Scale and Substance: reflections on academic conferences in European studies

By Adalgisa Martinelli

As an early-career researcher in European Studies, I have come to appreciate that academic conferences are not just venues to present our research. They are spaces where ideas take shape, networks are built, and scholarly identities begin to form. This spring, I had the opportunity to attend two very different conferences: the European Union in International Affairs (EUIA 2025) in Brussels (co-organised by the VUB, ULB, the University of Warwick, Egmont, and UNU-Cris) and the Challenges to Europe, European Challenges conference in Surrey, hosted by the Centre for Britain and Europe (CBE) at the University of Surrey.

Despite their differences in size, scope, and format, both conferences reminded me of the multiple roles these such events play in academic life. Rather than viewing them in opposition, big versus small, I see them as complementary, each offering distinct forms of intellectual and professional engagement. Here, I reflect on what stood out at each event, and what I took away in terms of substance and scholarly atmosphere.

EUIA 2025: A 360° view of Europe in a fragmented world

Hosted at USquare - the shared ULB/VUB campus in Brussels, the biennial EUIA conference brought together a vibrant mix of scholars, practitioners, and policymakers to reflect on Europe’s role in a challenging geopolitical environment. Since President Ursula von der Leyen's 2019 declaration of a Geopolitical Commission (Baracani & Kassim, 2024) the EU has faced overlapping global crises from COVID-19, the war in Ukraine, to climate change that continue to test its external ambitions and internal resilience.  The 2025 edition invited a critical reassessment: What does it mean for the EU to "act geopolitically" today? Is this shift toward pragmatism enhancing the EU’s global standing, or is it eroding its normative foundations?

With hundreds of attendees and dozens of parallel sessions, the conference offered a 360° view of the field from international relations to political science. Topics ranged from migration diplomacy and climate governance to EU-China relations and normative contestation. I presented a working empirical chapter on the European Commission’s evolving discourse from food security to food sovereignty, analyzing two critical junctures: the 2007–08 food crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic.

The size and scope of EUIA made it feel like a buzzing marketplace of ideas, an exciting, if sometimes overwhelming, environment. The breadth of sessions provided a sense of where the field is headed and how diverse the research community has become in approaching similar topics from different analytical standpoints. At the same time, the scale of the conference required pre-planning and intentionality to engage with colleagues by carefully pending which session to attend. Connections could be fleeting, and navigating the parallel panels meant making hard choices about where to invest one’s attention. Still, the conference’s agenda-setting nature was clear. Many discussions echoed with broader debates across EU institutions, media, and civil society, offering a powerful reminder of how academic work can intersect with real-world policy conversations.

Challenges to Europe, European Challenges: what type of dialogue in the era of dissensus?  

In contrast, the conference at the University of Surrey offered a more focused and intimate environment. Co-organized by the CBE and various specialist groups of the UK Political Studies Association, the event explored internal pressures on the EU, from rising populism and democratic backsliding due to the rise of far right, both radical and extreme, parties in contesting European governance and legitimacy.

Keynote addresses by Prof. Theofanis Exadaktylos and Dr. Nick Kitchen anchored the conference, offering thought-provoking insights on how to assess democratic resilience in light of the changing dynamics of Western alliances. Papers were pre-circulated, and sessions were attended by nearly all participants, fostering a strong sense of engagement and continuity. I presented a paper on how civil society organizations can fuel dissensus by framing the narrative of food sovereignty with a gastronationalist repertoire, challenging dominant discourses on the role CSOs organization play in fostering European integration.

What set this conference apart was the depth of dialogue. Conversations extended well beyond formal sessions, often over coffee, lunch, or informal gatherings. The scale created a kind of enforced sociability, you didn’t just encounter colleagues; you got to know them and that closeness yielded richer feedback, spontaneous collaborations, and possible future academic collaborations (Pierce, 2014).

Small doesn’t mean less serious or engaging! While large conferences often showcase a bigger variety of cutting-edge work across many fields, smaller ones offer more focused and substantive exchanges. There is less distraction and more room for critical reflection and conceptual development.

Lessons learned: beyond binary visions

Rather than seeing these two formats as a binary—“big and prestigious” vs. “small and intimate”— I found them to be mutually enriching. EUIA gave me a sense of visibility and connectedness within a broader academic ecosystem. It allowed me to situate my work in current, sometimes high-profile, debates and observe how research agendas are shaped across disciplines and institutions. The Surrey conference, on the other hand, gave me space for focused, in-depth engagement. It invited me to slow down, listen carefully, and critically reflect, not just on my own work, but on that of our peers. It also pushed me to talk to everyone in the room, to exchange ideas more freely, and to cultivate new intellectual relationships.

Each setting called for different academic skills from strategic planning and networking in Brussels, to more casual but meaningful discussion in Guildford, but both offered invaluable opportunities to grow as scholars.

What I’ve come to realize is that conferences are more than just professional milestones or platforms for dissemination. They are training grounds for how we want to think, collaborate, and contribute to our fields. Learning how to attend a conference is like working out; one thing is learning how to participate in and shape its conversations is another.

I feel fortunate to have experienced both types of gatherings this spring. They offered different energies, different lessons, and different challenges, but together, they represented two meaningful opportunities to my understanding of what it means to be part of an academic community.

Bibliography

Baracani, E., & Kassim, H. (2024). The ‘Geopolitical Commission’: An End of Term Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13673

Pierce, G. N. (2014). On meetings and conferences: Is bigger really better? Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology, 92(7), v–v. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjpp-2014-0081