoc basis, including representatives of local authorities, civil society and business;

58. Stresses the crucial role of EU Delegations in coordinating with local stakeholders, identifying potential investment opportunities, building in-depth knowledge about the EU's competitors and existing gaps, and supporting local partners in aligning their project applications with local as well as EU priorities, and therefore calls for EU Delegations to be provided with sufficient human, financial and technical resources, including through targeted training programmes, to allow them to fulfil these tasks; strongly opposes any plans to cut the staff of EU Delegations in partner countries;

59. Calls on the Commission and all stakeholders involved to ensure the meaningful consultation and participation of the Global Gateway Civil Society and Local Authorities Advisory Platform, as well as local civil society organisations, marginalised groups and trade unions, women's organisations and organisations of persons with disabilities, as well as local SMEs and indigenous peoples, and to create the conditions for those actors to play their democratic and partnership role beyond providing a rubber stamp, including by ensuring appropriate timeframes, frequency and follow-up on the outcome of these meetings; notes that the Platform should play a complementary role in the governance of the Global Gateway and contribute meaningfully to the selection, design and implementation of projects, thus improving the legitimacy and local acceptance of Global Gateway projects;

60. Stresses the need for more frequent and operational consultations with the Business Advisory Group, including with business representatives from the Global South, aimed at decision-making and concrete results; insists that potential conflicts of interest must be addressed, including through financial transparency requirements; suggests that Business Advisory Group members declare their engagement in Global Gateway projects; insists on the importance of the inclusion of European and local SMEs in the Business Advisory Group;

61. Recalls Parliament's strong role in shaping the EU's economic, climate, digital, trade and competitiveness policies; highlights that the current governance of the Global Gateway has not yet allowed Parliament to exercise its scrutiny duties or to contribute to parliamentary diplomacy;

62. Believes that stronger involvement of Parliament, as the EU's only directly democratically elected institution, is essential to ensure the Global Gateway's democratic legitimacy, transparency and policy coherence, and to enhance its visibility; underlines Parliament's crucial scrutiny and strategic steering role, including enhanced parliamentary oversight of project identification, selection and implementation, as well as the systematic evaluation of results and impact; emphasises that Parliament must play a central role in ensuring that Global Gateway investments make effective use of resources and are fully aligned with EU values, development objectives and sustainability standards;

63. Calls on the Commission to provide regular progress reports to Parliament on the implementation of Global Gateway projects, and a regular and structured strategic review of Global Gateway implementation by Parliament's competent committees in order to ensure that its objectives, priorities and geographical focus remain relevant, coherent and aligned with the Union's external action goals and development priorities, and the evolving geopolitical context;

64. Additionally underlines, as the Global Gateway becomes increasingly owned by Member States, the value of streamlining the scrutiny and oversight cooperation between the European Parliament and national parliaments in order to mirror the Team Europe approach; commits to ensuring adequate consultation, participation and representation, including in the future more operational Board; calls for the involvement of partner-country parliaments, including through the regular sharing of information and via existing multilateral assemblies;

65. Takes note of the newly created Global Gateway Investment Hub and welcomes the intended streamlining of project applications; stresses that the application process and coordination with Team Europe at national level must be transparent; notes with concern, however, the lack of representation from partner countries, particularly of civil society; underlines that better information on Global Gateway opportunities is also needed for European companies, in particular SMEs, and urges that the Hub is implemented in a way that facilitates SME access; further calls for a clear, public, up-to date and easily accessible indication of all planned, ongoing and completed tenders and projects, as well as for funding opportunities, paying special attention to SMEs and companies from smaller Member States that often lack permanent representations in partner countries and are less likely to have the public administration resources to create pathways for private sector investment; suggests establishing a matching platform for potential business partners and offtakers;

66. Points out that projects need to be economically viable, or to support the provision of public goods, and that the viability of Global Gateway projects depends on coherent legal frameworks and policies, such as trade agreements, tax policies, offtake agreements, emissions trading systems and carbon border adjustment mechanisms; calls on the Commission to better align the Global Gateway initiative with its internal policy agenda and initiatives such as the Competitiveness Agenda, the European Green Deal and the Digital Decade;

67. Recommends that the Commission, when selecting projects, prioritises those that have significant strategic importance;

68. Highlights the importance of cross-border Global Gateway projects in strengthening trade and development with key partners and supporting deeper regional economic integration in partner countries; stresses that infrastructure development should, where feasible, contribute to intra-regional trade integration, notably among Southern Neighbourhood, African, Latin American and Southeast Asian economies; underscores the strategic importance of the African Continental Free Trade Area in addressing regional fragmentation and calls for the Global Gateway to contribute, in a targeted manner, to addressing selected obstacles and bottlenecks that have slowed its implementation; underlines the importance of supporting the gradual development of intra-regional value chains and regional connectivity, including through dialogue and technical assistance aimed at reducing regulatory challenges and non-tariff barriers;

69. Highlights the strategic value of clean trade and investment partnerships, which follow a trade-driven and programme-driven logic, complementing the project-based approach of the Global Gateway while enabling better regional integration and contributing to the global goal of achieving the SDGs; underlines that combining market access with EU financing and funding tools such as Global Europe and the Global Gateway is essential; encourages the Commission to explore how clean trade and investment partnerships, strengthened through the Global Gateway, can help reduce non-tariff barriers for partner countries, including through targeted exemptions from selected EU legislation or through recognition of equivalence; invites the Commission to foster broad stakeholder involvement from businesses, especially SMEs, trade unions, civil society and local communities; underscores its willingness to strengthen parliament-to-parliament collaboration, to properly scrutinise the ongoing implementation and to contribute to building a people-to-people partnership as the basis for further mutual success;

70. Calls for a significant improvement in transparency, democratic accountability and information, robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, and regular reporting;

71. Calls for effective measurement of the impact of Global Gateway projects locally, including their social, environmental and economic outcomes, such as their contribution to poverty eradication, as well as their financial and economic sustainability, using indicators related to job creation, knowledge transfer, social inclusion and gender equality, in line with global social and human capital related objectives, such as the SDGs and the Gender Action Plan III;

72. Asks the Commission, furthermore, to provide evidence about the benefits of Global Gateway projects for local enterprises, especially SMEs, sustainable and inclusive businesses such as cooperatives and social enterprises, local communities and the workforce in partner countries; invites the Commission to monitor and evaluate the impact of the projects and publish such evidence to ensure, ex anteand ex post, that Global Gateway projects respect human rights commitments and have positive effects on the local economy and positive knock-on effects for wider segments of society; takes note of concerns from studies on and investigations into external investments which have sometimes found limited evidence of local benefits, including for SMEs and communities in partner countries;

73. Calls on the Commission to develop new instruments grounded in an evidence-based framework to monitor and assess the distribution and impact of interventions in partner countries, particularly in areas such as the quality and quantity of jobs, inclusive education, health, living standards, impacts on the most vulnerable groups, inequality and social cohesion, climate adaptation and environmental protection, and the development of local enterprises, including SMEs, as this would help optimise and broaden the local impact of current EU interventions and partnerships and support the design of future projects with lasting effects in partner countries; welcomes the inequality marker and the distributional impact assessment as useful tools to monitor the impact of Global Gateway projects; asks to disaggregate the data by gender and age to track women and girls' inclusion and benefits; underlines that such an empirical approach enhances transparency in spending and strengthens Parliament's oversight role as part of the budgetary authority;

74. Recommends monitoring the degree and success of the involvement of European and local companies; further recommends monitoring the establishment of supply and value chains, innovation gains, resilience and economic added value in both partner countries and the EU;

75. Calls on the Commission to regularly publish standardised, detailed and comparable statistics on the implementation of the Global Gateway, showing, among other things, the share of procurement and contracts awarded to EU and non-EU companies, the volume and sectoral distribution of private investment mobilised from each Member State and the main economic and social benefits generated, and to provide evidence of the leverage effect of EU guarantees, financial instruments and blended finance; underlines that such data are essential to assess the real level of 'European content' in Global Gateway projects and to ensure value for money for EU taxpayers; further stresses that such transparency measures would make it possible to assess whether a project delivers on its stated objective of mobilising significant private capital for sustainable and strategic projects;

76. Reiterates the need for a unified, publicly accessible methodology for calculating mobilised investments under the Global Gateway, including a clear distinction between EU budget funding, Member State contributions, private sector leverage and re-labelled pre-existing projects; calls on the Commission to publish annual audited figures;

77. Welcomes recent improvements to the information provided on the Global Gateway on the Commission's websites but underlines the need for more detailed information on Global Gateway projects, selection criteria, funding sources, ex anteimpact assessments, stakeholder participation, implementing partners, local added value, and expected as well as measured outcomes, including in terms of trade impacts and progress towards achieving the SDGs; believes that transparency and effective communication are essential to ensure predictability, foster partner-country trust, secure buy-in, build momentum and demonstrate the added value of the Global Gateway; takes note of the Commission proposal for a new tracking and performance framework which should contribute to streamlining monitoring and reporting, based on key performance indicators; points out that limited awareness of the Global Gateway initiative in many partner countries remains a major obstacle to its success; calls therefore for more visibility, a stronger narrative and a coherent communication strategy;

78. Deplores the fact that the Global Gateway brand still lacks recognition and visibility, especially among partner countries; calls therefore for a well-resourced, clear and coordinated communication strategy, which includes multilingual communication focussing on EU and partner countries' interests and results for local stakeholders as Europe's positive offer;

79. Urges the Commission to improve transparency in the implementation of the European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus by publishing detailed, regularly updated information on guarantee agreements, signed and disbursed investments, implementing partners and beneficiaries, as recommended by the European Court of Auditors;

80. Calls for the Global Gateway to be codified and integrated into the Global Europe regulation, to be adopted before the next multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034; is of the opinion that such an improvement is urgently needed to ensure the legal certainty and transparency of the mandate; underlines Parliament's guiding principles in this regard, namely the central operational role of the Global Gateway Governance Board in defining and selecting projects, a change from a Commission-driven approach to a bottom-up approach focusing on a transformative sustainable agenda in the mutual interest, and stronger involvement of business sectors, partners and Parliament, as well as increased accountability;

Future funding and procurement

81. Emphasises that the financial instruments available at national and European level for Global Gateway projects must be adjusted to take account of the strategic context, the supply chain imperative, the sector specificities and the competitive environment and be transformed into a toolbox allowing for the creation of mutually beneficial partnerships and a level playing field for European businesses in partner countries; stresses that ensuring a balance between ODA and non-ODA financing is essential; reminds the Commission of the current requirement that at least 93 % of expenditure under NDICI-Global Europe must fulfil the criteria for ODA;

82. Stresses that projects implemented under the Global Gateway have at their core the involvement of the private sector of the EU, the partner countries and trusted partners; highlights that entities from the EU or like-minded partners must make up a significant share of any consortia participating in Global Gateway projects;

83. Underlines that procurement policies, due diligence processes and the conception of tenders have a strong influence on the success or failure of Global Gateway projects; calls for the use of environmental, social and governance criteria as well as criteria regarding quality, innovation, resilience and European participation, and security, reliability, sustainability and competitiveness; asks the Commission to define 'strategic procurement' and to ensure that procurement procedures and project-selection criteria reflect the requirements outlined above, emphasising qualitative criteria over price, maintaining transparency, promoting fair competition and value for money, and safeguarding the EU's strategic interests and autonomy as well as aligning with its values; calls for the Commission to consider adjustments to its public procurement approach and rules to ensure a level playing field for European companies;

84. Calls on the Commission to implement such eligibility criteria for companies taking part in Global Gateway projects to ensure that companies from the EU, like-minded countries and partner countries always retain operational control in the projects concerned;

85. Commends the European Investment Bank (EIB) on rolling out its Strategic Procurement Roadmap and already having a substantial share of EIB-financed projects implemented by EU companies; asks the EIB to critically assess and change its risk-averse approach;

Trade and investment promotion

86. Stresses that the Global Gateway should, for projects having a trade and investment dimension, enhance and facilitate mutually beneficial trade and investment relations, notably by developing and opening new trade routes and business opportunities, including for SMEs, and by supporting the development and modernisation of trade-enabling infrastructure, which is key to addressing high trade costs; recognises that, in an increasingly competitive global environment where trade dependencies are heavily weaponised and used as tools of economic coercion, the Global Gateway plays a key role in supporting the diversification of supply chains, reducing critical dependencies in key sectors, strengthening the EU's geopolitical position and enhancing its strategic resilience, economic security and long-term competitiveness, as called for by Mario Draghi in his report of 9 September 2024 on the future of European competitiveness, while, in conformity with the principle of Policy Coherence for Development, supporting partner countries' development priorities and respecting their democratic decision-making processes;

87. Stresses that the success of Global Gateway investments depends on a stable and predictable trade framework; calls for Global Gateway investments to include, where relevant, trade-facilitation components, ensuring real sustainable development and market-access gains and export potential for partner countries; calls for synergies between the Global Gateway initiatives and EU's trade policy to be ensured, including trade agreements, as well as implementation priorities under their trade and sustainable development chapters, the Generalised Scheme of Preferences and other existing trade frameworks and mechanisms; underlines that ensuring such synergies also requires screening Global Gateway flagship projects for security and strategic risk, in particular where state-controlled companies from authoritarian states may gain control over critical digital, maritime, transport, energy or communications infrastructure; calls for the Global Gateway to be well aligned with WTO rules, and, to the extent possible, support the inclusion of partner countries in the rules-based regional and global trade system; calls on the Commission to assess the trade and investment flows generated under the Global Gateway;

88. Calls for the Global Gateway to engage the private sector more directly through trade and investment promotion, and to secure the commitment of European businesses to engage in partner countries on flagship projects;

89. Calls for increased technical assistance to support institutional capacity and regulatory reform, particularly aimed at streamlining trade processes and strengthening partner countries' ability to comply with international standards including sanitary and phytosanitary standards, technical standards, sustainability standards, customs digitalisation and value-chain traceability; underlines that the Global Gateway must, nonetheless, respect domestic regulatory space and not be conditioned on regulatory reforms that weaken regulatory authorities;

90. Calls for the Global Gateway to support trade-enabling projects that can achieve socially inclusive and environmentally sustainable economic growth, integration and job creation, and that respect human rights; underlines that these projects, notably transport corridors, must not come at the expense of employment conditions or labour and environmental protection; calls for assurances that projects enhance mutual competitiveness, including by enabling alignment with climate targets and supporting compliance with the EU's trade-related autonomous sustainability measures tackling carbon emissions and adverse environmental impacts, and promoting human rights; believes that the Global Gateway, while seeking to secure the resilient supply of critical raw materials needed for the green transition and for the economic security of the EU, should take into account inclusive development and ensure that trade partners benefit from resource extraction through local processing and the transfer of skills and know-how, and generate added value for local communities; recalls that, in line with the EU's green diplomacy efforts, the Global Gateway should contribute to the energy transition; calls for Global Gateway financing to ensure interoperability with EU standards, transparent procedures and respect for environmental, social and governance standards, including through continuous monitoring systems;

Financial tools

91. Underlines that the EU has been implementing development finance and guarantee-based investment operations since well before the launch of the Global Gateway in 2021, including through the European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus;

92. Calls on the Commission to carry out an impact assessment of the European Fund for Sustainable Development and the European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus, which should form the basis of the next Global Europe Fund supporting the Global Gateway in the next multiannual financial framework, which must also measure progress in terms of reducing inequalities and enhancing human development, inclusion and accessibility, as well as in the promotion of social and environmental standards; insists that any future financial instruments must be based on a sound assessment of existing financing; is of the opinion that greater transparency and reporting are needed, as well as improved risk management and governance structures, also in terms of the detail of the budget nomenclature; considers that the barriers currently preventing European SMEs from participating more broadly in Global Gateway projects should be removed, while recognising the challenges arising from the large-scale financing context and with multinational companies as key private sector partners;

93. Emphasises the importance of an inclusive Team Europe approach; encourages the Commission, the EIB, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and national development finance institutions to design and implement Global Gateway de-risking instruments to make them simpler and more predictable, and to work in a way that actively opens access for businesses from all Member States, including those with no national development finance institutions, providing proportionate entry requirements and tailored opportunities for SMEs, and to devise dedicated political risk insurance schemes to Global Gateway projects;

94. Highlights the importance of trade and export promotion tools, including export credit agencies, guarantees, insurance products and business partnerships, as integral components of the Global Gateway toolbox; encourages the Commission and Member States to enhance coordination on the use of export credit agencies, economic diplomacy activities and high-level political visits under a Team Europe approach, with a view to facilitating sustainable exports and market entry for European companies in partner countries, in particular SMEs; calls for robust safeguards to ensure full compliance with international rules, EU development objectives and EU standards on human rights, the environment, climate transparency and debt sustainability;

95. Calls for the Commission and the Member States to ensure the full transparency of any operations involving joint or coordinated action between European export credit agencies and development finance institutions, including through the publication of project selection criteria, beneficiaries and impact assessments;

96. Recalls that EIB Global, the European Investment Bank's development arm, is one of the key implementers of the Global Gateway and is therefore expected to apply the highest standards of transparency and accountability in its projects; urges the Commission and implementing partners to publish related information in a timely and accessible manner; encourages the Commission to maximise cooperation with the EIB as the EU's bank, which should be reflected in the next multiannual financial framework; encourages development finance institutions implementing Global Gateway projects, such as the EIB, to make each project-related debt assessment publicly available; reiterates its call for EIB Global to be centred around an equitable and sustainable development agenda in recipient countries;

97. Underlines the need for an increased use of blended finance and concessional instruments where appropriate to make projects commercially viable; welcomes the EIB's efforts to further maximise efficiencies and streamline processes, including by applying mutual reliance with dedicated Team Europe partners wherever possible;

98. Further calls for an assessment regarding the extent to which ODA resources could be mobilised under the Global Gateway with the help of the EIB, in order also to achieve a clearer distinction between the EU's competitiveness agenda coming from non-ODA sources and the development agenda covered by ODA; points out that new and innovative technologies and SMEs need specific funding instruments and that grants should be available as well as loans, de-risking instruments and potentially equity;

99. Recalls that, in addition to EIB Global, other multilateral development banks involved in the implementation of the Global Gateway must equally adhere to high standards of transparency and accountability; stresses that all multilateral development banks participating in Global Gateway operations should demonstrate development additionality, avoid practices that increase debt vulnerabilities in partner countries, and align their financing with equitable, sustainable and locally beneficial development outcomes; calls on the Commission to ensure full compliance with these principles;

°

° °

100. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the President of the European Council, the Council and the Commission.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Four years after its inception and one year into the new Commission's term in which the Commissioner for International Partnerships has been tasked with scaling up Global Gateway as his main mission, the European Parliament has decided to have a closer look into the current state of the implementation the Initiative. We are enacting this in a cross-committee and cross-party approach, since the Global Gateway Initiative constitutes a new, long-term approach to European external action by intentionally integrating development, economic and geostrategic aspects in a holistic way. In this new approach, the European private sector plays a key role. To make this new approach a real success, the inclusion of civil society as well as local authorities and communities is equally important.

Global Gateway seeks to enhance the EU's geopolitical influence by building long-term, reciprocal, and mutually beneficial partnerships, promoting sustainable development and inclusive growth.

In the many encounters and conversations Rapporteurs had with third countries, businesses, civil society representatives and academia, the need for the European Union to propose a new, interest-, demand- and value-driven offer to third countries was clearly indicated. It has also become an objective necessity after the COVID crisis, which revealed and exacerbated the vulnerabilities of the EU's supply chains and highlighted the need for a diversification of the European economy regarding its goal of green and digital transformation and the new security imperatives.

Drawing legally and financially on the NDICI - Global Europe instrument, the Initiative has made visible progress including over 270 Global Gateway flagship projects EUR 306 billion mobilised - according to the Commission at the second Global Gateway Forum, held in Brussels in October 2025 on which occasion also a Global Gateway Investment Hub has been presented.

The Forum, GG projects on the ground as well as the experiences of the stakeholders in the GG structures and procedures nevertheless point at major challenges related to governance, transparency and accountability.

Global Gateway's overly Commission-driven, centralised, top-down structure has limited responsiveness to partner countries and private sector needs and weak ownership by local actors. The selection of flagship projects does not yet, follow transparent criteria. Moreover, the participation of European stakeholders in projects and the benefits for the EU remain unclear, besides information that Chinese companies are profiting from the Global Gateway Initiative.

The Rapporteurs reckon that a shift towards a participatory, bottom-up model, matching partner countries priorities with European expertise and private sector offer is of utmost importance. In this regard, private sector logics needs to be better understood and faster addressed. Rules, tools and procedures must be adapted to increased European business involvement in the EU's cooperation with strategic partners. Moreover, the Global Gateway Civil Society and Local Authorities Platform must move beyond a symbolic or consultative role also with regard to monitoring whether investments deliver tangible local benefits, lead to sustainable job and value chain creation, are socially inclusive and strengthen social and economic resilience globally.

The Rapporteurs primarily suggest entrusting the Global Gateway Board with decision-making powers and capacities, enabling it to run the initiative operationally, starting with increasing the frequency of meetings. At the time of drafting this report, the Board had only met twice in four years. Parliament's role and presence in the Board must be strengthened, too, ensuring policy coherence, democratic legitimacy, monitoring of implementation, impact assessment and project outcomes, political support and accountability. Any structural adjustment should aim to enhance the EU's existing economic, financial and technical "firepower", at national and supranational level, through better coordination, bundling and mutual re-enforcement as well as the decrease of bureaucratic hurdles and regulatory adjustments.

Looking forward, the Rapporteurs point out that in the next Global Europe regulation (2028-2034) a reformed Global Gateway initiative needs to be codified ensuring clear legal mandates, stronger parliamentary scrutiny, transparent funding mechanisms and inclusive and effective stakeholder participation.

Global Gateway's geopolitical potential will remain significant provided in-depth reforms are undertaken in the upcoming months: Only then, the EU will come closer to its goal to become a strong strategic partner offering a partnership-based alternative to competing initiatives like China's Silk and Belt Road Initiative while advancing the Sustainable Development Goals and reinforcing the EU's vision of a fair and rules-based international order.

ANNEX: DECLARATIONS OF INPUT

DECLARATION OF INPUT FROM CHLOÉ RIDEL

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she included in her report input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that she received, in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register[6], or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

DECLARATION OF INPUT FROM HILDEGARD BENTELE

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she included in her report input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that she received, in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register[7], or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE (27.1.2026)

for the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Development

on Global Gateway - past impacts and future orientation

(2025/2073(INI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Thierry Mariani

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on International Trade submits the following to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Development, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Recital G a (new)

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24 a (new)

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 4 a (new)

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 a (new)

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 b (new)

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 c (new)

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 d (new)

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 e (new)

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 f (new)

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 g (new)

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 h (new)

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 i (new)

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35 j (new)

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 37

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for opinion declares that he included in his opinion input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that he received, in the preparation of the opinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register[8], or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for opinion.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for opinion declares that he has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

- : against

0 : abstention

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

- : against

0 : abstention