SME Policy Index for Western Balkans and Türkiye 2026

SME Policy Index 2026 performance: Overall trends and cross-dimensional insights

Overview of key findings by policy dimension

This chapter provides an overview of the regional scores and key findings of the 2026 SME Policy Index for each of the 13 policy dimensions.1 The 2026 assessment indicates that regional performance has not significantly accelerated since the last assessment.

After a decade of significant efforts to build policy frameworks and align with European standards, the overall reform trajectory appears to be stabilising. Scores have remained largely stagnant in 7 of the 122 policy dimensions compared to 2022 (Figure 1). Improvements in the formalisation and refinement of policy frameworks have been largely offset by limited and uneven gains in implementation, uptake and firm-level outcomes across policy areas.

However, this slowdown should not be interpreted as a decline in commitment or ambition. Policy frameworks are now largely in place, reform activity continues, and small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) development remains high on the policy agenda. Rather, the nature of the reform challenge has evolved. Many policy areas have moved beyond the design phase and entered a more demanding stage focused on implementation, where overall progress has been rather slow.

Overall, stronger performance, similar to what was observed in 2022, has been observed in more mature policy areas, notably the institutional and regulatory framework, the operational environment for SMEs, public procurement, and standards and technical regulations. By contrast, policy areas associated with longer term transformation – including innovation, SME greening and digital transformation – perform comparatively weaker, reflecting persistent implementation and monitoring gaps.

Figure 1. Regional score performance across dimensions

Taken together, these findings underscore the importance of interpreting SME policy performance as an interconnected system rather than as a set of stand-alone policy areas. This reflects not only the patterns observed in the assessment, but also the intrinsic nature of SME policy itself: outcomes for SMEs are shaped by the interaction of multiple, mutually reinforcing policy domains and cannot be meaningfully assessed in isolation.

To support this system‑level perspective, the assessment groups individual dimensions into four policy clusters (Table 4), bringing together related analytical aspects within the respective policy dimensions to reflect the evolving economic landscape and highlight cross-cutting issues affecting SME competitiveness and resilience across the region (see Methodology).

Table 4. SME Policy Index 2026 – Policy clusters

Policy clusters
Cluster 1: Ensuring an enabling environment for SMEs and entrepreneurs
Cluster 2: Fostering SME sustainability and resilience
Cluster 3: Supporting digital transformation of SMEs
Cluster 4: Harnessing human and social capital for SME development

Dimension 1: Entrepreneurial learning and women’s entrepreneurship (Cluster 4)

This dimension examines how policies across the Western Balkans and Türkiye (WBT) region foster entrepreneurial mindsets and promote inclusive entrepreneurship. It considers how education and training systems develop entrepreneurial competences and shape attitudes towards entrepreneurship alongside how policy frameworks, partnerships and support mechanisms expand access to opportunities, particularly for women entrepreneurs, through targeted measures (see Dimension 1).

Across the region, entrepreneurial learning and inclusiveness have made some progress since the previous assessment, as reflected in the increase in the average score for this dimension (see Table 5). While Montenegro and Türkiye continue to stand out as strong performers, Albania and North Macedonia have seen recent improvements, recording the most notable increases in performance. Despite stronger policy recognition of entrepreneurial learning across the region, entrepreneurship ecosystems remain only partially institutionalised, with limited alignment between policy frameworks and classroom delivery that continues to constrain the effectiveness, inclusiveness and long-term impact of entrepreneurial education.

Dimension 2: Bankruptcy and second chance for SMEs (Cluster 1, Cluster 2)

This dimension examines policies that help SMEs prevent and manage financial distress. It covers preventive tools such as early warning systems to help SMEs anticipate and mitigate financial challenges, advisory and technical support services for financial recovery, as well as legal frameworks for out-of-court settlements and second-chance mechanisms. This dimension also considers the digitalisation of restructuring and insolvency processes and transparency of bankruptcy-related information (see Dimension 2).

Insolvency and second-chance frameworks across the WBT region show only limited progress since the previous assessment (see Table 5), with reforms focusing on legal procedures while preventive mechanisms remain largely underdeveloped and early warning systems are mostly absent. Regional performance remains relatively low compared to other dimensions of the assessment, with Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Türkiye emerging as stronger performers. Overall, insolvency frameworks continue to be weakly institutionalised, often relying on fragmented, donor-driven initiatives and limited monitoring and data systems, thus hindering the effective and scalable delivery of prevention and second‑chance support for SMEs.

Dimension 3: Institutional and regulatory framework for SME policymaking (Cluster 1)

This dimension examines the extent to which the institutional and regulatory environment supports effective SME policymaking. It assesses whether governance structures, mandates and co-ordination mechanisms provide a solid basis for the design, implementation and monitoring of SME policies. It also considers the use of tools to ensure that regulations are streamlined and their impacts on SMEs systematically evaluated. In addition, it looks at how policymaking processes incorporate stakeholder input, focusing on the transparency, frequency and inclusiveness of consultations with the private sector (see Dimension 3).

Legislative and institutional frameworks for SME support have continued to evolve and be refined, although overall scores have largely stagnated since the previous cycle (see Table 5), reflecting limited substantive progress. In this assessment cycle, five of the seven economies score above the regional average of 3.77, indicating strong overall performance, with Montenegro demonstrating the most advanced results. Further progress towards higher performance levels will require addressing persistent challenges, such as co-ordination across government and predictable funding horizons.

Dimension 4: Operational environment for SMEs (Cluster 1, Cluster 3)

This dimension examines the extent to which the operational environment enables SMEs to interact efficiently with public administrations. It assesses the availability, quality and responsiveness of public services across key stages of the business life cycle, considering the extent to which administrative processes are accessible and tailored to the needs of SMEs (see Dimension 4).

Operational environment frameworks in the WBT region have recorded mixed progress across policy areas since the previous assessment, resulting in an overall stagnation in performance (see Table 5). Although advances have been observed in the expansion of digital government services and the strengthening of strategic frameworks, persistent bottlenecks in digital procedures, interoperability and administrative co‑ordination continue to constrain overall efficiency. In this context, Albania, Serbia and Türkiye stand out as comparatively stronger performers, reflecting more mature and integrated digital systems alongside clearer reform trajectories. However, limited integration of digital and administrative systems continues to limit the delivery of seamless, efficient and user-centric services for businesses.

Dimension 5a: Support services for SMEs and start-ups (Cluster 1, Cluster 2, Cluster 3)

This dimension assesses how governments organise and deliver business support services for SMEs. It examines whether strategic frameworks, institutions and budgets provide a structured basis for support; how programmes are designed and monitored; and how policies develop private advisory markets through incentives, quality assurance and support to business support service providers (see Dimension 5a).

Business support service systems across the WBT region show a slight overall deterioration (see Table 5), reflecting emerging implementation gaps as earlier gains in strategic frameworks and programme expansion have not been matched by progress in outcome‑based monitoring and private market development. Türkiye remains the clear regional leader while Montenegro continues to perform strongly supported by large‑scale and more consolidated delivery systems, stronger digitalisation of services, and more advanced use of co‑financing instruments; most other economies maintain solid but less mature systems, particularly in stimulating and sustaining private advisory provision. The key structural constraint remains the weak development of sustainable private business support service markets, as service provision continues to be predominantly programme‑driven and publicly anchored, with limited use of accreditation, demand‑side instruments and outcome‑based monitoring to support independent, quality‑assured service ecosystems.

Dimension 5b: Public procurement (Cluster 1, Cluster 2)

This dimension analyses the extent to which public procurement frameworks in the WBT region have supported SME access to public contracts. It examines the role of SMEs in public tendering processes and assesses whether the prevailing policy and business environment has acted as a facilitator or barrier to their participation, identifying the instruments that have proven effective and the areas where structural gaps persist (see Dimension 5b).

Public procurement systems across the WBT have remained stable (see Table 5), marked by strengthened legal and strategic frameworks, wider use of best price‑quality award criteria, and gradual improvements in monitoring and oversight, although implementation remains uneven. Albania, Kosovo and Serbia emerge as the strongest performers, supported by more advanced use of strategic procurement tools, stronger monitoring practices and measurable improvements in SME participation. Overall, however, improvements in procurement frameworks are not yet consistently reflected in SME access and upgrading across several economies, as gaps persist in SME‑specific data collection, contract segmentation, and consistent application of quality‑based and sustainable procurement practices across the full procurement cycle.

Dimension 6: Access to finance for SMEs (Cluster 1, Cluster 2, Cluster 3, Cluster 4)

This dimension assesses the strategies, legal frameworks and policies in place across the WBT region to facilitate SMEs’ access to external finance. It examines bank and non-bank financing as well as the broader conditions shaping SMEs’ financial inclusion (see Dimension 6).

Under the revised assessment framework,3 access‑to‑finance systems across the WBT region show mixed performance relative to the previous cycle (see Table 5), reflecting significant structural and methodological changes rather than a straightforward shift in policy effectiveness. Türkiye stands out as the clear leader, supported by large-scale and diversified financial instruments across bank and non-bank financing, while other economies maintain relatively similar levels of performance since the last assessment, reflecting moderate progress in banking infrastructure but limited development of alternative financing channels. At the same time, this progress is tempered by the limited development of non-bank financing instruments, as venture capital, equity markets and crowdfunding remain limited in scale and accessibility, constraining SMEs’ ability to access growth‑oriented finance beyond traditional bank lending.

Dimension 7: Standards and technical regulations (Cluster 1, Cluster 2, Cluster 3)

This dimension examines the quality infrastructure systems and procedures in place across the WBT region to support SME access to the EU Single Market. It assesses the coherence of institutional and strategic frameworks for quality infrastructure co-ordination; the degree of alignment with EU and international rules across technical regulations, standardisation, accreditation, metrology, conformity assessment and market surveillance; and the extent to which government initiatives have effectively broadened SME access to standardisation processes (see Dimension 7).

Standards and technical regulation systems across the WBT region have remained broadly stable, as continued legislative alignment with the EU acquis and incremental improvements in SME access to standardisation have not resulted in a significant change in overall performance (see Table 5). Türkiye and Serbia continue to lead due to strong quality infrastructure co‑ordination and extensive awareness raising while Albania and Montenegro have strengthened SME engagement through digitalisation and institutional consolidation; other economies remain constrained by uneven implementation across quality infrastructure pillars. Despite continued alignment efforts, regulatory improvements have not consistently translated into SME upgrading across several economies, reflecting persistent gaps in strategic co‑ordination, financial support for certification and standards adoption, and outcome‑focused monitoring of quality infrastructure interventions.

Dimension 8a: Enterprise skills (Cluster 4)

This dimension assesses policies and programmes that support the development of skills needed by SMEs and social enterprises. It examines how systems identify current and future skills needs through skills intelligence; the availability of upskilling and reskilling opportunities, particularly in green, digital and artificial intelligence-related areas; and the extent to which training provision addresses the specific needs of social enterprises (see Dimension 8a).

Since the previous assessment (see Table 5), skills and social entrepreneurship systems have recorded gradual progress in strengthening policy frameworks and expanding skills intelligence efforts, but implementation remains uneven and frequently lacks continuity and operational depth. As in 2022, Türkiye remains the leading performer in this dimension, supported by more advanced monitoring systems and a strong cross-sectoral strategic approach. Nevertheless, economies across the region continue to face challenges in translating policy ambitions into effective systems, as limited institutional co-ordination, reliance on donor-led and ad hoc initiatives, and weak incentives hinder the development of forward‑looking, responsive skills ecosystems.

Dimension 8b: Innovation policy for SMEs (Cluster 1, Cluster 2, Cluster 3)

This dimension assesses the strategic framework, infrastructure and policy measures in place to stimulate SME innovation and support the development of a knowledge-based economy in the WBT region. It examines the strategic, institutional and financial conditions that shape firms’ ability to innovate; adopt new technologies; collaborate with research institutions; and bring new products, services and processes to the market (see Dimension 8b).

Innovation systems across the WBT region have gradually improved since the previous assessment (see Table 5), supported by expanded strategic frameworks, increased public funding, and growing investment in innovation infrastructure and start-up support programmes. Türkiye and Serbia have consolidated their position as the lead performers in the region, reflecting comparatively mature and well-funded innovation ecosystems. However, the limited depth and integration of these ecosystems continue to constrain the translation of policy advances into broad-based innovation outcomes, while the absence of systematic monitoring and evaluation limits the ability to assess their effectiveness and to inform policy adjustments.

Dimension 9: SMEs in a green economy (Cluster 1, Cluster 2, Cluster 3)

This dimension assesses the provision of policies that promote green behaviour and resilience among SMEs in the WBT region while ensuring a balanced approach to economic opportunities and environmental sustainability (see Dimension 9).

SME greening frameworks across the WBT region show moderate improvement since the previous assessment (see Table 5), driven by stronger policy prioritisation; expanded incentives; and wider integration of greening objectives into SME, industrial and environmental strategies, although implementation and monitoring remain uneven. Türkiye and Montenegro record higher performance, reflecting more comprehensive greening policy frameworks, stronger financing instruments, and more integrated approaches linking regulation and support schemes. The other economies have advanced more gradually. Nonetheless, measurable SME-level outcomes remain limited across most economies due to weak monitoring systems; insufficiently scaled financial instruments; and weak links between policy design, implementation and impact assessment.

Dimension 10: Internationalisation of SMEs (Cluster 1, Cluster 2, Cluster 3)

This dimension assesses how effectively governments support SMEs internationalisation. It reviews whether policies and institutions enable SMEs to export, join global value chains and use e‑commerce as a channel for cross‑border trade. This dimension also reviews the availability and effectiveness of practical support, such as training, finance, digital tools and partnerships, and whether these measures are well‑implemented, monitored and aligned with broader economic strategies to strengthen SMEs’ international competitiveness (see Dimension 10).

Internationalisation systems across the WBT region display stable performance (Table 5), as strengthened strategic frameworks, improved institutional co‑ordination, and expanding delivery tools and activities have not yet translated into a step‑change in outcomes beyond export entry support. Türkiye records the highest performance, reflecting a large‑scale and well‑institutionalised system, followed by a group of economies including North Macedonia and Serbia, where institutional capacity and strategic coherence are stronger. Other economies continue to rely more heavily on exposure‑oriented and activity‑based instruments. At the same time, internationalisation systems remain only partially integrated, as pathways linking export readiness, finance, standards, supplier development and sustained participation in global value chains – particularly through e‑commerce – remain underdeveloped across much of the region.

Dimension 11: Digital transformation of SMEs (Cluster 1, Cluster 3)

This dimension examines to what extent policy frameworks enable SMEs to engage in and benefit from digital transformation. It assesses the policy foundations supporting SME digitalisation, the extent to which a trusted digital environment is in place, and how effectively policy efforts promote the adoption of emerging technologies to enhance productivity and sustainability (see Dimension 11).

Across the WBT region, digital transformation policies are characterised by relatively established foundations in strategic frameworks and digital safety alongside significantly weaker and more uneven progress in translating these into SME adoption of advanced technologies, as reflected in the overall score (see Table 5). Performance varies across the region, with Türkiye and Serbia recording higher scores, underpinned by more coherent digital policy frameworks, larger scale instruments and stronger innovation ecosystems. The remaining economies display broadly comparable performance, with emerging frameworks and still-limited delivery capacity. Overall, the assessment points to a persistent structural challenge across the region: while policy ambition is growing, translating digital frameworks into widespread, scalable and productivity-enhancing adoption by SMEs, particularly of advanced technologies, remains a work in progress.

Table 5. Western Balkan and Türkiye economies' score performance across dimensions

	ALB	BIH	KOS	MNE	MKD	SRB	TUR	WBT average 2026	WBT average 2022
Dimension 1: Entrepreneurial learning and women’s entrepreneurship	3.39	3.24	3.31	4.50	3.40	3.75	4.42	3.72	3.49
Dimension 2: Bankruptcy and second chance for SMEs	2.77	3.20	2.57	3.32	2.81	2.80	3.30	2.97	3.03
Dimension 3: Institutional and regulatory framework for SME policymaking	3.87	3.15	3.84	4.19	3.49	3.98	3.89	3.77	3.79
Dimension 4: Operational environment for SMEs	4.27	3.05	3.64	3.54	3.63	4.03	4.09	3.75	3.64
Dimension 5a: Support services for SMEs and start-ups	3.95	3.40	4.07	4.48	3.87	4.09	4.63	4.07	4.20
Dimension 5b: Public procurement	4.37	3.84	4.16	3.97	3.85	4.35	3.83	4.05	3.98
Dimension 6: Access to finance for SMEs	3.13	2.96	3.00	3.17	3.27	3.17	3.76	3.21	3.27*
Dimension 7: Standards and technical regulations	4.34	3.45	3.83	4.11	3.54	4.46	4.65	4.05	3.96
Dimension 8a: Enterprise skills	3.44	2.86	3.05	3.75	3.19	3.76	4.07	3.44	3.32
Dimension 8b: Innovation policy for SMEs	2.97	2.44	2.62	3.56	3.30	3.83	4.19	3.27	3.18
Dimension 9: SMEs in a green economy	2.69	2.96	2.29	3.82	3.01	3.07	4.31	3.16	2.94
Dimension 10: Internationalisation of SMEs	3.68	2.90	3.70	3.53	3.87	3.79	4.86	3.76	3.80
Dimension 11: Digital transformation of SMEs	2.93	2.33	2.91	2.81	3.10	3.38	3.57	3.00	n.a.

Notes: Dimension 6 was revised for the 2026 assessment to better reflect evolving SME finance policies and alignment with OECD and EU good practices, with a greater emphasis on non‑bank finance, capital market instruments and implementation effectiveness. To preserve comparability, 2022 scores were recalculated using the revised framework. Dimension 13 Dimension 13 – Digital transformation of SMEs was introduced in the 2026 cycle; as such, no comparison with the 2022 assessment is possible.

Notes

← 1.  The 2026 SME Policy Index covers 13 policy dimensions to reflect both continuity with the established Small Business Act (SBA) assessment framework and the evolving policy priorities affecting SME competitiveness. The core SBA‑related dimensions assessed in previous cycles remain unchanged, ensuring longitudinal comparability across most policy areas, while the “Digital transformation of SMEs” (Dimension 11) was introduced as a new, stand‑alone dimension to capture the growing importance of digitalisation; digital safety; and advanced technologies for SME productivity, resilience and competitiveness. As a result, the assessment expands from 12 to 13 dimensions in 2026, strengthening the analytical coverage of emerging transformation challenges while preserving the benchmarking function of the SME Policy Index. For full details on the methodology and the background to this assessment please refer to the dedicated sections (see Methodology).

← 2.  Dimension 13 – Digital transformation of SMEs was introduced in the 2026 cycle; as such, no comparison with the 2022 assessment is possible.

← 3.  Dimension 6 was revised for the 2026 assessment to better reflect evolving SME finance policies and alignment with OECD and EU good practices, with a greater emphasis on non‑bank finance, capital market instruments and implementation effectiveness. To preserve comparability, 2022 scores were recalculated using the revised framework; score changes should, therefore, be interpreted with caution, as they may reflect methodological adjustments in addition to policy developments.