The economic indicators we rely on today to understand the direction of the economy have, in fact, a history of barely a century. These concepts were originally developed to meet the needs of their time, to make social inequalities visible, and to measure how fairly prosperity was being distributed across society. Over the decades, methodologies have evolved and calculations have become more refined; yet, the figures we obtain still represent “the closest wrong answer to the truth.”
However, societies are by nature composed of diverse groups with differing priorities. Thus, even when a single and definitive figure, such as a country’s growth rate, is announced, its impact on daily life can vary greatly from one individual, class or sector to another. Economic indicators often resemble the elephant metaphor: everyone touches the same whole, yet each perceives a different part of it.
This is precisely why current debates on “growth” in Europe are so compelling. For some, a low growth rate signals stagnation; for others, it reflects a conscious slowdown in pursuit of sustainability. At a time when the EU is frequently accused of “not growing,” the real question may be this: Is the problem that Europe is not growing, or that our definition of growth itself needs to change?
In today’s age of global uncertainty, everything is the opposite of what it appears to be, and nothing is the opposite of what it seems to be. The purpose of this article is not to challenge the numbers themselves, but to question the meanings we assign to them. To truly read an economy is not merely to know the data; it is to recognize the intellectual framework, the value judgments and the choices that lie behind them – because every number carries both the story it tells and the story it conceals.
Therefore, as the world goes through the pains of a major transition, it is essential to question judgmental and conclusive perspectives – and not imprison ourselves within the “truths of yesterday” – if we are to keep pace with the spirit of our time.
Outgrown growth or stagnation?
In a global landscape dominated by the power struggle between the United States and China, the picture seems almost clear to an outside observer looking at Europe’s economic indicators: growth rates are historically low. Germany is being dragged along, France is stagnant, and Italy is barely growing. From the perspective of Türkiye or many Asian economies, this scenario inspires headlines claiming “Europe is collapsing.” But the matter is far from that simple.
Europe has long not only been experiencing stagnation but also theorizing it. Over the past decade, a noticeable “growth fatigue” has emerged. Constant growth is no longer seen as a goal, but as a paradigm to be transcended. Concepts like “redistribution of wealth,” “carbon-neutral economy,” or “quality-of-life-centered development” have replaced classical growth indicators with new normative ideals. The deep-rooted ideological commitment to protecting nature has borne political fruit in Europe, where in the 2019 elections, those who viewed environmental preservation as the top priority gained notable representation – around 10% – in the European Parliament. The European Commission’s “Beyond GDP” vision comes into play here: Gross Domestic Product is no longer a measure of success, or even a reference point.
Here lies the irony: while Europe claims to have “outgrown growth,” it is actually trying to make stagnation meaningful. Slowdowns are rebranded as “sustainability,” and production shortfalls are legitimized under the guise of “ethical maturity.” This new discourse is summed up by the concept of “outgrown growth, ”that is, transcending growth. Yet perhaps what Europe is really doing is not transcending growth, but aestheticizing it. When viewed through the lens of the far-right groups, whose influence continues to grow amid debates over employment, economic welfare, and austerity policies, a very different perspective emerges. Yet both represent the realities of Europe in 2025.
As the EU in the final quarter of 2025, it faces a profound rupture in its growth policy. Major economies such as France, Italy and Spain continue to miss the fiscal and debt criteria, while the commission’s new automatic debt-reduction plan, set to take effect in 2026, evokes memories of the “austerity without growth” era of the 2010s. In a phase where fiscal discipline is once again being idealized, Europe seems to be limiting its own economic momentum.
At the same time, the much-touted green transition has yet to evolve into a sustainable growth strategy. The “Green Deal Industrial Plan” remains largely on paper, energy costs are high and industrial competitiveness is weak. Domestic demand is stagnant, household confidence is low, and growth dynamics are regionally fragmented. Altogether, this raises a deeper question about how Europe now defines economic prosperity itself: more consumption or a sustainable nature.
Ahead or left behind?
From the perspective of emerging economies, this scenario is also worth noting. On the global competitive plane, the idea of “not growing” is often perceived as a near-catastrophe. Historically, growth remains synonymous with prosperity, employment and social mobility. Europe’s post-growth policies are thus met with caution, not only for economic reasons but also historical ones: while Europe approaches the threshold of maturity, most other countries are only now reaching the threshold of development.
Economic figures always tell two stories: one visible, one hidden. Europe’s story today is exactly that. On one hand, a discourse of ethicalized growth; on the other, an economic structure that has lost its dynamism. No matter how the world chooses to see this picture, Türkiye must interpret it carefully, reading both the crises and the opportunities it presents.
Obliged to full potential
If Europe consciously limits its growth, Türkiye’s export channels are directly affected, particularly in high-demand sectors such as automotive and home appliances. In the short run, orders may decline, but this situation also creates an opportunity for Türkiye to redirect its production capacity toward the segments Europe is leaving vacant. For instance, electric vehicle (EV) components and green energy technologies – areas that the EU has not fully prioritized in its own industrial strategy – offer Türkiye a chance to both expand production volumes and diversify its export portfolio. Even if overall European demand contracts, Türkiye can leverage its logistical proximity and cost advantages to capture market share in niche segments, strengthening its long-term strategic position.
Moreover, Europe’s stagnation serves as a wake-up call for Türkiye to rethink its branding and high-value-added strategies. In the EU, competition is increasingly defined not by price alone, but by sustainability, ethical production and quality. Türkiye can capitalize on this gap by strengthening its brands in green manufacturing and high-value-added sectors. In the automotive industry, for example, advanced component production for EVs stands out as a critical opportunity to fill demand vacuums created by Europe’s constrained growth and high energy costs. In doing so, Türkiye can position itself not merely as a manufacturer but as a strategic brand in the global competitive arena.
Whatever Europe’s choices on growth may be, the message for Türkiye is clear: as Mustafa Kemal Atatürk emphasized, what we need is to be hardworking and productive, and this productivity should align with the demands of our era, reflecting a vision of prosperity that goes beyond mere economic growth.
