How do EU Trade Associations Bridge Brussels and National Capitals? The Internal Side of Public Affairs (56)

By Alan Hardacre, PhD

Co-Founder Advocacy Academy, Advocacy Strategy

Working effectively in the EU requires working with all three key European Institutions (Commission / Parliament / Council). European Trade Associations often excel with the Commission (their natural partner) and work well with the Parliament (more challenging but still based in Brussels-Strasbourg). Where things become much more challenging is if/how/when they work with the Council across the 27 Member States and their network of National Associations. I have seen, far too often, how this results in a so-called two-legged stool – EU Associations that work with two of the three institutions. Clearly this is not good enough – for everyone involved. I think this is perhaps one of the most complex governance and operational challenges facing the European association community, national associations and of course all of the member companies.

The Structural Challenge

European public affairs work is only as strong as its national public affairs work. But, for many reasons this is a challenge to tackle. For example;

• Each Member State is different and might, or might not, have a National Association

• If there are National Associations the membership is likely not the same as the EU Association

• National Associations vary significantly in size, capacity, and access to decision-makers. Many are smaller more regulatory focused associations with limited capacity

• Not all National Associations can dedicate the same level of time or expertise to EU policy issues. Some can’t dedicate any.

• European policy developments often outpace the capacity of National Associations to respond or contribute, while feedback from capitals is not always systematically captured or shared.

• The relevance and urgency of EU files differ by Member State, making alignment on action difficult without structured coordination.

• EU files and issues are likely secondary to many national objectives – making EU work a distant second to national work.

  
  

From Coordination to Collaboration

Overcoming these challenges requires moving beyond traditional coordination models toward more structured, collaborative, and data-informed partnerships. Several solutions are emerging as best practices across the European Association landscape.

1. Shared Planning Frameworks and Priority Mapping

Creating a standardized “country-issue matrix” enables both European and National Associations to identify the priority and potential impact of each policy file. Using a simple scale (e.g., 1–5) ensures comparability and helps allocate attention and resources strategically. This shared framework brings transparency, allowing the European Association to target support where it is most needed and to anticipate upcoming challenges in specific markets.

2. Structured Communication and Clear Expectations

Formalizing communication processes between European and National Associations reduces misunderstandings and ensures efficiency. This includes:

• Distinguishing clearly between actions required and information provided.

• Scheduling regular online coordination meetings and one annual face-to-face forum.

• Sharing concise minutes and action trackers within 48 hours to maintain momentum.

The aim is to build predictability and professional discipline into the relationship, reducing the burden on limited national resources.

3. Tactical National Teams

In priority markets, small “tactical teams” combining local company representatives with National Association staff can serve as high-impact task forces. They operate on specific EU policy files, ensuring that messages developed at European level are effectively adapted to local contexts. These teams also offer valuable intelligence to the European Association on political sensitivities, local narratives, and stakeholder positions. These teams allow local engagement on EU priorities without putting too much burden on the national Trade Association – whilst keeping them informed and involved.

4. Direct European Association Involvement Where Necessary

In cases where National Associations face resource or access limitations, the European Association may need to engage directly with national policymakers — always in partnership and transparency with the local association. This should be seen not as bypassing, but as reinforcing the national effort during critical phases of the policy cycle. Of course this requires resources in the European Association.

Additional Strategic Solutions

Beyond these best practice measures, European Associations can further strengthen their in-country advocacy impact by investing in structural and cultural mechanisms that foster sustained alignment.

5. Thematic or Regional Hubs

Creating regional clusters (e.g., Nordics, Central Europe, Southern Europe) or thematic hubs (e.g., sustainability, market access) can enable smaller National Associations to pool capacity and expertise. These hubs can act as intermediaries between the European Association and national members, improving coverage without overburdening smaller associations.

6. Knowledge Platforms and Data Intelligence

Digital platforms for structured knowledge sharing — ideally equipped with AI-assisted search and summarization — can ensure continuity and reduce information loss. A shared extranet or SharePoint space can evolve into a dynamic repository of advocacy intelligence, good practices, and national stakeholder mapping.

7. Capacity Building and Skills Exchange

Structured training and peer-learning programmes enhance the overall advocacy maturity of the network. Short webinars on EU policy developments, targeted workshops on national implementation, and “mentorship pairings” between experienced and emerging National Associations foster both alignment and competence.

8. Joint Messaging and Spokesperson Development

Developing shared communication toolkits and coordinated public messaging helps project a consistent European narrative while allowing for national adaptation. Establishing a pool of trained national spokespersons, briefed on EU priorities, further enhances advocacy coherence across capitals.

A Framework for the Future

Ultimately, success in European advocacy depends on coordinated empowerment — where European Associations provide the structure, tools, and foresight, and National Associations bring local credibility, intelligence, political access and engagement. To make this work the onus is very much on the European Association to build the right framework.

By building the right structured collaboration, aligning on priorities, leveraging digital tools, and investing in people and partnerships, European Associations can turn a longstanding challenge into a strategic advantage — ensuring that Brussels and National Capitals speak with one clear, credible, and coordinated voice.