# EUR-Lex - 52012SC0256 - EN

*|*

# 52012SC0256

**COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Results of the first cycle of the Open Method of Coordination in the youth field (2010-2012) Accompanying the document COMMISSION COMMUNICATION Draft 2012 Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field (EU Youth Strategy 2010-2018) /* SWD/2012/0256 final */**

			*

			*

Table of Contents

Executive Summary. 4

1........... Introduction. 8

2........... General Overview of
Youth Policy. 8

2.1........ Youth policy: a policy
based on evidence. 8

2.2........ Legal framework and
national youth policy environment 9

2.3........ Implementation of the
first cycle of the EU Youth Strategy. 15

3........... Youth Employment and
Entrepreneurship. 20

3.1........ Commission initiatives
and action. 20

3.2........ Summary of initiatives
and action at national level 22

3.3........ Youth-led initiatives and
action. 28

4........... Education and Training. 31

4.1........ Commission initiatives and
action. 31

4.2........ Summary of initiatives
and action at national level 33

4.3........ Youth-led initiatives and
action. 37

5........... Social Inclusion. 39

5.1........ Commission initiatives
and action. 39

5.2........ Summary of initiatives
and action at national level 41

5.3........ Youth-led initiatives and
action. 46

6........... Health and Well-being. 49

6.1........ Commission initiatives
and action. 49

6.2........ Summary of initiatives
and action at national level 50

6.3........ Youth-led initiatives and
action. 53

7........... Youth Participation. 55

7.1........ Commission initiatives
and action. 55

7.2........ Summary of initiatives
and action at national level 57

7.3........ Youth-led initiatives and
action. 62

8........... Voluntary Activities. 65

8.1........ Commission initiatives
and action. 65

8.2........ Summary of initiatives
and action at national level 66

8.3........ Youth-led initiatives and
action. 70

9........... Culture and Creativity. 73

9.1........ Commission initiatives
and action. 73

9.2........ Summary of initiatives
and action at national level 74

9.3........ Youth-led initiatives and
action. 77

10......... Youth and the World. 79

10.1...... Commission initiatives and
action. 79

10.2...... Summary of initiatives and
action at national level 81

10.3...... Youth-led initiatives and
action. 85

11......... Structured Dialogue with
Young People and Youth organisations. 87

11.1...... Commission initiatives and
action. 87

11.2...... Summary of initiatives and
action at national level 89

11.3...... Youth-led initiatives and
action. 95

12......... Annex. 99

12.1...... Table of abbreviations. 99

12.2...... Council
Resolutions/Conclusions on youth (2010-2012) 101

Executive Summary

Background

The EU Youth Strategy

In 2009, the Council endorsed the renewed
framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-2018), known in
short as the EU Youth Strategy[1].
Its objectives are to:

(i)           create more and equal
opportunities for all young people in education and in the labour market, and

(ii)          promote the active citizenship,
social inclusion and solidarity of all young people.

The EU Youth Strategy advocates a
cross-cutting approach, branching out into eight different policy areas
(‘fields of action’), which are the following: Education and Training,
Employment and Entrepreneurship, Social Inclusion, Health and Well-being,
Participation, Culture and Creativity, Volunteering, and Youth and the World.

The EU Youth Strategy and its
implementation are based on the Open Method of Coordination, addressing both
the Commission and Member States to take specific actions in the
above-mentioned ‘fields of action’. To this end, it proposes a set of
instruments which include: evidence-based policy-making; mutual learning;
regular progress-reporting; dissemination of results and monitoring; Structured
Dialogue with young people and youth organisations; and mobilisation of EU
programmes and funds.

The EU Youth Strategy invited the
Commission and Member States to implement the strategy by fostering cooperation
that cuts across all of the various policy fields concerned. Such an approach
should be pursued at all levels, and policies can be improved by sharing good
practices. Youth work should be supported, developed and recognised for its
economic and social contribution.

EU Youth Report: reporting on progress
and looking ahead

The period covered by the EU Youth Strategy
is divided into three-year cycles, with the requirement to produce an EU Youth
Report at the end of each cycle, the first of which will be drawn up in 2012
and ‘consist of [...]a joint Council-Commission report
(political part), and supporting documents (statistical and analytical part).
The EU Youth report will evaluate progress made towards the overall objectives
of the framework, as well as progress regarding the priorities defined for the
most recent work cycle and identify good practices. [...] The EU Youth Report
should also serve as a basis for establishing a set of priorities for the
following work cycle.’

This Staff Working Document supports the
Commission Communication which presents the draft joint report on the EU Youth
Report to the Council. Summarising the results of the first cycle (2010-2012), it
presents the actions taken at EU-level and in Member States, as well as
initiatives taken by young people themselves. Separate chapters report on
achievements in all eight ‘fields of action’ of the strategy, the general
organisation and approach to youth policy, and the Structured Dialogue between
young people and policy-makers. The references made to Member States'
activities are based on National Youth Reports submitted by them[2]. Young people are
represented in the report by the European Youth Forum, which is an umbrella organisation
of approximately 40 National Youth Councils and more than 60 international
non-governmental youth organisations in Europe.

A second Staff Working Document supporting
the Commission Communication on the EU Youth Report 2012 provides a
comprehensive picture of the situation of young people in Europe based on the
latest available data, statistics and research. It portrays trends and
developments in young people's conditions in different areas, corresponding to
the ‘fields of action’. It builds on the dashboard of EU youth indicators,
which is an overview of 41 indicators that measure the most crucial aspects of
the lives of young people in Europe[3].

Results of the first cycle of
the Open Method of Coordination in the youth field 
(2010-2012)

Actions at EU level

The Europe 2020 strategy for smart,
sustainable and inclusive growth puts young people high on its agenda and
embraces a number of concrete initiatives to support them in getting jobs and
dealing with related challenges during this crisis. Young people are the target
group of the flagship initiative ‘Youth on the Move’, which promotes mobility
as a means of learning. They are also impacted by two other flagship
initiatives, ‘An Agenda for New Skills and Jobs’, which aims to improve
employability and employment opportunities for young people, and ‘A Platform
against Poverty and Social Exclusion’, the aim of which is to combat poverty
and exclusion from an early age.

In response to the unacceptably high youth
unemployment rates, the Commission proposed a comprehensive set of measures
under the ‘Youth Opportunities Initiative’ and urged Member States to make better use of the European Social Fund (ESF). It also proposed tailor-made
national approaches to youth unemployment through its Country Specific
Recommendations under the European Semester and through dedicated action teams
set up to assist those Member States with above average unemployment rates.

To better prepare young people for the
labour market, including in the medium term, and in line with the Europe 2020
benchmarks on tertiary education and early school leaving, the Commission
intensified its efforts to ensure that young people acquire the relevant skills
for the labour market and to improve education and training. The main
initiative in this field is the strategic framework for European cooperation in
Education and Training, which was adopted in 2009 for the period up to 2020 (ET
2020). In this context, the Commission presented a
strategy for the modernisation of Europe's higher education systems in 2011.

The Youth in Action and the Lifelong
Learning programmes support learning mobility in both formal and non-formal
education. Projects supported in 2011 under the Lifelong Learning programme
involved more than 530 000 participants, while Youth in Action projects
involved more than 180 000 young people.

The Commission is also endeavouring to lift
obstacles EU citizens, including the young, encounter when using their EU
rights, notably their right to free movement within the EU be it for leisure,
volunteering, study or work[4].

The EU Youth Strategy contributed to these
efforts by making youth employment the overall thematic priority during the
first Trio Presidency. This resulted in recommendations and proposals for
action through Council resolutions addressing the social inclusion of young
people, and the role of youth work in employability and accessing jobs. During
the same period, the Structured Dialogue between young people and policy-makers
focused on youth employment. The resulting recommendations culminated in a
Council resolution and were used to develop policy measures within the
Commission.

The Trio Presidency of Poland, Denmark and Cyprus chose ‘youth participation in democratic life’ as the overall thematic priority
between mid-2011 and end 2012. Youth participation is important not only to
increase citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity among young people; it
also helps young people to acquire valuable cross-cutting skills that add to
their employability. This work led to Council conclusions and resolutions that
emphasised the need for an inclusive approach to participation and to broaden
the range of tools for youth participation. It addressed interaction with young
people from EU neighbouring countries, especially in Eastern Europe, and
ensured better outreach to include young people with fewer opportunities. It
also looked at the creative potential of young people themselves in terms of
developing opportunities for youth participation.

Actions in Member States

All Member States submitted reports on how
the EU Youth Strategy has been implemented at a national level during the
period 2010-2012. These reports were drawn up in response to a comprehensive
questionnaire covering all aspects of the EU Youth Strategy[5]. Norway, Switzerland, Montenegro, and Croatia submitted such reports voluntarily. The National Youth
Reports can be downloaded from the Commission's website.

This report presents a summary of actions
taken, including tables indicating the aggregate responses of all National
Youth Reports to the various questions. It analyses trends in the ‘fields of
action’ and provides an overview of national policies, the use of funds in each
country, as well as specific projects and initiatives. As mutual learning is
key to the implementation of the European Youth Strategy, examples of good
practice from the Member States are highlighted throughout the report.

A majority of Member States have
legislation specifically pertaining to young people, some of which has only
relatively recently come into effect. The same applies to National Youth
Strategies. Structures for cooperation across ministries or with researchers
reflect the cross-sectoral approach of the EU Youth Strategy at national level.
Member States indicate that the EU Youth Strategy has been generally well
received, and have taken measures after it came into force in all eight ‘fields
of action’. The most dynamic policy field seems to be Participation, in which 18
Member States have taken action since the EU Youth Strategy came into force in
2010, whereas Culture and Creativity had the fewest initiatives.

Many measures relating to the ‘fields of
action’ had been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force, which
shows that the strategy ties in well with Member States' priorities. For
example, 22 Member States responded that they had already taken measures to
promote learning mobility of all young people before the EU Youth Strategy came
into effect in 2010. This was also the case in the areas of combating
homelessness and financial exclusion; support of youth organisations and
recognition of their important role in promoting participation from an early
age.

The Structured Dialogue between young
people and policy-makers has been successfully established. National Working
Groups have been set up and Member States are ready to enhance the transparency
and visibility of the process and monitor its follow-up.

Actions by young people

The European Youth Forum (YFJ) also
contributed to this report by describing its activities and appreciation of
measures in all eight ‘fields of action’. The YFJ is a key player in the
Structured Dialogue, with its President acting as chair of the European
Steering Committee.

YFJ has been very active in the field of
Employment and Entrepreneurship, including the submission of various position
papers that have fed into the Commission’s policy preparations. As youth
organisations are an important provider of non-formal learning, the YFJ has
also been active in promoting better recognition and quality of non-formal
education.

A wide range of activities were carried out
in preparation for and during the 2011 European Year of Voluntary Activities
Promoting Active Citizenship, during which YFJ organised a large volunteering
convention in Brussels.

1. 
Introduction

This part of the EU Youth Report assesses
the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy at national and EU level during its
first three-year work cycle. Separate chapters cover all eight ‘fields of
action’ of the Strategy.

Each chapter consists of three sections.
The first provides an overview of initiatives taken at EU level during
2010-2012. The second includes a summary and a brief assessment of the
initiatives and action taken at national level. This section is based on
National Youth Reports submitted by all Member States[6] and Norway, Switzerland, Montenegro and Croatia. These reports were drawn up in response to a comprehensive
questionnaire covering all aspects of the EU Youth Strategy[7]. The third section presents
measures taken by young people themselves, represented by the European Youth
Forum – a body which represents some 90 National Youth Councils and
international non-governmental youth organisations in Europe.

National Youth Reports can be downloaded
from the Commission's website.

2. 
 General Overview of Youth
Policy
2.1. 
Youth policy: a
policy based on evidence

This EU Youth Report has been drawn up
thanks to a framework for reporting and monitoring of youth data, research and
policy activities. This framework is anchored in the EU Youth Strategy, which
stresses the importance of evidence as a basis for policy.

EU Youth Policy is measured through a
dashboard of EU youth indicators, which was drawn up in 2011 on the basis of a
mandate from the EU Youth Strategy. An expert group fed into this dashboard[8], which presents 40 indicators
in all eight ‘fields of action’ of the EU Youth Strategy. Eurostat set up a sub-section
on youth on its website, displaying latest available data for the
indicators. The expert group on EU youth indicators meets annually to review
the dashboard. The Commission also released a
study[9]
showing how Member States work with youth indicators.

The Commission furthermore conducted a
Flash Eurobarometer-survey on youth (Fl319a and Fl319b) in
early 2011. The data collected further contributed to the dashboard of EU youth
indicators and a Commission benchmark on mobility.

This evidence-base was further enriched by
findings from a cluster of five youth-oriented socio-economic research projects
supported under the 7th EU Research Framework Programme, focusing on
marginalised groups of young people and their inclusion in society (young
homeless people; young people from a public care background; ethnic minority
youth including Roma and young unemployed).

The results and recommendations of these
projects are summarised in the forthcoming policy review[10] Social Inclusion of Youth
on the Margins of Society: More Opportunies, Better Access and Higher
Solidarity and were discussed at a European Conference
by European and national policy-makers, youth researchers and practitioners in
the youth field (November 2011).

The Commission is supported in its
evidence-based approach to youth policy by its partnership with the Council of
Europe (CoE) in the youth field. The EU-CoE
Youth Partnership manages the Pool of European Youth Researchers (PEYR)
and the European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy (EKCYP).
It also has a comprehensive online database with knowledge on the situation of
young people in Europe.

The Education, Audiovisual and Culture
Executive Agency (EACEA) also provides support in monitoring data and
statistics in the youth field.

2.2. 
Legal framework and national youth policy
environment

This chapter provides a general overview of
how the Member States and participating non-EU countries – 31 in all –
structure their youth policy in terms of legislation, policy strategies and
inter-ministerial cooperation. It also presents how these countries perceive
the impact of the EU Youth Strategy at the national and local levels as well as
other linkages between youth policy at national and EU level.

2.2.1. 
Youth laws or national legislation on youth

Responses in National Youth Reports[11] || || || || ||

Does your country have a 'youth law' or legislation that specifically refers to youth issues, or laws containing a section addressing the needs and/or rights of young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 27 || 3 || 3 || 21

No || ◊ || 6 || || 1 || 5

Although most Member States report to have
legislation that specifically refers to youth issues, or laws containing a
section addressing the needs and/or rights of young people, the responses do
not easily lend themselves to analysis. For instance, some countries which
answer in the affirmative to the question whether they have specific
legislation on youth make reference to legislation on children. Most countries
operate with an overlap in age between children and young people (children
defined up to the age of 18 and young people usually from the age of 15), and
in some countries the division between children and youth is vague. It should
be noted that several of the countries reporting that they do not have a ‘youth
law’ or specific legislation on young people, may have specific legislation on
children, defined up to the age of 18

Many Member States refer to specific youth
laws (see Table 2‑A). In countries with a federal
structure, the regions are autonomous on youth issues: In Belgium, the three Communities have separate youth legislation, and legislation on youth is
in place in all 17 Autonomous Communities of Spain. In Austria and Germany, national legislation is supplemented by
legislative acts at Federal State level. In Italy legislation in this
area only exists at regional level.

Whereas most Member States have legislation
on young people, such legislation is in most cases recent, which suggests that
youth legislation is an area still under development.

Table 2‑A: Overview of youth laws or national
legislation on youth

(Web-links included where provided)

EU MEMBER
STATES

BELGIUM:                            Laws and legislative acts pertaining to
young people's rights and well-being exist 
in all Communities (Flemish, French and German-speaking).

BULGARIA:                          The Family Code (2009, amended 2010) settles
relationships between parents and children.
Other legislative acts cover various issues relating to youth, among them
employment, health, physical education and sport.

CZECH REPUBLIC:             A number of laws address young people's
rights, welfare and care services, social protection,
education, etc.

DENMARK:                          There is no
specific youth law or youth legislation.

GERMANY:                          Legislation on child and youth (adopted 1990)
available online at
http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/sgb_8/ (in German).

ESTONIA:                              The Youth
Work Act was adopted in 1999; the renewed law came into force in 2010.

IRELAND:                             The Youth Work Act was adopted in 2001:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/pdf/2001/en.act.2001.0042.pdf (in English).

GREECE:                                A number of laws concern young people's
rights to education and
information, health and social protection, youth participation in elections,
entrepreneurship and employment, etc.

SPAIN:                                   At regional level, there exists
specific legislation on youth, such as training, employment, 
health, housing, education, environment, culture, sports, tourism and
recreation, associations, voluntary work, etc.

FRANCE:                               There is no specific youth law. However,
legislation which covers young people exists in 
various areas, such as education, employment, social affairs, health, justice,
professional training, etc.

ITALY:                                   No
national youth law, but some legislation exists at regional level.

CYPRUS:                                The main legislation concerning youth
is the Youth Board Law of 1994 (available in English).
Additionally, there are other laws addressing the needs/rights of young people.

LATVIA:                                The Youth Law is from 2009 and was
amended in 2011:
http://www.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=175920 (only Latvian).

LITHUANIA:                        The Law on a Youth Policy Framework (2003)
outlines the main concepts of youth policy,
defines youth policy areas and establishes principles of the implementation of
youth policy.

LUXEMBOURG:                  There is a Youth Law
(2008) and a Law on Youth Volunteering (2007).

HUNGARY:                           There is a law on the Children and Youth
Fund (1995) and a Regulation of the Ministry of 
Youth and Sports on the Functioning of the National Children and Youth Fund and
the Regional Youth Services (1999).

MALTA:                                No legislation on youth but a
Commissioner for Children Act, Chapter 462 of the Laws of 
Malta: http://www.mjha.gov.mt/LOM.aspx?pageid=27&mode=chrono&gotoID=462 (English version).

NETHERLANDS:                  The Youth Care Act 2005 and the
Social Support Law 2007 address child and youth issues. 
A new youth law will soon replace the Youth Care Act.
Youth Care Act: http://english.minvws.nl/en/folders/djb/2005/youth-care-in-the-netherlands.asp
 Social Support Act: http://english.minvws.nl/en/themes/social-support-act (English version).

AUSTRIA:                             There is a Federal Youth Promotion Act
(2001): http://www.en.bmwfj.gv.at/Youth/YouthPromotion/Seiten/default.aspx

POLAND:                              The Act on promotion of employment and
labour market institutions (2004) outlines special
measures for unemployed under the age of 25.

PORTUGAL:                         All youth legislation (latest revisions in
2011) is available online at 
http://juventude.gov.pt/Legislacao/Paginas/Legislacao_Juventude.aspx (in Portuguese). There are youth protection
acts in all nine regions. English versions are available upon request.

ROMANIA:                           The Romanian Youth Law was adopted in 2006.

SLOVENIA:                           Legislation on youth include the Youth
Councils Act,
http://www.ursm.gov.si/fileadmin/ursm.gov.si/pageuploads/pdf/ZJIMS/ZMS-NPB1__ANG.pdf, and the Public Interest in Youth Sector
Act, http://www.ursm.gov.si/fileadmin/ursm.gov.si/pageuploads/pdf/ZJIMS/ZJIMS_ENG.pdf (English version).

SLOVAKIA:                           Different legislation addresses needs and
rights of young people. The legal act closest
resembling a youth law is the Youth Work Support Act (2008).

FINLAND:                             There is a Youth Act (2006), http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Nuoriso/nuorisopolitiikka/?lang=en
(in English), and several other acts that address welfare and health, rights,
education and training.

UNITED KINGDOM:          There is the Children Act (2004), http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/31/contents, and
the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Act (2009). Furthermore, in Wales there is the Rights of Children and Young Persons Measure (2011) and in Scotland the Commissioner for Children & Young People Act (2003).

NON-EU COUNTRIES

SWITZERLAND:                  There is a Federal law on the
Promotion of extracurricular Child and Youth Welfare (2011).

MONTENEGRO:                  There is different legislation
pertaining to young people's rights and well-being. A separate
Youth Law is planned, scheduled for adoption in 2012.

CROATIA:                             Law on Youth Advisory Boards (LYAB),
adopted in 2007.

2.2.2. 
National Strategies and Action Plans or
cross-sectoral strategies specifically referring to youth issues

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does your country have a National Youth Strategy and/or Action Plan, or a cross-sectoral strategy specifically referring to youth issues? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 28 || 3 || 4 || 21

No || ◊ || 5 || || || 5

Even in the absence of a National Youth
Strategy or action plan, Ireland and Spain stress that strategies
existed previously and that new strategies are expected to be in place by the
end of 2012. Portugal and Spain are currently drafting a White
Paper on Youth. All ongoing processes mention that consultations with young
people are an inherent element in the development of youth policy. In Austria a national Action Plan for the Rights of Children and Youth has been in
place since 2004.

As is true for youth legislation, National
Youth Strategies and action plans are in many cases relatively recent. A
substantial number of countries in which strategies are already in place,
report ongoing processes to develop new strategies. This again suggests that
youth policy is an area of increasing importance at national level.

2.2.3. 
Institutional mechanisms aimed at cross-sectoral
youth policy

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does your Government have an inter-ministerial working group on youth or any other institutionalised mechanism for ensuring a cross-sectoral approach to youth policy? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries ||  EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such an institutional mechanism has existed since before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ■ || 27 || 1 || 4 || 22

YES, such an institutional mechanism was established after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 4 || 2 || || 2

NO, but we have an ongoing initiative to establish such an institutional mechanism in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not plan to establish such an institutional mechanism. || ♦ || 1 || || || 1

There are many examples of standing working
groups or advisory bodies with representatives of different ministries. In the
French community of Belgium, a permanent inter-ministerial Conference on
Youth has existed since July 2011 at the level of Ministers. In Cyprus, an inter-ministerial Consulting Committee on Youth consists of
representatives of 10 ministries and various government agencies. In the Czech Republic, the Youth Chamber, which is an advisory body to the Youth
Minister and consists of representatives from various ministries and youth
stakeholder groups, has been transformed into an efficient instrument for the
implementation of youth policy. In Spain, the Inter-ministerial
Commission for Youth comprises a senior representative of each ministry plus
the president of the National Youth Council, and its role is to propose
government programmes and measures in the youth field. The Council of Youth
Affairs in Lithuania consists of 6 representatives of different
ministries and 6 representatives of the Lithuanian Youth Council, and submits
proposals on youth policy to the Ministry of Social Security and Labour.

Several Member States mention that the EU
Youth Strategy's emphasis on a cross-sectoral approach has played an important
role for the recognition of youth policies and strategies at national level.

France

Policy in favour of young people

The document of transversal policy ‘Policy in favour of young
people’ is an annual annex to the draft of the budget law. It shows the policy
pertaining to young people from the age of 3 to 30 with measures taken,
indicators of performance and dedicated funding including costs of human
resources (€ 74.9 billions). Documents of transversal policy allow another
perspective on the budget, but are not subject to parliamentary decision. The
document on youth policy is written according to an inter-ministerial procedure
established by the Ministry of Finance. The policy is presented along five
strategic axes. In addition to informing Members of Parliament, the document
aims to harmonize the policies between the ministries involved in its
preparation and to detect possible synergies. It can be downloaded here.

2.2.4. 
Linkages between youth policy and youth research

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Is there an institutionalised and regular cooperation between the Ministry responsible for Youth and the youth research community in your country? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such cooperation has existed since before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ■ || 22 || 1 || 3 || 18

YES, such cooperation was established after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 2 || 1 || 1 || 0

NO, but we have an ongoing initiative to establish such cooperation in 2012. || ▲ || 6 || || || 6

NO, we do not have any initiative to establish such cooperation. || ♦ || 3 || 1 || || 2

Member States' governments take different
approaches to institutionalised cooperation with researchers. A significant
number of Member States fund Youth Institutes which often conduct research
themselves. In the cases of Luxembourg, Malta, and Portugal these institutes are part of a university, whereas research centres in the United Kingdom have a stronger emphasis on secondary analysis.

Germany and Austria both issue youth reports outlining the situation of young people during each
parliamentary term. Estonia refers to the organisation of cooperation
seminars by the Youth Institute. In Slovakia, cooperation takes place in
working groups. Facilitation of information exchange and stimulation of
research is the focus of the Nordic Youth Cooperation Committee in Denmark and the Youth Institute in the Netherlands. The Nordic Youth
Cooperation Committee derives new ideas also from the European dashboard of
youth indicators. The Youth Research Society in Finland promotes of
multidisciplinary youth research and was founded as non-profit organisation
already in 1988, the earliest year referred to by Member States responding to
this question.

With Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Latvia, and Lithuania nearly all the Member States
reporting ongoing initiatives are currently trying to establish a permanent
network of youth researchers.

2.2.5. 
Strategies and measures to support youth work

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does the Government of your country have a strategy to acknowledge, raise awareness of, and reinforce the role of youth work in society, in line with the Council Resolution on Youth Work (2010)[12]? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, we already had such a strategy in place since before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ■ || 19 || 3 || 1 || 15

YES, we have set up such a strategy since the adoption of the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 3 || || 1 || 2

NO, we do not have such a strategy in place, but the Government is planning to set up such a strategy in the coming year. || ▲ || 4 || || || 4

NO, the Government is not planning to set up such a strategy. || ♦ || 7 || || 2 || 5

The Flemish Community of Belgium, Germany, and Finland point out their long tradition of youth work, by
referring to well established funding procedures at various levels and long
standing laws. Finland not only underlines the importance of local,
regional, and national youth work in its policy programme, but also of virtual
youth work.

Several Member States refer to parts on
youth work in their National Youth Strategies (e.g. Latvia, Lithuania, and Hungary). In Slovenia the notion of the entire youth work sphere
being in the public interest is anchored in law. Spain reports on
efforts in the area of professional qualifications in the youth field; Malta refers to its university as an institution of higher education for the youth
field also delivering courses leading to vocational qualifications. In the Czech Republic high quality NGOs are awarded the honorary title
‘Organisation recognised by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports in the
field of children and youth work’.

Even some Member States that report not
having or planning such strategies are actively promoting youth work. In Bulgaria, the significance of youth work is outlined in the National Youth Strategy
(2010-2020); in Slovakia there is a Youth Work Support Act and in Sweden – where youth work is a local responsibility – one of the main roles of the
National Board of Youth Affairs is to provide relevant support to municipalities.
 Cyprus and Poland report that they provide active support to
youth work through their policies.

The most frequently mentioned measure is
the financing of non-governmental youth associations.

Malta

Youth Information Portal

Youth Information Malta consists of a web portal which includes
general information compiled in Maltese and in English about a wide range of
topics. A search function and accessibility features are also included. The
information is continually updated and includes detailed contact information of
various organisations together with embedded hyperlinks to access further
details directly from the source. The portal provides also a showcase of news,
music, and events pertaining to the youth field. The streaming music function
is aimed primarily to promote local artists and their music with direct links
to the respective websites. The events section is a showcase of events and
besides informing young people, it assists youth organisations, agencies and
groups in their promotions. Youth Information Malta aims also to be a common
meeting platform for young people, institutions, organisations and youth
workers. For more information click here.

2.2.6. 
Using general EU funding opportunities for youth
initiatives

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has your Government carried out specific initiatives targeting young people or the field of youth policy utilising EU funding opportunities through the European Social Fund, the European Regional Development Fund and/or the Rural Development Fund, or any other relevant EU funds or programmes such as PROGRESS? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, we have carried out youth initiatives or projects utilising the general EU funding opportunities mentioned above in the past, before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, but they are now finalised. || ■ || 13 || 1 || || 12

YES, we are currently carrying out youth initiatives or projects utilising the general EU funding opportunities mentioned above. || ● || 14 || 2 || 1 || 11

NO, we have not carried out youth initiatives or projects utilising the general EU funding opportunities mentioned above, but we are planning to do so in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || 1 || 0

NO, we do not plan to utilise the EU funding opportunities mentioned above to finance youth activities or projects. || ♦ || 5 || || 2 || 3

A majority of projects funded by the EU
through the European Social Fund (ESF), the European Regional Development Fund
and/or PROGRESS focus on labour market integration of young people.
Employability is strengthening e.g. through better recognition of non-formal
learning and supporting youth work, training of youth workers, stimulating
entrepreneurship, improving information services and developing ICT skills.
Other projects focus on developing networks of youth centres and regional youth
policy, improving systems of formal education, and promoting rural development
by working with young farmers. Diverse groups of young people at risk of social
exclusion and poverty or with special needs (immigrants, disabled, early school
leavers) are often targeted.[13]

2.3. 
Implementation of the first cycle of the EU
Youth Strategy
2.3.1. 
Impact of the EU Youth Strategy on national or
local level

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Please indicate how the EU Youth Strategy, adopted in November 2009, has influenced youth priorities in your country at the NATIONAL level? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

It has reinforced existing priorities. || ◄ || 27 || 2 || 2 || 23

It has led to a re-orientation of policy. || ► || 3 || 1 || || 2

It has had little or no impact on national youth policy. || ▬ || 3 || || 2 || 1

|| || || || ||

Please indicate how the EU Youth Strategy has influenced youth priorities in your country at the LOCAL and/or REGIONAL level? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

It has reinforced existing priorities. || ◄ || 24 || 1 || 2 || 21

It has led to a re-orientation of policy. || ► || 2 || 1 || || 1

It has had little or no impact on local and regional youth policy. || ▬ || 7 || 1 || 2 || 4

Member States will differ in national
priorities and vary their emphasis on different policy areas linked to youth.
However, the National Youth Reports show a strong coherence between national
initiatives and areas of action which they committed to prioritise through the
EU Youth Strategy.

Nearly all Member States report that the EU
Youth Strategy has reinforced their national priorities, with several stressing
its direct impact. For example, the strategy was a guiding document for
developing the National Youth Policy Programme in Lithuania, the link
between youth policy and labour market policies was strengthened in Austria and the dialogue with youth was further developed in the Flemish Community of Belgium.

The EU Youth Strategy seems to have had
less impact on local and regional youth policy, which is not unexpected given
that the Open Method of Coordination focuses on cooperation between the EU and Member States. Implementation at regional and local level will require tailoring measures
to regional and local circumstances, which probably requires more time.

2.3.2. 
Challenges in implementing the EU Youth Strategy
at national level

According to the National Youth Reports,
the EU Youth Strategy has been the subject of many conferences and meetings
across Europe, and all national governments have actively promoted the
Strategy. This is particularly true for the Member States which held the EU
Council Presidencies during the first two years of the EU Youth Strategy: Spain, Belgium, Hungary and Poland.

When assessing the challenges in
implementation, many National Youth Reports noted that the close links between
the EU Youth Strategy and National Youth Strategies made it artificial to
separate the two. Among the main challenges mentioned by most countries were:

· 
cross-sectoral and inter-ministerial
cooperation;

· 
convincing local authorities to put ‘youth’ on
the agenda;

· 
highlighting the added value of non-formal
education and youth work for other policy areas;

· 
consequences of high youth unemployment and its
social impact on young people.

The financial crisis only exacerbates these
challenges.

Few countries carried out assessments on
the impact of the EU Youth Strategy at national level and when it occurred, it
usually coincided with assessing national policy (such as in the Czech
Republic, Slovenia and Finland in 2011). In Estonia, the Estonian Youth Work Centre developed a youth monitoring system and
since 2010 publishes a youth monitoring yearbook. Germany is the only
country undertaking a separate evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy, focusing on
its governance instruments.

2.3.3. 
Consultation of young people in the reporting
exercise

In line with the bearing principle of youth
participation in the EU, nearly all Member States involved young people in
developing the National Youth Report. The most common way has been to involve
the National Youth Council, the National Working Group for the Structured
Dialogue and/or other relevant youth stakeholders, but some have also organised
specific events (Ireland), or had an online consultation (Bulgaria,
Romania and Slovakia). Several countries noted, however, that the format of
the National Youth Report was not suitable for a wider consultation with young
people.

Table 2‑B: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – legal framework, youth policy environment,
implementation of the EU Youth Strategy[14]

EU Member States || Does your country have a ‘youth law’ or legislation that specifically refers to youth issues, or laws containing a section addressing the needs and/or rights of young people? || Is the document available in other languages, in full or abbreviated version? || Does your country have a National Youth Strategy and/or Action Plan, or a cross-sectoral strategy specifically referring to youth issues? || Is the document available in other languages, in full or abbreviated version?

Belgium German-speaking || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

Belgium Flemish || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Belgium French || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ◊

|| Bulgaria || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ◊

|| Czech Republic || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Denmark || ◊ || || ◊ ||

|| Germany || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ◊

|| Estonia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Ireland || ▼ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

|| Greece || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ◊

|| Spain || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

|| France || ◊ || || ▼ || ◊

|| Italy || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Cyprus || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Latvia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

|| Lithuania || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Luxembourg || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ◊

|| Hungary || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

|| Malta || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Netherlands || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

|| Austria || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ◊

|| Poland || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Portugal || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ◊

|| Romania || ▼ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

|| Slovenia || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ ||

|| Slovakia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Finland || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Sweden || ◊ || || ▼ || ▼

|| United Kingdom || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ◊

|| Non-EU Members || || || ||

|| Norway || ◊ || || ▼ || ◊

|| Switzerland || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

|| Montenegro || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

|| Croatia || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

▼ Yes                   ◊ No

EU Member States || Does your Government have an inter-ministerial working group on youth or any other institutionalised mechanism for ensuring a cross-sectoral approach to youth policy? || Is there an institutionalised and regular cooperation between the Ministry responsible for Youth and the youth research community in your country? || Does the Government of your country have a strategy to acknowledge, raise awareness of, and reinforce the role of youth work in society, in line with the Council Resolution on Youth Work (2010)? || Has your Government carried out specific initiatives targeting young people or the field of youth policy utilising EU funding opportunities?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ♦ || ■ || ●

Belgium Flemish || ■ || ● || ■ || ●

Belgium French || ● || ■ || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ■ || ▲ || ♦ || ■

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Denmark || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ■

Germany || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Estonia || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Greece || ■ || ▲ || ▲ || ■

Spain || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

France || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Italy || ■ || ▲ || ▲ || ●

Cyprus || ■ || ♦ || ♦ || ■

Latvia || ■ || ▲ || ■ || ♦

Lithuania || ■ || ▲ || ● || ●

Luxembourg || ■ || ■ || ● || ●

Hungary || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Malta || ● || ■ || ■ || ●

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Austria || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Poland || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ■

Romania || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ■

Slovenia || ● || ▲ || ■ || ■

Slovakia || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ●

Finland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Sweden || ■ || ♦ || ♦ || ●

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || ||

Norway || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Switzerland || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ♦

Montenegro || ■ || ● || ● || ▲

Croatia || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ●

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                           ♦ No, without plans

EU Member States || Please indicate how the EU Youth Strategy, adopted in November 2009, has influenced youth priorities in your country at the NATIONAL level? || Please indicate how the EU Youth Strategy has influenced youth priorities in your country at the LOCAL and/or REGIONAL level?

Belgium German-speaking || ► || ►

Belgium Flemish || ◄ || ◄

Belgium French || ◄ || ▬

Bulgaria || ◄ || ◄

Czech Republic || ◄ || ◄

Denmark || ▬ || ▬

Germany || ◄ || ◄

Estonia || ◄ || ◄

Ireland || ◄ || ◄

Greece || ◄ || ◄

Spain || ◄ || ◄

France || ◄ || ◄

Italy || ◄ || ◄

Cyprus || ◄ || ◄

Latvia || ◄ || ◄

Lithuania || ► || ►

Luxembourg || ◄ || ▬

Hungary || ► || ▬

Malta || ◄ || ◄

Netherlands || ◄ || ◄

Austria || ◄ || ◄

Poland || ◄ || ▬

Portugal || ◄ || ◄

Romania || ◄ || ◄

Slovenia || ◄ || ◄

Slovakia || ◄ || ◄

Finland || ◄ || ◄

Sweden || ◄ || ◄

United Kingdom || ◄ || ◄

Non-EU Members || ||

Norway || ▬ || ▬

Switzerland || ▬ || ▬

Montenegro || ◄ || ◄

Croatia || ◄ || ◄

◄ It has reinforced existing priorities

► It has led to a re-orientation of
policy

▬ It has had little or no impact on
youth policy

3. 
Youth Employment and Entrepreneurship
3.1. 
Commission initiatives and action 
3.1.1. 
Youth employment: a priority for the European
Union

With the effects of the economic crisis on
young people becoming ever more severe, youth employment is an on-going concern
for the EU. Since 2010, the youth unemployment rate has increased to well over
more than one in five young Europeans, with much higher rates for young people
in a number of Member States or for young people with specific challenges, such
as early school leavers.

The Europe 2020 strategy dedicates two of
its flagship initiatives ‘Youth on the Move’[15]
and ‘An Agenda for New Skills and Jobs’[16]
to improving employability and employment opportunities for young people.
‘Youth on the Move’ was welcomed by the Council, thereby emphasising the
particular relevance of its cross-sectoral nature[17]. In December 2011 the
Commission launched the ‘Youth Opportunities Initiative’[18] to further stress the need for
action on the high youth unemployment rates and the growing number of young
people not in employment, education or training (so-called NEETs).

The Youth
Opportunities Initiative emphasised the primary role of Member States in
tackling unemployment and advocated mobilising the European Social Fund (ESF)
to further support skills development and the transition from school to work.
With strong backing from the informal European Council of 30 January 2012, the
Commission set up youth action teams to support the eight Member States[19] with the highest youth
unemployment rates. These teams worked together with national authorities and
social partners to develop actions appropriate for each country, along with
advising on the use of Structural Funds to support short- and long-term
measures.

To supplement national efforts, the
Commission initiated a number of measures at EU level, which included:

· 
The implementation of a preparatory action on
‘Youth guarantee schemes’ that will help Member States to ensure that all young
people are in a job, further education or training within four months of
leaving school.

· 
‘A quality framework for traineeships’ scheme
that aims to increase the transparency on the conditions for trainees
throughout the EU.

· 
‘Your first EURES job’, a targeted job mobility
scheme in the form of a preparatory action that aims, in 2012-2013, to reach
out to around 5 000 young people to help fill job vacancies in other Member
States.

The Commission also proposed to dedicate
more EU funds to apprenticeships, student placements in enterprises, young
volunteers and entrepreneurs under the ESF, the Lifelong Learning, the Youth in
Action and the Erasmus for Entrepreneurs programmes. A significant share of the
budget for social innovation will be targeted at youth in disadvantaged
situations and areas.

To enhance transparency, the EURES European
Job Mobility Portal gives access to over 1.3 million vacancies and 850 000 CVs,
and the European Vacancy Monitor provides quarterly labour-market updates on
the job opportunities available in different sectors and countries across the
EU. The awareness-raising campaign ‘Youth@Work’ (April 2011-May 2012) was aimed
to link up young people and SMEs.

Mutual learning and exchange of good
practice on youth employment has taken place with support of the ESF. For
instance, a Youth Employment Network on education, counselling mobility and
entrepreneurship, (consisting of Belgium, Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy,
Cyprus, Latvia, and Sweden) which produced a Benchmarking
Report in 2011 showcasing best practices based on studies and evaluation as
a basis for a Common Reference Framework.

The EU placed further efforts into
improving the quality of traineeships and work placements it supports through
its programmes. A new study[20]
provided a comprehensive overview of how traineeships are structured in Member
States, from legislative frameworks, governance and financing, to target
groups, sectors and professions. The study pointed out issues around the
current arrangements where improvement is needed, including areas related to
quality, and the need for new opportunities particularly for young people who
are unemployed, low skilled or at risk of social exclusion. The outcomes of the
study will be fed into on-going work related to moving obstacles to mobility
and improving the quality of traineeships and work placements.

3.1.2. 
Youth employment: the priority of the first
cycle under the EU Youth Strategy

Given the rising youth unemployment rates,
the Trio Presidency during 2010 and the first half of 2011 (Spain, Belgium and Hungary) chose ‘youth employment’ as the overarching
priority.

Within the Trio Presidency, each country
focused on a national priority, proposing action contributing to labour market
access and employability of young people from this specific angle. Under the
Spanish Presidency, the Council adopted a Resolution on the active inclusion
of young people: combating unemployment and poverty[21]; and
under the Belgian Presidency a Resolution on youth work[22]. Under the Hungarian
Presidency, the Council adopted a Resolution
on encouraging new and effective forms of participation of all young people
in democratic life[23], which stressed the value of participation in acquiring key
competences. Several events explored concrete policy approaches, including e.g.
a peer learning seminar on cross-sectoral youth policy cooperation in Madrid and a seminar
on flexicurity.

The European Youth Forum (YFJ), in
cooperation with the Trio Presidency, the Commission and National Working
Groups, conducted a Structured Dialogue on youth employment which resulted in a
number of concrete recommendations. The Council endorsed later a number of
recommendations in a Resolution, which notably called
for better labour market information, the recognition of non-formal learning, a
quality framework for internships, the flexibility to reconcile work and
private life, and more opportunities for mobility[24]. These recommendations were
well received and taken further by Commissioners Vassiliou and Andor.

3.1.3. 
Entrepreneurship: another career option

The Commission promotes entrepreneurship as
a career option. Within education policy, peer learning activities and targeted
funding of European projects aim to promote entrepreneurship as a key
competence in the education systems. The ‘Erasmus for Entrepreneurs’–
expected to finance around 600 exchanges in 2012 – offers new entrepreneurs
learning experiences in businesses abroad. The European Progress Micro-finance Facility[25] financially supports potential
young entrepreneurs and € 3 million of the ESF Technical Assistance will
be used to support Member States schemes for young business starters and social
entrepreneurs. The Commission organised meetings with youth representatives,
stakeholders and policy-makers to discuss policy initiatives to cooperate on
entrepreneurship promotion and share experience.

Romania – Youth in Action programme

Learning how to help young people find their place in society

The project trained youth leaders from Azerbaijan, Greece, Italy, Moldova, Romania, Serbia, Turkey and Ukraine in working with young people facing
unemployment, marginalisation and social exclusion. It guided them in
techniques to stimulate entrepreneurial skills among youth, and to interest
unemployed young people in seeking qualifications, employment and involvement
in society. 22 young people took part in this 10-day training course funded by
the Youth in Action national agency in Romania in mid-2010. It was hosted by Kasta Morrely in Iasi, Romania, a human rights organisation that promotes skills central to
the development of a democratic society. Through a non-formal approach,
discussions addressed entrepreneurship and business strategies, social
inclusion, youth unemployment in Europe, vocational qualifications, the
socioeconomic situation in participants' countries and the challenges of
engaging unemployed young people to participate actively in society. On the
basis of this project, further cross-border cooperation has developed to reduce
youth unemployment and support local communities.

3.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level
3.2.1. 
Youth measures in flexicurity strategies

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to take the specific situation of young people into account when devising flexicurity strategies? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 13 || || 2 || 11

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 10 || 3 || || 7

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 5 || || || 5

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 5 || || 2 || 3

Flexicurity
is about optimising the balance between labour market flexibility and security
for employees against labour market risks. Some countries adapted the legal
framework regulating employment contracts to improve access of young people to
the labour market. Others apply schemes to encourage employers to hire young
people, e.g. through tax incentives, or grant special facilities for dismissed
employees to find a job. Such measures are frequently combined with e.g. career
guidance, counselling or opportunities to gain work experience.

3.2.2. 
Cross-border professional and vocational
opportunities for young people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote cross-border professional and vocational opportunities for young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 23 || 3 || 1 || 19

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 5 || || 2 || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 4 || || 1 || 3

Many countries cite EU programmes such as
Youth in Action and Lifelong Learning as key sources for opportunities to
learn, train and work abroad. In Sweden, an evaluation of Youth in
Action projects in the field of training showed their value in developing
vocational, social and foreign language skills. In 2011 the Malta Qualifications Council started a Leonardo da Vinci project to test and
implement the European Credit System for Vocational Education and Training in a
national context, facilitating the recognition and transfer of learning
outcomes. There are also national cross-border programmes in vocational
training open to students from a neighbouring country, e.g. between Germany and France, and programmes that organise professional training in other parts
of the world.

The German ESF funded ‘IdA Programme –
Integration’ offers work experience abroad focussing on helping young people
facing difficulties to access the labour markets (e.g. disadvantaged youth,
young unemployed, single mothers, and young people with disabilities).

Many countries actively promote
opportunities to train or work abroad. The EURES network organises job days
and campaigns around working abroad. One of the tasks of the Eurodesk youth information
network, active in 33 countries, is to inform about mobility opportunities
(e.g. in the Flemish Community of Belgium, projects financed in this
field include the website www.gostrange.be
and a bi-annual information fair the latter of which attracted 1 500 young
people in 2011).

Other examples of policy initiatives to
promote cross-border professional and vocational opportunities for youth are a
programme for supporting distance learning to young people in remote areas of Greece,
a ‘mobility semester’ for all undergraduates at the University of Malta
and supporting young participants in ‘skills’ championships at national and
international level in Sweden.

3.2.3. 
Career guidance and counselling services

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to develop career guidance and counselling services? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 26 || 1 || 4 || 21

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 2 || || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || || 1

Career and counselling services are
frequently offered by education institutions as well as employment services. In
some countries such guidance is guaranteed by law. Youth information centres
can play an important role in counselling and provide information on job
opportunities, e.g. in the German-speaking Community of Belgium, where schools offer classes on ‘life planning’. The role of youth work is
especially relevant for young people who are out of reach of regular education
or employment systems and/or who need a second or third chance. In some
countries, for example Estonia, career and educational guidance targets
not only young people but also parents, teachers and youth workers. The ESF is
often quoted as a source to develop career guidance services.

Latvia

KIPNIS – Career education

In Latvia, the General Education Standard for secondary education
includes career planning and development, integrated into the various teaching
subjects. Subject teachers can themselves determine the methods for exploring
this within the curriculum and schools can also integrate it in extracurricular
activities. The ESF funded project KIPNIS provides career education guidelines
and in-service teacher training on implementing such career education. For more
information click here.

Many countries offer targeted support,
courses, counselling or work placements, to unemployed or vulnerable young
people. A full year comprehensive counselling programme is available to young
people in the French Community of Belgium, in which they can develop
individual plans through, for instance, awareness-raising for jobs in promising
sectors, sessions to explore one's own career path, information on job offers
and, if appropriate, social support. Some countries use special approaches,
such as one-stop-shops or online guidance. Other countries organise guidance on
specific topics, such as in Austria where guidance centres advise girls
on ‘non-traditional’ careers or in the Flemish Community of Belgium with
its ‘Personal Development Trajectory’ for students in dual education and work.
In Bulgaria, events brought together young jobseekers and employers to
exchange expectations and requirements. This led to common criteria in
selection procedures. There is also guidance
for organisations that support young people, e.g. the German
‘Jobstarter’ for companies offering placements.

Finland

MAST – Common guidance

The MAST project, supported by the ESF, developed a model for
counselling at regional level for students in vocational training. It aims to
lower drop-out rates and facilitate transition to work life. The project
involved schools, youth workshops and others working with young people. Its
success is based on strong cooperation between the partners involved and the
use of a common guidance model, e.g. to facilitate the assessment of skills
gained at work by the school. For more information click here.

The ‘Career Card’ in Greece is designed to help young people choose training to complement their
knowledge and skills, while the card will cover costs of counselling and
training.

The European Lifelong Guidance Policy
Network (ELGPN), supported by the
Commission and bringing together experts from 26 countries, enhances better
coordination of services, a common understanding of career management skills
and making the most of new technologies.

Portugal

Reflection for Action

The Portuguese NYC (CNJ) conducted a project ‘Reflection for Action
– Towards Youth Employment’ to implement the third phase of the first cycle of
Structured Dialogue. Seminars occurred from January to March 2011, through the
implementation of five regional meetings and one national event. In the latter
300 young people living in Portugal took part, from different socio-economic,
cultural backgrounds and geographical origin, side by side with
decision-makers, politicians and experts. They identified concrete actions to
be developed at EU level in terms of youth employment. Non-formal methods
education was an integrated component of this project to ensure a participatory
approach, focusing on young people's participation and cooperative work. The project
produced a website and a Guide on the Rights of Young Workers.

3.2.4. 
Promoting quality internships and
apprenticeships

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote quality internships and apprenticeships to facilitate the entry to, and progress within, the labour market? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 25 || 2 || 3 || 20

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 1 || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 0 || || || 0

Traineeships are frequently available as
part of formal education and several countries have dual track education
systems combining classroom teaching with apprenticeships, sometimes tailored
for young people with difficulties. The value of apprenticeships is supported
by numbers: in Wales, United Kingdom, more than 75 % of apprentices
achieve a full certificate. In Malta, 85 % of apprentices find
employment or start a business.

Several countries have taken legal measures
to promote apprenticeships. This is the case in Finland (to prevent
replacing regular workers by interns and better protection of interns at work),
 Germany (to widen possibilities for corporate internships), Romania (to improve the framework for apprenticeships in the workplace), Italy (to improve apprenticeship contracts) and Spain (to make trainees eligible for
social rights and benefits).

Broad policy programmes are also pursued.
In Germany, specific measures include the ‘Wege ins Ausland’ working
group, which has developed criteria and raised awareness for quality
traineeships abroad; in the United Kingdom, a web-based apprenticeship
vacancy system has been set up and apprentice-sharing between different
employers is facilitated. Furthermore, Austria offers guaranteed
placements in supra-company structures for apprenticeship-seekers in compulsory
education and Luxembourg introduced a system in vocational training that
transposes job profiles into learning profiles, listing all relevant
competences to be acquired.

Portugal

INOV – Training opportunities

To facilitate transition, Portugal's ‘INOV’ programme offers a range
of training opportunities: INOV-CONTACTO offers international
training to young graduates; INOV-Art offers internships in arts and
culture; INOV-Energi@ aims to enhance socio-professional skills of unemployed
graduates; INOV-Social promotes integration of young graduates in the
non-profit sector; INOV-Jovem supports professional training in SMEs in
innovation and business management; INOV-Mundus aims to promote involvement of
young graduates in organisations active in development cooperation. In 2010, INOV
attracted 35 100 participants.

France has
developed a comprehensive strategy for vocational training. Measures include a
card for apprentices with similar advantages as a student card, online
facilities for partner search and completion of administrative procedures and
the possibility to use temporary work agencies to hire apprentices. Financial
support is available to individual companies as well as to improve the
situation of apprentices and the vocational training system at large.

A number of countries offer graduates and
unemployed young people opportunities to gain work experience and acquire
further skills by extending unemployment benefits and/or providing financial
compensation to employers who offer training opportunities. The job guarantee
in Sweden targets young people aged 16 to 24 who have been enlisted with
the governmental employment services for more than three months. The guarantee provides
for professional orientation, work experience or even preparatory work to start
a business. In 2010 on average 47 000 people per month participated.

In the National Youth Reports submitted by
Member States, National Youth Councils in several countries call for further
efforts to offer quality traineeships.

3.2.5. 
Promoting sharing of responsibilities between
partners

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote sharing of responsibilities between partners in order to facilitate reconciliation between professional and private life for both young women and young men? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 25 || 2 || 3 || 20

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 4 || 1 || || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || 1 || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || || 3

Support to young parents is available
across Europe – albeit to different degrees – through access to childcare,
along with financial support or tax deductions. Aside from maternity leave,
paternity leave is increasingly available, which helps young women and men
better share family responsibilities. There are also possibilities for longer
‘parental’ leave, income support, the right to part-time work and the promotion
of flexible working arrangements. A number of countries run awareness campaigns
and in some countries (such as Denmark, Austria and Slovenia) companies can perform audits to test their ‘family-friendliness’.

Luxembourg

Megafamily

In Luxembourg, the Megafamily campaign on the balance between work
and private life was launched in 2011 by the Ministry responsible for equal
opportunities. It offers online evaluation tools to check one's own situation,
targeting both families and businesses. The ‘familytest’ reveals inequalities
between a couple regarding household chores and inspires a discussion on the
division of labour. Moreover a wide range of information helpful to reconcile
private and work life can be found on the website, e.g. on maternity leave,
social transfers, babysitters. Employers also have a space to exchange good
practices. The website is also linked to
a group on Facebook, which allows for communication on the subject.

3.2.6. 
Promoting entrepreneurship in the field of
sustainable development

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote entrepreneurship in the field of sustainable development? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 25 || 2 || 3 || 20

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 4 || 1 || || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || 1 || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || || 2

Support for potential or new entrepreneurs,
including young people, in the form of information, coaching, business
services, grants or loans, is available across the EU. In some countries, young
entrepreneurs enjoy more favourable conditions to set up a business. Others
address entrepreneurship within the education system to develop entrepreneurial
skills and creativity. Programmes are available for young people to this
purpose, such as the ones developed by Junior
Achievement-Young Enterprise; there is support for young people willing to
develop their own ‘junior enterprise’
whilst still in education. FINICIA-Jovem,
developed by the Youth Institute in Portugal, stimulates creativity and
innovation among young entrepreneurs, students, and young people in youth
organisations.

Partners from Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany, Spain, and Lithuania joined in a
Community of Practice ‘Learning network on inclusive entrepreneurship’ (COPIE) to share experience on producing an
environment in which entrepreneurship is a natural choice for people from all
walks of life. This project (2009-2012) gathered representatives from ESF
management and implementing bodies and was supported with a grant of € 630 000.

United Kingdom – Wales

YES – Empowerment

The Youth Entrepreneurship Strategy (YES) Action Plan in Wales seeks to equip young people with a ‘can do’ attitude and a drive to create
opportunities for themselves. The YES Action Plan outlines measures for young
people, education, business and community within three areas – Engaging:
Promoting the value of entrepreneurship to create opportunities and develop
young people – Empowering: Providing young people with entrepreneurial learning
opportunities – Equipping: Supporting young people to create and grow
businesses. For more information, click here.

Most countries encourage sustainable
activities. In Greece, training is available for unemployed to develop
specific skills in sustainable economic development. Cyprus runs a
scheme, co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund, for youth
entrepreneurship, emphasising new technologies, innovative production and
environmental issues to develop strong and competitive businesses. Programmes
in some countries focus on certain economic activities, e.g. the Ministry of
Agriculture in the Czech Republic supports young farmers who want
to start their own business.

Lithuania

Rural Development

There are support possibilities for youth under the Rural
Development Programme for Lithuania 2007-2013 consisting in setting up of young
farmers, modernisation of agricultural holdings, improvement of economic value
of forests, first afforestation of land, non-productive investments in forests,
diversification into non-agricultural activities, support for business creation
and development, encouragement of rural tourism activities. The applicants
under these measures are young farmers (a farmer, who is less than 40 years
old) and young people not less than 18 years old. For the implementation of the
projects, priorities of the Rural Youth Committee in 2012 are: promoting
entrepreneurship among rural youth; to organise the leisure time for rural
youth; to encourage the community of rural youth; to encourage volunteering of
rural youth; the development of rural youth-friendly spaces; to promote the ecological
awareness. For more information, click here.

Some countries support entrepreneurial
initiative in the non-profit sector. The ‘Zakon o socialnem podjetnistvu’ (law
on social entrepreneuship) in Slovenia promotes socially relevant
activities or support to people from vulnerable backgrounds. In the Flemish
Community of Belgium, the project ‘Opinno’ encourages science students
to orient themselves towards specific areas, including ‘energy and living
environment’; ‘CORE’ encourages secondary school students to work around
rational use of energy in cooperation with a start-up cooperative; and ‘VLAJO’
supports projects for secondary school students to start up their own business
in fair-trade products. In Italy, micro-credits are available to develop
social businesses or cooperatives that help increase jobs for disadvantaged or
socially vulnerable groups.

3.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

Young people's voices were heard through
the Structured Dialogue dedicated to this topic. The European Youth Forum (YFJ)
built on this by providing further feedback to the
Commission and the Council on the need for a strong
youth dimension in EU policy activities. It also
increased capacity building of youth organisations on youth employment policies
through its Youth Employment Action network.

The YFJ promoted a
European Quality Charter on Internships and Apprenticeships, which sets the
basic quality principles to ensure that internships and apprenticeships become
valuable and quality experiences across Europe. The YFJ also launched a survey
‘Interns Revealed’ on the experiences of young interns in Europe, and gathered signatures from
organisations on the website http://qualityinternships.eu/
and from individuals via Facebook.
This support campaign continued in 2012 and the Charter was officially
presented at the European Parliament in May 2012.

Youth organisations
also expressed themselves on access to entrepreneurship in an opinion presented
by the YFJ. This reaffirmed the need for stable, enabling, and supportive
environments to engage in entrepreneurship. This was further discussed during
the roundtable ‘Making Entrepreneurship a Real Option
for Young Europeans’ organised in the European Parliament in May 2011.

The YFJ also issued an
opinion on a youth
guarantee. This is important to
improve the situation of young people being neither in education, employment
nor training (NEETs), who often face poverty and social exclusion.

Young people gathered also at the ‘Youth Employment in Europe’ conference, co-organised by the YFJ and
the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) in Paris to express their opinions, concerns and suggestions
on policy measures to support youth employment.

Table 3‑A: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Youth Employment and Entrepreneurship

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to take the specific situation of young people into account when devising flexicurity strategies? || to promote cross-border professional and vocational opportunities for young people? || to develop career guidance and counselling services? || to promote quality internships and apprenticeships to facilitate the entry to, and progress within, the labour market? || to promote sharing of responsibilities between partners in order to facilitate reconciliation between professional and private life for both young women and young men? || to promote entrepreneurship in the field of sustainable development?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ■ || ● || ■ || ● || ■

Belgium Flemish || ● || ■ || ● || ● || ■ || ■

Belgium French || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ● || ■ || ● || ●

Czech Republic || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Denmark || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Germany || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ● || ♦ || ■

Greece || ● || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Spain || ▲ || ▲ || ■ || ● || ■ || ●

France || ■ || ♦ || ♦ || ■ || ♦ || ♦

Italy || ● || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ●

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

Latvia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Lithuania || ▲ || ♦ || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Luxembourg || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ● || ● || ♦

Hungary || ● || ● || ● || ● || ■ || ■

Malta || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Poland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Romania || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovenia || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovakia || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Finland || ● || ♦ || ● || ■ || ■ || ▲

Sweden || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || || || ||

Norway || ♦ || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Switzerland || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲

Montenegro || ■ || ● || ■ || ● || ▲ || ■

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                                   
             ♦ No, without plans

4. 
Education and Training
4.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

Education and training figures at the top
of the EU agenda with one of the five headline targets of the Europe 2020
strategy – the EU Strategy for jobs and growth – focusing on increasing
tertiary attainment to at least 40 % and reducing the share of early
school leavers to less than 10 % by 2020.

Through the strategic framework for
European cooperation in education and training, adopted in 2009 for the period
up to 2020[26]
(ET 2020), Member States agreed that the long-term strategic objectives of EU
education and training policies are (1) making Lifelong Learning and mobility a
reality; (2) improving the quality and efficiency of education and training;
(3) promoting equity, social cohesion and active citizenship; and (4) enhancing
creativity and innovation, including entrepreneurship, at all levels of education
and training.

Following up the Europe 2020 headline
target of lowering the rate of early school leavers to less than 10 % by
2020, the Commission adopted in 2011 the Communication Tackling early school
leaving which outlines policy measures aimed at reaching this goal. A
policy handbook with examples of good practice accompanied the Communication,
which was followed by a Council Recommendation in May 2012[27].

The Commission also adopted in 2011 the
Communication Agenda for the modernisation of Europe's higher education[28] which prioritises widening
access of under-represented groups into higher education as a means to improve
the attainment level.

Within the strategic framework, the first
Joint Report[29],
adopted in 2012 by the Commission and the Council, finds that Member States are
making slow progress towards achieving the Europe 2020 target of reducing the
share of early school leavers below the 10 % benchmark. In 2011, the early
school leaving rate averaged 13.5 % across the EU compared to 14.1 %
the year before (with considerable differences between Member States). If
current trends continue, the report states, the 2020 target will not be met.
The share of low-achievers in basic skills in reading, maths and science, in
contrast, is on track for meeting the EU target of less than 15 % by the
end of the decade (20 % in 2009 compared to 24.1 % in 2006).

The report also shows that achieving the
EU's tertiary attainment target – raising the share of 30 to 34 year olds who
have graduated from higher education from the current EU average of 34.6 %
to at least 40 % – cannot be taken for granted. Seven Member States score
below 25 %. To support Member
States' reforms and contribute to the goals of Europe 2020, the Commission
published a new agenda for modernisation of Europe's higher education systems
in September 2011[30].
The strategy identifies priority areas where EU countries need to do more to
achieve shared education objectives and sets out how the EU can support their
modernisation policies. EU-level initiatives will include a multi-dimensional
university ranking and an ‘Erasmus for Masters’ loan guarantee scheme for
students taking a full degree course abroad. The ‘Erasmus’ programme celebrated its 25 years' anniversary with some 3 million European
students having already participated. An Erasmus manifesto
recently prepared calls to enhance the quantity of the programme (student
numbers/targets and adequate funding, incl. for less well-off students) as well
as its quality (especially regarding programme preparation and credit
recognition).

The Commission encouraged learning mobility
through ‘Youth on the Move’, one of the flagships of the Europe 2020 strategy[31]. ‘Youth on
the Move’ was followed by a Council Recommendation on learning mobility[32] which provides guidance with regard to tackling administrative, institutional and
legal obstacles to learning mobility. The new proposal
for an integrated programme Erasmus for All[33] also devotes ample room to learning
mobility, and the Council has adopted a new benchmark in this area[34].

The EU Youth Strategy promotes youth work,
which offers non-formal and informal learning environments. Youth work has been
addressed during various events during 2010-2012. This included the first
European Youth Work Convention in Ghent, organised by the Belgian Presidency
with the support of the Commission (2010). The recommendations of this meeting
were endorsed in a Council Resolution[35].
The youth partnership between the European Commission and the Council of Europe
organised a symposium in 2011 on the recognition of youth work. The Commission
has also launched a study on the value of youth work in the EU the results of
which are expected in 2013.

Portugal – Youth in Action programme

Teach in order to learn

This project took place in Luau, Angola, involving 12 volunteers
from Portugal – along with Angolan young people – during one month in 2010. It
started with an exploration of the education and training needs among local children
and young people, to get to know the context they were operating in. On that
basis, the volunteers built a library from scratch: 300 cases of books were
delivered during the project, they classified and catalogued and incorporated
them into the new library, which became a cultural centre for extra-school
activities. They worked with local teachers in developing cultural and artistic
activities and providing teaching materials ranging from health to information
technology. They also gained a clearer sense of what European identity means –
something that they continued to display on their return home, in meetings and
presentations to their peers. The project also promoted international youth
work and the concept and practice of volunteering. Local newspapers,
newsletters, the radio, and videos made by the volunteers with their partners
during the project and distributed widely on their return ensured its
visibility.

Adult learning is a vital component of the
lifelong learning continuum, covering the entire range of formal, non-formal
and informal learning activities, general and vocational, undertaken by adults
after leaving initial education and training. Adult learning is important in
relation to the provision of second-chance opportunities and the acquisition of
basic skills such as literacy and numeracy, but also digital skills; in
relation to targeted learning for early school leavers and young people not in
education, employment or training (NEETs) as stated in the recent Council Resolution on a renewed European agenda for
adult learning[36].

Intergenerational learning (IL) has been
the main medium for the transfer of skills, knowledge and values between
generations for centuries. Nowadays IL is increasingly taking place outside the
family because of changes in structures of families and communities. IL in the
workplace provides a means to imparting tacit knowledge and skills between
older workers and apprentices and for younger workers to introduce new
technical knowledge. Alongside its importance in the context of working
environment, IL also has the potential to contribute significantly to promoting
social cohesion in general and is admirably suited to addressing many of the
key challenges facing Europe today, such as combating poverty, integrating young
people at risk, environmental protection and intercultural harmony.

Spain, Austria, Romania, Sweden – Grundtvig

Seniors for Intergenerational Knowledge Transfer

Once
seniors leave the labour market, they neither have the opportunity to offer
their know-how to others nor access to permanent learning processes (lack of
motivation), leading to a kind of social exclusion. The project used NICT-based
didactic methodologies to qualify seniors (coming from restructuring sectors)
to take active part (via volunteer work) in training processes aimed at young
people, thus giving value and transferring their knowledge to new generations.
Through such efforts, they became experienced mentors and were offered the
training they needed as well as the necessary tools and methodologies to enable
effective knowledge transfer across generations. For more information, click here.

To promote the validation of non-formal and
informal learning, the Commission prepared a draft Council recommendation on
this subject[37]. The
Commission is also working on a tool to help individuals record and present
skills acquired throughout their lives, particularly in non-formal settings,
and will provide soon an updated inventory.

4.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level

This summary is primarily focused on
non-formal learning issues, in line with the priorities of the EU Youth
Strategy. It does not encompass all the priorities of the Education and
Training Strategy.

4.2.1. 
Developing non-formal learning opportunities to
address early school leaving

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to support the development of youth work and other non-formal learning opportunities as a way of addressing early school leaving? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 24 || 1 || 2 || 21

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 2 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || 1 || 0

Many countries present good practices
around youth work activities targeting early school leaving. These include the
Youth Coach initiative in Austria, the European Social Fund (ESF)
co-funded ‘Developing youth work quality’ project in Estonia as well as
youth centres in the Czech Republic, Latvia and Lithuania . Other examples include the project Learning for Young Adults in Slovenia, involvement of youth workers in the
social guarantee scheme in Finland, special trainings for young people with fewer
opportunities in KOMPrax project in Slovakia and activity agreements in
the United Kingdom.

Germany, France and Romania
mention second chance schemes, while the French Community of Belgium, Luxembourg,
and Poland present specific voluntary services targeted at early school
leavers (‘solidarcité’ in Belgium, ‘service Volontaire d'orientation’ in
Luxembourg and ‘Voluntary Labour Corps’ in Poland).

The need for an individual follow-up of the
early school leaver by youth workers is often underlined in the National Youth
Reports, e.g. by France, Italy and Finland.

The Flemish Community of Belgium, Ireland, Spain and Sweden put a particular emphasis on supporting
the youth organisations or youth projects which address early school leaving.

Countries such as Bulgaria (with a project ‘To make the school more attractive’), Greece, Italy (National Guidance Plan) and Malta (with initiatives using non-formal learning
within schools) underline the development of specific programmes in schools to
prevent early school leaving.

Denmark and Portugal underline activities in favour of validation and recognition of non-formal
learning.

Belgium

Time-Out – swap school for non-formal learning

‘Time-Out Projects’ exist for young people that come into conflict
with teachers, with other children in their class or for those who have
problems with formal education. During this time-out period, formal education
or employment is replaced by non-formal learning opportunities. Young people
are supposed to return to class after this time-out period. For more
information, click here.

4.2.2. 
Use of EU tools for the validation of skills and
the recognition of qualifications

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to strengthen the use of the range of tools established at EU level for the transparency and validation of skills and the recognition of qualifications? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 21 || 1 || 1 || 19

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 2 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || 2 || 1

Many countries present the state of play
regarding the preparation of their National Qualifications Framework[38], to be developed within the
European Qualifications Framework (EQF)[39].

Besides the EQF, other European tools such
as Europass, YouthPass, the European Credit Transfer
and Accumulation System (ECTS), and the European Credit System for Vocational Education and Training (ECVET) are also often quoted.

The Czech Republic, Estonia, Spain,
Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia and the United Kingdom
have chosen to focus their answer on validation of competences acquired through
non-formal learning activities such as youth work, as there seem indeed to be
many developments in this area. The Czech Republic has developed
a Personal Competency Portfolio, which is a tool for recording key competences
acquired in non-formal learning settings. Spain is currently working on
the evaluation and recognition of competences gained via non-formal learning or
work experience. A law on the validation and recognition of non-formal learning
was adopted in February 2011 in Latvia. Non-formal education is being
revised in Lithuania and the set of competences gained via these
activities is being assessed. Slovenia also presents its ‘national
occupational qualifications’, a scheme for recognition and assessment of
non-formally obtained knowledge. In the United Kingdom, Wales has developed quality standards for youth work.

Estonia

Stardiplats – how to put non-formal learning into a CV

In 2010 the Estonian Youth Work Centre launched a non-formal
learning recognition instrument ‘stardiplats’, which is a web-based online
youth portal, where young people can gather and write down all of their formal
education and working experiences and also all different kinds of non-formal
education experiences. They can analyse and describe their non-formal learning
experience in that portal and afterwards print them out on CV or Europass
format if needed. The project is supported via the ESF co-funded state
programme ‘Developing youth work quality’ initiated by the Youth Affairs
Department of the Ministry of Education and Research and carried out by the
Estonian Youth Work Centre. For more information, click here.

4.2.3. 
Promoting learning mobility of all young people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote learning mobility of all young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 25 || 1 || 2 || 22

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 2 || 1 || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || 1 || 1

More than half of the Member States mention
the key role of Youth in Action and other EU programmes, such as the Lifelong
Learning programme, with a particular focus on Erasmus and Comenius, for
promoting learning mobility of youth.

Bulgaria concentrates on the promotion of Erasmus, providing also additional
financial subsidies for young people with fewer opportunities. Spain on the other hand presents a variety of grant schemes offered by ministries
and the Commerce Office for internships, research projects and language courses
all over the world. The main actor in Sweden in this field is the
International Programme Office for Education and Training. This government
agency awards grants and project funding but also runs communication
initiatives.

Ireland

National Youth Council of Ireland (NYCI) – sharing information on
learning mobility

The Government provides and promotes learning mobility through
support for agencies and in turn for young people to learn about each other in
the form of national and international visits and cross cultural exchange and
non-formal learning. The NYCI International Programme is supported to provide
information and advice through sharing information, face to face meetings,
development of partnerships and collaborations. It facilitates the learning
mobility of young people and youth workers in youth organisations. NYCI shares
information via youth.ie, e-newsletters, Facebook, Twitter, etc. NYCI works
largely with youth organisations to ensure the learning mobility of young
people. NYCI also works with the Department of Children and Youth Affairs, and
dáil na nÓg, the Youth Parliament, which gives young people in Ireland the opportunity to represent the views of those under the voting age of 18 at a national
level, and to call for changes to improve the lives of young people in Ireland. For more information, click here.

4.2.4. 
Raising public awareness of the value of
non-formal learning

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to make the broader public aware of the value of non-formal learning? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 19 || 1 || 3 || 15

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 11 || 2 || || 9

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 3 || || 1 || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 0 || || || 0

Non-formal learning activities are promoted
broadly across the Member States. They are often conducted through web-portals
(such as www.mitteformaalne.ee in Estonia
and www.hrdauth.org.cy in
Cyprus), special events (Youth Work Week in Wales, United
Kingdom), campaigns (e.g. connected with the European Year of Volunteering,
such as in Austria) or projects (Lithuania for instance mentions
a pilot project launched in 2011 for non-formal education of children,
including a scheme of individual vouchers; ‘changing mentalities’ project in Greece;
‘Youth information network’ in Latvia, ‘Year with Passion’ in Poland,
‘KOMPrax’ project in Slovakia).

In this context, the National Youth Reports
often[40]
seem to imply that a better assessment and quality of non-formal learning, as
well as its improved recognition and validation, can support promotion and
awareness-raising of its value.

Denmark and Sweden stress the very lively role of non-formal activities in their society (Folkbildning
activities in Sweden, volunteering in Denmark).

Portugal and
  Hungary mention their activities regarding training of trainers or
youth workers.

Ireland

National Quality Standards Framework for youth work

The National Quality Standards Framework (NQSF) aims to ensure that
youth work organisations provide quality services to young people. It also
provides an opportunity to articulate their practice through the development of
a common language within a structured framework. The NQSF is intended to be
both practical and developmental, in that it will enable youth work
organisations to assess service provision and to identify areas for
development. The values underpinning the development and implementation of the
NQSF are: (i) a clear understanding of youth work's educational purpose,
methodology and context; (ii) commitment to continual improvement and best
practice; (iii) transparency of governance and operation; (iv) equality and
inclusiveness embedded in policy and practice for staff, volunteers and young
people; (v) promotion of the young person's well-being by ensuring safe
learning environments. For more information, click here.

4.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

Youth organisations are a key provider of
non-formal learning. Youth organisations and the European Youth Forum (YFJ)
contributed to efforts for a better recognition and quality of non-formal
education by implementing a pilot project on quality assurance of non-formal
learning experiences in youth organisations. To explore spaces for flexibility
between formal and non-formal education, the YFJ regularly organises a
‘Non-formal Education Week’. Based on the pilot project, the YFJ developed a European
System for Quality Assurance of non-formal education, anchored in three
strands: expertise building, capacity building and developing a political
consensus with institutions and stakeholders on how to organise quality
assurance on non-formal education at European level.

Table 4‑A: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Education and Training

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to support the development of youth work and other non-formal learning opportunities as a way of addressing early school leaving? || to strengthen the use of the range of tools established at EU level for the transparency and validation of skills and the recognition of qualifications? || to promote learning mobility of all young people? || to make the broader public aware of the value of non-formal learning?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ● || ●

Belgium Flemish || ● || ● || ● || ●

Belgium French || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ■ || ●

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Denmark || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Germany || ■ || ■ || ● || ●

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ■ || ♦ || ■ || ▲

Greece || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Spain || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

France || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Italy || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Cyprus || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■

Latvia || ● || ● || ■ || ●

Lithuania || ● || ■ || ■ || ■

Luxembourg || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲

Hungary || ■ || ▲ || ● || ●

Malta || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Poland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Romania || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Slovenia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovakia || ■ || ▲ || ■ || ●

Finland || ● || ■ || ♦ || ●

Sweden || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || ||

Norway || ■ || ♦ || ♦ || ■

Switzerland || ♦ || ♦ || ■ || ■

Montenegro || ● || ● || ■ || ■

Croatia || ■ || ■ || ● || ▲

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                           ♦ No, without plans

5. 
Social Inclusion
5.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

Young people generally are among the most
vulnerable groups in society, and this is especially true in the current
crisis. The proportion of young people living at risk of poverty is several
percentage points higher than for the total population. Youth unemployment
rates are more than twice as high as for the total EU population, and the
impact of the crisis risks being particularly grave for today's generation of
young people[41].

The Europe 2020 strategy advocates not only
smart and sustainable, but also inclusive growth. One of its headline targets
is to lift 20 million people out of risk of poverty and social exclusion by
2020. One of the Europe 2020 flagship initiatives is the ‘European Platform
against Poverty and Social Exclusion’. Poverty should be combated from an early
age; children born into poverty face a substantially higher risk of remaining
poor throughout their youth and into adulthood.

Combating poverty and social exclusion is
primarily a Member State competence; the Commission plays a supporting and
coordinating role by identifying best practices and promoting mutual learning,
setting up EU-wide guidelines and making funding available.

Social inclusion of all young people is a
‘field of action’ of the EU Youth Strategy and also a key priority of the Youth
in Action programme. This programme supported more than 7 100 projects in this area for almost € 105
million in 2010 and 2011. More than 150 000 young people participated in
these projects, of which more than one third young
people with fewer opportunities.

In 2010 the Council adopted the Resolution
on active inclusion of young people: combating unemployment and poverty[42], emphasising the need
for Member States to step up efforts to reduce social exclusion of young people
and inviting them to act upon a number of issues.

2010 was the European Year of Combating
Poverty and Social Exclusion. The key objectives of the year were to raise
public awareness about these issues and to renew the political commitment of
the EU and its Member States to improve the situation. The Council Declaration
on the 2010 European Year[43]
signed at the end of 2010 concluded that: (1) The European Year of Combating
Poverty and Social Exclusion has contributed to giving a stronger voice to the
excluded. (2) The adoption of the Europe 2020 strategy was a major step
forward. (3) The recognition of the fundamental human right for all women, men
and children to live in dignity is at the heart of the EU commitment to social
inclusion. (4) Taking into account lessons learned from the past, the EU has to
provide concrete, satisfactory and urgent answers to the difficulties faced by
people living in poverty or social exclusion, by removing obstacles and
empowering women and men to change their situation. (5) The legacy of the
European Year of Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion 2010 will be further
developed through the flagship initiative ‘European Platform against Poverty’.

Social Inclusion of Youth on the
Margins of Society – More Opportunities, Better Access and Higher Solidarity

This policy review focuses on the situation of some specific youth
groups in the European youth policy context, such as the homeless or those at
risk of homelessness, migrant, ethnic minority youth and those young people
with public care backgrounds.

The policy review is based on the findings of a cluster of five
research projects on the social inclusion of young people, financed by the Socio-Economic Sciences and Humanities Programme
(SSH) of the EU 7th Framework Programme:

· 
YiPPEE: ‘Young People from a Public Care
Background: pathways to education in Europe’. (DK, ES, HU, SE, UK [January 2008 – August 2010] http://tcru.ioe.ac.uk/yippee).

· 
CSEYHP: ‘Combating Social Exclusion among Young
Homeless Populations: a comparative investigation of homeless paths among local
white, local ethnic groups and migrant young men and women, and appropriate
reinsertion methods’. (CZ, NL, PT, UK [May 2008 – April 2011] http://www.movisie.nl/homelessyouth).

· 
EUMARGINS: ‘On the Margins of the European
Community – Young adult immigrants in seven European countries’ (EE, ES, FR,
IT, SE, UK, NO [October 2008 – September 2011]
http://www.iss.uio.no/forskning/eumargins/index.html).

· 
EDUMIGROM: ‘Ethnic differences in education and
diverging prospects for urban youth in an enlarged Europe’ (CZ, DK, DE, FR, HU, RO, SK, SE, UK [March 2008 –February 2011] http://www.edumigrom.eu).

· 
YOUNEX: ‘Youth, Unemployment, and Exclusion in Europe: A multidimensional approach to understanding the conditions and prospects for
social and political integration of young unemployed’. (DE, FR, IT, PL, PT, SE,
CH [May 2008 – August 2011] http://www.younex.unige.ch).

Altogether, research evidence comes from eleven old and six new EU
Member States, which suggests that this policy-oriented review is based on a
good coverage of the countries of the EU.

More specifically, the objectives of the
review are:

· 
to provide an overview of the reasons for the
precarious situations of the examined youth groups and to formulate the policy
issues;

· 
to visualise the policy challenges needed to
produce greater social inclusion on the labour market and in the wider society;

· 
to highlight policy implications for
cross-border policy transfer; and

· 
to contribute with research-based
recommendations.

The EU financially supports initiatives
against poverty and social exclusion through the European Social Fund (ESF)[44], the European Globalisation
Adjustment Fund[45]
and the PROGRESS programme[46].

The ESF is dedicated to supporting
employment and raising living standards throughout the EU. The guiding
principle is investment in education and training. The European Globalisation
Adjustment Fund supports people who have lost their jobs as a result of
globalisation. PROGRESS is the EU's employment and social solidarity programme
whose aim is to encourage improvements in employment, social inclusion and
protection, working conditions, non-discrimination and gender equality.

Estonia, Spain, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, United Kingdom – Youth in Action programme

Jump start – giving young people a new sense of motivation

This short-term European Voluntary Service (EVS) project took place
in 2010 and involved seven unemployed young people from Spain, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden and the United Kingdom. It helped participants acquire a new
understanding of looking for a job during a three-week project at a vocational
school in rural Estonia. They learnt something concrete under the supervision
of qualified educators, overcame language barriers and, as unemployed young
people from Estonia also became involved, they came into contact with other
cultures. These were all young people with fewer opportunities, and half of
them had related social or health problems. Through this project, they
developed a new desire to plan for their future and identify objectives for
themselves. When returning home, they displayed an interest in active
participation in society: some got jobs, others went back to school, and some
became involved in other reintegration programmes and international youth
projects. Furthermore, for some of the school's staff and organisers of the
village, this was a novel teaching method and their first experience of dealing
with young people from different parts of Europe.

5.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level
5.2.1. 
Youth work and youth centres as means for social
inclusion

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to realise the full potential of youth work and youth centres as means of inclusion? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 20 || 1 || 1 || 18

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 2 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 4 || || 1 || 3

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || 1 || 1

Most Member States provide funding to youth
work organisations and projects through a range of schemes and national
programmes. Almost all have developed networks of youth work centres, which
offer information, counselling services, leisure time and after-school
activities for youth. The main focus usually is on socially vulnerable young
people.

Sweden has
initiated a specific training programme for youth workers and youth leaders on
youth policy and methods for how to promote the social inclusion of young
people at local level. Finland has realised the potential of youth work
to combat social inclusion, but admits there is still room for improvement. In Finland, the risk of discrimination and unfair treatment against children and young people
is particularly high in immigrant groups, the Roma, the indigenous Sámi people,
sexual minorities and among youth with disabilities. Slovenia finances
youth work measures by the National Youth Office while, simultaneously, the
local level provides a number of initiatives for ensuring a holistic approach
to the inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities.

5.2.2. 
Cross-sectoral approach to improve community
cohesion and solidarity

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to adopt a cross-sectoral approach when working to improve community cohesion and solidarity and reduce the social exclusion of young people, addressing the inter linkages between e.g. young peoples education and employment and their social inclusion? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 21 || || 2 || 19

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 2 || || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012 || ▲ || 2 || 1 || 1 || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || 1 || 1

In view of the inter-linkages between e.g.
young people's education, employment, health and their social inclusion, many Member States confirm the importance of pursuing a
cross-sectoral approach and of including a youth dimension in these policy
areas linked to social inclusion. Member States frequently mention the involvement of relevant
ministries and stakeholders such as youth NGOs when deciding on youth related
issues, strategies or action plans. Many put a strong emphasis on youth in
their employment policies with the main goal to promote the integration of
young people in the labour market and decrease youth unemployment.

The aim of Malta's ‘Embark for Life’
project is to provide support to young people, aged 16 to 24, who need
assistance to integrate better into the workforce and society. Through this
project, young people benefit from a number of individual sessions with a
Professional Youth Support Worker. These experts help young people identify
their strengths and weaknesses and outline areas they need to work on in order
to improve their employability prospects.

In Austria, two federal ministries
(Ministry of Social Affairs and Ministry of Education) work together to improve
the situation of young people at risk through the project ‘Youth Counselling’.
The project started in January 2012 in several federal states and its aim is to
prevent early school leaving, to provide support for pupils/students at risk
and those dealing with psycho-social or family problems. The youth coaches are
mainly social workers who cooperate with teachers and school boards/directors
in offering advice and helps solving individual problems for young people at
risk of social exclusion.

Finland

Myrsky – social participation through arts in rural areas

The Myrsky project (The Storm), which was started in 2008 by the
Finnish Cultural Fund, has financed youth art projects run by professional
artists. During 2008-2011, over 14 000 young persons have participated. The
objective is to offer young people in rural areas artistic activities. It is
especially targeting young people at risk of social exclusion or
marginalization, and aims at strengthening the social
participation of these young people through creating art.

In the spring of 2011 Myrsky became a part of the Finnish Children
and Youth Foundation's activities. For more information click here.

5.2.3. 
Development of intercultural awareness and competences

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to support the development of intercultural awareness and competences for all young people and combat prejudice? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 21 || 1 || 3 || 17

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 9 || 2 || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012 || ▲ || 2 || || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || || 1

A number of cited initiatives in this area
target specific groups. Germany reports two federal initiatives with
particular emphasis on disadvantaged youth and young people with migration
background to promote tolerance and democracy, and strengthen civil society. Portugal's
‘Escolhas’ programme aims to mobilise local communities for projects of equal
opportunities aimed at children and young people from vulnerable socio-economic
contexts, particularly the descendants of immigrants and ethnic minorities.
School curricula in Austria include intercultural learning as a
principle of teaching. It describes a holistic way of teaching students in
diverse classes together with people using diverse first languages and having
different ethnic backgrounds.

Many countries organise specialized
training programmes for youth workers, youth leaders and young people to
develop intercultural awareness and combat prejudice. In Luxembourg, a mandatory training for specialists in the youth field includes subjects
on intercultural awareness and competences. The Czech Republic and Latvia report various non-formal learning activities for youth workers and young
people on topics addressing prejudice and intercultural learning.

The ESF is, according to Member States,
frequently used to co-finance initiatives to develop intercultural awareness. Spain communicates with youth and addressed the topic in a youth friendly manner
through the launch of the initiative ‘Rap Against Racism’ – a song, a video and
a campaign with the participation of leading representatives of the Spanish
hip-hop scene. The government of Sweden has adopted a national action
plan to promote democracy and combat violent extremism with a specific focus on
young people.

5.2.4. 
Homelessness, housing and financial exclusion
with focus on young people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to address the issues of homelessness, housing and financial exclusion with a particular focus on young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 24 || || 2 || 22

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 2 || 1 || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || 1 || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || 1 || 0

A number of Member States cited examples of
youth-targeted support measures related to housing. Apart from general measures
concerning housing policy, Cyprus grants low priced ready-made dwellings
to young people from low-income strata and tackles the accommodation problem of
students through the construction of student residences and subleasing flats at
lower prices. The Czech Republic provides shelter services for young
homeless mothers and their children and ‘half-way houses’ which means temporary
residence services for young persons up to the age of 26 years, who leave
educational facilities for institutional or protection care. Spain provides technical and legal advice to young people under the age of 35 in
buying and providing housing as well as grants, subsidies, state aid
programmes, monthly allowances for covering rental costs and other kinds of
financial support. Finland also ensures sufficient investment funding in
order to improve the living conditions of young people on the brink of
independence with a focus on youth homelessness and the prevention of social
exclusion, as well as reinforcing social skills. In Slovenia young
people are classified as a priority group in a number of state measures to
improve the housing situation; however, their access to housing remains limited
given that in the majority of cases the number of applicants for subsidies,
financial assistance and non-profit housing far exceeds the funds available.
State subsidies intended for first-time home buyers are specifically aimed at
young people; however, the eligibility for such subsidies is limited to young
families and exclude individuals.

From the National Youth Reports, it seems
that there is a trend of tackling the issues of homelessness, housing and
financial exclusion of young people through the general social policies of the
country and not through youth oriented policies in particular.

5.2.5. 
Access to quality services

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote access to quality services e.g. transport, e-inclusion, health, social services? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 24 || || 3 || 21

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 5 || 2 || || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || 1 || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || 1 || 1

Some countries have incorporated the
objective to ensure access of young people to quality services in their
national youth strategies or action plans, whereas others mention the value of
youth information offices and services providing tailor-made youth information.

Belgium, Spain, Lithuania, Austria and Portugal report discounts for young
people on transport services. Austria furthermore offers e.g. free
public schools and universities. In the Flemish Community of Belgium it is common practice to make public services less expensive for young people.

The Swedish government developed an
online youth clinic and a strategy with a long-term objective to gradually
reduce the number of children and young people using tobacco, narcotic drugs,
doping substances and alcohol.

Austria

Youth Coaching – counsel for special needs

BMUKK/Ministry of Education: In January 2012, the initiative Youth
Coaching was started up in several federal states; the aim of the initiative is
to prevent early school leaving, to provide support for pupils/students at risk
and those dealing with psycho-social or family problems. The ‘Youth Coaches’
are mainly social workers offering counselling and overcoming individual
problems in school. They are requested to co-operate with teachers and school
boards/directors. For more information click here.

Addressing social exclusion by promoting
e-inclusion services, however, is rarely reported. Only Estonia and the Flemish Community of Belgium mentioned e-inclusion services in their
National Youth Reports. The e-inclusion concept, in particular focused on
youth, needs to be more developed in all countries.

Slovakia

Emancipated young adults

Financial support for young adults (ESF) in order to help them to be
more emancipated consists of activities which promote the availability and
quality of care services (social services and measures of social protection and
social guardianship), improve the position of vulnerable and marginalized
population groups in the labour market and society. The project consists of
several programmes: Social, educational and other programmes and methods
designed to prepare children for emancipation before completion of a court
decision about staying in an orphanage. Programmes and other training methods
work to promote the emancipation of young adults after leaving an orphanage.
Support programmes, professional activities and special methods of work for an
adult person after orphanage leaving, focused on the ability to acquire and
maintain a household. New and innovative programs focus on adaptation,
integration, careers and facilitate entry into the labour market.

5.2.6. 
Specific support for young families

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote specific support for young families? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 22 || 1 || 2 || 19

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 2 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 3 || || || 3

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || 1 || 0

Wherever Member States provided examples of
measures in this area, state guarantees and subsidies for young families to buy
or renovate housing are most often mentioned. Some countries also mention well
developed family policies and financial support to young parents. Young
families in Austria benefit from paid parental leave for mothers and/or
fathers (shared), direct financial child benefits or specific tax benefits for
single parents, special access to cheap housing or no-interest-loans for
building and a well-structured system of child-care. The Czech Republic has facilitated reconciling professional and family life by designing specific
flexible measures in its labour law (e.g. reduced working hours upon request of
pregnant women or flexible working time to young mother/father). The Housing
Development Plan in Estonia sets out measures and financing to
support young people and families to buy or renovate their homes. In addition a
state guarantee for mortgage for young families aims to support young families
to buy their own dwelling. Italy introduced a national fund for newborn
babies, under which new parents can apply for bank loans benefiting from
special refunding conditions. Malta's social marketing campaign targets
young people to promote work-life balance. Poland aims at a
well-developed nursery system co-financed by government and the establishment
of clubs for children up to three years old. Slovenia reports to have a
highly developed family policy comprising a lot of benefits and services for
children and families with children.

5.2.7. 
Young people and youth organisations in the
European Year of Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion in 2010

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to engage young people and youth organisations in the planning, delivery and evaluation of European Year of Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion in 2010? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 12 || 1 || 1 || 10

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 10 || 1 || || 9

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 10 || 1 || 3 || 6

Many countries report participation in and
organisation of various events and projects in relation to the European Year
2010, whereby many projects addressed youth.

Bulgaria
reports that various projects and initiatives were implemented under the Youth
in Action programme and several national programmes. In Hungary, youth organisations, NGOs in the youth field and student unions were
consulted on the topic of the European Year 2010. Latvian youth was
widely represented in the majority of activities, and a 13 year old singer,
involved in Latvian Child Forum activities, was one of the Ambassadors of the
European Year 2010.

5.2.8.     Cross-disciplinary research on active inclusion

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does the government of your country support and promote cross-disciplinary research relating to young people and their living conditions in line with the Council resolution on active inclusion, having regard to the socio-economic environment and the opportunities and obstacles this poses for the social inclusion and employability of young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, the Government has supported and promoted such cross-disciplinary research since before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ■ || 22 || 2 || 1 || 19

YES, measures were taken to support and promote such cross-disciplinary research after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 1 || || || 1

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 7 || || 2 || 5

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || 1 || 1 || 1

A number of Member States inform that they release regular
evidence-based reports on young people's situation, including their living conditions.
Some Member States have a monitoring system in place with a variety of youth
indicators (Flemish Community of Belgium, Estonia, the Netherlands,
Finland, Wales in the United Kingdom) or support longitudinal
research on youth (socio-economic panel in Germany, National
Longitudinal Study of Children in Ireland).

5.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

Young people and their representative
organisations such as the European Youth Forum (YFJ) were actively engaged in
promoting and implementing the 2010 European Year of Combating Poverty and
Social Exclusion and the 2012 European Year of Active Ageing.

Youth, through the channel of their
representative body, the YFJ were consulted prior to elaborating the flagship
initiative ‘European Platform Against Poverty’[47], and continues together with
other civil society organisations, notably within the ‘Platform of European
Social NGOs’, to be involved in its monitoring.

The YFJ is facilitating a project on the
European coordination platform of young migrants and young people with migrant
background (YM+). This project is supported by the European Programme for
Integration and Migration (EPIM), and involves 20 organisations from different
European countries. The YFJ organised two capacity building events for YM+ in
spring 2011 on advocacy and EU institutions and on organisational and project
development, and established a group of contact persons, which assisted in the
organisational development of YM+.

Table 5‑A: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Social Inclusion

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives || Does the government of your country support and promote cross-disciplinary research relating to young people and their living conditions in line with the Council resolution on active inclusion?

EU Member States || to realise the full potential of youth work and youth centres as means of inclusion? || to adopt a cross-sectoral approach when working to improve community cohesion and solidarity and reduce the social exclusion of young people, addressing the inter linkages between e.g. young peoples education and employment and their social inclusion? || to support the development of intercultural awareness and competences for all young people and combat prejudice? || to address the issues of homelessness, housing and financial exclusion with a particular focus on young people? || to promote access to quality services e.g. transport, e-inclusion, health, social services? || to promote specific support for young families? || to engage young people and youth organisations in the planning, delivery and evaluation of European Year of Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion in 2010?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ● || ● || ● || ● || ● || ♦

Belgium - Flemish || ● || ● || ● || ● || ● || ● || ♦ || ■

Belgium - French || ■ || ▲ || ■ || ▲ || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ● || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ● || ■

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ▲

Denmark || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

Germany || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

Greece || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ▲ || ♦ || ▲

Spain || ■ || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

France || ♦ || ● || ♦ || ● || ♦ || ■ || ● || ■

Italy || ■ || ■ || ● || ■ || ● || ● || ● || ■

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Latvia || ● || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ▲

Lithuania || ■ || ♦ || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲

Luxembourg || ■ || ● || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

Hungary || ▲ || ■ || ▲ || ▲ || ● || ● || ● || ■

Malta || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ●

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Austria || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Poland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ■ || ▲

Romania || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovenia || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ■

Slovakia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Finland || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Sweden || ● || ● || ● || ● || ● || ● || ♦ || ■

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || || || || || ||

Norway || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Switzerland || ▲ || ♦ || ■ || ♦ || ♦ || ♦ || ♦ || ♦

Montenegro || ● || ▲ || ● || ● || ■ || ● || ♦ || ▲

Croatia || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ▲

■ Yes, before the EU Youth
Strategy came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth
Strategy came into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                                                ♦
No, without
plans

6. 
Health and Well-being
6.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

The majority of young people in the EU
enjoy good health; nevertheless, evidence shows that the current crisis risks
to have an impact on the health and well-being of young people – in particular
in low-income families[48].

Although health is mainly a national
competence, the Commission coordinates and complements these efforts through
action at EU level.

Under the Youth Health Initiative and as a
follow-up to the 2009 ‘Be healthy, Be yourself’ Conference, a number of actions
were carried out around four priorities (empowerment and participation,
inequalities and vulnerability, communicating health, and mainstreaming these
principles across European health policy). The Commission organised a youth health event ‘Food for mind, mind for health’ in
October 2010 in Torino, then European Youth Capital, together with
stakeholders active on youth health[49].

Young people are a specific target group in
several EU health initiatives around smoking, alcohol abuse, nutrition, obesity
and drug use[50].
In pursuing action in this area, the Commission cooperates with stakeholders
such as the European Youth Forum (YFJ).

The ‘Together for Health’ Programme
(2008-2013)[51]
supports a number of youth-related projects. One was the publication Preventing
Injuries in Europe[52]
assessing progress by European countries implementing the WHO Resolution on the
prevention of injury and the promotion of safety[53]. The ProYouth initiative promotes healthy
eating, body satisfaction and preventing eating disorders in young people aged
15 to 25. Under the Drug Prevention and Information Programme, the Commission
supports several projects focused on prevention of drug use and treatment of
teenagers and young adults, among others a programme targeting young polydrug
users, a resilience-based interactive drug education programme, and family
empowerment and hepatitis prevention projects.

In 2011, the Commission launched a study
‘Making the case for investing in the health of young people: assessing the
economic impact of poor health and actions to promote and protect better health
of children in Europe’ together with the Health Behaviour in School-aged
Children International Coordinating Centre within the University of Edinburgh.

Greece – Youth in Action programme

Board game about mental health

A group of young people from an NGO called ‘Athina’, in Greece, active in the field of mental health and de-institutionalisation mainly of children
and teenagers, proposed the creation of the first educational board game aiming
at informing young people and raising awareness on mental health issues through
question and answers. The game is addressed to teenagers, students and secondary
school pupils and one of the main aims is to combat social exclusion and stigma
on mental health issues.

6.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level
6.2.1. 
Implementation of the Council Resolution on the
health and well-being of young people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to follow up the Council Resolution on the health and well-being of young people and encourage youth fitness and physical activity by applying the EU Physical Activity Guidelines? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 22 || 1 || 2 || 19

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 2 || || 5

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || 2 || 1

Many countries undertake efforts to improve
the health and well-being of young people through existing capacities within
the sport movement or the education system. For instance, Austria enhanced its policy on the involvement of youth in sport. The Austrian
Health Promotion Foundation implements ‘Guidelines to Physical Activity’
through a general call for fitness and physical activity and by funding
projects, campaigns and activities. Slovenia addresses insufficient
physical activity by ‘the National Sports Programme’ and ‘the National Health
Enhancing Physical Activity Programme 2007-2012’, which established 11 goals
targeting young people aged 15 to 29 years. Finland set up a
cross-sectoral health-enhancing physical activity steering group at the end of
2011 to develop new strategic guidelines. Cyprus introduced several
initiatives, e.g. Student Sport Label/Badge Scheme in 2011 and a Health Card is
issued for all competitive sport athletes. Latvia is implementing the
National Sports Development Programme 2006-2012 and Bulgaria the
programme ‘sport for Children in their spare time’ targeting young people up to
the age of 18.

6.2.2. 
Encouraging healthy lifestyles for young people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to encourage healthy lifestyles for young people via physical education, education on nutrition, physical activity and collaboration between schools, youth workers, health professionals and sporting organisations? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 26 || 1 || 4 || 21

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 2 || || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 0 || || || 0

Most Member States promote healthy
lifestyles for young people. Often they thereby focus on specific health
issues, such as physical education, health education, prevention of alcoholic
beverages and tobacco products, healthy nutrition and sexual education. The
government of Spain launched the ‘National Agreement against the
consumption of alcoholic beverages by minors’, which includes a manifesto
signed by stakeholders from various social, educational and business sectors
committing them to work side by side to achieve zero consumption of alcohol by
young people under the age of 18. To prevent smoking by young people, the
government launched an awareness-raising campaign together with the Spanish
Association Against Cancer (AECC), the National Youth Council and the Healthy
Universities Network to mark the World No Tobacco Day on 31 May. The National
Institute for Youth set up a new ‘Center for Sexual Health Injuve’, to
prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. In Poland, the ‘Fruit at School’ programme promotes healthy nutrition, aiming to
increase the consumption of fruits and vegetables by children and to shape
their eating habits. Since 2011 the Ministry of Education provides funding for
organisations promoting healthy lifestyle during ‘out-of-school’ activities.

A number of Member States emphasise
prevention and promotion of healthy lifestyles. For example, the Bulgarian
National Health Strategy 2007-2012 raises the awareness for healthy lifestyles
and health risks, whereby children and young people are targeted through
Internet and social media. The Flemish Community of Belgium actively promotes the use of a health policy in every school. In Slovenia, the Programme for Children and Youth 2006-2016 promotes healthy
lifestyles, whereby placing considerable emphasis on awareness-raising in
elementary and secondary school curricula. The Hungarian National Youth
Strategy addresses health awareness in education and training and develops
knowledge and methods within the national curriculum and school-based
pedagogical programmes.

6.2.3. 
Increasing knowledge and awareness of health
issues among youth workers

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to increase knowledge and awareness of youth workers and youth leaders of health issues? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 18 || 1 || 2 || 15

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 1 || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 4 || || || 4

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || 1 || 1 || 1

Member States frequently mention close
cooperation between public bodies and civil society stakeholders. In the Czech Republic, a specialised unit for preventing risky behaviour within the
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports coordinates policy and legislative
initiatives and cooperates closely with regional specialists and schools. By
law, youth workers and youth leaders, especially those who organise camps for
children and young people, have to be trained in security and health issues.

The General Secretariat for Youth in Greece conducted a series of online debates on AIDS/HIV where young people had the
opportunity to ask questions on HIV transmission and treatment to doctors,
psychologists and relevant institutions and organisations. The questions and
answers now constitute a guide on AIDS, which can be found on the web-portal of
the General Secretariat for Youth and which is distributed to schools, youth
workers and others interested in learning more about AIDS.

The National Youth Institute in Portugal runs the ‘Cuida-te’ (Take care of yourself) programme in partnership with
public and private bodies to promote healthy lifestyles. It targets young
people, but also others, such as teachers, parents, youth organisations and
health professionals. The Austrian Nutrition Action Plan includes an
on-going Structured Dialogue with young people on nutrition. The Spanish
Youth Council is pursuing a campaign around HIV prevention and is active within
the context of the national strategy against alcohol abuse.

6.2.4. 
Encouraging peer-to-peer education

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to encourage peer-to-peer health education? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 17 || 1 || 1 || 15

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 1 || 2 || 5

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 6 || 1 || 1 || 4

In almost every country where peer-to-peer
education has been implemented, policy-makers see it as a crucial tool to reach
out to younger people. Methods such as peer group education and peer
counselling are seen as bringing added value into prevention work.

For example, the National Youth Service
Strategy of Wales, United Kingdom, identifies peer education as a key
youth work methodology and many local authorities and voluntary sector youth
organisations have local initiatives. In order to transfer this concept into
practice on a more ambitious and national basis, an apprenticeship programme
has been established. A total of 26 apprentice youth workers are employed to
engage with young people at risk of becoming NEET (not in education, employment
or training).

6.2.5. 
Making health facilities more youth friendly

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to facilitate access to existing health facilities by making them more youth friendly? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 17 || || 2 || 15

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 1 || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 3 || 1 || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 5 || 1 || 1 || 3

Member States mention some concrete
examples of how health facilities can be made more youth friendly. In 2010, Bulgaria maintained 19 consulting rooms across the country for anonymous and free of
charge consultations and tests of HIV. Consulting offices are situated at
regional health inspections, municipal hospitals and non-governmental
organisations. Ensuring guaranteed health services with high quality and easy
access is one of the goals of the National Health strategy 2008-2013. Primary
and specialized aid practice is to be brought closer to remote areas and
residential districts populated mainly by Roma people.

Finland
takes efforts to reduce regional differences in access to pupil and student
welfare services. School and student health services are now more easily
accessible, e.g. services of school health nurses have improved during the last
few years. The development will be assessed in cooperation with children and
young people. To strengthen the youth perspective, discussion days were
organised about 80 times in 60 different municipalities from 2009-2011 and
involved 2 500 young people.

Latvia

Health and safety at work

Within the ESF project ‘Practical application of the legislation on
occupational safety and health and labour relations in sectors and enterprises’
(2008-2013) implemented by the Latvian Employers' Confederation, a computer
game on occupational safety and health issues has been elaborated for young
people. The game suggests to solve real problems related to health and safety
at work in real Latvian enterprises (seven companies working in distribution of
automobiles, retail trade, manufacturing and distribution of cosmetics,
telecommunications, tourism and hotel services, construction, distribution of
computer techniques).

Information about the game is available online as well as the game.

6.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

After the launch of the Youth Health
Initiative in 2009, the YFJ contributed to the development of a roadmap for the
implementation of the initiative. The Youth Forum also followed the
implementation of the EU Mental Health Pact and conferences on the link between
mental health, social exclusion and employment. The Forum also participated in
the advisory board of the Commission's Help campaign
and supported the Alcohol Policy Youth Network.
It furthermore participated in the ‘Youthlink’ project on sexual and
reproductive health and rights and developed its work on health inequalities.
It also organised an event in October 2010 with the European Parliament
Intergroup on Youth. The Forum continued awareness-raising and capacity
building among its Member Organisations on health issues within non-formal
education and health training.

The Youth Forum supported research from the
  University of Maastricht on the relationship between youth unemployment and
mental health problems, and in its publication ‘Youth Employment in Europe
– A Call for Change’ it emphasised the issue of mental scarring caused by
youth unemployment and the social impact that the exclusion of young people is
currently having.

Table 6‑A: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Health and Well-being

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to follow up the Council Resolution on the Health and Well-being of Young People and encourage youth fitness and physical activity by applying the EU Physical Activity Guidelines? || to encourage healthy lifestyles for young people via physical education, education on nutrition, physical activity and collaboration between schools, youth workers, health professionals and sporting organisations? || to increase knowledge and awareness of youth workers and youth leaders of health issues? || to encourage peer-to-peer health education? || to facilitate access to existing health facilities by making them more youth friendly?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ● || ● || ♦

Belgium Flemish || ● || ● || ♦ || ♦ || ●

Belgium French || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲

Bulgaria || ● || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Denmark || ♦ || ■ || ♦ || ♦ || ■

Germany || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Greece || ▲ || ▲ || ● || ♦ || ■

Spain || ■ || ● || ■ || ■ || ●

France || ● || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Italy || ■ || ■ || ● || ● || ■

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Latvia || ● || ● || ● || ● || ♦

Lithuania || ● || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Luxembourg || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ● || ♦

Hungary || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ▲ || ▲

Malta || ● || ● || ● || ■ || ●

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Poland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Romania || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ■ || ■

Slovenia || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ▲ || ●

Slovakia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Finland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ▲

Sweden || ■ || ● || ■ || ♦ || ●

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || || ||

Norway || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ♦

Switzerland || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Montenegro || ■ || ■ || ● || ● || ●

Croatia || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■ || ■

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                                   
             ♦ No, without plans

7. 
Youth Participation
7.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

Youth participation is about young people's
initiatives, individually or as a group, to engage in societal activities, to
freely express their views and to contribute to decision-making on matters
affecting them.

Promoting youth participation is central to
EU youth policy, it both is an underlying theme of the EU Youth Strategy and
one of the ‘fields of action’ is dedicated to its promotion. It is incorporated
into the Treaty of Lisbon, where Article 165 TFEU stipulates that ‘Union action
shall be aimed at [...] encouraging the participation of young people in
democratic life in Europe’[54]. The right of young people to participate in
decision-making is also underlined in the Council Conclusion on the European
and International Policy Agendas on Children, Youth and Children's Rights[55]. In addition, Article 24 (1)
of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU stipulates that children may
exptress their views freely and their views on matters which concern them must
be considered in accordance with their age and maturity.

The Hungarian Presidency gave special
priority to participation during its mandate. Under their Presidency, the
Council adopted a Resolution on encouraging
new and effective forms of participation of all young people in democratic life[56], emphasising a broad concept
of ‘participation’ which covers not only social and political participation but
also participation in the labour market and education. The Resolution also
examines new forms of participation such as social media and online
communities.

The Trio Presidency of Poland, Denmark and Cyprus built on this work, making ‘youth participation in democratic life in Europe’ the overarching priority for the second half of the first cycle of the EU Youth
Strategy between mid-2011 and end 2012. In 2011, under Polish Presidency, the
Council adopted Conclusions on the Eastern dimension of youth participation
and mobility[57],
calling on the Commission and Member States to promote exchanges and mobility
for young people in the EU and their eastern neighbours.

The Structured Dialogue is one of the EU
Youth Strategy's key initiatives bringing together young people and
decision-makers around key issues all across Europe. Given its importance,
Chapter 11 of this document is entirely dedicated to this process.

The Flash Eurobarometer
on ‘Youth on the Move’ from 2011 addressed opinions and attitudes of young
people also regarding participation, for example about their involvement in
society as volunteers, as members of organisations, and as participants in
international activities, cultural activities and political activities.

The Commission also conducted a study on
‘Youth Participation in Democratic Life’[58],
which addresses: youth representation; promoting youth engagement; voting and
deliberation; creativity, innovation and youth participation; (new) media and
youth participation; and finally, youth exclusion. Among its conclusions are
that there is indeed no crisis of democratic participation or disenchantment
with politics among youth in Europe, but that young people lack attractive
alternatives among established politicians and feel that their opinions are not
represented[59].

The Commission initiated efforts to
restructure the European Youth Portal,
adding features to promote youth participation online. From providing
information on opportunities for young people, the portal is being turned into
a platform for young people to engage with each other and to have their say on
the issues that affect them. The Youth Portal will also support the Structured
Dialogue, with a view to stretching its outreach.

The Commission's ‘Europa Diary’
has received a major makeover, moving from a paper-based diary format to a
completely online product. It aims to give information to school pupils about
their rights, participation, health issues, personal safety, consumer issues,
studying, and the environment. As announced in the EU
Agenda for the Rights of the Child[60], the Commission launched the ‘Kids' Corner’ website[61] in 2011, which aims to give
children and young people information on their rights as well as information
about the EU and its Member States. A key feature of the Kids' Corner is the EU Website on the Rights of the child[62], where they can learn through
games, quizzes and child-friendly texts in 22 EU languages. It works as a
‘one-stop shop’ so it is very convenient for the children, who can easily find
all the different games at one place.

Young EU citizens can now use the new
online tools provided by the Commission's ‘European Citizens
Initiative’ (ECI), to come together to raise issues and make proposals for
EU legislation. The ECI, was launched in April 2012, and is open to young
people who are old enough to vote in European Parliament elections[63].

Finally, the Commission is working on a
Youth on the Move Card initiative, as part of the flagship initiative ‘Youth on
the Move’. It launched consultation to hear stakeholders' views on an
initiative to promote the use of youth and student cards making the lives of
young people who are mobile within Europe easier, by giving them information,
support and special deals.

Bulgaria – Youth in Action programme

Engaging young people in decision-making

This project aimed to identify how to increase active participation
and youth employment in small and remote towns in Bulgaria. Research was
conducted on the factors that determine the choice of hometowns, and
discussions were organised with decision-makers on their vision for employment,
education and training, housing policy, transport, recreation, and healthcare.
Participants became involved with local governments in the development of
municipal youth strategies. At a national youth meeting in Sofia in October 2010, 70 young people presented and shared local level experiences and
developed recommendations for the National Youth Strategy and the Europe 2020
strategy. They discussed with decision-makers issues related to economic
activities and entrepreneurship, employment and career development, recreation,
youth volunteering, and political participation and civic activism at the local
and national levels. The project activities demonstrated that youth policies
are developed not only by organisations and institutions in the capital city
but also with the participation of organisations from remote and small towns. A
project video was produced and published on YouTube.

7.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level
7.2.1. 
Mechanisms for dialogue with youth on national
youth policies

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to develop mechanisms for dialogue with youth and youth participation on national youth policies? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 23 || 1 || 4 || 18

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 10 || 2 || || 8

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 0 || || || 0

Member States are active in promoting youth
participation mechanisms since already before 2010. From the range of
activities, Member States quote some good examples of more recent activities.
Some Member States initiated legal action. The Bulgarian Government is
drafting a Youth Law, which allows for the creation of a national consultative
youth council to assist the Minister for Education, Youth and Science in
developing national policy. In Wales in the United Kingdom, pre-existing
guidance on consulting with and involving young people in decision-making
became legally binding in 2012.

Others enlarge possibilities for young
people to participate in decision-making. The Flemish Community of Belgium started the ‘Youth Ambassadors for...’ project, in which youth representatives
express their opinions on the thematic priorities chosen by the Trio
Presidencies in the context of the EU Youth Strategy.

7.2.2. 
Guidelines on youth participation, information
and consultation

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to encourage use of already existing, or development of, guidelines on youth participation, information and consultation in order to ensure the quality of these activities? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 24 || 1 || 3 || 20

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 1 || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || 1 || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 0 || || || 0

Member States were already actively
pursuing activities in this area prior to 2010 and continued to do so after the
Strategy came into place. Some countries focus on ensuring a high standard of
quality. The Ministry of Education and Science in Latvia launched an
evaluation of existing youth participation mechanisms in 2011. To share best
practice among practitioners and maintain a high quality of youth provisions, a
biennial National Meeting in Spain in 2010 brought together over 200
youth information workers.

Several countries have produced information
material. In 2011, in the Flemish Community of Belgium researchers
developed a framework and a manual on youth participation, together with youth
organisations. Estonia publishes a manual ‘Youth involvement and
participation’, which focuses on practical issues around participation as well
as evaluating the effectiveness of youth councils. In Sweden, the Ministry of Education and Research is producing guidelines for consultation
with civil society organisations, including youth organisations.

7.2.3. 
Governmental support of youth organisations and Local/National
Youth Councils

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to support politically and financially youth organisations, as well as local and national youth councils and promote recognition of their important role in democracy? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 28 || 3 || 3 || 22

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 5 || || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 0 || || || 0

Some Member States have recently developed
youth consultation structures. The Ministry of Education in Poland supported the process of establishing the Federation of Youth Organisations
(National Youth Council), whereby ensuring its independence free from state
influence. In Cyprus, 20 new municipal and community youth councils were
created in 2010 with the support of the Youth Board of Cyprus. The board[64] also signed a memorandum with
the Cyprus Youth Council to cover expenses of young people who participate in
seminars abroad.

Following the earthquake of 2009, the Italian
Government's ‘Partecipiamo!’ project created structures and opportunities for
young people in the affected areas to help revitalise local communities. This
enabled them to be involved in decisions around rebuilding facilities of
importance to them, such as schools, leisure and sports centres, and other
community buildings.

In some countries, efforts have been made
to further recognise and support youth representative organisations. In the United Kingdom, the Westminster government and the devolved governments/assemblies in Wales and Scotland provide financial support to NGOs which allow young people to be heard by
decision-makers, such as the UK Youth Parliament, the Scottish Youth Parliament
and Funky Dragon in Wales.

Hungary

Region legion – Youth for the South-East Hungary (DKMT) Euro-region

The four day meeting with the participation of 30 young people took
place in Szeged, Hungary. The goal of the meeting was to bring together young
people and decision-makers from the DKMT Euro-region to initiate a discussion
and a joint action plan on youth issues. Young people, who were already
experienced in the implementation of youth projects, were involved, many of
them being leaders of formal and informal youth organisations based in their
home town. During the meeting youth projects, which had been previously
realised in the DKMT region, were examined, then a joint action plan was drawn
up with decision-makers – including the wording of a letter – to draw attention
to the potential of young people in the region. A publication was edited as a
follow-up summarizing the outcomes of the meeting. As a result a network of
child and youth self-governments was established in the region that played a
significant role in the re-creation of the National Council of Child and Youth
Self-Governments in Hungary. For more information, click here.

7.2.4. 
Promote the greater participation of young
people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote the participation of more and a greater diversity of young people in representative democracy, in youth organisations and other civil-society organisations? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 21 || 1 || 2 || 18

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 10 || 2 || 1 || 7

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || 1 || 0

National Youth Reports present several
concrete activities to promote wider involvement of youth in participation
since 2010. In Lithuania, the Ministry of Social Security and Labour
approved a programme to develop youth volunteering as a means to get more young
people involved in civic and democratic life. The Swedish Government has
allocated funds for youth organisations and other civil society organisations
to help them improve methods to stimulate non-organised young people to become
active in the organisations of civil society.

Some activities focus on specific groups.
In Austria, the National Youth Council has set up a project group on
‘Intercultural Opening of Youth Work’ to establish a model on how to enable the
greater participation of young people from migrant backgrounds in youth
organisations. The Youth Council in the French Community of Belgium has contacted local youth clubs which work with young people from difficult
socio-economic circumstances in order to raise participation levels of young
people from all sectors of society. The Flemish Community of Belgium passed the
‘Participation Act’ which allowed financial support to youth initiatives
working with young immigrants and young people living in poverty.

Sweden

Commitment guides

The purpose of the Commitment guides is to stimulate people living
in areas with less organised inhabitants, in particular young people and women,
and increase their contacts with civil society organisations in different areas
of activity. Support to the Commitment guides has been allocated by the
National Board for Youth Affairs during 2010 with converted
€ 1.4 million. The number of 91 applications received was above
expectations. Of the 21 projects granted, 10 focused in particular on
women/girls. Dialogue with parents regarding attitudes and values has had a
great importance for involving young women. The Commitment guides have reached
about 6 000 young people in various ages. The National Board for Youth Affairs
will as a consequence of the very good results and big demand continue to
support organisations in this field until 2013. For more information, click here.

7.2.5. 
Use of ICT to broaden and deepen participation
of young people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to make effective use of information and communication technologies to broaden and deepen participation of young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 19 || 1 || 2 || 16

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 9 || 1 || 2 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 3 || 1 || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || || 2

A relatively high number of countries
report that such initiatives were carried out after 2010. One reason for this
may be that e-participation still is a concept under development.

Whilst most countries reported the use of
websites to pass information to young people, with ministries either delivering
websites themselves or supporting NGOs to deliver youth information websites,
others mentioned using social networking sites to inform and engage young
people.

In view of the fast evolving development in
social media, there are some interesting new initiatives. The Flemish Community
of Belgium awarded grants to projects developing computer games to help
young people to cope with different challenges in life, and the Government and
National Agency in Italy encouraging the use of internet radio to engage
with young people. The Ministry of Family, Seniors, Women and Youth in Germany initiated the ‘Dialogue Internet’ project, one of the elements of which is
promoting e-participation. In Malta, the Youth Agency created the Youth
Information Malta website in 2011, as a result of needs identified during the
consultation process for the country's new National Youth Policy. In the United Kingdom, Young Scot[65],
working in partnership with local authorities and the Scottish Youth
Parliament, developed an online platform to enable young people to vote
electronically using Scotland's youth smart card. In a first round of elections
for the Scottish Youth Parliament, over 21 000 votes were cast online. The
e-Voting platform has also been used to support a participatory budgeting
exercise in Shetland, with young people voting using their cards to choose
projects to be funded.

7.2.6. 
Supporting ‘learning to participate’

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to support various forms of learning to participate from early age through formal education and non-formal learning? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 26 || 2 || 2 || 22

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 4 || 1 || || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || 2 || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || || 1

In this field, most countries mention
examples in formal education, as supporting school and pupil councils and
adding citizenship education into the curricula. There were fewer reported
examples from the non-formal sector. In Bulgaria, the National Centre
‘European Youth Programmes and Initiatives’ conducts annual training for young
people, youth leaders and NGO representatives, with the aim to deliver greater
participation skills. Wales in the United Kingdom supported the
development and dissemination of participation training packages through
networks such as the Participation Workers Network and Pupil Voice Wales.

Some initiatives cover both formal and
non-formal education. Luxembourg is piloting education on participation
to very young children through school reception classes, as well as to older
children and young people through schools and non-formal education projects. In
  Finland, the Government's Child and Youth Policy Programme promotes
the participation in everyday environments in early-years education, schools
and educational institutions, and youth facilities, and states that youth
facilities are there to support the voluntary activities of young people and
increase the level of youth participation in the planning, implementation and
evaluation of activities.

7.2.7. 
Developing opportunities to debate with young
people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to further develop opportunities for debate between public institutions and young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 16 || 1 || 1 || 14

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 12 || 2 || 1 || 9

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || 1 || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || 1 || 2

Examples of concrete activities since 2010
include the involvement of local youth councils in evaluating the quality of
local opportunities for youth participation in Finland, as part of the
national evaluation of basic services, and the ‘Participation Café’ project in Estonia
in 2011 which brought together decision-makers and young people to discuss
various topics affecting young people's participation, such as the right to
vote at age 16, youth unemployment, and other important issues.

Some Member States link dialogue to
long-term, strategic development. The new Austrian Youth Strategy will
create new opportunities for dialogue between decision-makers and young people,
and the Flemish Community of Belgium is planning a Youth Pact 2020 which
will be the culmination of a large-scale debate between decision-makers and
young people about making the Flemish Community of Belgium a place where young
people like to live in 2020.

Slovenia

Council of the Government for Youth

This inter-ministerial working group (Svet vlade Republike Slovenije
za mladino) was established in 2009. The Council is a consultative body that
proposes measures and monitors the consideration of youth interests in various
public policies at the national level. It gives the Government and the
responsible ministries incentives and suggestions for the regulation of youth
matters and promotes youth participation in these processes. The Council which
comprises representatives of youth organisations and various ministries on an
equal basis is chaired by the Minister of Education and Sport. For more
information, click here.

7.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

Youth organisations and the European Youth
Forum (YFJ) have been actively engaged in the implementation of the Structured
Dialogue (see Chapter 10) and undertook their own efforts to foster the
capacity of youth organisations to take part in decision-making processes.

Since 2010 the YFJ actively advocated
lowering the voting age to 16 across Europe, and organised several meetings to
further explore and raise awareness on the topic. This campaign led to the
organisation of the European Parliament Roundtable on expanding democracy in
Europe in December 2011 and enabled a discussion on this topic in an
institutional forum.

Better youth participation at local level
is promoted through the European Youth Capitals, a title awarded to a city for
one year, during which it can showcase its youth-related cultural, social,
political and economic life and development. It is chosen by the YFJ based on a
jury selection process.

The YFJ commissioned a study ‘The Impact of the New Provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon
on Youth’, conducted by Prof. Ponzano, which reported on
opportunities and limits in the application of article 165 TFEU.

Table 7‑A: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Youth Participation

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to develop mechanisms for dialogue with youth and youth participation on national youth policies? || to encourage use of already existing, or development of, guidelines on youth participation, information and consultation in order to ensure the quality of these activities? || to support politically and financially youth organisations, as well as local and national youth councils and promote recognition of their important role in democracy? || to promote the participation of more youth and a greater diversity of young people in representative democracy, in youth organisations and other civil-society organisations?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ▲ || ■ || ●

Belgium Flemish || ● || ● || ■ || ●

Belgium French || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ● || ●

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Denmark || ● || ■ || ■ || ■

Germany || ● || ■ || ■ || ■

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Greece || ● || ■ || ■ || ●

Spain || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

France || ● || ● || ■ || ●

Italy || ● || ● || ■ || ■

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Latvia || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Lithuania || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Luxembourg || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Hungary || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Malta || ■ || ■ || ● || ●

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Poland || ● || ● || ● || ■

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Romania || ● || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovenia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovakia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Finland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ▲

Sweden || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || ||

Norway || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Switzerland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Montenegro || ■ || ● || ● || ●

Croatia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                           ♦ No, without plans

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to make effective use of information and communication technologies to broaden and deepen participation of young people? || to support various forms of learning to participate from early age through formal education and non-formal learning? || to further develop opportunities for debate between public institutions and young people?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ●

Belgium Flemish || ▲ || ■ || ●

Belgium French || ■ || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ●

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ■

Denmark || ■ || ■ || ■

Germany || ● || ■ || ●

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ●

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■

Greece || ■ || ■ || ●

Spain || ■ || ■ || ■

France || ● || ■ || ♦

Italy || ● || ■ || ●

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■

Latvia || ▲ || ♦ || ▲

Lithuania || ■ || ■ || ■

Luxembourg || ■ || ● || ●

Hungary || ● || ● || ■

Malta || ● || ■ || ●

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ■ || ■ || ●

Poland || ♦ || ■ || ●

Portugal || ▲ || ■ || ■

Romania || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovenia || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovakia || ■ || ■ || ■

Finland || ■ || ■ || ■

Sweden || ♦ || ■ || ♦

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || ||

Norway || ■ || ■ || ■

Switzerland || ● || ▲ || ♦

Montenegro || ● || ■ || ●

Croatia || ■ || ▲ || ▲

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                           ♦ No, without plans

8. 
Voluntary Activities
8.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

A Council Recommendation on the mobility
of young volunteers across the EU[66],
adopted in 2008, remains highly relevant when outlining EU initiatives during
the first cycle of the EU Youth Strategy. It aimed to create more cross-border
volunteering opportunities for young people through cooperation between
organisers of voluntary activities, complementing the European Voluntary
Service (EVS). It recommends Member States to develop opportunities for
cross-border volunteering, raise awareness and assure its quality, recognise
learning outcomes and promote mobility of youth workers and young leaders while
giving particular attention to young people with fewer opportunities.

The expert group established in 2009 to
facilitate the implementation of the Recommendation, continued to meet in order
to identify ways and means of cooperation and learn from each other through the
exchange of information and best practices. Among the group's achievements are
a multilateral cross-border volunteering project, a mapping of good practices,
a conference on cross-border volunteering in central Europe organised by the
Czech Republic, and a high-level seminar led by Germany. The active involvement
of Member States experts has contributed to a deeper understanding of volunteering.

The EVS, one of the main components of the
Youth in Action programme, facilitates every year around 7 000 young people
between 18 and 30 to work as a volunteer abroad. The programme also includes measures to support youth workers and youth organisations to
improve the quality of their activities, also in the field of volunteering.

Two European Years help raise awareness for
youth volunteering: the European Year of Voluntary Activities Promoting Active
Citizenship 2011 and the European Year 2012 for Active Ageing and
Solidarity between Generations. While the first one gave visibility to the work
of many youth volunteers and drew attention to its value both for society and
the individuals, the current Year highlights, among others, intergenerational
volunteering.

Malta – Youth in Action programme

Disability is no bar to helping others

An Italian volunteer spent three months in
Malta with the NGO Razett tal-Hibberija, which helps children and adults with
learning and physical disabilities to develop their potential. It offers an
array of therapeutic, educational and leisure services to them, free of charge.
The NGO initially hesitated, because the young Italian himself has suffered
from a physical disability since birth. Working with a foreign volunteer who
has a disability was a new concept for the centre's staff and volunteers. But
the experience proved valuable to everyone. Through his responsibilities in the
park, the volunteer overcame his physical barriers and strengthened his
self-confidence and independence. Through his volunteering experience he
impressed himself and inspired people around him, and proved to be an
invaluable learning activity supplementing his university studies.

8.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level
8.2.1. 
Opportunities for and awareness about mobility
of young volunteers

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to create more opportunities for mobility of young volunteers? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 19 || 2 || 2 || 15

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 1 || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 4 || || 1 || 3

|| || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to raise awareness about opportunities for mobility of young volunteers? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 18 || 1 || 2 || 15

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 11 || 2 || || 9

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

Many Member States quote the Youth in
Action programme, particularly the EVS as an important, if not the main source
for youth volunteering in another European country. In addition, a number of
countries conduct bi-lateral or multi-lateral exchange programmes. Germany
has several international agreements in the youth exchanges, and especially
agreements with France and Israel are used as basis for
pilot projects on cross-border volunteering. Spain and Portugal
signed a protocol of cooperation in the youth field, which encourages the
mobility of young people between both countries. Italy and Montenegro
have an active youth exchange. The Polish-Lithuanian Youth Exchange Fund
provides support for young people's engagement in activities across the border.
Denmark refers to volunteering as part of different Nordic programmes.

France and Luxembourg
launched new voluntary services, the service civique, which are open to
young people from other European countries. Conversely, Italy's civic
service allows young people to volunteer in another country. The Czech Republic
launched a pilot call for innovative projects promoting cross-border
volunteering. Poland focused on youth mobility in Eastern Europe and the
Caucasus countries.

A number of Member States pursue strategic
approaches to promoting youth volunteering. Austria, Lithuania, Romania
and Slovenia, for example, prepared volunteering laws, as did Croatia.
In Bulgaria volunteering is one of the main strategic goals of the
National Youth Strategy and also Hungary promotes volunteering through
its youth strategy. Spain and Greece, for example, have specific
Volunteer Strategies. The Czech Republic adopted an Action Plan, which
promotes a youth dimension in all forms of voluntary activities as well as
cross-border volunteering. Germany initiated new opportunities for
cross-border volunteering, such as a new format of the international youth
voluntary services. Many countries also refer to the expert group on the
Mobility of Young Volunteers as an important forum to advance the
implementation of the Recommendation.

In terms of awareness raising for
volunteering, many Member States referred to the value of the European Year of
Volunteering 2011. Some refer to Eurodesk and its network as an important
provider of information about volunteering. France has a Youth Portal with
a specific ‘International Mobility’ section and young people share related
information via social media such as Facebook and Twitter. In the United
Kingdom the ‘Volunteer Scotland’ website offers numerous volunteering
opportunities from small local to large scale international volunteering. Bulgaria,
Estonia and Spain reach out to formal-learning institutions, such
as schools or universities, to promote volunteering. Italy organised a
promotional truck tour.

8.2.2. 
Quality assurance

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to assure quality through the development of self-assessment tools? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 13 || 2 || 2 || 9

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 4 || || || 4

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 9 || 1 || 1 || 7

The ‘Youthpass Certificate’ from the Youth
in Action programme is mentioned by some Member States as a tool in this
context and a valuable starting point for further initiatives. Measures for
quality assurance by self-assessment are generally closely intertwined with
efforts regarding recognition of non-formal learning.

By way of example, in Sweden,
where voluntary activities are primarily organised by civil society
organisations, several self-assessment tools are in use, such as the
‘Experience, Learning, Development – ELD’ assessment tool, developed by the Centre
for International Exchanges. Finland also reports considerations for
developing criteria and tools for self-assessment. Germany is preparing to take concrete measures having provided central
units for quality management in the International Youth Volunteering Programme.

8.2.3. 
Promoting cross-border mobility of youth workers
and young volunteers

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote cross-border mobility of youth workers and young people in youth organisations? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 20 || 2 || 1 || 17

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 9 || 1 || 2 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || 1 || 2

Several Member States cite how the Youth in
Action programme, the main programme for mobility at EU level in this field,
contributes to mobility in a concrete way. For example, in Slovenia the
Youth in Action programme has prompted several pilot youth worker exchange
projects. In addition, it developed youth worker exchange programmes in
cooperation with partners from Finland.

In addition to the Youth in Action
programme, there are nationally driven initiatives promoting exchanges between
youth workers. The French Community of Belgium has a youth worker
exchange with France and Switzerland. Its ‘Tremplins Jeunes’
programme offers internships in youth organisations. France encourages
the mobility of youth workers through the law on the civic service.

8.2.4. 
Particular attention to young people with fewer
opportunities

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to give particular attention in this context to young people with fewer opportunities? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 19 || 1 || 2 || 16

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 10 || 2 || 2 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || || 3

In a number of countries, prevention of
exclusion is part of broader youth strategies and funding schemes, also
covering volunteering.

Slovenia's
Volunteering Act stipulates specific attention to young people with fewer
opportunities. Hungary made inclusion a priority of its volunteering
programmes. In Italy, the EuroGames 2010 project, which focused on
capacity building for volunteering and sustainable development, actively reached
out to young people with fewer opportunities.

Finland
stresses the importance of creating local working models and basic structures
in the field of volunteering.

8.2.5. 
Promoting the recognition of skills acquired
through voluntary activities

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote the recognition of skills acquired through voluntary activities through instruments such as Europass, Youthpass and Member State instruments? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 19 || 1 || 2 || 16

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 2 || 1 || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 5 || || || 5

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || 1 || 2

Member States actively undertake efforts
ensuring that the value of volunteering experiences is duly recognised. Portugal
grants all young people who participated in voluntary activities a certificate,
Austria developed a Volunteer Pass and the Czech Republic created a
Personal Competence Portfolio (‘Keys for Life’ project). Youth Portfolio is a
self-assessment tool available in Luxembourg. Youthpass gets mentioned
as the primary means of recognition by the Member States and Bulgaria
based its national document on the Youthpass.

A number of Member States are focusing on
outreach to the labour market to have experiences gained through volunteering
recognised by employers. Denmark states that the skills required through
volunteering are highly recognised on the labour market. Hungary
inserted the need to develop a validation system, in particular in view of
future employment of young volunteers, into its National Youth Strategy. The Slovak
KOMPrax network for the recognition of youth work is preparing a database
which intends to function as an ‘achievements platform’ also accessible to
employers. In the French Community of Belgium the Scouts raised
awareness of volunteering outcomes in enterprises. Latvia aims at making
Youthpass better known in the entrepreneurial world.

Social recognition, such as the ‘Volunteer
of the Year’ in Slovenia or the ‘saltire Award’ in the United Kingdom
are appreciated by volunteers. In Germany, former EVS volunteers promote
through the EuroPeers programme volunteering in schools, youth clubs, and
pedestrian zones but also in local and regional media.

8.2.6. 
Promoting intergenerational solidarity through
voluntary activities

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote intergenerational solidarity through voluntary activities? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 14 || 1 || 1 || 12

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 1 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 8 || 1 || 1 || 6

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 5 || || 1 || 4

Many Member States declare that the
European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations 2012
enhances their intergenerational activities, including volunteering. Lithuania
aims at promoting volunteering under the European Year 2012.

There are a number of examples of youth
organisations' involvement in projects around intergenerational solidarity. Slovenia
reports on youth organisations participating in the ESF network for
intergenerational solidarity. Estonia encourages joint voluntary
activities of the young and the elder generation, especially at the local
level. Also the Czech Republic supports joint volunteering at local
level through projects such as ‘Volunteering - A Way to Development of Local
Communities’ by Hestia, the national volunteering centre, and ‘Between
Generations – Active and Together’ by the Network of Healthy Cities. In Ireland
the National Youth Council cooperates with the organisation Age Action, in Denmark,
the National Youth Council works regularly with organisations of the elderly, Germany
and Spain promote intergenerational housing and Slovakia involves
all generations in a project on road safety.

An example of a volunteering project
whereby young people help elderly people can be found in Portugal, where
the young run errands for and keep the elderly company in the framework of the
project ‘Recados e Companhia’. Other fields of intergenerational volunteering
are, for example, culture (Austria: music; Malta: theatre),
social care (Portuguese voluntary programmes with the Institute of
Social Security), environment (Cyprus: recycling; Estonia:
garbage cleaning) and IT skills (Denmark: computer literacy and use of
cell-phones).

Bulgaria

National volunteering campaign

In connection with the celebration of the European youth week in
2011 and the European Year of Volunteering, the Ministry of Education, Youth
and Science co-organised a National volunteering campaign. The main idea was to
convince all of us, that together we can change the world to the better. This
campaign started on Facebook 21 April and finished 31 December 2011. It
targeted young Bulgarian people to generate ideas and to exchange them using
the social network as well as to exchange practices in the sphere of volunteering.
The Facebook application ‘The Change Starts with You’ had for each of the nine
messages separate webpages (e.g. Help elderly people! Accept the different!
Don't be aggressive!). Users could there publish photos and descriptions of the
initiatives realized in connection with the relevant ideas. For more
information, click here or
here.

8.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

Preparing for the 2011 European Year of
Voluntary Activities Promoting Active Citizenship, the European Youth Forum
(YFJ) was represented in the ‘European Year of
Volunteering 2011 Alliance’, an informal
grouping of 39 European networks of Civil Society Organisations active in
volunteering, working together on the advocacy for and promotion, preparation
and implementation of the European Year of Volunteering.

The YFJ organised the II Youth Convention
on Volunteering, the biggest civil society event of the European Year on
Volunteering. Hosted by the European Parliament, it provided a space for young
volunteers and youth organisations to work together, to discuss with European
decision-makers and celebrate young people's commitment throughout Europe. The
convention included a range of activities, from policy-debates, exchanges of
practices, meetings of young European and Chinese volunteers to public
concerts. This gave visibility to volunteering in
youth work, showcased the impact of youth organisations, and provided youth organisations
with a space to exchange and to learn from best practices.

The YFJ also called for the adoption of a
European Charter on the Rights and Responsibilities of Volunteers. This Charter
was developed in an open discussion with stakeholders, and based on the
collection, analyses and interpretation of existing studies, surveys and
statistical data on the legal status of volunteers and volunteering
organisations.

Table 8‑A: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Voluntary Activities

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to create more opportunities for mobility of young volunteers? || to raise awareness about opportunities for mobility of young volunteers? || to assure quality through the development of self-assessment tools? || to promote cross-border mobility of youth workers and young people in youth organisations?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ♦ || ●

Belgium Flemish || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Belgium French || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ● || ●

Czech Republic || ● || ● || ● || ●

Denmark || ■ || ♦ || ■ || ■

Germany || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ■

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Greece || ▲ || ● || ▲ || ▲

Spain || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

France || ● || ● || ♦ || ●

Italy || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

Latvia || ♦ || ● || ● || ♦

Lithuania || ♦ || ♦ || ♦ || ♦

Luxembourg || ● || ● || ● || ■

Hungary || ■ || ■ || ▲ || ■

Malta || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ● || ● || ● || ●

Poland || ● || ● || ♦ || ■

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Romania || ■ || ● || ▲ || ■

Slovenia || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ●

Slovakia || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ●

Finland || ♦ || ♦ || ♦ || ■

Sweden || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || ||

Norway || ♦ || ♦ || ♦ || ■

Switzerland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Montenegro || ● || ■ || ● || ●

Croatia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                     ♦ No, without plans

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to give particular attention in this context to young people with fewer opportunities? || to promote the recognition of skills acquired through voluntary activities through instruments such as Europass, Youthpass and Member State instruments? || to promote intergenerational solidarity through voluntary activities?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ●

Belgium Flemish || ● || ● || ▲

Belgium French || ■ || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ●

Czech Republic || ● || ● || ▲

Denmark || ♦ || ■ || ■

Germany || ■ || ■ || ■

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ■ || ♦ || ■

Greece || ▲ || ▲ || ▲

Spain || ■ || ■ || ■

France || ● || ♦ || ♦

Italy || ■ || ■ || ●

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■

Latvia || ● || ■ || ▲

Lithuania || ♦ || ■ || ▲

Luxembourg || ■ || ● || ♦

Hungary || ● || ■ || ▲

Malta || ■ || ■ || ●

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ■ || ■ || ■

Poland || ■ || ▲ || ▲

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■

Romania || ■ || ▲ || ■

Slovenia || ● || ▲ || ●

Slovakia || ■ || ▲ || ■

Finland || ♦ || ■ || ♦

Sweden || ■ || ■ || ♦

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || ||

Norway || ■ || ♦ || ♦

Switzerland || ■ || ■ || ▲

Montenegro || ● || ● || ●

Croatia || ● || ■ || ■

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                     ♦ No, without plans

9. 
Culture and Creativity
9.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

Member States and the Commission are
working together to increase opportunities for young people to experience
culture and develop their talent and creative skills. This includes making new
technologies available to empower young people's creativity, promoting
specialised training in culture, new media and intercultural competences for
youth workers, and encouraging partnerships between culture and creative
sectors on the one hand and youth organisations or workers on the other.

Under the European Agenda for Culture[67], some initiatives directly
address youth creativity and culture. The Council adopted Conclusions on promoting
a creative generation in 2009[68]
and Conclusions on cultural and creative competences and their role in
building intellectual capital of Europe in 2011[69]. Promoting accessible and
inclusive culture is among the priorities of the Work Plan for Culture
2011-2014 adopted by the Council in 2010[70].

Under the EU Youth Strategy, a study
on youth access to culture in Europe[71],
released mid-2010, highlights good practices. It also includes proposals for
helping European institutions and Member States overcome common obstacles such
as cost and distance and improve access of all young people to all forms of
creative and cultural activity. Council Conclusions on access of young
people to culture adopted in November 2010[72]
underlined the need to promote the development of
long-term coordinated policies for access of young people to culture on all
levels and to deepen knowledge and exchange of experiences on the subject.

The Council also adopted Conclusions in May
2012 on fostering the creative and innovative potential of young people[73], where it invited Member
States to support young people's creativity through non-formal and informal
learning activities. The Conclusions foresee the setting up of a peer-learning
expert group on this theme.

Hungary, Romania, Turkey – Youth in
Action programme

Branch of olive

The project created a multicultural and multi-religious atmosphere
by bringing together 20 young people belonging to Christianity, Judaism and
Islam from Hungary, Romania and Turkey for 10 days in Antalya, Turkey in 2011.
The project focused on intercultural learning, and each group planned its own
activities for a designated culture day, at which it introduced its culture and
religion. All participants were also involved in workshops on diverse
activities such as Ashura, painting Easter eggs, the Shabbat ritual, or henna
night, effectively removing prejudices among the participants. A kite workshop
involved group work and the kites were flown together in a spirit of
brotherhood and freedom. A visit to the ‘Garden of tolerance’, where a mosque,
a church and a synagogue stand alongside one another, helped to reinforce the
sense of co-existence, and each group had a chance to introduce its own
rituals. An imam read extracts from the Quran and explained the meaning in
English, answering questions from participants. Participants learnt about each
other's religions and cultures, improved mutual understanding, and broke down
stereotypes and prejudices.

9.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level
9.2.1. 
Following up the Council Conclusions on
promoting a creative generation

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to support the development of creativity among young people by following up the Council conclusions on promoting a creative generation: developing the creativity and innovative capacity of children and young people through cultural expression and wider access to culture? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 23 || 1 || 1 || 21

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 2 || 1 || 5

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012 || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || 2 || 0

Many countries mention specific projects
aiming at promoting youth access to culture and cultural expression: the French
Community of Belgium, Denmark, Germany, and Spain
all have awards to stimulate and highlight youth creativity while Estonia
and Italy mention student cards which promote access to culture. Luxembourg
offers free access to museums for young people, Malta has a specific
culture card, Portugal reports having a youth creative programme, Sweden
has the Creative Schools initiative and the United Kingdom promotes the
Welsh Young Creators' strategy.

Some countries also present broader
programmes or strategies for youth cultural education (Ireland, France,
Lithuania, Poland and Slovenia) sometimes involving
cooperation between Ministries of Culture and Ministries of Education/Youth.

Italy

Io Studio – enable students to participate in culture

The project aims at establishing a public-private institutional
network that can provide students with easier access to a variety of goods and
services in the fields of cultural and natural heritage, ICT, travel, and
sports. Introduction of students to various forms of cultural education outside
school perimeter is the main objective. The project enables them to actively
participate in the cultural realities of their territory, as well as nationally
and internationally.

The established partnerships involve students in projects, which
seek to stimulate their creativity by making them the protagonists of the
creative and training processes as well as to encourage direct contact with the
business world and cultural production circuits.

In the framework of this project a Student Card and a Student Portal
website
were developed.

9.2.2. 
Making new technologies readily available to
young people

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to make new technologies readily available to empower young people's creativity and capacity for innovation, and attract interest in culture, the arts and science? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 22 || || 2 || 20

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 3 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || 1 || 0

Some countries mention support of specific
projects to make new technologies available to young people.

Sweden
underlines the role of schools to stimulate youth creativity and mentions
support to the use of ICT in teaching, while France stresses the role
that cultural institutions may have in this regard and the need to raise their
awareness.

Support of young people to achieve media
literacy is indicated as an element of national strategies for youth by
Belgium, Italy, Austria, and Slovenia.

Belgium – Flemish Community

Nugames

This project is an initiative of the Flemish Youth Support Centre in
cooperation with other youth organisations funded by the Government of the
Flemish Community of Belgium. Nugames are recreational activities that use
technology and digital media being at the same time linked to the surrounding
physical space too. They are intended for group play. The activities are freely
accessible and can be modified and spread widely. Nugames are modular, which
makes them easy to adapt to different contexts. The use of Nugames and other
digital technology can make youth work more attractive to young people and
furthermore help bridge the digital divide. New forms of play will lead to new
creative forms of expression for young people. For more information, click here or here.

Estonia and Malta
stress that they set up schemes to highlight creative industries' activities
that target young people.

9.2.3. 
Providing access to environments in which young
people can develop their creativity

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to provide access to environments where young people can develop their creativity and interests and spend a meaningful leisure time? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 26 || 1 || 3 || 22

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 2 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 0 || || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 0 || || || 0

Free access to museums for young people (Luxembourg)
or specific cards providing easier access to cultural products or facilities (Italy,
Malta and Austria) are presented as measures to promote young
people's creativity.

Italy

Osthello

Since 2010 the Government promoted and funded with more than € 3
million ‘Osthello’, a pilot project carried out in collaboration with the
Italian Association of Youth Hotels (AIG) intending to develop youth mobility
and youth creativity. It consists of using hostels for young people all over
the country which have been provided and equipped with appropriate spaces for
artistic production such as recording studios, photographic laboratories,
cinema sets, and theatre and multimedia laboratories. The pilot initiative is
carried out in eight youth hotels and deal on five artistic subjects. This
chance for young artists to produce free of charge and to meet important
artists and teachers of various fields at relevant seminars could become even
more proactive by creating a network of events, exhibitions and multimedia
tools set up across the territory. For more information, click here.

The role of youth/leisure time centres in
providing creative environments for young people is particularly pointed out in
the reports from the German-speaking Community of Belgium, the Czech
Republic, Cyprus, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary,
Slovenia, and Finland.

Spain

Youth Creating Spaces – places to develop a creative spirit

The Spanish Institute for Youth (INJUVE), from 2005 to 2009, has
promoted the young artistic creation in collaboration with various local
authorities, through the construction and rehabilitation of buildings to house
Youth Creating Spaces. A Youth Creating Space is a place for sharing knowledge,
meeting and learning, where young people can develop a creative spirit with
means that are usually difficult to get. It is a network of ‘own spaces’ for
young people with whom they can identify and turn it into a personal project.
The versatile spaces are eligible for rehearsal, performance, assembly, and
other creative leisure of various types. It offers several areas fully equipped
with the necessary for practicing creative activities, including services for
the general operation such as buffet, offices, toilets, storage, and information
about youth. For more information, click here.

Estonia, France,
Italy, and Slovenia mention that cultural institutions are
encouraged to provide young people with access to facilities where they can
develop creative activities.

The National Youth Report for Sweden
underlines that the Swedish Arts Council allocates around 30 % of state
cultural funding to operations and projects that directly benefit child and
youth culture, while Ireland supports a National
Youth Arts Programme which endeavours to set standards for quality youth arts
work through the promotion and development of models of best practice.

9.2.4. 
Promoting specialised training in culture, new
media and intercultural competences for youth workers

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote specialised training in culture, new media and intercultural competences for youth workers? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 22 || 1 || 2 || 19

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 1 || 1 || 5

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || 1 || || 0

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || || 1 || 2

Among measures that have been taken, some
Member States emphasise training in intercultural competences of youth workers
(among them Belgium, Cyprus and the United Kingdom)
whereas others report that priority is given to training in new media or
technologies (the Czech Republic, Spain, Luxembourg, and Austria).
The National Youth Report of Belgium, the Czech Republic, Austria,
and Slovenia mention the role of the Youth in Action programme in
supporting training activities for professionals and volunteers in youth
organisations and youth centres on cultural aspects.

9.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

Whilst creativity and culture are not
currently within the strategic priorities of the European Youth Forum (YFJ),
culture was nevertheless progressively integrated into its actions. In 2010 and
2011 particularly, the YO! Fest was organised and brought together an
international array of young musicians to take part in a public youth event in
Brussels.

The YFJ further contributed to the
discussions on young people's access to culture during the Belgian Presidency
of the Council of the EU, which led to the adoption of Council Conclusions on
access of young people to culture 19 November 2010[74].

Table 9‑A: Overview
of responses contained in National Youth Reports – Culture and Creativity

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to support the development of creativity among young people by following up the Council Conclusions on promoting a creative generation? || to make new technologies readily available to empower young people's creativity and capacity for innovation, and attract interest in culture, the arts and science? || to provide access to environments where young people can develop their creativity and interests and spend a meaningful leisure time? || to promote specialised training in culture, new media and intercultural competences for youth workers?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ● || ●

Belgium Flemish || ● || ● || ● || ▲

Belgium French || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ■ || ● || ● || ●

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Denmark || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Germany || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Greece || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Spain || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

France || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Italy || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Latvia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Lithuania || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Luxembourg || ● || ▲ || ● || ■

Hungary || ● || ▲ || ● || ●

Malta || ● || ● || ● || ■

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ● || ● || ■ || ■

Poland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ●

Portugal || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Romania || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovenia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovakia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Finland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Sweden || ● || ● || ■ || ♦

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Non-EU Members || || || ||

Norway || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ■

Switzerland || ♦ || ♦ || ■ || ♦

Montenegro || ● || ● || ● || ●

Croatia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

■ Yes, before the EU Youth
Strategy came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth
Strategy came into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                     ♦ No, without plans

10. 
Youth and the World
10.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

The EU Youth Strategy ‘field of action’
Youth and the World aims at supporting the implementation of the EU's external
policies in the youth field. It encourages young people's cooperation with
regions outside of Europe through enhancing young people's participation in and
contribution to global policy processes. Numerous activities of Youth and the World are implemented within
the partnership between the European
Commission and the Council of Europe (CoE) in the youth field. In the context
of the EU-CoE youth partnership, two symposia were organised with Eastern
Europe and Caucasus countries, including the Russian Federation. The first,
hosted in Ukraine in 2011, focused on the Eastern dimension of participation
and mobility of young people. This was followed up by a symposium focusing on
the well-being of young people, hosted in June 2012 in
Georgia. Both activities offered opportunities for
exchanging views on youth policies, priorities and good practices. The European Commission maintains contact also with other
international organisations in this field, such as the UN
family and the World Bank. The Commission supported, for example, the UN Year for Youth and took part in the Youth World Conference in Mexico in 2010.

The priority regions for Youth and the
World are in particular the accession and pre-accession states, the Eastern
Partnership countries and the Russian Federation, the Southern Mediterranean
(South Med) region and Southeast Europe. Other focus areas are Africa, Canada,
and China. These priorities allow for a flexible response to political and
societal developments, requirements, changes and opportunities in the youth
sector.

Outreach to eastern European and Caucasus
countries was a priority of the Polish EU Presidency in 2011. During this
presidency, the Council adopted Conclusions on the Eastern dimension of
youth participation and mobility[75] and
the EU Presidency Youth Conference included participants from these countries. The Structured Dialogue with young people and youth organisations,
which also included the formulation of concrete recommendations during the EU Presidency Youth Conference in Warsaw,
was dedicated to this subject.

The South Med region was in particular
brought to the global public's attention through the youth-led uprisings in
some Arab countries during 2011, called the ‘Arab Spring’. In light of these
events, the Commission organised a seminar on the empowerment
of youth organisations and youth-led civil society initiatives in Malta in
March 2012 followed by a youth policy conference in Tunis in August 2012. These
events were organised in the framework of the EU-CoE youth partnership in
cooperation with different partners such as the North-South Centre[76], the League of Arab States, the Maltese and Tunisian governments,
the European Youth Forum (YFJ) and civil society organisations in the region.
The aims of these events were to analyse the current situation and to identify
future practical steps to promote youth participation. The ground for these
events had already been prepared by a youth policy seminar in Egypt in 2010.

As a follow-up to EU-Africa Youth Summits
held in 2007 and 2010, the first meeting of the Africa-Europe Youth
Platform/Forum is envisaged for November 2012 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. This
will bring together the Commission, the Council of Europe, the North-South
Centre, the African Union (AU), the EU-CoE youth partnership, the YFJ and the
Pan-African Youth Union.

The second EU-Canada Youth Policy Round Table on youth
participation took place in Helsinki, Finland as a follow-up to the 2009
EU-Canada Roundtable on Youth Employment. It was organised in the framework of
the EU-Canada Agreement in Higher Education, Training and Youth[77]. The main goals were to exchange good practices, policy models and
experiences in the EU and Canada in the youth policy area.

The year 2011 was designated the EU-China
Year of Youth with a view to further promote and deepen the partnership between
China and Europe, promote intercultural dialogue and
strengthen mutual understanding and friendship between our youth. Several
activities were organised throughout the year involving policy-makers and youth
organisations, some even continued beyond 2011.

The policy efforts are
supported by several programmes in the youth field. The Youth in Action
programme has a special strand called ‘Youth in the World’ which supports
activities aimed at strengthening relations between the EU and its neighbours,
as well as the rest of the world. A total of nearly 27 000 young people and
youth workers participated in 2010 and 2011 in exchanges and other non-formal
education activities supported by the programme in sub-action ‘Cooperation with
EU neighbours’.

The Commission
is increasingly focusing on the youth dimension of EU development cooperation.
The focus on vulnerable groups, including youth, is embraced in the
Communication on the future of EU development cooperation Increasing the
impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change[78].

Youth employment has also become a major
issue in the post-Arab spring context in the Southern Neighbourhood region. A
study by EuropeAid published in 2010 on ‘Social Inclusion and youth in EC
External Cooperation’ focusing on ENP countries, provided key information and
recommendations on how to streamline and better tackle youth challenges in our
external financial cooperation. In
line with the Joint Communications of 8 March and 25 May 2011, geographical
interventions in southern neighbourhood will have a strong focus on youth
inclusion. In this regard, in the 2011 SPRING programme (Support for
Partnership, Reform and Inclusive Growth – € 350 million) youth employability
and skills development are considered as priorities for ensuring democratic
transformation, institution building and economic growth. An example of this
greater focus is the forthcoming ‘Jeunesse-emploi’
(€ 23 million) programme in Algeria which will start in 2013. In the most
recent Joint Communication of May 2012 Delivering on a new European
Neighbourhood Policy[79], the EU reinforces its commitment to support partner countries
reforms aimed at promoting social cohesion and employment, in particular for
young people, in an integrated approach.

Europeaid's regional programme on
youth in the enp region.

The regional Eastern Partnership Youth programme (2012-2015) will strengthen the response of the Eastern Partnership countries
to the needs of youth in their societies. The programme has two components:
capacity building to officials and civil society actors in the youth policy
domain, conducted by a Youth Regional Unit; and a grants scheme which takes the
shape of the ‘Eastern Partnership Youth in Action Window’. Priority in awarding
grants under this window will be given to projects targeting disadvantaged
young people living in rural or deprived urban areas.

In the Neighbourhood South area, the EuroMed Youth IV
Programme, with timeframe 2010-2013 and a total
budget of € 5 million, aims to support and strengthen the participation and
contribution of youth organisations and youth from the Euro-Mediterranean
region towards the development of civil society and democracy. As a response to
the recent events in the area, the programme has been granted with extra € 6
million top-up in 2012.

The ‘field of action’ Youth and the World
also supports recent Communications from the European External Action Service
(EEAS) and the European Commission on a new response to a changing
neighbourhood[80], a partnership for democracy and shared prosperity with the
Southern Mediterranean[81], and the Commission Communication Eastern Partnership[82].

Denmark, Germany, United Kingdom –
Youth in Action programme

Global Youth and Sports Forum for the Millennium Development Goals

The Global Youth and Sports Forum project took place in 2010
involving seven promoters from three EU countries (Denmark, Germany and the
United Kingdom) and three partner countries (African and South-American). It
gathered 100 young people to establish a platform for young citizens to debate
and act upon the role of youth and sport to reach the Millennium Development
Goals (exchange of good practices, dissemination of recommendations from
participants to stakeholders at local, national and international levels,
international networking and partnership-building between participants and
among partner organisations for future initiatives). The promoters were
international, member-based youth and sport umbrellas, international youth and
sport foundations and regional ‘sport for Social Change Networks’.

10.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level
10.2.1. 
Raising awareness of young people about global
issues

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to raise the awareness of young people about global issues such as sustainable development and human rights? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 21 || 2 || 2 || 17

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 9 || 1 || 2 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || || 2

Almost half of the Member States indicate
that global issues are part of the education curriculum, a national youth
policy programme or strategy, an action plan or a specific education programme.
The important role of the Youth in Action programme as a means to support young
people's initiatives and projects was also mentioned.

According to the National Reports, a number
of key state institutions or non-governmental organisations are involved in
raising awareness of young people about global issues (e.g. Youth Councils,
youth organisations, National Authority for Youth, advisory councils, National
Commission for Human Rights, specific ministries, General Secretariat for
Youth, inter-ministerial working group, informal network of organisations and
institutions active in the field, youth institutes, Environmental Education
Centre). For example in Sweden, the International Development
Cooperation Agency disseminates information about development cooperation and
global issues and the Living History Forum works with young people on
tolerance, democracy and human rights. With the support of the Spanish
Institute for Youth, Spain organised an international activity called
‘University for Youth and Development’ where more than 300 young people from over
80 countries discussed current youth issues and focused especially on
sustainable development.

Slovenia

Global Education Week

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs coordinates an inter-ministerial
working group for global education, under the auspices of which various events
are held for raising awareness of the importance of global education in schools
and in general. Under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and coordinated by SLOGA,
an NGO platform for development cooperation and humanitarian aid, a week of global
education is organised every year in cooperation with a number of
non-governmental organisations for young people. In 2011, the central topic
focused on a responsible behaviour of individuals to our planet and its
inhabitants. A number of events were held throughout Slovenia, also in
cooperation with all kinds of organisations, schools, and associations that are
engaged in global education in various ways. For more information, click here.

10.2.2. 
Providing opportunities for young people to
exchange views with policy-makers on global issues

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to provide opportunities for young people to exchange views with policy-makers on global issues (e.g. via participation in international meetings, virtual platforms/fora etc.)? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 21 || 2 || 3 || 16

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 8 || 1 || 1 || 6

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012 || ▲ || 3 || || || 3

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 1 || || || 1

Most Member States mention that they
provide opportunities for young people to exchange views with policy-makers on
global issues (e.g. via participation in international meetings, virtual
platforms/forums, etc.).

Member States use several channels for
encouraging exchanges of opinions between young people and policy-makers on
global issues. This includes international events organised by the government
or NGOs (Slovenia), conferences, online live debates, various forums and
exchanges at the international level either by the ministry responsible for
Youth issues or through Youth Councils (Flemish Community of Belgium,
Denmark, Greece, Spain and Cyprus). Some Member States
(German-speaking Community of Belgium, Latvia, Hungary and Sweden)
mentioned that the EU Youth Conferences function in a positive way in this
matter through the Structured Dialogue as well as the National Working Groups.
YFJ, Youth in Action programme (Estonia and Ireland), EuroMed
Youth (Malta) Platform
and International Advisory Committee were also referred to in this context.

10.2.3. 
Encouraging young people to go ‘green’

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to encourage young people to participate in green volunteering and ‘green’ patterns of consumption and production (e.g. recycling, energy conservation, hybrid vehicles, etc.)? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 22 || 1 || 2 || 19

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 1 || 1 || 4

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 3 || 1 || 1 || 1

Special websites for young consumers exist
in Ireland and Sweden. Eco-friendly ideas, civic participation
and social actions are promoted in Lithuania via the national event
‘Let's do it’. Luxembourg, Hungary and Finland are
developing agendas or action plans for education in sustainable development.
Such an agenda (Education for Sustainable Development and Global Citizenship)
has been in place in the United Kingdom already since 2008 as well as in
the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Latvia and Slovenia. Slovenia
is also part of an international programme of eco-schools which encourages the
education of children and is managed by the association ‘Ecologists without
borders’. In Bulgaria, the national programme underlines the use of
green energy, environmental protection and recycling. In Latvia, its
Green point organises a competition ‘Green Night’ event both for students and
pupils.

10.2.4. 
Promoting entrepreneurship, employment,
education and volunteering opportunities with countries or regions outside of
Europe

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to promote entrepreneurship, employment, education and volunteering opportunities with countries or regions outside of Europe? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 21 || 2 || 2 || 17

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 6 || 1 || 2 || 3

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 2 || || || 2

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 4 || || || 4

Several Member States indicate that they
have inter-governmental or inter-organisational partnership agreements with
strategic regions outside the EU. Such programmes contribute to the development
of better relations and understanding between nations and facilitate
educational cooperation and further youth exchanges. Some projects aim at youth
work professionals and training of young people for the creation of
international youth networks. For example, Spain's Cooperating Youth
programme serves as a gateway to the field of international cooperation for
young university graduates by providing professional services at offices in
Latin America, Africa and Asia. Estonia facilitates educational
cooperation and youth exchanges between associations, young people, and
specialists with China and Japan to promote mutual understanding, broaden the
international perspectives and support young leaders in a global society. Some
Member States, such as the Czech Republic, Poland and Finland
have programmes run by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or the Ministry of
Education. In the Czech Republic, the United Nations Volunteers Contact
Point provides an opportunity for young volunteers to be actively involved in
UN development programmes and peace missions. France created a platform
‘France
Volontaires’ which consists of public sector,
international solidarity associations and young people and has an aim to
support the development of international voluntary exchanges and solidarity.
Within its Presidency in the second half of 2010, Poland granted a
number of scholarships to several ‘Meet your neighbour’ projects. Under the Hungarian
Presidency during the first half of 2011, the EU-China Youth Year promoted
youth initiatives and exchanges, and a number of young people from China
attended the EU Youth Conference and the European Youth Week.

To promote entrepreneurship, employment,
education and volunteering opportunities with countries or regions outside of
Europe, several Member States, for instance the German-speaking Community of
Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Austria, Finland and Sweden
stressed the importance of EU mobility programmes, such as Youth in Action
(especially European Voluntary Service) and Lifelong Learning (primarily
Erasmus – student exchange in higher education). They also underline the role
of the National Agencies of these programmes (Romania) and the SALTO
Resource Centres (Poland).

10.2.5. 
Encouraging young people to participate in
development cooperation activities

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives to encourage young people to participate in development cooperation activities either in their country of residence or abroad? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, such measures had already been taken before the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010, no additional initiatives were necessary. || ■ || 23 || 2 || 3 || 18

YES, such measures/initiatives were taken after the EU Youth Strategy came into force in January 2010. || ● || 7 || 1 || 1 || 5

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 1 || || || 1

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 2 || || || 2

A common way for young people to
participate is to engage in civil society organisations concentrating on
development, or by carrying out voluntary activities in their home country or
in a developing country. Some Member States highlight the opportunities offered
by the Commission's Youth in Action programme (Bulgaria, Luxembourg,
Austria, and Slovenia) while others emphasise national programmes
(Flemish Community of Belgium, French Community of Belgium, the
Czech Republic, Germany, Estonia, Spain, Cyprus, Lithuania,
Poland, Finland and Sweden). Many of the National Youth Reports also
stress that projects supporting the participation of young people in
development cooperation also help them develop a European identity and sense of
solidarity. The Flemish Community of Belgium reports that it supports
both international youth projects in countries in need of humanitarian help as
well as international projects that raise young people's intercultural
competences and awareness of problems in developing countries. National
programmes providing opportunities for young graduates and young people to
obtain experience from working in international organisations and in developing
countries include the Junior Professional Officer programme in Sweden,
the Aid Volunteering programme in Poland and the Spanish
Cooperation Youth programme. The Development Aid Programme in the Czech
Republic supports the development of the youth sector in specific countries
and offers training courses concerning development projects at the national
level. In Bulgaria, a national information campaign about volunteering
and the Annual Ball of Volunteers are examples of activities aiming at
awareness-raising among youth organisations on this subject. Germany and
Austria offer school partnership programmes on development cooperation
issues. Lithuania highlights ‘Green Capital’ a cooperation project
focusing on climate change, sharing of knowledge and personal experience.

10.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

The inclusion of Youth and the World as a
new ‘field of action’ in the EU Youth Strategy has been welcomed by young
people. This ‘field of action’ reflects the aims of the Youth Forum's work in
strengthening inter-regional and global youth dialogue and cooperation, supporting
the development of youth work in other regions of the world and looking for
synergies between European youth organisations and their counterparts
elsewhere.

In 2010 and 2011, the Youth Forum's
engagement in cooperation with other regions of the world focused on
Africa-Europe youth cooperation, Euro-Mediterranean youth cooperation, the
EU-China Year of Youth, EU-Canada cooperation as well as other initiatives
carried out by youth organisations with other regions of the world. The Youth Forum engaged in several processes with Africa, Latin
America and the Caribbean, China, Arab and Mediterranean regions. These include
the ‘Universities’ on Participation and Citizenship in Uruguay, and on Youth
and Development in Cape Verde and Spain; the Youth Leaders Meeting on Youth
Policies in the context of Africa-Europe youth cooperation and the Euro-Latin
American and Caribbean Youth Forum.

The YFJ was also active in the UN
High-level Meeting on Youth, the 4th Forum of the UN Alliance of
Civilisations, as member of the International Coordination Meeting of Youth
Organisations (ICMYO) and as co-organiser of the 11th and 12th
Universities on Youth and Development (UYD), held in Mollina, Spain.

In the field of
sustainable development, the Youth Forum adopted several policy positions
linked to the UN Millennium Development Goals and prepared youth delegates for
climate-related and social development-related international events.

In an EU-Canada roundtable in Helsinki in
2011, jointly organised by the Canadian government and the Commission,
representatives of youth organisations had opportunities to exchange views with
youth workers, researchers and officials from both sides of the Atlantic on the
topic of youth participation.

The YFJ was actively
involved in the 2011 EU-China Year of Youth, contributing to realising youth
dialogue and achieving full involvement of young people and youth organisations
in EU-China relations.

The YFJ contributed to the Structured
Dialogue on the involvement of civil society and local authorities in EU
Development Cooperation, organised in 2010.

Table 10‑A: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Youth and the World

Has the Government of your country - existing or previous - taken concrete measures or carried out any specific policy initiatives

EU Member States || to raise the awareness of young people about global issues such as sustainable development and human rights? || to provide opportunities for young people to exchange views with policy-makers on global issues (e.g. via participation in international meetings, virtual platforms/forums, etc.)? || to encourage young people to participate in green volunteering and ‘green’ patterns of consumption and production (e.g. recycling, energy conservation, hybrid vehicles, etc.)? || to promote entrepreneurship, employment, education and volunteering opportunities with countries or regions outside of Europe? || to encourage young people to participate in development cooperation activities either in their country of residence or abroad?

Belgium German-speaking || ● || ● || ♦ || ● || ●

Belgium Flemish || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Belgium French || ■ || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Bulgaria || ● || ● || ● || ▲ || ●

Czech Republic || ■ || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Denmark || ♦ || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■

Germany || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Estonia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Ireland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Greece || ■ || ● || ● || ■ || ■

Spain || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

France || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ●

Italy || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Cyprus || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Latvia || ■ || ● || ■ || ● || ●

Lithuania || ♦ || ♦ || ■ || ♦ || ●

Luxembourg || ● || ▲ || ▲ || ♦ || ●

Hungary || ● || ● || ▲ || ● || ■

Malta || ● || ■ || ● || ■ || ■

Netherlands || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Austria || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Poland || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Portugal || ● || ● || ■ || ■ || ■

Romania || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Slovenia || ▲ || ▲ || ■ || ▲ || ▲

Slovakia || ● || ● || ♦ || ♦ || ♦

Finland || ■ || ▲ || ■ || ■ || ■

Sweden || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

United Kingdom || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■ || ♦

Non-EU Members || || || || ||

Norway || ■ || ■ || ♦ || ■ || ■

Switzerland || ● || ■ || ■ || ■ || ■

Montenegro || ● || ● || ● || ● || ●

Croatia || ■ || ■ || ■ || ● || ■

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                                   
             ♦ No, without plans

11. 
Structured Dialogue with Young People and Youth
organisations
11.1. 
Commission initiatives and action

Structured Dialogue with Young People[83] is an operational tool of the
EU Youth Strategy, which enables young people and youth organisations to
contribute to policy-making. It is conducted in cycles of 18 months,
coinciding with the terms of office of Trio Presidencies, on overall thematic
priorities set by the Council. In addition, individual Presidency countries set
national priorities for Structured Dialogue which, wholly or partially,
contribute to the overall thematic priority.

Structured Dialogue is conducted at
national and EU level:

· 
National Working Groups (NWG) manage
consultations of young people and youth organisations within their respective
countries on the basis of guiding questions set by the European Steering
Committee for the Structured Dialogue (ESC) for each phase of the Structured
Dialogue cycle. The guiding questions reflect the overall thematic priority of
the Structured Dialogue cycle and the national priority set by the presidency
countries for its phase of the cycle. NWGs may adapt the guiding questions to
take account of national situations and report the outcomes of consultations to
the ESC.

· 
Outcomes are collated and serve as a basis for
debates conducted at EU Youth Conferences organised by each presidency country,
where selected youth delegates and policy-makers representing national
authorities and EU institutions will draw conclusions (in the form of joint
recommendations) aimed, in most cases, at Member States and the European
Commission. The conclusions are subsequently reflected in Council
resolutions/conclusions adopted by youth ministers.

At the end of the first cycle (on youth
employment) of Structured Dialogue, a Council Resolution was adopted to
provide an overview of the process and its outcomes.

Hungary

Compendium on Structured Dialogue

In early 2012, the outgoing Hungarian Presidency published a
compendium on the first cycle of Structured Dialogue. The Compendium provides
an overview of the Structured Dialogue conducted on the theme of ‘youth
employment’, with contributions from the main actors in the process. It
contains facts and figures relating to the first cycle and lists its main
outcomes and achievements. It is a useful reference point, which may inspire
those entrusted with ensuring the successful conduct of Structured Dialogue in
the years to come. The Commission has made this compendium available on the European
Youth Portal[84].

NWGs were established in all Member States
during the first cycle of Structured Dialogue. In the second cycle of
Structured Dialogue (on youth participation in democratic life[85]), NWGs in
all Member States organised consultations of young people and youth
organisations and reported on their outcomes.

Table 11‑A: Structured Dialogue with Young People and Youth Organisations

Structured Dialogue enables young people and youth organisations to
contribute to policy-making. Its cycles of 18 months coincide with the
terms of office of Trio Presidencies.

Overall thematic priorities are set by the Council and
may be supplemented by national priorities of individual presidency countries. The
priorities are reflected in guiding questions set for each phase of the cycle
of Structured Dialogue (18 months). The European Steering Committee for
the Structured Dialogue (ESC) sets the guiding questions which form the basis
of consultations in Member States. ESC consists of three representatives
(national authority, National Agency for Youth in Action programme, National
Youth Council) of each of the Member States of the Trio Presidency, the
European Commission and the European Youth Forum (YFJ). The latter chairs the
ESC and provides most of its secretarial functions.

National Working Groups (NWG) manage consultations of young people, youth
organisations and other stakeholders. NWGs may adapt the guiding questions to
take account of national situations.

Background documents for EU Youth Conferences
are drawn up on the basis of a consolidated report of outcomes of national
consultations. EU Youth Conferences are organised by each Member State holding
the Council Presidency, where nominated youth delegates and policy-makers,
representing national authorities and EU institutions, conduct debates and draw
conclusions (in the form of joint recommendations).

Joint recommendations are generally aimed at Member
States and the European Commission and are subsequently reflected in Council
resolutions/conclusions adopted by Youth Ministers.

With a view to developing and refining the
process, and as an integral part of the 5th European Youth Week in
May 2011, the Commission took the initiative to host Structured Dialogue
devoted to the conduct of the Dialogue itself. This Dialogue took stock of the
process on the basis of experiences gained from the conduct of its first cycle.
Youth delegates representing all NWGs and policy-makers from most national
authorities adopted 45
joint recommendations on the future conduct and development of Structured
Dialogue.

Dedicated pages have been added to the European
Youth Portal to promote and enhance the visibility of the process.

Germany

Online procedure for Structured Dialogue

Together with the NWG the National Co-ordination Unit developed an
online procedure to compile the dialogue results. In a first phase, the
demands, concerns, desires and results of the dialogue processes are compiled.
These contributions are published immediately on a website for all to see.
Compilation is followed by a second phase during which the participants
prioritise the input and thereby determine which content will flow into the
National Youth Report.

For the purposes of this online procedure, a special tool (the
‘participation tracker’) was developed to offer the young people low-threshold
access to participation and at the same time provide all participants with the
highest degree of transparency. With the ‘participation tracker’, a nationwide
eParticipation procedure was used for the first time and it also serves as a
pilot project for further developments in this area. For more information,
click here.

Although Structured Dialogue is only
conducted in Member States, youth delegates and government officials from EU
Candidate Countries, European Economic Area (EFTA-EEA) and other non-EU Youth
in Action programme countries have, at the discretion of Member States holding
the Presidency, been invited to participate in EU Youth Conferences.

The first two cycles of Structured Dialogue
on employment and youth participation fed into Council documents and were
actively used by the Commission to further their policies in these areas. Worth
mentioning are take up of recommendations in the several of the Commission's
policy initiatives to fight youth unemployment and the opening of an Eastern
Partnership Window in the Youth in Action programme aimed at cooperation with
eastern European neighbouring countries. The results of these efforts are
described in further detail in the relevant chapters addressing employment,
participation and youth in the world.

11.2. 
Summary of initiatives and action at national
level

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has your government carried out any specific measures or is it planning to do so based on the conclusions from the European Youth Week, which present a number of recommendations on how the structured dialogue can be improved at the national and the European levels? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

YES, the government has implemented specific measures responding to recommendations from the European Youth Week in May 2011. || ▼ || 16 || 3 || || 13

NO, but we plan to take concrete measures in this field in 2012. || ▲ || 8 || || 1 || 7

NO, we do not have any current plans to carry out measures in this field. || ♦ || 9 || || 3 || 6

Most Member States have responded actively
to the recommendations on how to improve the Structured Dialogue. The ESC for
the Structured Dialogue and the Commission also responded to relevant
recommendations from the conclusions drawn during the 2011 European Youth Week.

Germany believes
that it has only limited means of exerting influence on the conduct of
Structured Dialogue at EU level, but relies on contacts with the ESC to present
proposals for improvements. Some Member States, including the Netherlands
and Lithuania comment that efforts to improve the conduct of Structured
Dialogue at national level are undertaken by the NWG, rather than the
Government, which does not play a leading role in NWG.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has your Government supported the establishment of a National Working Group? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 29 || 3 || || 26

No || ◊ || 4 || || 4 || 0

All Member States demonstrated their
commitment to Structured Dialogue by actively supporting the setting up of a
NWG during the first cycle of the process. NWGs in all Member States
contributed to the consultations of young people undertaken prior to the EU
Youth Conferences organised by Poland and Denmark, which
completed the first two phases of the second cycle on ‘youth participation in
democratic life’.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does the National Youth Council play a leading role in the National Working Group? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 24 || 3 || || 21

No || ◊ || 9 || || 4 || 5

NYCs do not exist in all Member States, but
they have the leading role in most NWGs. Slovakia reports that in line
with the recommendations adopted during the 2011 European Youth Week, the
leading role of the NWG was transferred to the Slovak Youth Council. In Bulgaria
and Hungary, where there are no NYCs, other youth representatives
are members of the NWG. In France, CNAJEP, as the national
representative of organised youth, is performing the leading role in the NWG
during the second cycle of Structured Dialogue. In Romania the leading
role is assumed by the national ministry, and in Greece the General
Secretariat for Youth plays the leading role in the absence of cooperation with
the NYC.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does the competent national ministry play an active role in the National Working Group? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 28 || 3 || || 25

No || ◊ || 5 || || 4 || 1

The competent ministry for youth affairs
plays an active role in all NWGs with the exception of Finland. Although
the Finnish Ministry is represented in the NWG and finances its activities, the
Ministry has chosen not to play an active role.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Is the competent national ministry aware of the process of consultations, and subsequent results, undertaken by the National Working Group in response to guiding questions issued by the European Steering Committee for the structured dialogue with youth? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 28 || 3 || || 25

No || ◊ || 5 || || 4 || 1

The competent ministry for youth affairs is
aware of the tasks and achievements of NWGs in all Member States. Finland,
however, reports that whereas the Ministry is aware of the consultations and
results, it is difficult to estimate to which extent it has taken these into
consideration.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Given the cross-sectoral character of the EU Youth Strategy, have other national ministries played an active role in the National Working Group? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 6 || || || 6

No || ◊ || 27 || 3 || 4 || 20

In Bulgaria, Latvia, Hungary,
the Netherlands and Portugal ministries responsible for
employment issues participated in the first cycle of Structured Dialogue. The
active role of other national ministries in NWGs will inevitably depend on the
relevant thematic priority of the Structured Dialogue, but the potential for
their involvement may increase in the future given the cross-sectoral character
of the EU Youth Strategy.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does your Government provide financial or other support for the National Working Group? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 25 || 3 || || 22

No || ◊ || 8 || || 4 || 4

A significant majority of Member States'
governments provides financial and other means of support for the activities of
NWGs. Financial support is often given in the framework of subsidies to the NYC
(e.g. Spain, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Sweden),
regular national grant schemes (e.g. Denmark, and Estonia), or
the Youth in Action programme (e.g. Latvia).

The German-speaking Community of Belgium,
Ireland, Cyprus, and Lithuania refer to the provision of
venues. For political support of the NWG, in the Czech Republic there is
a civil servant in charge of close cooperation with its Chair.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Does your Government consider the National Working Group already established in your country to be sufficiently inclusive in its composition to ensure a participatory process open to all young people? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 19 || 1 || || 18

No || ◊ || 14 || 2 || 4 || 8

Although the majority of governments
consider their NWGs to be sufficiently inclusive, others express suggestions
for broadening outreach in future. Latvia reminds of the necessity to
involve more young people, who are ready to be active. Cyprus argues
that creative and innovative ways of reaching out to young people should be
further explored, while Sweden reports on the difficulty, as in other
European countries, in reaching young people who are not part of an
organisation. Although Ireland considers its NWG to be inclusive, its
verdict is qualified by a reference to ‘in as far as it is practicable’.

Belgium
established three NWGs (French Community, German-speaking Community and Flemish
Community) to reflect its federal structure.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Has your Government taken any initiatives to follow up the points that were raised as priority areas in the conclusions of the structured dialogue on youth employment, as outlined in the Council Resolution on the structured dialogue? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 12 || 2 || || 10

No, but we intend to take relevant initiatives/measures in 2012 || ▲ || 12 || || 1 || 11

No, we do not have any current plans for a follow-up || ♦ || 9 || 1 || 3 || 5

A majority of Member States responded
positively to the outcomes of the Structured Dialogue on youth employment and
have already, or are in the process of so doing, taken initiatives to ensure a
follow-up of outcomes.

Several Member States refer to national
strategies, which include some of the conclusions. In Germany the
conclusions were picked up both by the federal and state governments. Namely
the ‘Recognition of non-formal education’ is integrated into their work and
influenced also the discussion regarding the development of an ‘Independent
Youth Policy’. Ireland followed the conclusions mainly by establishing
the ‘JobBridge’ national internship scheme. Italy in contrast undertook
a reform of apprenticeships.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Would your Government support a structured dialogue with young people and youth organisations in other fields than those covered by the overall thematic priorities, and individual Presidency priorities, agreed at European level? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 26 || 3 || 1 || 22

No || ◊ || 7 || || 3 || 4

A significant majority of Member States
have embraced the concept of Structured Dialogue to the extent that they would
support its extension at national level. Some Member States 
(the Czech Republic Greece, Spain,) argue such developments
are already being implemented, whereas Austria feels that any extension
should be partly funded by EU funds. Sweden reports that regular
consultations with young people and youth organisations are a natural part of
national youth policy. France explains that the means for having a
continuous consultation process between the government and organised youth do
not exist.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Do youth researchers and those engaged in youth work play a role in carrying out the structured dialogue in your country? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 26 || 2 || 1 || 23

No || ◊ || 7 || 1 || 3 || 3

A significant majority of Member States
report that researchers and youth workers are involved in the Structured
Dialogue process, either as members of the NWG or as active participants in
consultations – or both.

Portugal
puts emphasis on the involvement of experts in workshops and the provision of
information at the infopoint network ‘Lojas Ponto JA’. In Germany,
scientific support comes from the research group ‘Youth and Europe’ at the
Centre for Applied Policy Research.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Would your Government support efforts to enhance the visibility and transparency of structured dialogue at national level? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 30 || 3 || 1 || 26

No || ◊ || 3 || || 3 || 0

All Member States support efforts to
enhance the national visibility of the process. Austria reports that
this is one of the core aims of its NWG, while Spain seeks greater
‘social visibility’. Lithuania emphasises the need to promote Structured
Dialogue on the websites of important stakeholders. At EU level, the European
Youth Portal now provides dedicated pages on Structured Dialogue and optional
online functionalities are being added to support the conduct of future
national consultations.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Based on the experiences gained since 2010, does your Government feel that the format and working methods employed at EU Youth Conferences contribute to a successful conduct of structured dialogue? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 23 || 1 || 1 || 21

No || ◊ || 10 || 2 || 3 || 5

Hungary
argues that the final outcome of the first cycle of Structured Dialogue proves
that the working methods of three (linked) conferences are useful and can lead
to a well prepared result. Germany calls for a greater role to be played
by the outcomes of consultations and perceives that there is not sufficient
time allowed for debates in workshops. Estonia feels that EU Youth
Conferences should provide for more sharing of experiences and good practices
between national youth organisations. Spain emphasises the importance of
ensuring that non-organised youth and young people with fewer opportunities are
represented, whereas Finland argues for continuity in the process and
recommends that young participants be experienced in the field of EU policy.
The French Community of Belgium reports that the language barrier is a
major problem and obstacle, and Austria calls for new technology tools to be
employed to give more young people a chance to participate in Conferences.
Parts of the EU Youth Conferences organised in Poland, Denmark
and Cyprus were made available to a larger audience through the use of
web-streaming.

Responses in National Youth Reports || || || || ||

Based on the experiences gained from the first two cycles of the structured dialogue, does your Government have particular recommendations for the further development of the structured dialogue? || Total || Belgium || Non-EU countries || EU countries excl. Belgium

Yes || ▼ || 23 || 3 || || 20

No || ◊ || 10 || || 4 || 6

Structured Dialogue is an on-going and
developing process. Building on the positive experience gained from the 2011
European Youth Week and the organisation of a Structured Dialogue with the main
actors in the process, the Commission will ensure that such dialogues are
conducted regularly to facilitate any future improvements of the Structured
Dialogue.

Netherlands

Local Structured Dialogue

In the Netherlands the NWG chaired by the NYC (NJR) has started a
pilot project with Dutch local authorities/municipalities (‘gemeenten’) to
organise the Structured Dialogue at the local level. This involves one kick-off
meeting and five intensive local dialogue sessions between local policy-makers,
professionals and young people to discuss how the Structured Dialogue can be
implemented on a structural basis on the local level and to promote the
European Youth Strategy with local administrators. For more information please
contact the Dutch National Youth Council NJR at: info@njr.nl; jacqueline.baljeu@njr.nl.

Several Member States are developing and
defining their contribution to the Structured Dialogue. Portugal revised
and redefined its execution of the process in cooperation with its NYC, and the
NWG set up ambitious regional and national consultations in accordance with the
joint recommendations issued during the 2011 European Youth Week. By adopting a
new Public Interest in the Youth Sector Act, Slovenia defined Structured
Dialogue as ‘an open, transparent, long-term, continuous and systematic
dialogue between young people and the holders of power at the national and
local level’. The Youth Department of the Czech Republic identified
Structured Dialogue as a priority area in the 2012-13 Action Plan on the
Concept of Czech Youth Policy. Discussions were initiated with the National
Council of Children and Youth to shape the functioning of the NWG and change
its primary mission of responding to tasks set by the Trio Presidencies into
one of being an equal partner to the Ministry in the preparation of a new
concept for youth policy after 2013.

Some Member States are also reporting
developments in the methodology employed when conducting Structured Dialogue at
national level. In Hungary the joint recommendations issued during the
2011 European Youth Week were taken into consideration during the process of
establishing a new NWG, which has created its own Facebook site, ‘Have Your
Say’ to be able to address and communicate directly with young people and to
enable youth to keep an eye on the process. In the Netherlands, the NYC
makes a particular effort to involve unorganised youth as much as possible.
Lessons and debates in schools organised by representatives of the NYC, as well
as online questionnaires and polls, are among the consultation methods that
have been employed.

The majority of Member States are satisfied
with the format of the EU Youth Conferences organised during the first cycles
of Structured Dialogue, Sweden reports that it nominates the same two
youth representatives to participate in all three EU Youth Conferences
organised during a cycle. Both the youth representatives and the NWG feel that
this is a successful method to sustain consistency in the national
consultations and the EU Youth Conferences.

Poland

Infopack for Structured Dialogue

At the end of 2011 a new Infopack on Structured Dialogue was
prepared by the National Agency of the Youth in Action programme and the Polish
Council of Youth Organisations. That short guide on the Dialogue shows how the
process works and how to implement it on a local level including advice on
meetings at schools, universities or how to facilitate the dialogue in a youth
organisation by creativity techniques. Find the InfoPack here.

Most Member States issued recommendations
for the further development of the Structured Dialogue, based on the
experiences gained from the completion of its first two cycles. These
recommendations include:

· 
A single overall thematic priority should be the
focus of Structured Dialogue during each of its cycles, covering all three
Presidency terms of office (the Flemish and the French Communities of Belgium,
the National Youth Council of the Netherlands)

· 
A clear link between the three consultation
cycles and the overall thematic priority is essential (Hungary and Portugal)

· 
More transparency is required to illustrate the
follow-up to the outcomes of the consultation processes (Germany)

· 
New methods should be used to reach a larger
number of young people, e.g. by consulting European Youth Card holders (Finland)

· 
Member States should explain to young people the
importance of participating in a Structured Dialogue consultation (Cyprus)

· 
The Youth in Action programme and its successor
must be construed to meet the needs of Structured Dialogue, in terms of
application deadlines, eligibility of expenses and recognition of in-kind
contributions and volunteering time as eligible elements of co-funding
(National Youth Council of Austria)

· 
A consistency in the nomination of youth
representatives attending EU Youth Conferences (Sweden)

· 
The term ‘Structured Dialogue’ needs to be
explained, as young people do not understand what it means (Estonia)

· 
Solicit the opinion of young people before
setting thematic priorities for Structured Dialogue (French Community of
Belgium)

As the Structured Dialogue only involves
Member States, questions relating to this ongoing process have not been answered
in National Youth Reports submitted by non-EU countries.

11.3. 
Youth-led initiatives and action

The YFJ regards the Structured Dialogue as
one of the most important developments for EU cooperation in the youth field
since 2010. It has created a direct communication channel between young people
and decision-makers at European level, as well as in all Member States. From
the very beginning, the YFJ has been one of the key stakeholders and played a
leading role in the implementation of the process within the ESC.

Since 2009, the YFJ has been involved in
preparing and developing the process and defining the structures needed for its
implementation, namely NWGs and the ESC. Holding the Chair and secretariat of
the ESC, the Forum has until today been in charge of communication with NWGs.

During the first and second cycles of
Structured Dialogue, the YFJ selected a group of facilitators to ensure
continuity and efficiency in the preparation and methodology of EU Youth
Conferences. Likewise, it contributed to the organisation of the European Youth
Week 2011, in which an interim assessment of the process was made and a set of
joint recommendations regarding its future was drafted.

After each phase of national consultation,
the YFJ collected reports from NWGs and synthesised them thematically. These
compilations were used as background documents for the discussions at the
consequent EU Youth Conferences. The YFJ additionally used NWGs' feedback to
put together an overview of methodologies used for consultations in Member States,
allowing NWGs to build on each other's experience. This was also used to
identify challenges NWGs face and address them within the ESC.

During these two cycles, the YFJ has been
successful in engaging NYCs to take part in Structured Dialogue, and is now
working towards more involvement of international non-governmental youth
organisations. In addition to broadening the scope of the process, the Forum
also worked on the visibility of Structured Dialogue, by publishing information
on it on its webpage.

After each EU Youth Conference, the YFJ
ensured political follow-up of the recommendations put forward during the
process, both within the youth field and in other fields, for example the
employment field during the first cycle of Structured Dialogue.

Table 11‑B: Overview of responses contained in
National Youth Reports – Structured Dialogue

EU Member States || Has your government carried out any specific measures or is it planning to do so based on the conclusions from the European Youth Week, which present a number of recommendations on how the structured dialogue can be improved at the national and the European levels? || Has your Government supported the establishment of a National Working Group? || Does the National Youth Council play a leading role in the National Working Group? || Does the competent national ministry play an active role in the National Working Group? || Is the competent national ministry aware of the process of consultations, and subsequent results, undertaken by the National Working Group in response to guiding questions issued by the European Steering Committee for the structured dialogue with youth?

Belgium German-speaking || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Belgium Flemish || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Belgium French || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Bulgaria || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Czech Republic || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Denmark || ▲ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Germany || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Estonia || ▲ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Ireland || ♦ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Greece || ♦ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Spain || ♦ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

France || ♦ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Italy || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Cyprus || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Latvia || ▲ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Lithuania || ▲ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Luxembourg || ▲ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Hungary || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Malta || ▲ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Netherlands || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Austria || ▲ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Poland || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Portugal || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Romania || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Slovenia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Slovakia || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Finland || ♦ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ◊

Sweden || ♦ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

United Kingdom || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Non-EU Members || || || || ||

Norway || ♦ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

Switzerland || ♦ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

Montenegro || ♦ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

Croatia || ▲ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

▼ Yes                   ◊ No

▲ No, but plans 2012                           ♦ No, without plans

EU Member States || Given the cross-sectoral character of the EU Youth Strategy, have other national ministries played an active role in the National Working Group? || Does your Government provide financial or other support for the National Working Group? || Does your Government consider the National Working Group already established in your country to be sufficiently inclusive in its composition to ensure a participatory process open to all young people? || Has your Government taken any initiatives to follow up the points that were raised as priority areas in the conclusions of the structured dialogue on youth employment, as outlined in the Council Resolution on the structured dialogue? || Would your Government support a structured dialogue with young people and youth organisations in other fields than those covered by the overall thematic priorities, and individual Presidency priorities, agreed at European level?

Belgium German-speaking || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ♦ || ▼

Belgium Flemish || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Belgium French || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Bulgaria || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Czech Republic || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ▲ || ▼

Denmark || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▲ || ▼

Germany || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Estonia || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Ireland || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Greece || ◊ || ◊ || ▼ || ▲ || ▼

Spain || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▲ || ▼

France || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ♦ || ◊

Italy || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Cyprus || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Latvia || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼ || ▼

Lithuania || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ▲ || ▼

Luxembourg || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▲ || ▼

Hungary || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Malta || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▲ || ▼

Netherlands || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Austria || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Poland || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▲ || ▼

Portugal || ▼ || ◊ || ◊ || ▲ || ▼

Romania || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▲ || ◊

Slovenia || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ▲ || ▼

Slovakia || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ♦ || ▼

Finland || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ♦ || ▼

Sweden || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ♦ || ◊

United Kingdom || ◊ || ◊ || ▼ || ♦ || ◊

Non-EU Members || || || || ||

Norway || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ♦ || ◊

Switzerland || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ♦ || ◊

Montenegro || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ▲ || ◊

Croatia || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ♦ || ▼

▼ Yes                   ◊ No

■ Yes, before the EU Youth Strategy
came into force in January 2010

● Yes, after the EU Youth Strategy came
into force in January 2010

▲ No, but plans 2012                           ♦ No, without plans

EU Member States || Do youth researchers and those engaged in youth work play a role in carrying out the structured dialogue in your country? || Would your Government support efforts to enhance the visibility and transparency of structured dialogue at national level? || Based on the experiences gained since 2010, does your Government feel that the format and working methods employed at EU Youth Conferences contribute to a successful conduct of structured dialogue? || Based on the experiences gained from the first two cycles of the structured dialogue, does your Government have particular recommendations for the further development of the structured dialogue?

Belgium German-speaking || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼

Belgium Flemish || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼

Belgium French || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Bulgaria || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

Czech Republic || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Denmark || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

Germany || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼

Estonia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Ireland || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Greece || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

Spain || ◊ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼

France || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Italy || ◊ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Cyprus || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Latvia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Lithuania || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Luxembourg || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼

Hungary || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Malta || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

Netherlands || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Austria || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼

Poland || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

Portugal || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Romania || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Slovenia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Slovakia || ▼ || ▼ || ◊ || ▼

Finland || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

Sweden || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ▼

United Kingdom || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

Non-EU Members || || || ||

Norway || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

Switzerland || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

Montenegro || ◊ || ◊ || ◊ || ◊

Croatia || ▼ || ▼ || ▼ || ◊

▼
Yes                   ◊ No

12. 
Annex
12.1. 
ANNEX 1: Table of abbreviations

EU Member States[86]

BE || Belgium

BG || Bulgaria

CZ || Czech Republic

DK || Denmark

DE || Germany

EE || Estonia

IE || Ireland

EL || Greece

ES || Spain

FR || France

IT || Italy

CY || Cyprus

LV || Latvia

LT || Lithuania

LU || Luxembourg

HU || Hungary

MT || Malta

NL || Netherlands

AT || Austria

PL || Poland

PT || Portugal

RO || Romania

SI || Slovenia

SK || Slovakia

FI || Finland

SE || Sweden

UK || United Kingdom

||

Non-EU Member States

HR || Croatia

ME || Montenegro

NO || Norway

CH || Switzerland

Other Abbreviations

CoE || Council of Europe

EACEA || Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency

EEA || European Economic Area

EFTA || European Free Trade Association

EKCYP || European Knowledge Centre on Youth Policy

EQF || European Qualifications Framework

ESC || European Steering Committee for the Structured Dialogue

ESF || European Social Fund

EU || European Union

EU-27 || 27 Member States of the EU

EVS || European Voluntary Service

GP || General practitioner

ICT || information and communications technology

ILO || International Labour Organisation

MS || Member State(s)

NEET || Not in Employment, Education or Training

NGO || Non-governmental organisation

NQSF || National Quality Standards Framework

NWG || National Working Group

NYC || National Youth Council

OECD || Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

SALTO || Support, Advanced Learning and Training Opportunities within the European YOUTH programme – a network of eight resource centres

South Med || Southern Mediterranean region

TFEU || Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

UN || United Nations

UNICEF || United Nations Children's Fund

VET || Vocational education and training

WHO || World Health Organization

YFJ || European Youth Forum

12.2. 
ANNEX 2: Council Resolutions/Conclusions on youth
(2010-2012)

11 May
2010

Resolution of the Council and of the
Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the
Council, on the active inclusion of young people: combating unemployment and
poverty

OJ C 137, 27.5.2010, pp. 1-6

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:137:0001:0006:EN:PDF

19
November 2010

Resolution of the Council and of the
Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the
Council, on youth work

OJ C 327, 4.12.2010, pp. 1-5

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:327:0001:0005:EN:PDF

19
November 2010

Council Conclusions on access of young
people to culture

OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, pp. 2-3

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:326:0002:0003:EN:PDF

19
November 2010

Council Conclusions on the European and
International Policy Agendas on Children, Youth and Children's Rights

OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 1

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:326:0001:0001:EN:PDF

19
November 2010

Council Conclusions on the Youth on the
Move initiative – an integrated approach in response to the challenges young
people face

OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, pp. 9-11

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:326:0009:0011:EN:PDF

19 May
2011

Resolution of the Council and of the
Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the
Council, on the structured dialogue with young people on youth employment

OJ C 164, 2.6.2011, pp. 1-4

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2011:164:0001:0004:EN:PDF

19 May 2011

Resolution of the Council and of the
Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the
Council, on encouraging new and effective forms of participation of all young
people in democratic life in Europe

OJ C 169, 9.6.2011, pp. 1-5

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2011:169:0001:0005:EN:PDF

28
November 2011

Council Conclusions on the Eastern
dimension of youth participation and mobility

OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, pp. 10-14

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2011:372:0010:0014:EN:PDF

11 May
2012

Council Conclusions on fostering the
creative and innovative potential of young people

OJ C 169, 15.6.2012, pp. 1-4

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2012:169:0001:0004:EN:PDF

[1]               Council Resolution of 27 November 2009 on a renewed
framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-2018) (2009/C
311/01), OJ C 311, 19.12.2009, pp. 1-11.

[2]               Separate contributions were submitted by the three
language communities of Belgium. All EU candidate countries and EFTA-countries,
which are programme countries under the Commission's Youth in Action programme,
were invited to submit National Youth Reports.

[3]               SEC(2011) 401. This document presents 40 indicators.
One additional indicator has since been added, bringing the total number of EU
Youth Indicators to 41.

[4]               COM(2010) 603.

[5]               The National Youth Reports cover the period from
beginning of 2010 until end 2011 and provide a preview of intended activities
for 2012.

[6]               Separate contributions were submitted by the three
language communities of Belgium. All EU candidate countries and EFTA-countries,
which are programme countries under the Commission's Youth in Action programme,
were invited to submit National Youth Reports.

[7]               The National Youth Reports cover the period from
beginning of 2010 until end 2011 and provide a preview of intended activities
for 2012 as Member States reports had to be returned early 2012.

[8]               SEC(2011) 401.

[9]               ECORYS, 2011. Assessing practices for using
indicators in fields related to youth – Final Report for the European Commission, DG
Education and Culture. Available here

[10]             Kutsar, D. and Helve, H., 2012. ‘Social Inclusion of
Youth on the Margins of Society: More Opportunities, Better Access, and Higher
Solidarity’ Policy review of the Youth Research Cluster on Social Inclusion (forthcoming).
The policy review will be made available here.

[11]             Belgium appears in a separate column because there are
different contributions from the three language communities of Belgium.

[12]             OJ C 327, 4.12.2010, pp.
1-5.

[13]             The question does not refer to EU programmes such as
the Lifelong Learning or Youth in Action programmes.

[14]             Alphabetical order according to country's name in
national language.

[15]             COM(2010) 477.

[16]             COM(2010) 682.

[17]             OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, pp. 9-11.

[18]             COM(2011) 933.

[19]             Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal,
Slovakia and Spain.

[20]             European Commission, 2012. Study on a comprehensive overview on
traineeship arrangements in Member States. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European Union. Available here.

[21]             OJ C 137, 27.5.2010, pp. 1-6.

[22]             OJ C 327, 4.12.2010, pp.
1-5.

[23]             OJ C 169, 9.6.2011, pp. 1-5.

[24]             OJ C 164, 2.6.2011, pp. 1-4.

[25]             OJ L 87, 7.4.2010, p. 6.

[26]             OJ C 119, 28.5.2009, pp. 2-10.

[27]             COM(2011) 18; Doc. 5242/11 – SEC(2011) 96; OJ C 191, 1.7.2011, pp. 1-6.

[28]             COM(2011) 567.

[29]             Annex I to the Annual Growth Survey 2012 COM(2011) 815.

[30]             COM(2011) 567.

[31]             COM(2010) 2020.

[32]             OJ C 199, 7.7.2011, pp. 1-5.

[33]             COM(2011)
788.

[34]             OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, pp. 31-35.

[35]             OJ C 327, 4.12.2010, pp. 1-5.

[36]             OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, pp. 1-6.

[37]             To be tabled in September 2012.

[38]             BE, BG, EL, CY, AT, PT, RO, SI,
FI, SE, all indicate where they stand with this preparation.

[39]             OJ C 111, 6.5.2008, pp. 1-7.

[40]             In particular Flemish Community BE, CZ, DE, EE, ES, FR,
LU, AT, SI, FI.

[41]             See also Chapter 3 ‘Youth
Employment & Entrepreneurship’

[42]             OJ C 137, 27.5.2010, pp. 1-6.

[43]             OJ C 333, 10.12.2010, pp. 8-9.

[44]             For ESF Regulation, period 2007-2013, see OJ L 210,
31.7.2006, pp. 12-18; OJ L 126, 21.5.2009, pp. 1-2.

[45]             For legislation establishing the European Globalisation
Adjustment Fund see OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, pp. 1-6; OJ L 167, 29.6.2009,
pp. 26-29; OJ L 48, 22.2.2008, pp. 82-88.

[46]             For legislation establishing PROGRESS see OJ L 315, 15.11.2006, pp.1-8; OJ L 65,
3.3.2007, p. 12; OJ L 87, 7.4.2010, p. 6.

[47]             COM(2010) 758.

[48]             WHO Regional Office for
Europe, 2011. Impact of Economic Crises on Mental Health. Copenhagen: WHO
Regional Office for Europe. Available here.

[49]             The International Union for
Health Promotion and Education (IUHPE-CIPES) European Centre, the
European Youth Forum and other youth organisations.

[50]             The EX-Smokers
Campaign (2010-2013), the Strategy to support Member States in reducing
alcohol-related harm (2006-2012); the strategy on Nutrition, Overweight and
Obesity related Health Issues (2007-2013); and the EU Drugs Strategy
(2005-2012).

[51]             OJ L 271, 9.10.2002, pp. 1-12; OJ L 301, 20.11.2007,
pp. 3-13.

[52]             WHO Regional Office for
Europe, 2010. Preventing Injuries in Europe – From international collaboration
to local implementation. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe. Available here.

[53]             Resolution on the Prevention of
injuries in the WHO European Region of 15 September 2005, EUR/RC55/R9, 54257.

[54]             Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union (TFEU),
OJ C 83, 30.3.2010, pp. 47-199.

[55]             OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, p. 1.

[56]             OJ C 169, 9.6.2011, pp. 1-5.

[57]             OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, pp. 10-14.

[58]             European Commission, 2012. Youth Participation in
Democratic Life (forthcoming).

[59]             Other studies that concern the issue of participation
of young people are for example the Study to collect data on children's
involvement in judicial proceedings in the EU, (terms of reference available here)
and the Study on the legal framework for child participation at EU Member State
and EU levels which should be launched in 2012.

[60]             COM (2011) 60.

[61]             http://europa.eu/kids-corner/index_en.htm.

[62]             http://ec.europa.eu/0-18/

[63]             18 years old and above, except in Austria where the
voting age is 16.

[64]             The Youth Board of Cyprus is a legal entity of public
law (Semi-Governmental organisation), with representatives from party youth
organisations and members who are appointed directly by the Council of
Ministers in the Governing Board.

[65]             The national youth information and citizenship agency
for Scotland.

[66]             OJ C 319, 13.12.2008, pp. 8-10.

[67]             More on the European Agenda for Culture on the specific
Commission website.

[68]             OJ C 301, 11.12.2009, pp. 9-11.

[69]             OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, pp. 19-23.

[70]             OJ C 325, 2.12.2010, pp. 1-9.

[71]             EACEA, 2008. Access of young people to culture.
Brussels: EACEA. Available here.

[72]             OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, pp. 2-3.

[73]          OJ C 169,
15.6.2012, pp. 1-4.

[74]             OJ C 326, 3.12.2010, pp. 2-3.

[75]             OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, pp.
10-14.

[76]             The North–South Centre, officially the European Centre
for Global Interdependence and Solidarity, is an autonomous agency – called a Partial
Agreement – of the Council of Europe.

[77]             OJ L 397, 30.12.2006, pp. 15-21.

[78]             COM(2011) 637.

[79]             JOIN(2012) 14.

[80]             COM(2011) 303.

[81]             COM(2011) 200.

[82]             COM(2008) 823.

[83]             The implementation of Structured
Dialogue is detailed in annex III of the Council Resolution on a renewed
framework for European Cooperation in the youth field (2010-2018), OJ C 311,
19.12.2009, p. 11, and in the annex of the Council Resolution on the
Structured Dialogue with young people on youth employment, OJ C 164,
2.6.2011, p. 4.

[84]             Ministry of National Resources of Hungary, 2011. Compendium of
the Structured Dialogue with Young People and Youth Organisations on Youth
Employment during the Spanish, Belgian and Hungarian EU Presidencies.
Available here.

[85]             The first part of the second cycle finished with
Council Conclusions, OJ C 372, 20.12.2011, pp. 10-14.

[86]             Alphabetical order according to country's name in
national language.