Advancing research on the European Union’s maritime security: Reflections on a UACES-funded field trip to Brussels.
I am very pleased to acknowledge the generous support provided by the University Association for Contemporary European Studies (UACES) through its “Microgrant Scheme”, which enabled me to undertake a research visit to Brussels in June 2026 in support of my forthcoming book, “The Making of a Strategy: The European Union and Maritime Security, 2000-2025”. The award funded an intensive two-day fieldwork visit to Brussels, allowing me to collect primary research material for two key chapters of the manuscript. As the main centre of European policymaking, Brussels offers unparalleled opportunities to engage directly with officials involved in the formulation and implementation of the European Union’s security and defence policies. Therefore, the opportunity to conduct on-site research represented a significant contribution to the development of the project.
My book examines the transformation of the European Union into an increasingly prominent maritime security actor between 2000 and 2025. It seeks to explain how maritime security has emerged as a strategic priority within the Union’s external action and to explore the political, institutional, and geopolitical factors that have shaped this evolution. Spanning a period that includes the launch of Operation Atalanta, the adoption of the first European Union Maritime Security Strategy in 2014, the revision of that strategy in 2023, and the deployment of Operation Aspides in the Red Sea until the latest development in the Strait of Hormuz, the project provides the first comprehensive account of the development of the EU’s maritime strategic thinking. By combining documentary analysis, elite interviews, and original empirical research, the study seeks to advance our understanding of how European maritime strategy is formulated and implemented.
The research visit took place over two days in early June 2026 and centred on a series of interviews with officials working within European Union institutions. During the visit, I conducted four anonymous elite interviews with policymakers possessing direct knowledge of the development of the EU’s maritime security agenda. These interviews generated valuable insights into the internal dynamics of policy formulation, the interaction between EU institutions and member states, and the strategic considerations underpinning the Union’s evolving maritime posture. The discussions also shed light on the processes through which consensus is built among diverse actors operating within the EU’s complex institutional environment. At the thematic level, the interviews focused on the formulation and evolution of the European Union’s maritime security strategies, the role of key institutional actors, and the influence of changing geopolitical conditions on strategic decision-making. Particular attention was devoted to understanding how policymakers have responded to emerging challenges, including instability in the Union’s southern neighbourhood, increased geopolitical competition in maritime domains, and growing concerns regarding the security of global sea lines of communication. As with many studies of European policymaking, official documents reveal only part of the story. For this reason, elite interviews provide a unique opportunity to explore the motivations, preferences, and negotiations that often remain hidden from the public record. Consequently, the evidence gathered in Brussels constitutes a particularly important component of the project’s broader methodological framework.
The material collected during the visit will contribute directly to the chapters examining the development of the European Union’s Maritime Security Strategies and the institutional processes through which maritime security became embedded within the Union’s strategic thinking. The interviews have already provided important empirical evidence and helped identify new avenues for analysis that will strengthen the manuscript’s overall argument. Beyond the immediate research outputs, the visit also reinforced the value of conducting fieldwork within the institutional environment under examination. Direct engagement with policymakers and practitioners offers insights that cannot be fully replicated through remote research methods and contributes significantly to the depth and quality of academic scholarship.
This research visit illustrates the important role that targeted funding schemes play in supporting high-quality research in European Studies. In this regard, microgrants possess the potential to generate substantial scholarly benefits by facilitating access to primary sources, enabling engagement with policymakers, and supporting the collection of original empirical evidence. The UACES Microgrant Scheme performs a particularly valuable function in this regard by helping researchers undertake activities that directly enhance the quality, originality, and impact of their work.
I am extremely grateful to UACES for its support of this project. Such funding has made a meaningful contribution to the development of the manuscript and has enabled the collection of evidence that will strengthen its empirical and analytical foundations. As the project progresses towards completion, the findings generated through this fieldwork will be incorporated into the manuscript and disseminated through future academic publications, conference presentations, and engagement with the wider community in this scholarly field. I look forward to sharing the outcomes of this research and to contributing further to scholarly debates on the European Union’s role as a maritime security actor, and I encourage all researchers to apply for the upcoming rounds of the UACES’ “Microgrant” applications.
