EN    EN EN
 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 3.7.2007 
SEC(2008) 2174 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  
 
accompanying the  
Proposal for a 
 
RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNCIL 
 
on mobility of young volunteers across Europe 
 
  
IMPACT ASSESSMENT  
{COM(2008) 424} 
{SEC(2008) 2175} 
 
EN 2   EN TABLE OF CONTENTS 
1. Procedural issues.......................................................................................................... 4  
1.1. Lead service .............................................................................................................. ... 4 
1.2. Other involved services................................................................................................ 4 1.3. Reference to the Commission Work Programme 2008................................................ 4 1.4. Roadmap ................................................................................................................... ... 4 
1.5. Impact Assessment Board............................................................................................ 5 1.6. Legal basis............................................................................................................... ..... 5 
1.7. Inter-service consultation meetings.............................................................................. 6 1.8. Introduction to the Impact Assessment Report ............................................................ 6 1.8.1. Purpose................................................................................................................. ........ 6 
1.8.2. Background .............................................................................................................. .... 7 
1.9. Purpose of the impact  assessment report ..................................................................... 8 
1.10. Main sources of information and consultations ........................................................... 8 2. problem definition........................................................................................................ 8 2.1. Description of the situation in the Member States....................................................... 8 2.2. Underlying motives.................................................................................................... 10 2.3. Why is it a problem? .................................................................................................. 10 2.3.1. Consequences for the European Union...................................................................... 10 2.3.2. Consequences for the Member States ........................................................................ 11 2.3.3. Consequences for the target groups ........................................................................... 11 2.4. Why the EU should act .............................................................................................. 12 3. Objectives.................................................................................................................. . 12 
3.1. General objective ....................................................................................................... 12  
3.2. Specific objectives ..................................................................................................... 12  
4. Policy options............................................................................................................. 1 3 
4.1. Option 1: Status quo................................................................................................... 14 4.2. Option 2: Improving the interoperability of  existing schemes in the Member States 15 
4.3. Option 3: Expansion of the Eu ropean Voluntary Service.......................................... 17 
4.4. Option 4: Harmonisation of nati onal youth volunteering schemes............................ 17 
 
EN 3   EN 5. Comparison of the Different Options  and Their Expected Impacts........................... 18 
5.1. Likely economic, social a nd environmental impacts ................................................. 18 
5.2. Impacts outside of the EU.......................................................................................... 18 5.3. Conclusions............................................................................................................... . 19 
6. Stakeholders Consultations and Evidence Material................................................... 19 6.1. Results of stakeholder consultation............................................................................ 19 6.2. Results of Member State consultation........................................................................ 20 6.3. Evaluation of the European Voluntary Service.......................................................... 21 6.4. Eurobarometer............................................................................................................ 2 1 
6.5. Contributions of other European institutions ............................................................. 22 6.5.1. European Parliament .................................................................................................. 22 6.5.2. European Economic and Social Committee............................................................... 22 6.5.3. Committee of the Regions.......................................................................................... 22 7. Monitoring system ..................................................................................................... 23 7.1. Indicators................................................................................................................ .... 23 
 
EN 4   EN 1. PROCEDURAL ISSUES  
1.1. Lead service  
Directorate-General for Education and Culture, Youth Policy Unit (DG EAC.D1). 
1.2. Other involved services 
The other service involved are: SG; LS ; BEPA; EMPL; JLS; ESTAT; JLS; DEV; 
AIDCO; ECHO; REGI O; TAXUD; COMM. 
1.3. Reference to the Commission Work Programme 2008  
The proposed Recommendation on Mobility of  Young Volunteers across Europe will 
be part of the EU's "Renew ed Social Agenda: Opportunitie s, Access and Solidarity in 
21st Century Europe".  
1.4. Roadmap 
ROADMAP 
2007 - 2008 
2007   
Adoption of Commission Communication 
"Promoting Young People's Full Participation in Education, Employment and Society" announcing a new initiative on youth volunteering  5 September 
Adoption of Council Resolution on Voluntary 
Activities of Young People 19 November 
2008   
Adoption of the opinion of the Committee of 
the Regions (Declan and Donnell) on the contribution of volunteer ing to social and 
economic cohesion  6 February 
Meeting of EP interest group on volunteering  13 February 
Stakeholder consultation 25 February 
Consultation of Member States 13 March 
Meeting of Directors-General for Youth, 
Slovene Presidency, Brdo, Slovenia 21 April  
 
EN 5   EN Adoption of MEP Harkin's report on the value 
of volunteering 23 April  
Adoption by the Commission 2 July, as pa rt of the EU's "Renewed Social 
Agenda: Opportunities, Access and Solidarity in 21
st Century Europe"  
Seminar on youth volunteering, French Presidency, Lyon, France  3-5 September 
Seminar of Italy on international aspect of 
youth volunteering 11-13 September 
Seminar on civic services, AVSO1 and IANYS2 November  
Council of Youth Ministers 20 November 
2009  
Seminar on volunteering and non-formal 
learning, Czech Presidency March 2009 
1.5. Impact Assessment Board 
This impact assessment was sent to the Impact Assessment Board on 30 April 2008. 
On 21 May 2008 representatives of DG EAC we re invited to discuss it with the 
Board. Further to this meeting, the Board submitted its written Opinion on 26 May.  
The Board recognised the clear presentation of  results of the stakeholder consultation 
and the good explanation of how  the initiative respects the subsidiarity principle. 
Further to the Board's comments, definitions have been integrated and the scope, 
content and legalities of th e preferred option have been  clarified. The ambition and 
its added value in relation to other initiati ves in the field of the proposed initiative 
have been explained and costs ha ve been estimated for each option. 
The difference between primary objectives  (mobility and interoperability) and 
secondary effects (education and employabi lity, competitiveness and citizenship) has 
also been accentuated. 
1.6. Legal basis 
The legal basis for proposing a new initia tive on voluntary activi ties of young people 
is Article 149 (4) of the Treaty establis hing the European Community, which also 
provides the legal basis for the Youth in  Action Programme and its Action 2, the 
European Voluntary Service (EVS).  
                                                 
1 Association of Volunteering Organisations 
2 International Association for National Youth Service 
 
EN 6   EN 1.7. Inter-service consultation meetings  
Two inter-service consultation meetings of the established Interservice Group on 
Youth Issues with other services of the European Commission took place on 27 
February and 24 April 2008 with colleag ues from various DGs: SG; LS; BEPA; 
EMPL; JLS; ESTAT; JLS; DEV; AIDCO;  ECHO; REGIO; TAXUD; COMM. Their 
comments have been taken into account in the proposal and in the impact assessment.  
1.8. Introduction to the Impact Assessment Report  
1.8.1.  Purpose 
This initiative is addresse d to young people in the Eur opean Union under 30 years of 
age who wish to volunteer in a country other than their own. Its scope covers voluntary activities conducted abroad durin g a limited period of time, typically 
several months in areas such as civi l protection, social inclusion, cultural 
preservation, regional development and e nvironment. They are described by the 
Commission Communication of 2004
3 as voluntary engagement in another country 
that is characterised by the following asp ects: open to all young people, undertaken 
by own free will, fixed period, with clear  objectives, structure and framework, 
unpaid but pocket money and coverage of expenses. Volunteering must be clearly 
distinguished from employment and is no substitution for work.  
This proposal will be part  of the EU's "Renewed So cial Agenda: Opportunities, 
Access and Solidarity in 21st century Europe" in c ontributing by opening up new 
opportunities for mobility, non-formal  education and solidarity.  
The purpose of the proposal is to promote the mobility of young people in Europe by 
inviting the Member States to remove cons traints on cross-border  volunteering. Such 
mobility should contribute to the development of quality education (volunteering being an important form of non-formal lear ning), and consequently enhance Europe's 
competitiveness. It will increase solidarity and strengthen a sense of European citizenship. Concretely, the initiative aims to enhance the interoperability between 
Member States of existing youth volunteering schemes, whether organised by civil 
society or public authorities. 
It must be ensured that all young people can take advant age of these opportunities 
that are mainly - and still to an insuffici ent degree - taken up by students and workers 
who are often already high-skil led. In this respect the sign ificance and added value of 
volunteering activitie s needs to be better appreciated.  
Volunteering plays an impor tant role in the social , professional and economic 
integration of young people and also benefits  the communities they serve. This is 
particularly important for young people wi th fewer opportunities, for whom this 
engagement is often a second chance to acquire new skills and competences and 
thereby improve their employability. These benefits are even greater in the case of 
                                                
 
3 Proposed common objectives for voluntary activities among young people in response to the Council 
Resolution of 27 June 2002 regarding the framework of European cooperation in the youth field, 
COM(2004) 337 final, Brussels, of 30 May 2004 
 
EN 7   EN cross-border volunteering. Expe rience shows that voluntary engageme nt in another 
country impacts strongly on a young person  and his/her personal development and 
also has the further added-value of maki ng him/her a more attractive candidate for 
jobs in the international marketplace. The cross-border comm unity in which the 
youth volunteers is also enriched both cultu rally and economically by the volunteer's 
participation and activity in that particular community. 
The existing national approaches would be reinforced by the promotion of a 
European and cross-border dimension of volunteering by young people. National 
schemes alone find it, however, difficult to meet this spec ific demand, which 
underscores the need for better in teroperability between them.  
The degree of the ambition of the proposal is  not radical change but an evolution of 
already existing mechanisms in the field within Member States. Based on existing Resolutions on youth volunteering and m obility Recommendations, the goal is to 
propose operative recommendations for a quantum leap towards mobility of young volunteers in Europe. 
1.8.2.  Background 
Voluntary activities of young people have  gained importance at national and 
European level in recent years. The European  Voluntary Service, an  integral part of 
the Union's youth programmes since 1996, is constantly undergoing development. 
Mobility Recommendations of 2001 and 2006
4 have already started a process of 
steadily enhancing the mobility  of young volunteers in Europe. 
Following the adoption of the White Paper on  Youth in 2001, Member States agreed 
on the application of the open method of coordination and adopted common 
objectives in the youth field. Two Council Reso lutions specific to volunteering have 
been adopted on this issue in the framework for the open method of cooperation in the youth field, setting and confirming common  objectives for voluntary activities in 
2004
5 and 20076. 
In this context the Commission carried out an analysis of the reports of Member 
States on the implementation of the comm on objectives for voluntary activities of 
young people. In this report7 the Commission concluded th at whereas some progress 
has been achieved, a committed joint effort at European level is required to make further significant progress. Based on this analysis, the Commission proposed in its Communication "Promoting Young People' s Full Potential in Education, 
Employment and Society" of 5 September 2007
8 to launch a consultation and impact 
                                                 
4 Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 July 2001 on mobility within the 
Community for students, persons unde rgoing training, volunteers, teach ers and trainers, OJ L 215/30 of 
9.8.2001, and Recommendation of th e European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 
on transnational mobility within the Community for education and training purposes: European Quality 
Charter for Mobility, OJ L 394/5 of 30.12.2006 
5 13996/04 of 15 November 2004 
6 14427/07 of 19 November 2007 
7 Commission staff working paper "Analysis of national reports from the Member States of the European 
Union concerning the implementation of the common objectives for voluntary activities of young 
people", SEC1084(2007) of 5 September 2007 
8 COM(2007)498 of 5 September 2007 
 
EN 8   EN assessment on a new initiative at EU le vel to promote and recognise voluntary 
activities of young people. This is the purpose of the current proposal. 
In April 2007 the Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA) presented the 
reflection paper "Investing in Youth – An  Empowerment Strategy" which outlines 
the importance of citizenship and participati on as factors to increase social capital. In 
this context reference is made to volunt eering as one form of youth engagement.9 
1.9. Purpose of the impact assessment report 
This impact assessment report aims to suppor t a policy action at EU level to improve 
the cross-border mobility of volunteering by young people.  
The report defines the problem at stake as well as the rationale for a policy action at 
EU level and addresses the aims of the initiative in terms of general and specific objectives. Finally it presents a range of different policy options to achieve such 
objectives and an analysis and co mparison of their possible impact.  
The results of the stakeholder consulta tions, as well as evidence material, are 
presented, and ways to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the proposed initiative are addressed. 
1.10. Main sources of information and consultations 
The main sources of information are the Member States' reports on the 
implementation of the common objectives  for voluntary activities of young people 
and the Commission's subsequent analysis report as well as two consultation 
meetings with Member States. 
Findings concerning volunteering in the Eurobarometer survey 2007 on youth are 
also taken into account, as well as the eval uation of the European Voluntary Service 
(EVS). The outcomes of two inter-service consultations of Commission services as 
well as the reports and opinions of the European Parliament, the Economic and 
Social Committee, and the Committee of th e Regions have also been taken into 
account. 
The results of consultations of civil soci ety as well as stakeholder documents on the 
issue have also been taken on board. Fo r detailed information about the above 
mentioned evidence please see chapter 6 below. 
2. 
PROBLEM DEFINITION  
2.1. Description of the situat ion in the Member States 
The main responsibility for developing vol unteering schemes for young people is at 
the national, regional  and local level, and these activ ities are often managed by civil 
society. They are also characterised by a di versity of approaches  and players. In 
some Member States, civic services play  a prominent role. In other countries 
                                                 
9 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/policy_advisers/index_en.htm 
 
EN 9   EN volunteering is almost completely impleme nted by civil society organisations with 
the state being involved only in  the context of the EVS. 
The current importance of vol unteering at European level is underscored from recent 
developments in Member States. For exam ple, Germany, France and Italy - all of 
which already have a civic service in place  - support and develop the volunteering of 
young people for reasons that are also important  to the European Union; that is, to 
offer youth a concrete experience of activ e citizenship and non-formal learning. The 
Member States have expressed interest in adding a European dimension via an 
exchange of experiences supported and coordinated by the Union. 
Other Member States show interesting de velopments as well. The UK has set up a 
central coordination body for voluntary activities of young people, which had 
otherwise been organised in a decentralised  way. The Czech Republic is considering 
improving the legal situation of young vol unteers and their soci al protection in 
particular. Denmark is striving for a highe r quality of voluntary activities of young 
people through a Quality Reform Programm e. Luxembourg developed a new service 
called "Service volontaire d'orientation" in the framework of a new law supporting 
youth volunteering. In Spain a National Vo lunteering Plan (2005-2009) was adopted 
that strengthens NGOs. New vol unteering plans have also been adopted at regional 
level. Lithuania inscribed volunteering in the framework of the achievement of the Lisbon Agenda. It adopted a National So cial Inclusion Acti on Plan (2006-2008), 
which seeks to make volunt eering more popular, motivate and train volunteers, and 
create a volunteering database and webpor tal. Ireland created support opportunities 
for volunteering, as shows the example of Foróige, a national volunteering 
organisation, which enjoys a large vari ety of support from different sources. 
Given the national developments above, the situation in the Member States could 
thus be described as promising but fragmented  in the sense that th ey lack an adequate 
European cross-border dimension that could satisfy the increase in demand. 
A 2007 Eurobarometer
10 survey of youth in the Memb er States found that while only 
16% of the interviewed young people participate in a vol untary activity, 74% would 
be interested in a volunteering expe rience if there were more programmes 
encouraging it. 
Furthermore, a 2008 survey by the Associat ion of Voluntary Or ganisations (AVSO) 
of 138 volunteer organisations estimates th at the number of their volunteers has 
grown by 57% from 2007 to 200811. 
The European Voluntary Service financed appr oximately 4 000 cross-border volunteers in 
2007, meeting three quarters of the nu mber of requests. In that par ticular year it was necessary 
to raise the EVS budget by 5% to the detrimen t of other Actions in the Youth in Action 
Programme. EVS requests have further increased by 17% so far this year. 
                                                 
10 "Looking Behind the Figures: The main results of the Eurobarometer 2007 survey on youth", Office of 
Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxemburg, 2007, ISBN 978-92-79-05540-9; http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm 
11 Survey of AVSO and Youthnetworks; NoBorders Foundation, Netherlands, 28 February 2008; 
http://www.avso.org/ 
 
EN 10   EN There are currently 96 million young people between  the age of 15 and 29 in the European 
Union12. Under the assumption that voluntee ring would reach the level of 15%13 already 
attained in certain countries and that one third of thes e volunteers would wish to participate in 
a transnational volunteering project, this represents per year a potential of 320 00014 young 
people. Even if only 1% of all young people in the age group wished to participate in a transnational volunteering project, this would still represent 64 000
15 young volunteers abroad 
per year. 
2.2. Underlying motives 
Currently the number of cross-border volunt eering opportunities is low. There is a 
lack of opportunities for trans-European  volunteering. Where such opportunities 
exist, there is often a lack  of organisation in inform ation dissemination, with the 
consequence that young people who wish to volunteer abroad in Europe have 
difficulties accessing the existing possibilities.  
Former initiatives of the European Union to strengthen mobility were the Mobility 
Recommendations within the Mobility Charte r. But these focus primarily on students 
and teachers and to a much lesser extent on volunteers. They deal with general issues 
such as recognition, obstacles and the cond itions of mobility, but lack tailored 
proposals that adequately a ddress the particular need s of young volunteers. While 
helpful, these past initiative s should not be seen as an obstacle to furt her progress in 
promoting mobility for youth volunteers.  
While EVS is well accepted by young people, its budget is limited and it has yet to 
achieve wide brand recognition as, fo r example, the ERASMUS programme.  
The European Parliament recognised the pr oblem of lack of in teroperability of 
national schemes for volunteering of young pe ople at European level, and proposed 
some preparatory measures in the 2008 budget for improving the situation through a 
project called Amicus (see chapter 6.5.1).  
2.3. Why is it a problem? 
2.3.1.  Consequences for the European Union 
As a leading form of non-formal learni ng, cross-border volunteer ing experience can 
lead to enhanced skills and competen ces which increase youth employability. The 
lack of mobility in the context of yout h volunteering is an unn ecessary loss of EU 
competitiveness. With high youth unemployment in many parts of the EU16 and 
market demand for young workers particularly high in some sectors, volunteering is 
a means to bridge the gap between sc hool education and employment. Today's 
globalising marketplace puts a prem ium on people who are multilingual and 
                                                 
12 EUROSTAT "Population by sex and age on 1 January of each year ", latest update 25 April 2008, 
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu 
13 15.1% of young Italians are already involved in civic service. Source: "Youth Civic Service in Europe, 
Policies and Programmes: France, Germany, Italy, th e Czech Republic, Poland and at European level", 
edited by the Association of Voluntary Organisations (AVSO), Pisa: Plus-Pisa un iversity press, c2005  
14 96.000.000 multiplied with 15% multiplie d with 1/3 divided by 15 years  
15 96.000.000 multiplied with 1% divided by 15 years  
16 14,6% of young people in the EU; source: EUROSTAT, Euro-Indicators 44/2008 of 1 April 2008 
 
EN 11   EN multicultural. For creativity and innovati on to flourish, the EU's youth should have 
the widest of opportunities to broaden their horizons and r ealise their human 
potential. Opening up more cross-borde r volunteering opportunities for all youth 
across Europe would be a means to implem ent the European Y outh Pact and help 
achieve the Lisbon goals.  
In the context of the final evalua tion of the Youth Programme (2000-2006),17 young 
volunteers having participat ed in the EVS expressed, among others, the following 
opinions: 76% of them considered that th e experience had cha nged or influenced 
their jobs and future plans and 90% of them  considered that their command of one or 
more languages spoken in the host country improved as a consequence of their participation in a cross-bord er volunteering experience.  
Equally important, cross-border volunteering would contribute to the development of 
a greater sense of EU citizenship by in creasing the knowledge and understanding of 
one's neighbours. Young volunteers are a cons iderable resource which can help to 
strengthen social solidarity in Europe and their activities could be put to assist other EU policy goals such as civil protection, social inclusion, regional development and 
the environment seeing young people do "good work s" would also help to turn what 
is often a negative image of youth in some  national media. The EU also needs to 
raise awareness of its value to young Europeans for the EU project to move forward.  
In the context of the evaluation of the Youth in Action Programme mentioned above, 
80% of young volunteers having participated  in the EVS considered that their 
participation in general made them more  active in youth, societal or political 
organisations and 77% consider ed that, after having carried out their project, they felt 
more responsible for helping people in other countries. 
2.3.2.  Consequences for the Member States 
Welcoming more youth volunteers from other Member States, in turn, contributes to 
the development and cultural richness of the local communities they serve. Member States lose out on a valuable opportuni ty to develop the skills and sense of 
citizenship of their youth, a demographic group  which in most Member States is in 
decline. Member States simply cannot afford  not to make the most of a diminishing 
human asset if they wish to sustain their social model and way of life. 
2.3.3.  Consequences for the target groups 
As the latest Eurobarometer on youth s hows, young people appreciate mobility and 
wish to make more out of it. Youth seek to be actively engage d in the world around 
them during the "youthful" period of their liv es and often wish to do so in another 
country or culture. In doing so, they do not only acquire important competences to 
enter the labour market, such as language skills, but they al so win self-esteem 
through acts of solidarity. Bu t current opportunities are st ill limited and far from 
achieving their great potential. 
Youth workers try to promote volunteering not without a certain success. But when 
they wish to launch cross-border vol untary activities, they face a number of 
                                                
 
17 http://ec.europa.eu/youth/index_en.htm 
 
EN 12   EN challenges. They lack information about vol unteering abroad, they  lack training for 
the specific requirements of trans-Europ ean volunteering and their mobility needs to 
be increased in order to allow them to better understand the situation in other 
countries than their own. 
2.4. Why the EU should act 
Youth volunteering is a domain where the s ubsidiarity principle applies and Member 
States have the principal responsib ility to develop actions. Yet the 
internationalisation of volunteering is a difficult task for any national voluntary 
system.  
Individual Member States are less effectiv e to solve alone the problems linked to the 
challenge of trans-European youth volunteering. It is at EU level that an overview of 
the different situations in the Member States  exists. Therefore part  of the solution can 
best be proposed at EU level, which, gi ven its knowledge of the problem and needs 
common to all Member States and of  the various national youth volunteering 
situations, can propose some elements of  the solution that are matched to the 
Member States' possibilities, thereby resp ecting the proportional ity of the proposal. 
Mobility is at the very core of European  affairs, and experience, as in previous 
examples of reinforced mobility of othe r groups of population (workers, students, 
etc.) shows that it is clearly  at the level of the EU that action is appropriate and 
effective. 
3. OBJECTIVES  
3.1. General objective 
The general objective of the proposed initiative is to promote the mobility of young 
people so that they have the opportunity to  volunteer anywhere in Europe if they 
wish to do so. Better education, employa bility, competitiveness and citizenship are 
all side effects of this primary objective.  
3.2. Specific objectives  
Specific objective 1: To improve the knowledge of nationa l youth volunteering 
schemes and cross-border opportuni ties of volunteering for young people  
There is a need to improve the knowledge of the national scheme s and cross-border 
opportunities of volunteering fo r young people and transfer this information to the 
European Commission for further dissemina tion in order to achieve a global and 
coherent view of the situation at national and European levels. In addition, exchange of information and good practices should be  reinforced between Member States. 
Specific objective 2: To increase ex change opportunities for young volunteers
  
The number of cross-border exchanges of young volunteers need to  be increased. In 
order to do so, more opportunities of hosti ng and sending organisations need to be 
created. It would be necessary for the hostin g and sending organisati ons to liaise with 
 
EN 13   EN their counterparts in other countries. Greater linkages and contacts between the 
European, regional and local level should be developed.  
Specific objective 3: To assure a reasonable level of quality  
Civil society flags a need for improved quality of youth volunteering. To respond to 
this demand regarding cross-border volunteering activities, some basic quality requirements should be developed and implem ented according to the specificities of 
each Member State: the quality of organisa tions involved in volunteering; training of 
volunteers and staff; activity preparati on and accompaniment; voluntary activities 
themselves and their tracking and follow-up. Member States should address also the 
issue of lack of ad equate social protection provisi ons for young volunteers that could 
act as a disincentive to their mobility.
 
Specific objective 4: To promote sk ills and competence acquired by young 
volunteers  
Skills and competences acquired in tr ans-European volunteering should be 
recognised appropriately in order to facili tate school reintegration and/or improve 
employability of young volunteers. European-w ide recognised instruments such as 
the European Qualification Framework (EQF), Europass for CVs and self-
assessment modules and Youthpass for certificates, should be used more. In this way 
the contribution of trans-European voluntar y activities to economic integration would 
be strengthened and made more visibl e for employers and public institutions. 
Specific objective 5: To ta rget cross-border support for youth workers and young 
people with fewer opportunities for mobility  
Youth workers  
Training and qualification of youth workers dealing with cross- border volunteers 
should be improved and linked to the EQF. Mobility of youth workers aimed at a 
better knowledge of other national sche mes should also be encouraged.  
Young people with fewer opportunities for mobility 
Volunteering constitutes a particularly valu able possibility of mobility for those 
young people who benefit less, or not at all, of m obility schemes. It would therefore 
be an interesting instrument for young pe ople with fewer opportunities, but these 
young people have specific needs that mu st be taken into account. Young people 
with fewer opportunities for mobility are understood to be young people, who are not 
enrolled at university and those who are low-skilled.  
4. POLICY OPTIONS  
In the following different options are pres ented. After a short description of the 
option, its impact is evaluated according to it s ability to fulfil the general and specific 
objectives and its estimated costs. 
 
EN 14   EN 4.1. Option 1: Status quo 
Description  
The status quo is based the open method of coordination, EVS and the Mobility 
Recommendations.  
The open method of coordination (OMC) fo cuses on the definition of common 
objectives to improve volunt eering of young people within Me mber States. It aims at 
developing, facilitating promoting and r ecognising voluntary activities of young 
people within the Member States.  
EVS offers cross-border vol unteering opportunities to a restricted number of young 
people (see option 3 and chapter 6.3).  
The Mobility Recommendations focus primar ily on students and teachers and to a 
much lesser extent on volunteers. They deal with general issues and do not take the 
specific needs of young volunteers into account.  
Impact  
The OMC common objectives on vol unteering, EVS and the Mobility 
Recommendations, have all brought a bout good results but demonstrate some 
limitations. 
The definition and follow-up of common objec tives helped raise awareness about the 
importance of volunteering of young people in  Members States and to develop new 
national schemes. Pressing obstacles still persist and trans-European cross-border 
mobility is weakly developed. Apart from a few bilateral agreements EVS has been successful and the number of applic ations already exceeds budgetary and 
organisational possibilities. The current fi nancial and organisational equipment of 
EVS falls short of demand. 
The Mobility Recommendations have proven to be useful but insufficient. They also 
lack tailored proposals that  would adequately address the particular needs of young 
volunteers.  
Amicus, the pilot project described in ch apter 2.2., for which preparatory measures 
are underway, is a one-shot approach and a demonstration of the existing need for 
more cross-border volunteering. It might he lp achieve the objectives, but is not a 
comprehensive and sustainable solution in itself. 
Costs
 
The current situation would entail no additi onal cost, neither for the Union nor at 
national level. 
Conclusion  
Concluding it can be said  that the status  quo might allow some improvements 
concerning the specific objectives regard ing knowledge, recognition and quality, but 
it is not appropriate to reach  the general objectives, as it does not permit to do the 
 
EN 15   EN qualitative and quantum leap which is nece ssary to increase the cross-border mobility 
of young volunteers in Europe. It would ne ither have any additional effect on 
competitiveness, citizenship and solidarity. The status quo could satisfy a limited number of Member States not having a much elaborated state national scheme. 
4.2. Option 2: Improving the interoperabili ty of existing schemes in the Member 
States 
Description
 
This option aims at improving the interoperability between the existing national 
youth volunteering schemes, whether organise d by civil society or public authorities 
in the Member States through a variety of measures. The aim is for national 
voluntary schemes to open up "slots" for vol unteers from other Member States and to 
keep the specific needs of such "visiting volunteers" in mind when designing their activities. 
Better knowledge of national schemes and on  civil society orga nisations could be 
stored with the European Comm ission for further dissemination.  
Other assets would be support to the hosting organisations  in the country, 
information towards young people, youth  workers and yout h leaders about 
opportunities abroad, and high light of the value of and promote much more the 
European youth/mobility cards, whic h allow a variety of discounts on 
accommodation, travel, culture, sport, etc .. Promotion of a form of "quality 
assurance" to protect volunt eers going cross-border and encourage participation in 
schemes unfamiliar to youth elsewhere would be another cornerstone of this option. Quality assurance would also comprise information about requirements to hosting 
and sending organisations and would addr ess issues of social protection for 
volunteers going abroad. 
– Greater importance would be attributed to  the adaptation of learning outcomes of 
youth volunteering to national and Europ ean qualification frameworks or their 
equivalent, the promotion of the use of Europass for trans-European volunteering 
of young people, the development of a certificate based on Youthpass or 
equivalent and the promotion of tran s-European volunteering of young people 
towards employers, authorit ies, institutions, etc. 
A specific focus would be on youth workers and youth leaders, their information and 
training in organisations, loca l authorities and civic serv ices about trans-European 
volunteering of young people. Trans-Europ ean mobility of youth workers and youth 
leaders themselves would be encouraged as well as targeted cro ss-border support for 
youth with fewer opportunities. 
Under this option the Commission would be  able to support the Member States' 
efforts by enhancing access to volunteering opportunities via the further development 
of the European Young Volunteers' Portal as  part of the existin g Youth Portal. The 
Commission will also have an important ro le concerning the recognition of voluntary 
activities of young people via EU instrument s like EQF, Europass and Youth Pass.  
 
EN 16   EN In this option, EVS shall continue as a stimulating programme (not mass programme) 
of cross-border volunteering and as a labor atory for testing qua lity, recognition and 
support improvements.  
This option will complement existing R ecommendations on mobility, which lack 
tailored proposals that adequately addre ss the particular needs of young volunteers, 
and Resolutions on youth vol unteering that focus on voluntary activities within the 
Member States and lack cr oss-border provisions.  
To get the appropriate impact, the proposed legal form for this option is a 
Recommendation. A Commission Recommenda tion, though legally possible, would 
not have more impact than option 1 (sta tus quo), as a Com mission Recommendation 
would only engage the Commi ssion and not involve the Member States as much as a 
Council Recommendation would do. A Counc il Recommendation would have the 
advantage of replying to both these require ments and is expressly foreseen in the 
legal basis, Article 149 (4) of the Treaty.  
Taking into account that the main effort to  increase mobility of young volunteers has 
to be made by Member States, such a Council Recommendation appears most 
appropriate.  
Impact  
This option would take a qualitative and quant itative leap forward in order to allow 
for a significant development of young pe ople's mobility through volunteering in 
Europe, with numerous positive conseque nces on their education, employability, 
competitiveness, and citizenship. It would al so allow developing solidarity further in 
Europe, which is particularly important given the social real ity of demographic 
development and the growing intergenerationa l gap. It respects subsidiarity as it is 
based on existing national schemes.  
The complexity of the operation is however not to be underestimated. This is why a 
progressive implementation should be envisaged.  
Costs  
The budgetary impact at national level would be  limited to the costs linked to the greater 
interaction of national schemes. On the basis of  the current experience of  EVS, the travel and 
training costs related to the linguistic prepar ation of the volunteer can be estimated at 
1 000 EUR per volunteer, with the other costs be ing neutralised on the basis of reciprocity. 
On the hypothesis of 64 000 young cross-border volunteers (see point 2.1), this would 
represent a global cost of around 64 MioEURO pe r year spread across 27 Member States and 
NGOs, depending on their capacity and interest. A part of this budget would also be covered 
by existing cross-border activitie s. On the side of the EU budge t, the cost fo r the portal is 
already covered by the Youth in Action Programme. 
Conclusion Concluding it can be stated that this option appears to best meet the general objective 
of mobility and the specific objectives  of knowledge, exchange opportunities, 
quality, promotion of skills and competen ces and targeted support for youth workers 
and young people with fewer opportunities. 
 
EN 17   EN 4.3. Option 3: Expansion of the European Voluntary Service  
Description  
This option would be the expansion of EVS as a universal service, offering each 
young person who wishes it the opportunity to carry out a trans-border voluntary 
experience. This would be organise d and paid by the European Union. 
Impact  
This option would have the advantage of  offering a quality European volunteering 
service to each young European reside nt who wishes for it. It would  require an 
enormous organisational and administrati ve body at EU level and would need a 
significantly higher budget.  
This option would allow reaching the general objective of mobility. It would have 
positive consequences in terms of education, competitiveness, citizenship and solidarity, but it would only lead to a part ial realisation of the specific objectives, 
namely of quality, recognition and support for youth workers and young people with fewer opportunities, but not the one on know ledge of national s ituations. Another 
important drawback would be the risk of reducing the diversity of schemes that currently exist in Europe, which is one of the main characteristics of the voluntary 
sector that should be preserved and valorised. 
Costs
 
This option would entail additional cost s for the budget of the Union. On the 
hypothesis of 64 000 young volunteers abroad pe r year see point 2.1), this would 
represent a cost of around 640 MioEUR18 per year for the budget of the Union, to be 
compared to the current budget of 36 Mi oEUR for EVS. Such expenses are 
obviously not compatible with the budgetary framework of the financial perspectives for the period 2007-2013.  
Conclusion It can be concluded that this option does not  appear to be feasible for practical and 
financial reasons. 
4.4. Option 4: Harmonisation of nati onal youth volunteering schemes 
Description
 
This option would target a Regulation aligning the existing national youth 
volunteering schemes, with a view to inciting Member Stat es to create civic services. 
A civic service is a voluntary service managed by the State or  on behalf of the State.  
Impact  
                                                 
18 EVS cost +/- 10 000 EURO per volunteer 
 
EN 18   EN If all Member States had ci vic services in pl ace, the interchange  of young volunteers 
would be easy. The States would be in charge, the structures would be the same, support as well as information would be  centralised. This option would allow 
reaching the fixed general and specific objectives in term s of mobility and 
interoperability with positive consequences in terms of educati on, competitiveness, 
citizenship and solidarity, but does not a ppear to be feasible for reasons of 
subsidiarity. The Treaty expressly exclud es harmonisation measures. In addition 
Member States object a harmonisation in th is field because they all have different 
and diverse youth voluntary schemes.  
Costs
 
Costs have not been estimated  Conclusion
 
This option has been discarded for a l ack of EU competence and respect for 
subsidiarity. 
5. COMPARISON OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND THEIR EXPECTED IMPACTS  
5.1. Likely economic, social and environmental impacts 
While the option "status quo" would have a limited economic, social and 
environmental impact, other options would be designed to have positive social 
impacts not only for the young volunteer in qu estion, but also for society. In this 
respect, it should be noted that in particular young people with fewer opportunities of 
mobility would benefit and enjoy social (re )integration through such volunteering.  
Options 2, 3 and 4 would also improve the young volunteers' economic integration as 
described before. Europe's Internal Market needs a more skilled, competent, multilingual and mobile workforce.  
Apart from economic and social impacts, op tion 2, 3 and 4 could al so trigger positive 
environmental impacts, as one of the domains proposed for the opening up of more opportunities for young volunteers is that of the environmental and civil protection. 
The option "Expansion of EVS" would have a negative economic impact for the EU, 
as it would be very expensive to step up the budgetary means for a European-level quality youth volunteering service. 
5.2. Impacts outside of the EU 
Positive spill-over effects could also be expected in the area of external relations as 
better interoperability of  national schemes and more information sharing may 
stimulate young Europeans to engage more in volunteering in third countries and 
allow more exchanges with third countries.  
 
EN 19   EN The conditions of admission of third-country  nationals for the purposes of studies, 
pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service ar e set out by in a 
Council Directive19, which provides the possibility of granting special residence 
permits to third-country volunteers. While students, pupils and trainees obtain visa 
more easily, Member States are free to decide applying the Di rective also to young 
volunteers. In this context Member States  should consider applying the Directive 
also to young volunteers in th e same way as to students. 
5.3. Conclusions 
Concluding it can be stated that by comparing the differe nt options, option 2 should 
be considered as the preferred option in order to better achieve the full range of objectives.  
No negative economic, social and envir onmental effects ar e expected, on the 
contrary, there will be a positive economic, social and environmental impact. 
CRITERIA OPTION 1 OPTION 2 OPTION 3 
1. Impact on:    
Mobility low high high 
Competitiveness low high high 
Citizenship low high high 
Solidarity low high high 
2. Feasibility yes yes no 
3. Subsidiarity yes yes no 
4. Proportionality no yes no 
 
Administrative costs related to the prefe rred option will be limited to those of the 
reporting exercise (every four years). 
6. STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATIONS AND EVIDENCE MATERIAL  
6.1. Results of stakeholder consultation 
In February 2008, a stakeholder consultati on of 17 European level umbrella youth 
and volunteering organisations and nationa l youth and volunteering organisations 
took place. At this meeting, it became clear that civil society counts on the 
Commission to take action in order to fac ilitate and improve the situation of young 
                                                 
19 2004/114/EC of 13 December 2004  
 
EN 20   EN volunteers. They also conf irmed the challenges identified by the Commission and 
expect that the most pressing obstacles to volunteering, such as social protection and 
visa difficulties, be solved, that the quality of youth volunteering be improved, and 
that voluntary activitie s be better recognised. They are ready to assume a more active 
role in implementing the new initiative. To this end they would need more support 
from Member States. 
Following this meeting, some of the organi sations present delivered their comments 
in writing to the Commission. Among those were the most important and powerful 
EU umbrella volunteering organisations, su ch as the Association of Voluntary 
Organisations (AVSO) and the European  Centre of Volunteering (CEV). CEV 
underlines the need for a closer coopera tion between volunteering at local and 
European level, while AVSO calls for ne w innovative volunteering partnerships in 
the Member States. AVSO is also in favour of an EU approach with a view to life-
long volunteering. This argument is also s upported by CEV. Both NGOs regret the 
lack of professional approach of some  volunteering organisa tions. AVSO points at 
the incompatibility of volunteering with une mployment benefits as great obstacle. 
The recognition of volunt eering through EU instrument s was strongly supported by 
both NGOs.  
The European Youth Forum (EYF) also confirmed the need to have a 
Recommendation adopted by the EU in order to add Europe an value to the voluntary 
activities of young people. They insisted th at the Recommendation should cover all 
kinds of national schemes and not only national civic services. They requested a European Framework for the Rights of Vol unteers and to base the quality assurance 
on a self-assessment tool. 
6.2. Results of Member State consultation 
The national reports of Member States on youth volunteering of 2006/2007 show that 
all Member States support voluntary ac tivities of young people. The support can be 
political, legal or financial. France, L uxembourg, Belgium and the UK have made it 
a political priority of the government. Thos e countries that have a voluntary service 
in place also have a legal basis. All Member States ha ve increased financial support 
for volunteering. The financial support takes the form either of support for voluntary 
organisations and their networks, for vol unteering programmes or for specific 
measures like training. Alt ogether the reports show that, while good results were 
reached at national level, the interoperabi lity between the nati onal schemes needs to 
be improved. The objective of the open me thod of coordination is to improve youth 
volunteering at national leve l, but it did not touch upon cross-border vo lunteering. 
For this a new instrument is needed. For many Member States, EVS is the main (or the only) tool of trans-European youth volunteering. Member Stat es praise EVS but 
recognise its limited outreach due to budgeta ry and organisational constraints as 
there are many more young people than vol unteering opportunities under EVS. Only 
few Member States have estab lished trans-border volunteering. 
Some Member States have  trans-border volunteering limited to the field of 
development cooperation; as for example Sweden and Denmark. One Member State, 
Austria, is starting to develop a sm all trans-border volunt eering programme. 
 
EN 21   EN Altogether it can be concluded that there is a wish and need for more mobility in 
youth volunteering but that so far achievement s in this directio n are very limited. 
In March 2008 the Commission organised a consultation meeting with Member 
States. There was a consensus on the importance among the Member States of the mobility and interoperability concept presented by the Commission. Member States' concerns were about respect for the divers ity of national youth volunteering schemes. 
On 21 April 2008 the Commission's ideas were  discussed with the Member States' 
Directors-General for Youth. Many Member States expressed their support, and no 
objections were made to the Commission's pr oposals. On the contra ry Member States 
were interested by the idea of creating gr eater interoperabili ty of national youth 
volunteering schemes and a better mobility for young volunteers. There was 
confirmation that it would be important  to tackle social obstacles to youth 
volunteering.  
6.3. Evaluation of the European Voluntary Service 
An evaluation of the EVS was part of the final evaluation of the former Youth 
Programme (2000-2006)
20. In general this programme is considered by the evaluators 
to have been very su ccessful in improving young pa rticipants’ citizenship 
competencies, especially when it comes to attitudes, communication and social skills. 
The feeling of being a European citizen as indicated by the young people was already 
relatively high among participants  prior to the start of the activity, but th e percentage 
increased quite considerably after particip ation (from 70% to 85- 90%). The attitude 
towards Europe also became more positive due to participation in the programme, especially for ex-EVS participants from new Member States. The evaluators consider the programme to be effective in these asp ects. They also note that the effectiveness 
of the programme on employability has been  higher for EVS than for other Actions. 
Ex-EVS participants report a very positive effect on their employability, especially in 
terms of job orientation (62% of the EV S participants state that participation 
influenced their professional career, while 56% indicated it has given them better job 
opportunities). 
6.4. Eurobarometer 
The Eurobarometer survey on youth of 2007
21 confirms that for 90% of the consulted 
young people the European Union means free dom to travel, to study and to work 
elsewhere. The meaning of "b eing a citizen of the European  Union" is for 77% of the 
respondents the right to move permanen tly to another country. 74% of those 
interviewed said that they would increase th eir activity as citizen in society if there 
were more programmes en couraging volunteering. 
                                                 
20 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/evalreports/youth/2007/prog/sum_en.pdf  
21 "Looking Behind the Figures: The main results of the Eurobarometer 2007 survey on youth" 
 
EN 22   EN 6.5. Contributions of other European institutions 
6.5.1.  European Parliament  
In April 2008 the European Parliament  adopted the report on the "Role of 
Volunteering in Contributing to Economic and Social Cohesion"22, prepared by MEP 
Marian Harkin. In this report the European  Parliament encourages the development 
of civil society and of pa rticipative democracy by maki ng it easier to bring Europe 
closer to its citizens. To this end it proposes the prom otion, support and facilitation 
of voluntary action. The report also outlines the contribution of volunteering to social 
capital and to economic cohesion as well as its support of the Lisbon objectives 
through the promotion of employability and so cial inclusion. The economic value of 
volunteering and its contri bution to social cohesion, intergenerational support, 
integration, intercultural dial ogue and cultural development is highlighted as well as 
the role of volunteering in bridging divide d societies. In the report the Commission is 
called upon to investigate the developm ent of a common framework in which 
national and local tools operate to enhance the mobility of volunteers. 
On the other side, the European Parliame nt, as the EU's budgetary authority, has 
introduced a new preparatory measure in the field of youth volunteering into the 
2008 budget, named Amicus. This initiative aims at facilitating the interoperability of 
existing national volunteering schemes in  view of promoting trans-national 
volunteering. Amicus will open national volunteering schemes to trans-national mobility by offering young Europeans the possi bility to participate in volunteering 
activities, proposed by civil society or ci vic service bodies in another EU country. 
Amicus will also be the occasion for Member  States to deal at  EU level with the 
conditions of interoperability, such as qua lity standards, recognition mechanisms and 
the support of trans-European youth vol unteering actions through youth work. 
6.5.2.  European Economic and Social Committee 
In December 2006 the European Economic and Social Committee adopted an 
opinion on "Voluntary activity: its role in European society and its impact"
23. In its 
opinion the European Economic and Soci al Committee recognises the need of 
defining volunteering. It makes the link with  the Lisbon strategy and refers to the 
European Youth Pact. It calls for a better recognition of volunteering and 
volunteering organisations. It also dedicates a lot of atte ntion to the socio-economic 
role of volunteering for society and calls for the elimination of obstacles and in 
particular in the field of taxation, social  security and insura nce. The European 
Economic and Social Committee also calls for a closer coopera tion of all actors 
(employers, organisations, pub lic authorities, etc.). 
6.5.3.  Committee of the Regions 
In February 2008 the Committee of the Regions adopted an opinion on "The 
contribution of volunteering to economic and social cohesion"24. In this opinion the 
Committee of the Regions underlines the im portance of volunteering in contributing 
                                                 
22 REGI/6/50546, 2007/2149, of 21 April 2008 
23 SOC 243, of 13 December 2006  
24 ECOS-IV-017, of 6-7 February 2008 
 
EN 23   EN to the Lisbon Agenda, refers to the lack  of research and statistical data on 
volunteering, demands a particul ar attention on the legal status of volunteers, asks to 
step up the support for volunteering organisa tions, underlines the ro le of volunteering 
in social cohesion, and expr essly requests that an EU dimension be developed in 
volunteering. 
7. MONITORING SYSTEM  
The Commission will monitor the imple mentation of the Council Recommendation 
and intends to ensure th e political follow-up by: 
-Meeting regularly Member States fo r implementing the recommendation and 
monitoring indicators; 
- Inviting Member States to report regular ly on the progress of implementation (this 
could be done in intervals of three years as already agreed by Member States for the regular European youth report);  
- Analysing the Member States' reports, evaluating the progress made and, proposing 
how to proceed further in order to better and completely achieve the set objectives; 
- Reporting on the implementation of the Council Recommendation to the other EU 
institutions, to the Council, the Europ ean Parliament, the Economic and Social 
Committee and the Committee of the Regions . The EC will report to the other EU 
institutions by using, inter alias, the outcome s of the Member States' triennial reports 
as well as the outcomes of an external evaluation on the implementation and impact of the Council Recommendation (planned). Such a reporting will also indicate possible proposals order to  better and completely achieve the set objectives 
7.1. Indicators  
The Commission is in the progr ess of developing indicato rs in cooperation with the 
Member States and with scientific s upport for the youth field by the Centre of 
Research on Lifelong Learning (CRELL)
25. The following indicators are in 
development: 
- State of knowledge on youth volunteering - Number of young trans-European volunteers - Measures to eliminate obstacles - Recognition of skills and compet ences acquired through volunteering  
- Extent of employment offered to young volunteers - Development of hosting capacities (or: num ber of bi- and multila teral agreements - 
purpose to measure degree of interoperability) 
                                                
 
25 http://crell.jrc.ec.europa.eu/  
 
EN 24   EN - Number of organisations that fulf il a reasonable level of quality  
- Number of cross-border youth volunteers using Europass 
- Number of youth workers proficient in supporting cross-border volunteering.